My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
#02 - Cross Walk Discussion
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2020's
>
2024
>
04-09-24 W
>
#02 - Cross Walk Discussion
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/21/2025 1:20:56 PM
Creation date
8/16/2024 2:15:42 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
240
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> 8 <br />separately by site type (e.g., two-lane versus multilane road, high volume versus low volume) would <br />produce different results on the safety effects of marked versus unmarked crosswalks. <br /> <br />Behavioral Studies Related to Marked Crosswalks <br /> <br />In addition to crash-based studies, it is also important to review studies that evaluate the effects of <br />crosswalk marking on pedestrian and motorist behavior. Such review can reveal changes in behavior, <br />which can lead to crashes for different crosswalk conditions. The following paragraphs discuss some of <br />these behavioral studies. <br /> <br />Katz et al. conducted an experimental study of driver and pedestrian interaction when the pedestrian <br />crossed a street.(12) The pedestrians in question were members of the study team, and they crossed a street <br />under a variety of conditions (960 trials). It was found that drivers stop for pedestrians as a function of <br />several variables. Drivers stop more frequently when the vehicle’s approach speed is low, when the <br />pedestrian is in a marked crosswalk, when the distance between vehicle and pedestrian is greater rather <br />than less, when pedestrians are in groups, and when the pedestrian does not make eye contact with the <br />driver. Thus, the marked crosswalk is a specific factor in positive driver behavior in this study. <br /> <br />A study by Knoblauch et al. was conducted to determine the effect of crosswalk markings on driver and <br />pedestrian behavior at unsignalized intersections.(13) A before-after evaluation of crosswalk markings was <br />conducted at 11 locations in 4 U.S. cities. The observed behaviors included pedestrian crossing location, <br />vehicle speed, driver yielding, and pedestrian crossing behavior. It was found that drivers approach a <br />pedestrian in a crosswalk somewhat more slowly, and that crosswalk usage increases, after markings are <br />installed. No evidence was found indicating that pedestrians are less vigilant in a marked crosswalk. No <br />changes were found in driver yielding or pedestrian assertiveness as a result of adding the marked <br />crosswalk. Marking pedestrian crosswalks at relatively low-speed, low-volume, unsignalized <br />intersections was not found to have any measurable negative effect on pedestrian or motorist behavior at <br />the selected sites (which were all two- or three-lane roads with speed limits of 56 or 64 kilometers per <br />hour (km/h) or 35 or 40 miles per hour (mi/h)). <br /> <br />In a comparison study to the one discussed above, Knoblauch and Raymond conducted a before-after <br />evaluation of pedestrian crosswalk markings in Maryland, Virginia, and Arizona.(14) Six sites that had <br />been recently resurfaced were selected. All sites were at uncontrolled intersections with a speed limit of <br />56 km/h (35 mi/h). The before data were collected after the centerline and edgeline delineations were <br />installed but before the crosswalk was installed. The after data were collected after the crosswalk <br />markings were installed. Speed data were collected under three conditions: no pedestrian present, <br />pedestrian looking, and pedestrian not looking. All pedestrian conditions involved a staged pedestrian. <br />The results indicate a slight reduction in vehicle speed at most, but not all, of the sites. Overall, there was <br />a significant reduction in speed under both the no pedestrian and the pedestrian not looking conditions. <br />(Note: This study and the 2001 behavioral study by Knoblauch et al. mentioned above were both <br />conducted as part of the larger FHWA study conducted in conjunction with the current study described <br />here.) <br /> <br />These studies found pedestrian behavior to be, if anything, slightly better in the presence of marked <br />crosswalks compared to unmarked crosswalks. Certainly the results showed no indication of an increase <br />in reckless or incautious pedestrian behavior associated with marked crosswalks. All of the sites used in <br />the Knoblauch studies were two-lane and three-lane roads, and all had speed limits of 56 or 64 km/h (35 <br />or 40 mi/h). No formal behavioral studies were found which have studied pedestrian and motorist <br />behaviors and conflicts on roads with four or more lanes with and without marked crosswalks. Such <br />multilane situations may pose different types of risks for pedestrians, particularly where high traffic <br />volume exists and/or where vehicle speeds are high. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.