NYMTC Regional Pedestrian Safety Study - New York Metropolitan ...
NYMTC Regional Pedestrian Safety Study - New York Metropolitan ... NYMTC Regional Pedestrian Safety Study - New York Metropolitan ...
transit terminals. Yonkers, in their Central Park Avenue Plan, examined each crosswalk along Central Park Avenue and relocated many of the crosswalks to improve pedestrian path continuity. The analysis of crosswalk locations should be included in both safety audits (discussed in Section 5.1) and in sidewalk plans (discussed in Chapter 6). Figure 5.3 Non-Continuous Pedestrian Path Controlled Midblock Crosswalks: Controlled midblock crosswalks are recommended for very long blocks where warrants for the installation of midblock signals are met. The elimination of turning vehicles reduces the number of potential vehicle pedestrian conflicts and reduces the number of places that the pedestrian must look for approaching vehicles. MUTCD recommends that midblock signals be 300 feet from the nearest signalized intersection (MUTCD 4C.05, 2003), indicating that they could be used for blocks that are 600 feet or longer. For two-way streets, a raised median improves the safety of midblock crossings. Bulbouts may also be used; they make the crossing more visible to the drivers and shorten the crossing distance for the pedestrian. Note that uncontrolled, but marked midblock crosswalks are not recommended because statistical evidence indicates that pedestrian crashes are much higher at uncontrolled marked crosswalks. This is discussed in more detail in section 5.2.4 (Uncontrolled Crosswalks). Raised Median: Installing a raised median in wide streets breaks a long crossing distance into two shorter segments and provides a protected haven for pedestrians to wait for a WALK signal or a break in traffic. (Note that wheelchair ramps or a non-raised path must be included for ADA access.) It encourages the pedestrian to wait, rather than trying to finish crossing through moving vehicles. The height improves visibility for both the pedestrian and the drivers. It also has the effect of slowing traffic by narrowing the roadway. NYCDOT has installed several raised medians, sometimes with bollards added at the end toward the intersection. The NYCDOT studies of safety at schools (Section 3.3) recommend the installations of pedestrian islands at 80 of the 135 schools. Figure 5.4 Raised Median with Non-raised Path for Wheelchairs The average crash reduction factor for medians is 40 percent (NYMTC workshop, 2006). The Zegeer, Stewart, et al. (2005) states that the presence of a raised median was associated with a significantly lower pedestrian crash rate at multilane crossing locations, with both marked and unmarked crosswalks. In contrast, painted (not raised) medians and center two-way left-turn lanes did not offer significant safety benefits to pedestrians on multilane roads, compared to no median at all. Bowman and Vecellio (1994) compared undivided multilane roadways, two-way left turn lanes, and raised-curb medians. In both central business district and suburban locations, NYMTC Pedestrian Safety Study 60
the pedestrian crash rate was significantly higher on undivided arterials than on arterials with raised medians. Raised Median with Slalom Path: Under this treatment, the pedestrian path has turns rather than proceeding straight across the median, further encouraging the pedestrian to wait for a second WALK signal rather than rushing across the second half of the roadway. This measure can be particularly effective at intersections where the street and/or pedestrian path either jogs or is diagonal to the cross street. When the path jogs, many pedestrians choose the shorter, diagonal path. When the pedestrian path is not at a right angle to the street being crossed, the pedestrian in one direction has to turn his/her head more than 90 degrees to see approaching traffic; many do not look carefully. A slalom path, with pedestrian fencing or planting to force pedestrians to follow it, can ensure that the pedestrian is crossing at right angle with the traffic. Figure 5.5 Before and After Installation of Raised Median with Slalom Path (Computer enhanced) Pedestrian Fencing: When no other measure has stopped pedestrians from crossing at dangerous locations, fencing could channel pedestrians to the crosswalk and discourage all but the most athletic and determined jaywalkers. NYCDOT has put pedestrian fencing at various locations in New York City. Pedestrian fencing is useful in places where vehicular traffic is forced to stop at a distance from the intersecting street, for example, to facilitate vehicle turns (e.g. trucks, buses). NYSDOT best practices recommend pedestrian fencing to channel pedestrians to safer crossing locations, to protect pedestrians in work zones, for crowd control and security purposes, and as temporary pedestrian safety measures in lieu of future safety improvements. They do not recommend fencing where walking is a primary Figure 5.6 Pedestrian Fencing mode (for example, in CBDs), where they might impede disaster-related evacuations, or in NYMTC Pedestrian Safety Study 61
- Page 17 and 18: Figure 2.1 Ten Year Trend in Pedest
- Page 19 and 20: Figure 2.3 Historic Trend in Annual
- Page 21 and 22: than fatality rates.) The most noti
- Page 23 and 24: III. ORGANIZATIONS FOR PEDESTRIAN S
- Page 25 and 26: • Updating and creating new stand
- Page 27 and 28: The New York State Metropolitan Pla
- Page 29 and 30: getting input from people who have
- Page 31 and 32: i. 20% of priority crash locations
- Page 33 and 34: located by reference marker (the sm
- Page 35 and 36: that the proper signage and other t
- Page 37 and 38: and funding has been secured to adv
- Page 39 and 40: Westchester County and NYSDOT have
- Page 41 and 42: programs in each borough. The NYCDO
- Page 43 and 44: IV. PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ISSUES IN THE
- Page 45 and 46: Drivers: Typical statements about d
- Page 47 and 48: • Ability to lift foot high decre
- Page 49 and 50: The national data indicates that th
- Page 51 and 52: Vendors Vendors set up their carts
- Page 53 and 54: Table 4.1 Continued Staten Island H
- Page 55 and 56: 4.4 Existing Infrastructure and Lan
- Page 57 and 58: Some sidewalks are poorly designed
- Page 59 and 60: pedestrian design. At least one per
- Page 61 and 62: Crosswalks need to be more visible.
- Page 63 and 64: V COUNTERMEASURES AND STRATEGIES Th
- Page 65 and 66: timing and street lighting. New Jer
- Page 67: Providing Sidewalks: Walking-along-
- Page 71 and 72: Speed management through engineerin
- Page 73 and 74: nearby streets. Whereas Bus-pedestr
- Page 75 and 76: and have geometric curvature that e
- Page 77 and 78: Roadway narrowings are used to prov
- Page 79 and 80: have experienced a maintenance prob
- Page 81 and 82: measures with specific geographic a
- Page 83 and 84: and 3.0 feet per second more approp
- Page 85 and 86: Figure 5.17 Split Phase Cycle Sourc
- Page 87 and 88: Combined Automatic and Actuated Sig
- Page 89 and 90: 5.2.5 Visibility To insure safety,
- Page 91 and 92: Pedestrian Crosswalk Signs: There a
- Page 93 and 94: also be placed next to the stop lin
- Page 95 and 96: Table 5.5 Crash Reduction Factors f
- Page 97 and 98: ask them to act as role models for
- Page 99 and 100: 5.3.3 Educating Local Officials and
- Page 101 and 102: • Good planning and organization.
- Page 103 and 104: VI. FUNDING Funding for pedestrian
- Page 105 and 106: York, Projects are chosen by the NY
- Page 107 and 108: NHTSA distributes the Section 402 f
- Page 109 and 110: VII. RECOMMENDATIONS As noted in Ch
- Page 111 and 112: o Safe Routes to School • NYMTC s
- Page 113 and 114: easy to use is residential populati
- Page 115 and 116: REFERENCES American Council of the
- Page 117 and 118: ITE (1998) Design and Safety of Ped
transit terminals. Yonkers, in their Central Park Avenue Plan, examined each crosswalk along<br />
Central Park Avenue and relocated many of the crosswalks to improve<br />
pedestrian path continuity. The analysis of<br />
crosswalk locations should be included in both<br />
safety audits (discussed in Section 5.1) and in<br />
sidewalk plans (discussed in Chapter 6).<br />
Figure 5.3 Non-Continuous <strong>Pedestrian</strong> Path<br />
Controlled Midblock Crosswalks: Controlled<br />
midblock crosswalks are recommended for very<br />
long blocks where warrants for the installation of<br />
midblock signals are met. The elimination of<br />
turning vehicles reduces the number of potential<br />
vehicle pedestrian conflicts and reduces the<br />
number of places that the pedestrian must<br />
look for approaching vehicles. MUTCD<br />
recommends that midblock signals be 300 feet<br />
from the nearest signalized intersection (MUTCD 4C.05, 2003), indicating that they could be<br />
used for blocks that are 600 feet or longer. For two-way streets, a raised median improves the<br />
safety of midblock crossings. Bulbouts may also be used; they make the crossing more visible to<br />
the drivers and shorten the crossing distance for the pedestrian. Note that uncontrolled, but<br />
marked midblock crosswalks are not recommended because statistical evidence indicates that<br />
pedestrian crashes are much higher at uncontrolled marked crosswalks. This is discussed in<br />
more detail in section 5.2.4 (Uncontrolled Crosswalks).<br />
Raised Median: Installing a raised median in wide streets<br />
breaks a long crossing distance into two shorter segments<br />
and provides a protected haven for pedestrians to wait for a<br />
WALK signal or a break in traffic. (Note that wheelchair<br />
ramps or a non-raised path must be included for ADA<br />
access.) It encourages the pedestrian to wait, rather than<br />
trying to finish crossing through moving vehicles. The<br />
height improves visibility for both the pedestrian and the<br />
drivers. It also has the effect of slowing traffic by<br />
narrowing the roadway. NYCDOT has installed several<br />
raised medians, sometimes with bollards added at the end<br />
toward the intersection. The NYCDOT studies of safety at<br />
schools (Section 3.3) recommend the installations of<br />
pedestrian islands at 80 of the 135 schools.<br />
Figure 5.4 Raised Median with<br />
Non-raised Path for Wheelchairs<br />
The average crash reduction factor for medians is 40 percent (<strong>NYMTC</strong> workshop, 2006). The<br />
Zegeer, Stewart, et al. (2005) states that the presence of a raised median was associated with a<br />
significantly lower pedestrian crash rate at multilane crossing locations, with both marked and<br />
unmarked crosswalks. In contrast, painted (not raised) medians and center two-way left-turn<br />
lanes did not offer significant safety benefits to pedestrians on multilane roads, compared to no<br />
median at all. Bowman and Vecellio (1994) compared undivided multilane roadways, two-way<br />
left turn lanes, and raised-curb medians. In both central business district and suburban locations,<br />
<strong>NYMTC</strong> <strong>Pedestrian</strong> <strong>Safety</strong> <strong>Study</strong> 60