NYMTC Regional Pedestrian Safety Study - New York Metropolitan ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

accommodate the turning movement of larger vehicles or an intersection with no pedestrian traffic (for example, in an industrial area) versus a densely populated area. Traffic Calming Traffic calming was mentioned in several of the interviews, with four traffic calming measures being specifically mentioned: bulbouts (or neckdowns), roundabouts, speed tables, and on-street parking. The objectives of traffic calming include reducing traffic speeds, reducing traffic volumes, and facilitating the shared use of the roadway by different types of users (including both motorized and non-motorized). All of these objectives contribute to pedestrian safety, but speed reductions in particular can increase pedestrian safety considerably. A good in-depth source of information on the design and impacts of different traffic calming measures is the ITE “Traffic Calming: The State of the Practice” (Ewing, 1999, available on line at the Institute of Transportation Engineers website: www.ite.org). This section describes first, traffic calming programs that combine multiple traffic calming measures in one neighborhood or area and second, individual traffic calming measures. There are tables that indicate the effectiveness of the traffic calming measures in reducing speed and volumes at the end of the traffic calming section.. Traffic Calming Programs A set of programs aimed at calming the traffic have been adopted at various places around the world. Such programs include: Community Streets, “Woonerf,” Play Streets, transit malls, and area wide traffic restrictions: Community Streets: In Japan traffic calming strategies have been directed toward community streets, which rely on measures such as speed humps, bulbouts, chicanes, and other devices (see below for descriptions) to slow down motor vehicle traffic. Roadpia (short for Road Utopia) is neighborhood-wide installations of community streets that give priority to pedestrians and cyclists. The combination of traffic calming devices was effective in reducing traffic, vehicle speeds, and collisions (See Sriver and Kwon, 1999). Woonerf: The Netherlands developed the concept of “woonerf” (a Dutch word meaning roughly street for living) based on the residential yard (Kraay, 1976). These are areas where the physical and visual treatments of the public right-of way create a pedestrian-oriented area. Only local traffic is allowed to use the roadway and all modes are “forced” to travel almost as slow as the slowest mode (the pedestrian) through design features, such as special paving materials, lack of curbs, trees planted in the street, and street parking. (See example at: http://www.walkinginfo.org/de/curb1_print.cfm?codename=32d&CM_maingroup=TrafficCalmi ng ) Transit Malls with Shared Use of Pedestrian-Oriented Space: A study of crashes occurring before and after implementation of transit malls in Philadelphia and Minneapolis, showed nonpedestrian collisions decreasing sharply on transit malls with no evidence of an increase on NYMTC Pedestrian Safety Study 64
nearby streets. Whereas Bus-pedestrian conflicts are much higher on transit malls than on other streets, they have not resulted in a higher number of bus-pedestrian collisions. Areawide Traffic Restrictions: Areawide traffic restriction plans have been employed in Upsala, Sweden, entailing closing streets to vehicular traffic, using one-way flow on bypasses, and bus-only streets. Risk for pedestrians within the restricted area declined by 29 percent. However, risk on the streets outside the restricted area increased although by only 12 percent. (Lovemark, 1974 and Brownfield, 1980, cited in Campbell et al., 2004). Traffic Diversion: Traffic diversion can be made by street closures, diverters, and signs restricting access, either during the peak travel hours or on a 24-hour basis. These projects are designed to shift traffic off of a neighborhood street that is suffering from cut-through traffic onto other streets. If these “ other streets” are major streets or arterial roads (that is, not other residential streets), the project generally can be considered successful. Traffic diversion projects often limit resident access, as well as for their guests and service vehicles. Play Streets: Play streets entail closing, usually for a period of several hours, a neighborhood street to allow children to use it as a playground. Play streets have been employed in the United States in center city neighborhoods with few parks to provide safe play areas. A series of interview studies at 20 sites in Philadelphia and New York City found play streets to be effective in eliminating traffic and parking. (See example at: http://www.walkinginfo.org/pedsafe/popup4.cfm?codename=34e) Traffic Calming measures Gateways: Entrance and exit symbols such as “gates” into/out of a city are widely utilized in Europe to visually inform drivers of a change in driving environment such as speed limit, pedestrian and/or bicycling activity. Entrance gates also offer an aesthetic effect that welcomes visitors and drivers to the city or a neighborhood and acknowledges them as they leave. Such entrance and leaving gates would be most beneficial for major roadways that enter well-designated cities. In densely developed areas such as most of the NYMTC region, the boundaries of the cities and villages are often not clearly distinguishable. However, it is still possible to integrate similar “gates” on roadway sections that warrant speed and/or volume reduction or to indicate a transition from one type of street to another. Examples may include business districts, dense residential areas, and school areas. Additional gateway examples can be found in Brewer et. al. Figure 5.8. Gate at City College of New York (2001). NYMTC Pedestrian Safety Study 65
Page 1 and 2:
New York Metropolitan Transportatio
Page 3 and 4:
1. Report No. 2. Government Accessi
Page 5 and 6:
Table of Contents 1 Introduction 1
Page 7 and 8:
Table of Figures 2.1 Ten Year Trend
Page 9 and 10:
I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Study Origin an
Page 11 and 12:
in the United States; the 2004 data
Page 13 and 14:
Table 1.1 Organizations That Were I
Page 15 and 16:
II. BACKGROUND ON PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
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 and 68: Providing Sidewalks: Walking-along-
Page 69 and 70: the pedestrian crash rate was signi
Page 71: Speed management through engineerin
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
Page 119 and 120: Parsons Brincherhoff Quade & Dougla
Page 121 and 122: Intentionally left blank. NYMTC Ped
Page 123 and 124:
Intentionally left blank. NYMTC Ped
Page 125 and 126:
NYMTC Pedestrian Safety Interview f
Page 127 and 128:
12. Do you have any strategies or t
Page 129 and 130:
Appendix B: PEDESTRIAN SAFETY CONTA
Page 131 and 132:
New York City Department of Transpo
Page 133 and 134:
Suffolk County Department of Public
Page 135 and 136:
Appendix C: TRAFFIC SAFETY BOARD CO
Page 137 and 138:
Appendix D: ON LINE PEDESTRIAN SAFE
Page 139 and 140:
FARS Query System is an interactive
Page 141 and 142:
Education and Enforcement Counterme
Page 143 and 144:
Appendix E: NEW YORK CITY FATATLIES
Page 145 and 146:
Appendix F: Prompt Lists for Pedest
Page 147 and 148:
Pedestrian Safety Prompt List Gener
Page 149 and 150:
pathway provide direct access to wa
Page 151 and 152:
If so, is there a sign that explain
show all

NYMTC Regional Pedestrian Safety Study - New York Metropolitan ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?