Agenda - Public Works Committee - 07/15/2014

Home

This six -step procedure to determine LOS for pedestrians at uncontrolled crossing locations is provided in the worksheets at the end of this guide- book (pages 30-34). The input information for use in the equations is provided in the input table on the second worksheet. An explanation of measuring crosswalk length (L) and crosswalk width (NV can be found on page 4 of this guidebook. LOS is generally deemed acceptable between A and D and deemed unac- ceptable at E or F. Local agency direction on acceptable service levels should be verified. If the LOS is acceptable and the location already has treatments such as signing and/or striping, consider making no changes at the existing crossing. If LOS is unacceptable, skip to Step 6, If this procedure is completed after Step 11, consider applying appropriate treatment option(s) if LOS is acceptable. If LOS is deemed acceptable, consider making no changes at the crossing or possibly removing treatments if they are not needed. Pedestrian Sight Distance If adequate service levels are provided, pedestrian sight distance (PedSD) should be checked if the crossing is absent of any treatment options. This indicates that the crossing is unmarked and unsigned. If adequate PedSD is provided, consider no changes at the existing crossing. Review: Origins and *estinations, Alternate outes The potential origins and destinations in the area should be reviewed for the most likely path to see how it lines up with the crossing being analyzed. The most important thing to remember is that pedestrians will take the shortest possible route. Understanding this is essential to understanding why a route is being used, especially when there are alternatives available that may actually be safer and provide less delay. In some cases, existing crossings may not actually be placed in locations where pedestrians are using them if the understanding of origins and destinations is incorrect. Check to see if an alternative route can serve the same movements effec- tively while providing less delay. This includes the time to traverse to the alternative crossing, cross, and complete the movement to the destina- tion. Average wait time at signals should be added into the equation if the crossing requires traversing a traffic signal. If the primary origin -destination movements can be accomplished effec- tively at another crossing without much backtracking, consider making no changes at the existing crossing or adding pedestrian channelization and/or wayfinding. Also consider evaluating the alternate crossing loca- tion. Sources: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 6th Edition, Washington DC: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2011. C. V. Zeeger, J. R. Stewart, H. H. Huang, P. A. Lagerwey, J. Feaganes and B. Campbell, 'Safety Effects of Marked versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations: Final Report and Recommended Guidelines," Federal Highway Administration, McLean, VA, September 2005. Transportation Research Board, HCM 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 2010. 15