Treatments Used at Pedestrian Crossings of Public Transit Rail Services (2015)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in cooperation with the Transit Development Corporation. It was conducted through the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP), which is administered by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FRA, FTA, Transit Development Corporation, or AOC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. DISCLAIMER The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research. They are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The information contained in this document was taken directly from the submission of the author(s). This material has not been edited by TRB.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ v LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... vi AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......................................................................................... xi ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................ xiii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... xiv CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1 RESEARCH PROBLEM STATEMENT ................................................................................... 1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................... 1 RESEARCH APPROACH.......................................................................................................... 1 REPORT STRUCTURE ............................................................................................................. 2 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEWS ................................................................................ 3 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 3 RAIL CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................................................................... 3 PEDESTRIAN CHARACTERISTICS ....................................................................................... 3 CROSSING TREATMENTS ..................................................................................................... 3 Traffic Control Devices .......................................................................................................... 4 Passive Signs ........................................................................................................................... 5 Warning Messages .................................................................................................................. 5 Warning Signs for Enforcement ............................................................................................. 5 Blank-Out Signs ...................................................................................................................... 6 Experiences with Signs for Second Train Condition .............................................................. 6 Pavement Markings ................................................................................................................ 7 Dynamic Envelope Markings ................................................................................................. 8 Detectable Warnings ............................................................................................................... 8 Pathway Stop Lines ................................................................................................................. 9 Flashing Light Signals ............................................................................................................ 9 In-Pavement Flashing Lights .................................................................................................. 9 Pedestrian Signals ................................................................................................................... 9 Preemption of Traffic Signals near Railroad Crossings.......................................................... 9 Audible Crossing Warning Devices ...................................................................................... 10 Pedestrian Automatic Gates .................................................................................................. 11 Pedestrian Automatic Gate with Horizontal Hanging Bar (Also Known as Gate Skirts)..... 11 Pedestrian Swing Gates ......................................................................................................... 12 Channelization ...................................................................................................................... 12 Barriers .................................................................................................................................. 13 Pedestrian Fencing ................................................................................................................ 14 Clearly Define Pedestrian Crossing ...................................................................................... 14 Flangeway Filler ................................................................................................................... 14 Smooth and Level Surface .................................................................................................... 15 i

Pedestrian Crossing Designs that Consider Accessibility .................................................... 15 Offset Pedestrian Crossing .................................................................................................... 16 Pedestrian Refuge ................................................................................................................. 16 Sidewalk Relocation ............................................................................................................. 17 Stop/Terminal Design ........................................................................................................... 17 Removable Barriers .............................................................................................................. 17 Sight Distance ....................................................................................................................... 18 Illumination ........................................................................................................................... 18 Mirrors .................................................................................................................................. 18 Required Stop ........................................................................................................................ 18 Overview of Crossing Conditions ......................................................................................... 19 CROSSING TREATMENT SELECTION ............................................................................... 19 CRASH REDUCTION FOR PEDESTRIAN-ROADWAY CROSSING TREATMENTS ..... 20 CHAPTER 3: TRANSIT CRASH DATABASES .................................................................... 21 OVERVIEW OF AVAILABLE CRASH DATABASES ......................................................... 21 Federal Transit Administration – National Transit Database ............................................... 21 Federal Railroad Administration – Office of Safety Analysis .............................................. 23 DATABASE ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................... 24 Light Rail and Streetcar ........................................................................................................ 24 Commuter Railroads ............................................................................................................. 26 CHAPTER 4: ONLINE SURVEY OF PRACTITIONERS .................................................. 29 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 29 SURVEY ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................................... 29 SURVEY RESPONSES ........................................................................................................... 33 Question 1: Type of Transit Rail Service.............................................................................. 33 Question 2: Treatments Currently in Use ............................................................................. 33 Question 3: Treatments Removed from Use ......................................................................... 37 Question 4: Approaches to Identify, Evaluate, and Improve Pedestrian Safety ................... 37 Question 5: Other Comments and Observations ................................................................... 38 Questions 6 and 7: Potential Follow-Up and Respondent Contact Information ................... 39 FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................ 39 CHAPTER 5: TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS .......................................................................... 41 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 41 TELEPHONE INTERVIEW ADMINISTRATION ................................................................. 41 TELEPHONE INTERVIEW RESPONSES ............................................................................. 43 Treatment Effectiveness ........................................................................................................ 43 Removal of Treatments ......................................................................................................... 47 Audit/Diagnostic Review ...................................................................................................... 47 Education and Enforcement .................................................................................................. 48 NEPA Accommodations ....................................................................................................... 49 Guidance Documents ............................................................................................................ 49 FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................ 49 ii

CHAPTER 6: SITE VISITS ..................................................................................................... 51 OVERVIEW OF SITE VISIT METHODOLOGY ................................................................... 51 Region Selection ................................................................................................................... 51 Research Staff for Visits ....................................................................................................... 52 Pre-Visit Plans ...................................................................................................................... 52 Site Visit – Review of Pedestrian-Rail Crossings ................................................................. 52 Site Visit – Meetings ............................................................................................................. 53 Post-Site Visit ....................................................................................................................... 53 Institute of Transportation Engineers Annual Meeting ........................................................ 53 BOSTON SITE VISIT .............................................................................................................. 53 Meetings in Boston ............................................................................................................... 53 Site Visit in Boston ............................................................................................................... 54 Observation Development for Boston .................................................................................. 56 General Observations for Boston .......................................................................................... 57 Observations Related to Traffic Control Devices – Markings and Detectable Warnings for Boston .................................................................................................................. 57 Observations Related to Traffic Control Devices – Signs for Boston .................................. 61 Observations Related to Active Traffic Control Devices – Signals or Audible Warning Devices for Boston .................................................................................................... 64 Observations Related to Active Traffic Control Devices – Automatic Gates for Boston .... 64 Observations Related to Design of the Crossing for Boston ................................................ 65 Observations Related to Orientation and Mobility for Boston ............................................. 67 Observations Related to Crossing Surface for Boston .......................................................... 67 Observations Related to Fences and Barriers for Boston ..................................................... 70 Observations Related to Train Operations for Boston .......................................................... 73 Observations Related to Other Features for Boston ............................................................. 74 PORTLAND SITE VISIT ......................................................................................................... 75 Meetings in Portland ............................................................................................................. 75 Site Visits in Portland ........................................................................................................... 75 Observation Development for Portland ................................................................................ 76 General Observations for Portland ........................................................................................ 76 Observations Related to Traffic Control Devices – Markings and Detectable Warnings for Portland ............................................................................................................... 79 Observations Related to Traffic Control Devices – Signs for Portland ................................ 82 Observations Related to Active Traffic Control Devices – Signals or Audible Warning Devices for Portland ................................................................................................. 84 Observations Related to Active Traffic Control Devices – Automatic Gates for Portland .. 86 Observations Related to Design of the Crossing for Portland .............................................. 86 Observations Related to Orientation and Mobility for Portland ........................................... 88 Observations Related to Crossing Surface for Portland........................................................ 90 Observations Related to Fences and Barriers for Portland ................................................... 90 Observations Related to Train Operations for Portland ........................................................ 95 Observations Related to Other Features for Portland ........................................................... 96 LOS ANGELES SITE VISIT .................................................................................................... 99 Meetings in Los Angeles ...................................................................................................... 99 Site Visits in Los Angeles ..................................................................................................... 99 iii

Observation Development for Los Angeles .......................................................................... 99 General Observations for Los Angeles ................................................................................. 99 Observations Related to Traffic Control Devices – Markings and Detectable Warnings for Los Angeles ....................................................................................................... 104 Observations Related to Traffic Control Devices – Signs for Los Angeles ....................... 112 Observations Related to Active Traffic Control Devices – Signals or Audible Warning Devices for Los Angeles ......................................................................................... 119 Observations Related to Active Traffic Control Devices – Automatic Gates for Los Angeles ................................................................................................................... 122 Observations Related to Design of the Crossing for Los Angeles ...................................... 124 Observations Related to Orientation and Mobility for Los Angeles .................................. 128 Observations Related to Crossing Surface for Los Angeles ............................................... 133 Observations Related to Fences and Barriers for Los Angeles ........................................... 134 Observations Related to Train Operations for Los Angeles ............................................... 137 Observations Related to Other Features for Los Angeles ................................................... 137 CHAPTER 7: SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 139 SUMMARY OF GUIDEBOOK ON PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS OF PUBLIC TRANSIT RAIL SERVICES...................................................................................................................... 139 SUMMARY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS ............................................................................. 140 Rail Characteristics ............................................................................................................. 140 Pedestrian Characteristics ................................................................................................... 141 Pedestrian Crossing Treatments .......................................................................................... 141 Crashes ................................................................................................................................ 141 Surveys ................................................................................................................................ 142 Site Visits ............................................................................................................................ 142 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 145 iv

LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Pedestrian fatalities and injuries reported by transit agencies operating light rail and streetcar transit systems, 2008–2012. .................................................................................. 25 Table 2. Commuter rail fatalities and injuries by type of person. ................................................. 28 Table 3. Type of transit rail service offered by respondents’ transit agencies. ............................ 33 Table 4. Pedestrian treatments currently in use. ........................................................................... 34 Table 5. Pedestrian safety treatments in use by type of rail service offered. ................................ 35 Table 6. Approaches to identify, evaluate, and improve pedestrian safety. ................................. 37 Table 7. Pedestrian safety approaches in use by type of rail service offered. .............................. 38 Table 8. Reasons for selecting locations for site visits. ................................................................ 51 v

LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. Percentage of total 5-year pedestrian fatalities and injuries. ......................................... 25 Figure 2. Survey invitation email sent to practitioners. ................................................................ 30 Figure 3. Introduction to online survey......................................................................................... 30 Figure 4. First question of online survey. ..................................................................................... 31 Figure 5. Questions 2–9 of online survey. .................................................................................... 31 Figure 6. Questions 10–19 of online survey. ................................................................................ 32 Figure 7. Question 20 of online survey. ........................................................................................ 32 Figure 8. Question 21 of online survey. ........................................................................................ 32 Figure 9. Questions 22–26 of online survey. ................................................................................ 32 Figure 10. Conclusion to online survey. ....................................................................................... 33 Figure 11. Telephone interview questions. ................................................................................... 42 Figure 12. Example of an in-station pedestrian crossing. ............................................................. 54 Figure 13. Example of a median running train approaching a pedestrian and roadway crossing. ............................................................................................................................... 55 Figure 14. Example of a street running train approaching a pedestrian crossing. ........................ 55 Figure 15. Example of commuter rail. .......................................................................................... 56 Figure 16. Example of solid yellow markings used at pedestrian-rail crossing near a pedestrian-roadway crossing. .............................................................................................. 58 Figure 17. Example of solid yellow markings used at pedestrian-rail crossing within a station. ................................................................................................................................. 58 Figure 18. Example of crosswalk markings for roadway and rail; note the lack of curb ramp between the roadway and the median. ................................................................................ 59 Figure 19. Another example of crosswalk markings for roadway and rail. In addition, note the lack of curb ramp between the roadway and the median. ............................................. 59 Figure 20. Example of combining both yellow and white markings at a pedestrian-rail crossing. ............................................................................................................................... 59 Figure 21. Example of pavement crosswalk markings used with mixed traffic. .......................... 59 Figure 22. Example of no pavement markings or detectable warnings for pedestrian-rail crossing and solid red bricks within white transverse lines for the nearby pedestrian- roadway crossing. ................................................................................................................ 60 Figure 23. Another example of no pavement markings or detectable warnings for pedestrian- rail crossing and solid red bricks within white transverse lines for the nearby pedestrian-roadway crossing. .............................................................................................. 60 Figure 24. Pedestrian crossing of roadway and tracks for light-rail being operated in the median; note differences in how the pedestrian crossing is marked for the roadway (white continental markings) and the rail (solid yellow markings)..................................... 60 Figure 25. Example of challenges in waiting area within narrow median – bicyclist is waiting in area painted yellow. Also example of yellow paint used as warning for edge of train. ................................................................................................................................ 61 Figure 26. Example of detectable warning strip used at edge of platform. .................................. 61 Figure 27. Sign used at several pedestrian-rail crossings. ............................................................ 62 Figure 28. Example of sign used with mixed traffic operations. .................................................. 62 vi

Figure 29. Example where the back, but not the front, of the crossbuck assemblies are present for the pedestrian approach. .................................................................................... 62 Figure 30. Example of a stop sign used between tracks to indicate train operators should stop train prior to the pedestrian-rail crossing. ........................................................................... 63 Figure 31. Example of a warning sign used to inform train operators that a pedestrian-rail crossing is ahead. ................................................................................................................. 63 Figure 32. Example of single automatic gate for both sidewalk and roadway. ............................ 65 Figure 33. Example of automatic pedestrian gates. ...................................................................... 65 Figure 34. Example of grade separated pedestrian crossing, aerial view. .................................... 66 Figure 35. Example of grade separated pedestrian crossing, side view. ....................................... 66 Figure 36. Example of uneven surface. ........................................................................................ 68 Figure 37. Example of uneven edges between the rubber panel used within the tracks and the asphalt used outside the tracks that make it difficult for pedestrians who are blind to follow the edge all the way across the crossing. ................................................................. 68 Figure 38. Example of rubber panels providing a distinctive edge of crossing, however, an uneven edge because of the nature of the panels and the angle crossing at this location. .. 69 Figure 39. Example of straight edge for crossing. ........................................................................ 69 Figure 40. Aerial view of bike path crossing of a rail. ................................................................. 69 Figure 41. Approach to bike crossing of railroad tracks. .............................................................. 70 Figure 42. Signs used at bike crossing. ......................................................................................... 70 Figure 43. Example of flangeway filler used in a crossing. .......................................................... 70 Figure 44. Another example of flangeway filler. .......................................................................... 70 Figure 45. Example of fence between sidewalk and tracks prior to a crossing. ........................... 71 Figure 46. Example of fence used between two tracks within a station that ends prior to a marked pedestrian crossing. ................................................................................................ 72 Figure 47. Example of change in fence height prior to pedestrian crossing to improve sight distance. ............................................................................................................................... 72 Figure 48. Example of fence used to restrict pedestrians walking across the rails and a pedestrian grade separate structure to accommodate the need to move from one station platform to the other. ........................................................................................................... 73 Figure 49. Example of mirror in a station. .................................................................................... 74 Figure 50. Example of train doors showing stop, state law message. .......................................... 75 Figure 51. Sign informing pedestrians of construction-related disruptions. ................................. 77 Figure 52. Pedestrians walking near construction site. ................................................................. 77 Figure 53. Example of gap between guardrail and barrier fencing where pedestrians could bypass safety treatments. Situation was immediately reported when observed by a Tri- Met representative. .............................................................................................................. 78 Figure 54. Multi-use path crossing at the Gateway Center Transit Center. .................................. 79 Figure 55. Example of detectable warning at station pedestrian crossing. ................................... 80 Figure 56. Example of STOP HERE pavement marking in conjunction with a swing gate. ....... 80 Figure 57. Example of STOP HERE pavement marking without detectable warning. ................ 80 Figure 58. Pavement markings in Portland informing pedestrians to DON’T STAND HERE. .. 81 Figure 59. Crossing containing DON’T STAND HERE marking and transverse crosswalk lines. .................................................................................................................................... 81 Figure 60. Example of oncoming trolley sign with Tri-Met logo................................................. 82 Figure 61. Example of oncoming trolley sign with side view of trolley. ..................................... 82 vii

Figure 62. Example of oncoming commuter rail train. ................................................................. 82 Figure 63. Example of MUTCD LOOK sign (left side) and Tri-Met LOOK BOTH WAYS sign (right side) used at a Portland crossing. ....................................................................... 83 Figure 64. Example of STOP sign on multi-use path. .................................................................. 83 Figure 65. Example of STOP sign with swing gates. ................................................................... 83 Figure 66. Example of active blank out signal with audible warning. ......................................... 85 Figure 67. Example of the pedestrian flasher with crossbuck sign............................................... 85 Figure 68. Example of the pedestrian active signal system with LOOK BOTH WAYS sign. .... 85 Figure 69. Example of the use of swing gates at location with active vehicle warning devices. ................................................................................................................................ 86 Figure 70. Example of a pedestrian-only crossing configuration for a median running train. ..... 87 Figure 71. Example of a straight pedestrian-only crossing. .......................................................... 87 Figure 72. Example of a diagonal pedestrian-only crossing. ........................................................ 87 Figure 73. Example of an apex ramp in downtown Portland. ...................................................... 89 Figure 74. Example of protection from the counterweight. .......................................................... 89 Figure 75. Example of multiple tracks arraigned at different angles. ........................................... 90 Figure 76. Example of pedestrian crossing tracks while train is present. ..................................... 90 Figure 77. Example of handle barriers between track and channelization. .................................. 91 Figure 78. Example of handle barriers between channelization and street. .................................. 91 Figure 79. Examples of handle barriers between pole and fencing. ............................................. 91 Figure 80. Example of tubular fencing. ........................................................................................ 92 Figure 81. Swing gate being pushed open by wind. ..................................................................... 93 Figure 82. Example of barrier guiding pedestrians to crossing. ................................................... 93 Figure 83. Example of barrier preventing crossing other than at designated spot. ....................... 94 Figure 84. Temporary barriers at the Rose Quarter Transit Center. ............................................. 94 Figure 85. Example of trains entering/exiting a marked school zone. .......................................... 95 Figure 86. Example of using smooth concrete for train as compared to the brick pattern in neighboring lanes. ............................................................................................................... 96 Figure 87. Example of surface treatments and a dynamic envelope surface treatment involving brick. ................................................................................................................... 97 Figure 88. Example of rails separate from vehicle traffic at the boarding location. ..................... 97 Figure 89. Sign indicating lane only for light rails. ...................................................................... 98 Figure 90. Example of streetcar operations along with vehicles in downtown Portland. ............. 98 Figure 91. The pictogram within this blank out sign shows a side view of a train approaching from the left. ...................................................................................................................... 101 Figure 92. The pictogram within this blank out sign shows a side view of a train approaching from the right. .................................................................................................................... 101 Figure 93. Fencing between roadway and tracks. ....................................................................... 102 Figure 94. Curbing between roadway and tracks. ....................................................................... 102 Figure 95. Fencing prevents pedestrians from crossing at the corner and leads to the swing gates at crossing location. .................................................................................................. 103 Figure 96. Flexible delineators between ends of rail cars prevent visually impaired travelers from falling between cars. ................................................................................................. 103 Figure 97. Detectable warning along full length of platform edge with an adjacent yellow line that has STAY BEHIND YELLOW LINE word marking. ....................................... 106 Figure 98. In-station pedestrian crossing. ................................................................................... 106 viii

Figure 99. Detectable warning installed inside swing gates. ...................................................... 107 Figure 100. The detectable warning is placed on the side of the gate arm opposite the rail. ..... 107 Figure 101. Detectable warning at swing gate on side opposite rails. ........................................ 108 Figure 102. Detectable warning extending on both sides of swing gate. ................................... 108 Figure 103. Preferred use of detectable warnings on curb ramp along with swing gate. ........... 109 Figure 104. Detectable warning surface installed to inform pedestrians who are visually impaired of overhead gate arm hazard. ............................................................................. 109 Figure 105. Visually impaired pedestrian has no warning of hazardous counterweight ahead. . 110 Figure 106. Diagonal black and yellow striping used in the vicinity of rail crossings to indicate the dynamic envelopes of rail cars....................................................................... 110 Figure 107. Smooth area within stamped crosswalk provides ADA compliant surface for pedestrians in wheelchairs. ................................................................................................ 111 Figure 108. Diagonal striping indicates dynamic envelope of train cars; photo shows location of detectable warning and stop line also.............................................................. 111 Figure 109. Symbol and word pavement markings supplementing signs to indicate where pedestrians should not be walking. ................................................................................... 112 Figure 110. Pedestrian prohibition signing and pavement marking. .......................................... 113 Figure 111. Example of swing gate. ........................................................................................... 114 Figure 112. Another example of swing gate next to automatic pedestrian gate arm. ................. 114 Figure 113. Example of swing gate for emergency exit. ............................................................ 115 Figure 114. Example of swing gate for emergency exit from rail side....................................... 115 Figure 115. Sign directing pedestrians to the ramp to the boarding platform. ........................... 116 Figure 116. Example of sign used at a Metrolink station to reinforce the pavement marking message of staying behind yellow line. ............................................................................. 116 Figure 117. LOOK BOTH WAYS sign. ..................................................................................... 117 Figure 118. Suicide crisis sign. ................................................................................................... 117 Figure 119. Example of pedestrian signal head used at a pedestrian crossing near a station in Los Angeles; note the addition of the blank-out sign showing the train (close-up shown in Figure 121) placed next to the solid upraised hand symbol (see close-up shown in Figure 120) indicating that pedestrian should not start a crossing. ................... 118 Figure 120. Close-up of countdown indication used in conjunction blank-out sign. ................. 118 Figure 121. Close-up of blank-out sign used in conjunction with pedestrian signal head. ........ 118 Figure 122. Another example of train blank-out signs mounted next to pedestrian signal head since that is the area where pedestrians should be looking. ..................................... 119 Figure 123. Signs used at quiet zones. ........................................................................................ 119 Figure 124. Pushbutton-integrated accessible pedestrian signal with sign emphasizing where to wait. ............................................................................................................................... 120 Figure 125. Fencing channelizes pedestrians to crossing location; figure shows well-located .. 121 Figure 126. APS at bottom of ramp from platform. ................................................................... 121 Figure 127. Four-quadrant automatic pedestrian gates and swing gates. ................................... 122 Figure 128. Crossing with automatic pedestrian gate arm with LED flashers at pedestrian- only crossing. .................................................................................................................... 123 Figure 129. Closer view of crossing with automatic pedestrian gate and swing gate for emergency egress; swing gate labeled for exit only. It has no kick plate for wheelchair users. .................................................................................................................................. 123 ix

Figure 130. Narrow center platforms allow little room for wheelchairs or pedestrians using guide dogs. ........................................................................................................................ 125 Figure 131. Pedestrian refuge too small to hold many pedestrians. ........................................... 126 Figure 132. Flexible delineators on end of median refuge. ........................................................ 126 Figure 133. Another example of the flexible delineators. .......................................................... 127 Figure 134. X-shaped crossing at Expo and Grammercy. .......................................................... 127 Figure 135. Z-crossing with bollards but not a detectable warning at the edge of the median refuge. ................................................................................................................................ 128 Figure 136. Ramp without attached ADA compliant handrails. ................................................. 129 Figure 137. Ramp with attached ADA compliant handrails. ...................................................... 130 Figure 138. The long and winding walkway in this photo connected the platform with the street approximately 40 feet below. .................................................................................. 130 Figure 139. Ramp from station level to street above. ................................................................. 131 Figure 140. Fencing to guide pedestrian to crossing. ................................................................. 131 Figure 141. Abundance of identical handrails at this station would be confusing to pedestrians who are visually impaired who are trying to find the crossing, which is out of view to the left. ............................................................................................................. 132 Figure 142. Inadequate cues for direction of crosswalk, which angles to the right away from previous direction of travel. .............................................................................................. 132 Figure 143. Diagonal crossing at an offset intersection. ............................................................. 133 Figure 144. Precast concrete panels. ........................................................................................... 134 Figure 145. Fencing along with the signs clearly indicates there is no pedestrian crossing at this location. ...................................................................................................................... 135 Figure 146. Fencing to prevent pedestrians from crossing trackbed. ......................................... 135 Figure 147. Fencing between rails and street. ............................................................................. 136 Figure 148. Extensive fencing channelizes pedestrians. ............................................................. 136 Figure 149. Channelization that guides pedestrian to appropriate crossing location. ................ 137 Figure 150. Example of Ambassador positioned in the median at a station entrance. ............... 138 Figure 151. Example of Ambassador stationed at a crossing. .................................................... 138 x

AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported herein was performed under Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Project A-38 by the Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI), Texas A&M University, and Accessible Design for the Blind (ADB). Kay Fitzpatrick, TTI senior research engineer, was the principal investigator. The other authors of this report are Jeff Warner (associate transportation researcher, TTI), Billie Louise Bentzen (ADB), Janet M Barlow (ADB), Marcus A. Brewer (associate research engineer, TTI), Ben Sperry (assistant professor, formerly with TTI and currently with Ohio University). The work was performed under the general supervision of Dr. Fitzpatrick. The authors wish to acknowledge the many individuals who contributed to this research by participating in the phone interviews and assisting with site visits. Those individuals include (but are not limited to): Online and Phone Survey: • Craig MacDonald, Bi-State Development Agency – St. Louis Metro. • Vijay Khawani, Los Angeles Metro. • Ronald Nickle, MBTA – Boston. • John MacQueen, Metro Transit – Minneapolis. • Robert Pitts, Regional Transportation District – Denver. • Darryl Abansado, Sacramento Regional Transit District. • Michael Hursh, Santa Clara VTA. • Kurt Wilkinson, Tri-Met – Portland. • Dave Goeres, Utah Transit Authority. • James Hoskins, Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority – Austin. • Walter Heinrich, Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County – Houston. Boston Site Visit: • John Van Hoff, AECom. • Tim Huya, BNSF Railway. • Brian F. Gilleran, Federal Railroad Administration. • Tom R. Lancaster, Lancaster Engineering. • James Buckley-Waterman, MBCR. • Barry Osburn, MBCR. • Derek Weldon, MBCR. • Steven V. Culp, MBTA. • Tracey Kauffman, MBTA. • Arthur Munchbach, MBTA. • Joseph Kolb, Orientation and Mobility Specialist. • Ann Hershfang, Walk Boston. • Wendy Landman, Walk Boston. xi

Portland Site Visit: • Patricia Kepler, Independent Living Resources. • Mike Yamada, Oregon Commission for the Blind. • Peter Koonce, Portland Bureau of Transportation. • Paul Zebell, Portland Bureau of Transportation. • Bryon McNatt, Tri-Met. • Allen Morgan, Tri-Met. • Kurt Wilkinson, Tri-Met. • John Betts, Tri-Met Committee on Accessible Transportation Member. • Zoe Presson, Tri-Met Committee on Accessible Transportation Member. Los Angeles Site Visit: • Pauline Chan, City of Los Angeles DOT. • David Kao, City of Los Angeles DOT. • Khanh Vue, City of Los Angeles DOT. • Richard Franco, Junior Blind of America. • Chau Luc, Junior Blind of America. • Virginia Piper, Junior Blind of America. • Daniel Levy, LA Metro. • Zoric Sheynman, LA Metro. • Abdul Zohbi, LA Metro. • Tracy Berge, Metrolink. • Naresh Patel , Metrolink. • Deborah Murphy, Walk Los Angeles. xii

ABSTRACT There is a natural interaction between pedestrians and public transit rail services. To compile the guidance from other existing resources into one document, and to supplement that guidance with observations of existing pedestrian-rail treatments, TCRP sponsored this project to develop a Guidebook for pedestrian crossings of public transit rail services. Several research activities were conducted to develop the Guidebook including conducting a literature review, investigating online transit crash databases, performing online survey of practitioners, and conducting telephone interviews to ask for further details. The key research activity was visiting several public transit rail services crossings to observe the challenges faced by pedestrians at public transit rail services crossings. Site visits were made to Boston, Portland, and Los Angeles. The purpose of pedestrian crossing devices is to make pedestrians aware of the presence of the train and/or to prevent pedestrians from crossing at inappropriate times. Some of the crossing treatments fit within a traffic control device category while others, such as fencing, are part of the infrastructure provided at the crossing. A single crossing treatment or device will not be sufficient; rather a combination of devices is needed to communicate appropriate crossing locations and crossing times. xiii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY There is a natural interaction between pedestrians and public transit rail services. Transit rail services provide a high-capacity travel option for trips between major origin-destination pairs in an urban area, allowing pedestrians to travel to many more places than otherwise feasible on foot. Improving pedestrian access to transit rail stations obviously benefits the pedestrian by providing a safer and more usable route. Improving pedestrian access also benefits transit rail by resulting in a more attractive service and improved consistency at crossings. To compile the guidance from other existing resources into one document, and to supplement that guidance with observations of existing pedestrian-rail treatments, TCRP sponsored this project to develop a Guidebook for pedestrian crossings of public transit rail services. The Guidebook discusses issues associated with pedestrian crossing of public transit rail services and provides examples of treatments in use. Included within the Guidebook are summaries of transit rail service options, safety and accessibility issues related to pedestrians and rail crossings, and methods of selecting appropriate treatments for a given crossing. A collection of existing treatments is described, and case studies provide additional insight on the process for identifying and implementing pedestrian crossing treatments. Several research activities were conducted to develop the Guidebook including conducting a literature review, investigating online transit crash databases, performing an online survey of practitioners, and conducting telephone interviews to ask for further details. The key research activity was visiting several public transit rail services crossings within select regions. These visits provided the opportunity to observe the challenges faced by pedestrians at public transit rail services crossings and included observations made during three site visits to Boston, Portland, and Los Angeles. A synopsis of findings from the research activities follow. Rail Characteristics. The systems considered in this research—light rail, commuter rail, and streetcar transit systems—represent 58 unique transit rail systems that operated a total of 4,475 route-miles of service in 41 different urban areas of the United States. In 2011, more than 950.9 million unlinked passenger trips were made on these 58 systems, with trips covering more than 13.6 billion miles. The magnitude of these figures suggests that the transit rail systems within the scope of this research are important parts of the multimodal transportation system of the communities in which they operate. Pedestrian Characteristics. Pedestrians possess certain unique characteristics and behaviors that must be considered in the planning, design, and operation of pedestrian crossings for public transit rail services. Some of these characteristics include that pedestrians are slow, flexible, fragile, sensitive to their surroundings, and may be inattentive. Pedestrian Crossing Treatments. The purpose of pedestrian crossing devices is to make pedestrians aware of the presence of the train and/or to prevent pedestrians from crossing at inappropriate times. Several types of crossing treatments or devices are used at rail crossings. xiv