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.
63 A P P E N D I X B Treatment and Comparison Site Examples of Pedestrian Count Summaries NCHRP Project 17-56 QC Pedestrian Volume Count Report Examples CITY AS RI RRFB PHB TREATMENT SITES COMPARISON SITES TUCSON, AZ 83 36 0 82 85 65 ST. PETERSBURG, FL 113 19 32 3 115 45 PORTLAND, OR 53 40 2 2 61 33 CHARLOTTE, NC 2 34 0 2 36 112 TOTAL (14 cities as of 8 Dec 2014) 292 313 50 96 499 476 AS = Advance Stop, RI = Refuge Island, RRFB = Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon, PHB = Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
64 Development of Crash Modification Factors for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Treatments Figure B-1. Example of a Tucson PHB with AS.
Treatment and Comparison Site Examples of Pedestrian Count Summaries 65 Figure B-2. Example of a Tucson PHB with RI and AS.
66 Development of Crash Modification Factors for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Treatments Figure B-3. Example of a St. Petersburg RRFB with AS.
Treatment and Comparison Site Examples of Pedestrian Count Summaries 67 Figure B-4. Example of a St. Petersburg AS.
68 Development of Crash Modification Factors for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Treatments Figure B-5. Example of a Portland RI.
Treatment and Comparison Site Examples of Pedestrian Count Summaries 69 Figure B-6. Example of a Portland RI.
70 Development of Crash Modification Factors for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Treatments Figure B-7. Example of a Charlotte Comparison Site (four lanes next to bus stop and no marked crosswalk).
Treatment and Comparison Site Examples of Pedestrian Count Summaries 71 Figure B-8. Example of a Charlotte RI without a marked crosswalk.