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.
NCHRP Web-Only Document 312 Enhancing Pedestrian Volume Estimation and Developing HCM Pedestrian Methodologies for Safe and Sustainable Communities Paul Ryus Anusha Musunuru Kelly Laustsen James Bonneson Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, VA Sirisha Kothuri Christopher Monsere Nathan McNeil Portland State University Portland, OR Krista Nordback Seth LaJeunesse Wesley Kumfer Libby Thomas University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center Chapel Hill, NC S. Ilgin Guler The Pennsylvania State University State College, PA Conduct of Research Report for NCHRP Project 17-87 Submitted April 2020 NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed, and implementable research is the most effective way to solve many problems facing state departments of transportation (DOTs) administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local or regional interest and can best be studied by state DOTs individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation results in increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 initiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniquesâthe National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), United States Department of Transportation, under Agreement No. 693JJ31950003. 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, FTA, GHSA, NHTSA, or TDC 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 Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; the FHWA; 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 was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation improvements and innovation through trusted, timely, impartial, and evidence-based information exchange, research, and advice regarding all modes of transportation. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 8,000 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 individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.
C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP WEB-ONLY DOCUMENT 312 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Waseem Dekelbab, Associate Program Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Jarrel McAfee, Senior Program Assistant Natalie Barnes, Director of Publications Heather DiAngelis, Associate Director of Publications Janet M. McNaughton, Senior Editor Jennifer Correro, Assistant Editor NCHRP PROJECT 17-87 Field of TrafficâArea of Safety George R. Branyan, District Department of Transportation, Washington, DC DeWayne David Carver, Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, FL Casey-Marie Claude, Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS), Boston, MA Jacqueline DeWolfe, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Boston, MA Carissa Dale McQuiston, Michigan Department of Transportation, Lansing, MI Barbara Katherine Ostrom, Wood, Vienna, VA Keith A. Robinson, Gray Bowen Scott, Walnut Creek, CA Yiyi Wang, San Francisco State University, Fremont, CA Joyce Yassin, WSP, Detroit, MI Jeremy Raw, FHWA Liaison Richard A. Cunard, TRB Liaison
iv Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... vi LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... ix SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Guide to Pedestrian Analysis.................................................................................................................. 2 Pedestrian Satisfaction Crossing Roadways Treated with Safety Countermeasures .............................. 3 Updates to HCM Pedestrian Delay Methods .......................................................................................... 5 Pedestrian Network QOS ....................................................................................................................... 7 References .............................................................................................................................................. 8 CHAPTER 1. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................ 9 Overview ................................................................................................................................................ 9 Research Problem Statement ................................................................................................................ 10 Work Scope .......................................................................................................................................... 11 CHAPTER 2. STATE OF THE PRACTICE .................................................................................. 13 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 13 Literature Review ................................................................................................................................. 13 Assessment of HCM 6th Edition Methods ............................................................................................ 17 Stakeholder Interviews ......................................................................................................................... 18 Development of the Phase II Work Plan .............................................................................................. 21 CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH APPROACH ........................................................................................ 24 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 24 Pedestrian Crossing Satisfaction and Safety Countermeasures ............................................................ 24 Estimating Pedestrian Delay ................................................................................................................. 55 Pedestrian Network QOS ..................................................................................................................... 92 CHAPTER 4. FINDINGS AND APPLICATIONS ...................................................................... 100 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 100 Pedestrian Crossing Satisfaction and Safety Countermeasures .......................................................... 100 Estimating Pedestrian Delay ............................................................................................................... 130 Pedestrian Network LOS .................................................................................................................... 152
v CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTED RESEARCH .................................... 157 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................157 Suggested Research ..................................................................................................................161 CHAPTER 6. REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 164 APPENDIX A: LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................. 168 Introduction .............................................................................................................................168 Techniques for Efficient and Accurate Estimation of Pedestrian Volume and Exposure .................169 Performance Measures for Evaluating Pedestrian Safety, Operations, Mobility, and Satisfaction ..............................................................................................................................173 Pedestrian Safety Countermeasure Effects on Pedestrian Safety, Operations, and Quality of Service.....................................................................................................................................186 Current HCM Methods for Evaluating On-Street Pedestrian Operations and Quality of Service.....................................................................................................................................192 Summary .................................................................................................................................213 References ...............................................................................................................................218 APPENDIX B: STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS ................................................................ 230 Introduction .............................................................................................................................230 Interview Results ......................................................................................................................231 APPENDIX C: RESEARCH APPROACH ATTACHMENTS ........................................... 248 Attachment C1: Intercept Survey Instrument ..............................................................................248 Attachment C2: Video Data Collection ......................................................................................258 Attachment C3: Naturalistic Walking Study ...............................................................................274 Attachment C4: Pedestrian Network LOS ..................................................................................277 APPENDIX D: RESEARCH PROBLEM STATEMENTS .................................................. 280 Introduction .............................................................................................................................280 Group 1: Pedestrian Safety Countermeasure Satisfaction Measures ..............................................280 Group 2: Sidewalk and Intersection Quality of Service ................................................................282 Group 3: Operational Measures .................................................................................................288 References .......................................................................................................................................... 294 Note: NCHRP Web-Only Document 312 is associated with NCHRP Research Report 992: Guide to Pedestrian Analysis. Readers can read or purchase NCHRP Research Report 992 at www.trb.org.
vi List of Tables Table S-1. Effect of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments on Motorist Yielding Rates. ...................................... 5 Table 2-1. Key Factors Affecting Pedestrian Crash Frequency. ................................................................. 14 Table 2-2. Key Factors Affecting Pedestrian Crash Severity. .................................................................... 14 Table 2-3. Key Factors Affecting Pedestrian Speed. .................................................................................. 15 Table 2-4. Effects of Pedestrian Safety Countermeasures on Pedestrian Operations and LOS at Intersections. ......................................................................................................................................... 16 Table 2-5. Interviewee Response Rate by Organization Type. ................................................................... 19 Table 3-1. RRFB Treated and Control Crossing Sites. ............................................................................... 26 Table 3-2. Median Island Treated and Control Crossing Sites. .................................................................. 27 Table 3-3. LPI Treated and Control Signalized Crossing Sites. ................................................................. 28 Table 3-4. Results of Speed Investigation along MLK Jr. Blvd. in Chapel Hill ......................................... 30 Table 3-5. Response Rates at RRFB and RRFB Control Survey Sites. ...................................................... 36 Table 3-6. Response Rates at Median Island and Median Island Control Survey Sites. ............................ 37 Table 3-7. Response Rates at LPI and LPI Control Survey Sites. .............................................................. 38 Table 3-8. Crosswalk Intercept Survey Response Summary. ..................................................................... 39 Table 3-9. RRFB and Control Sites Video Data Collection. ...................................................................... 48 Table 3-10. Median Island Treated and Control Sites Video Data Collection. .......................................... 49 Table 3-11. LPI Treated and Control Sites Video Data Collection. ........................................................... 50 Table 3-12. Participant Information. ........................................................................................................... 52 Table 3-12. Summary of Motorist Yield Rates for Alternative Pedestrian Crossing Treatments. .............. 60 Table 3-13. Pedestrian LOS and Delay Thresholds. ................................................................................... 87 Table 3-14. Measures of Pedestrian Connectivity Used in Planning Literature. ........................................ 93 Table 3-15. Methods Related to Pedestrian QOS Used in Planning Literature .......................................... 96 Table 3-16. Pedestrian LOS Score Thresholds. .......................................................................................... 98 Table 3-17. Sidewalk Condition. ................................................................................................................ 99 Table 3-18. Physical Buffer Type. .............................................................................................................. 99 Table 4-1. Survey Respondent Satisfaction by Crossing Type. ................................................................ 101 Table 4-2. Comparison of Treated and Controlled Unsignalized Crossings. ............................................ 101 Table 4-3. Pedestrian Satisfaction at Unsignalized Intersections by Speed Limit. ................................... 102 Table 4-4. Ethnicity and Gender of Respondents. .................................................................................... 102 Table 4-5. Age and Gender of Respondents. ............................................................................................ 103 Table 4-6. Trip Purpose. ........................................................................................................................... 104 Table 4-7. Travel to and from Public Transit. ........................................................................................... 104 Table 4-8. Trip Length. ............................................................................................................................. 105 Table 4-9. Responses to Frequency of Crosswalk Use. ............................................................................ 105 Table 4-10. Level of Agreement with Statements. ................................................................................... 106 Table 4-11. Unsignalized Intersection Crossing Satisfaction with Agreement with Feelings of Being Delayed. ................................................................................................................................... 106 Table 4-12. Summary of Observed Relationships between Pedestrian Satisfaction and Agreement with Statements. ................................................................................................................................. 107 Table 4-13. Percentage of Motorists Yielding to Pedestrians at Unsignalized Crossings by Treatment Type. ................................................................................................................................. 108 Table 4-14. Satisfaction of Pedestrians with Motorist Yielding at Unsignalized Crossings. ................... 108 Table 4-15. Pedestrian Crossing Satisfaction when Delayed due to Motorist. ......................................... 109 Table 4-16. Pedestrian Crossing Satisfaction Related to Delay from Signal Timing at Signalized Intersections. ..................................................................................................................... 109
vii Table 4-17. Pedestrian Crossing Satisfaction Related to Delay from Signal Timing at Signalized Intersections. ....................................................................................................................................... 109 Table 4-18. Pedestrian Crossing Satisfaction Relationship with Interactions. ......................................... 110 Table 4-19. Rotated Factor Loadings for Eight Survey Response Questions at Signalized Sites. ........... 111 Table 4-20. Logistic Regression Model for Signalized Sites with Survey Results. .................................. 112 Table 4-21. Logistic Regression Model for Signalized Sites without Survey Results.............................. 113 Table 4-22. Rotated Factor Loadings for Eight Survey Response Questions at Signalized Sites. ........... 114 Table 4-23. Logistic Regression Model for Unsignalized Sites with Survey Results. ............................. 116 Table 4-24. Logistic Regression Model for Unsignalized Sites without Survey Results. ........................ 118 Table 4-25. Descriptive Statistics for Unsignalized Sites with Median. ................................................... 120 Table 4-26. Descriptive Statistics for Unsignalized Sites without Median. .............................................. 122 Table 4-27. RRFB and Control Sites Descriptive Statistics. .................................................................... 123 Table 4-28. Median Island and Control Sites Descriptive Statistics. ........................................................ 124 Table 4-29. Signalized Sites Descriptive Statistics. .................................................................................. 125 Table 4-30. Correlation among Participantsâ EDA and Heartrate (HR) Readings. .................................. 126 Table 4-31. Multilevel Mixed Effects Generalized Linear Model Results for Participantsâ Electro- dermal Activity and Heart Rate, with a Random Interval Fit at the Level of Participantsâ Trips. ........ 128 Table 4-32. Proposed HCM Default Motorist Yield Rates for Alternative Pedestrian Crossing Treatments. .......................................................................................................................................... 136 Table 4-33. Study Site Characteristics. ..................................................................................................... 137 Table 4-34. Geometric Features of the Street Being Crossed. .................................................................. 138 Table 4-35. Traffic Characteristics at the Subject CrossingâMotorized Vehicles. ................................. 140 Table 4-36. Traffic Characteristics at the Subject CrossingâPedestrians. .............................................. 141 Table 4-37. Data Obtained from FDOT for PLOS and PLTS Calculation. .............................................. 153 Table A1. Methods for Counting Pedestrians. .......................................................................................... 170 Table A2. Barriers Associated with Pedestrian Counting Methods. ......................................................... 171 Table A3. Pedestrian Crash Risk Factors. ................................................................................................. 174 Table A4. Summary of Walking Speeds (ft/s) Based on Age. .................................................................. 177 Table A5. Summary of SpeedâDensity Studies. ....................................................................................... 179 Table A6. Summary of Studies on Pedestrian Satisfaction. ...................................................................... 182 Table A7. List of Commonly Used Pedestrian Countermeasures. ............................................................ 187 Table A8. Factors Affecting Pedestrian Safety at Intersections................................................................ 188 Table A9. Key Factors Impacting Pedestrian Safety at Crosswalks. ........................................................ 189 Table A10. Summary of Countermeasure CMFs. ..................................................................................... 191 Table A11. Limitations of Current HCM Pedestrian Methods. ................................................................ 212 Table A12. Key Factors Affecting Pedestrian Crash Frequency. ............................................................. 214 Table A13. Key Factors Affecting Pedestrian Crash Severity. ................................................................. 214 Table A14. Key Factors Affecting Pedestrian Speed................................................................................ 214 Table A15. Effects of Pedestrian Safety Countermeasures on Pedestrian Operations and LOS at Intersections ........................................................................................................................................ 215 Table B1. Organizations Interviewed by Type. ........................................................................................ 231 Table B2. Interviewee Ratings of Potential Research Topics. .................................................................. 245 Table C1-1. Chapel Hill Surveyors. .......................................................................................................... 256 Table C1-2. Portland Surveyors. ............................................................................................................... 257 Table C2-1. Timing for Unsignalized Crosswalks with Medians. ............................................................ 263 Table C2-2. Timing for Unsignalized Crosswalks with No Median......................................................... 264 Table C2-3. Comparison of Vehicle Volume and Pedestrian Crossing Time and Delay Metrics. ........... 270 Table C2-4. Summary of Interrater Reliability for Categorical Variables. ............................................... 270 Table D1. Summary of CMFs for Pedestrian Safety Countermeasures (Adapted from NCHRP 17-73). .................................................................................................................................. 281 Table D2. Cost per Countermeasure Study. .............................................................................................. 282
viii Table D3. Cost for Urban Sidewalk QOS Study. ..................................................................................... 284 Table D4. Cost for Rural Pedestrian Facility QOS Study. ........................................................................ 285 Table D5. Cost for LOS Methods for Intersection Forms Not Addressed in the HCM Study. ................ 286 Table D6. Cost for Driveway Crossings Study. ........................................................................................ 287 Table D7. Cost for Basic Crosswalk Questions Study. ............................................................................. 289 Table D8. Cost for High-Volume Pedestrian Facilities Study. ................................................................. 291 Table D9. Cost for Effects of Pedestrian Delay Study. ............................................................................. 292 Table D10. Cost for Pedestrian Crossing Spacing Study. ......................................................................... 293 Table D11. Cost for Building Entrance and High-Volume Transit Stops Study. ..................................... 294
ix List of Figures Figure S-1. Conceptual network connectivity map. ...................................................................................... 8 Figure 3-1. Distance Measurements for LIDAR Speed Gun Data Collection. ........................................... 30 Figure 3-2. Histogram of Motorist Speeds at RRFB Crossing of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. near Chapel Hill Town Hall. ........................................................................................................................ 31 Figure 3-3. Extendable Pole with Camera Attached and Battery Pack, Chapel Hill; Setting up Intercept Survey Camera, Portland. ...................................................................................................... 33 Figure 3-4. Camera Angles and View of an Unmarked Crossing on NC-54, Chapel Hill. ........................ 34 Figure 3-5. Camera Angles and View of a Signalized Crossing on Raleigh Rd, Chapel Hill. ................... 34 Figure 3-6. Camera Angles and View of a RRFB crossing on MLK Blvd, Chapel Hill. ........................... 35 Figure 3-7. Camera Setup at Southern LPI crosswalk on Columbia St and Rosemary St, Chapel Hill. ....................................................................................................................................................... 42 Figure 3-8. Camera Angles and Screenshots of Eastern LPI Crosswalk on Raleigh Rd and Hamilton Rd, Portland. ......................................................................................................................... 43 Figure 3-9. Motor Vehicle Maneuvers Relevant to the Studied Crosswalk................................................ 47 Figure 3-10. Example Visualization of a Participantâs Walking Trip, with Time- and Location- bound EDA and HR Readings. ............................................................................................................. 54 Figure 3-11. Intersection Traffic Movement and Crosswalk Numbering Scheme. .................................... 67 Figure 3-12. Pedestrian Movement and Crosswalk Numbering Scheme for Two-stage Crossing. ............ 68 Figure 3-13. Pedestrian Movement and Crosswalk Numbering Scheme with Diagonal Movements. .......................................................................................................................................... 71 Figure 3-14. Example Phase Sequence for Two-stage Crossing Shown Using Dual-ring Structure. ......... 76 Figure 3-15. Example Phase Sequence for Diagonal Crossing Shown Using Dual-ring Structure. ........... 82 Figure 4-1. Participantsâ Mean and Maximum EDA Values while Walking through Various Land Use and Roadway Environments. ....................................................................................................... 127 Figure 4-2. Participantsâ Mean and Maximum Heart Rate Values while Walking through Various Land Use and Roadway Environments. ............................................................................................. 129 Figure 4-3. Influence of Vehicular Traffic Volume on Pedestrian DelayâExisting Methodology. ........ 132 Figure 4-4. Influence of Vehicular Traffic Volume on Pedestrian DelayâGroup 1 Revisions. .............. 134 Figure 4-5. Influence of Vehicular Traffic Volume on Pedestrian DelayâGroup 1 & 2 Revisions. ....... 135 Figure 4-4. Comparison of Predicted and Measured Crossing Time. ....................................................... 142 Figure 4-5. Comparison of Predicted and Measured DelayâCrossings without a Left-turn Lane. ......... 144 Figure 4-6. Comparison of Predicted and Measured DelayâCrossings with a Left-turn Lane. .............. 144 Figure 4-7. Influence of Intersection and Link LOS Score on Segment LOSâExisting Methodology. ..................................................................................................................................... 146 Figure 4-8. Influence of Roadway Crossing Difficulty on Segment LOSâExisting Methodology. ....... 147 Figure 4-9. Influence of Segment Length on Segment LOSâExisting Methodology. ............................ 148 Figure 4-10. Influence of Intersection and Link LOS Score on Segment LOSâProposed Changes. ............................................................................................................................................. 149 Figure 4-11. Influence of Roadway Crossing Difficulty on Segment LOSâProposed Changes. ........... 150 Figure 4-12. Influence of Segment Length on Segment LOSâProposed Changes. ................................ 151 Figure 4-12. Pedestrian Level of Traffic Stress (PLTS) for Roadway Segments in Tampa. .................... 154 Figure 4-13. Pedestrian Level of Service (PLOS) for Roadway Segments in Tampa. ............................. 155 Figure 5-1. Extract from a Connectivity Island Map for Fort Collins, Colorado. .................................... 160 Figure A1. Sensitivity of HCM Pedestrian Signalized Intersection LOS to Input Factors. ...................... 197 Figure A2. Sensitivity of HCM Pedestrian Link LOS to Input Factors. ................................................... 200 Figure A3. Sensitivity of the Roadway Crossing Difficulty Factor to Input Factors. ............................... 201
x Figure A4. Sensitivity of Pedestrian Space LOS to Input Factors. ........................................................... 205 Figure A5. Sensitivity of HCM Pedestrian Uncontrolled Crossing Delay LOS to Input Factors. ............ 207 Figure C1-1. Turning Movement Diagram for Counting Motorists. ........................................................ 255