U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000
| < Previous | Table of Content | Next > |
This report documents efforts on and findings from Phase 2 of a cooperative agreement between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) Transportation Research Center (TRC), titled “Pedestrian Safety Engineering and Intelligent Transportation System-Based Countermeasures Program For Reducing Pedestrian Fatalities, Injuries, Conflicts, and Other Surrogate Measures” (Cooperative Agreement Number DTFH61-01-X-00018, UNLV Account Numbers: 2360-254-49BX, 2330-254-49CA and 2330-254-49CD UNLV/TRC/RR-02-03). Five state and local agencies in Nevada co-sponsored the program: City of Las Vegas, Clark County Department of Public Works, Nevada Department of Transportation, Nevada Office of Traffic Safety, and the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada. Several other local agencies and private sector organizations were cooperating partners: City of North Las Vegas, City of Henderson, Orth Rodgers Inc. etc.In Phase I: The effectiveness of a pedestrian safety plan to target higher-injury areas;
The goals of the program are to deploy and evaluate countermeasures (that were identified and developed in Phase 1) to help improve pedestrian safety and walkability (and reduce/minimize risk). The intent of this program is to serve as an example of what would lead to the implementation of successful pedestrian safety countermeasures across the nation. Some of the countermeasures deployed in Phase 2 have been selected in consultation with Florida (Miami-Dade County) team and San Francisco team. This is to permit a comparative evaluation of countermeasures at three different locations in the country.
A Geographic Information Systems (GIS) based methodology was used to identify high pedestrian risk zones and areas in the study area. Initially 16 high risk zones comprising of 47 pedestrian high crash sites were identified in the Phase 1. However, due to limited financial resources to improve pedestrian safety at all the identified locations, eighteen (18) pedestrian high crash sites were identified in the Las Vegas metropolitan area. Of these 18 locations, countermeasures were deployed at 14 locations with the remaining 4 sites as control sites, where none of the countermeasures were deployed. Seventeen countermeasures were initially selected to evaluate in this program Based on the risk associated at each site, multiple countermeasures were deployed at several sites. The deployment of these multiple countermeasures was done in phases to evaluate effectiveness of each individual countermeasure. Data were collected before and after each countermeasure deployment at sites. Statistical analyses were performed on the collected data to determine the significance of the changes in measures of effectiveness before and after deploying the countermeasure.
Although seventeen countermeasures were initially selected to evaluate in this program, it later reduced to fifteen, due to the unavailability of vendors to supply two of the countermeasures, “Enlarged Pedestrian Signal Heads” and “Advanced Warning Roving Eyes for Motorists.” However, a new countermeasure is added to the list and it would be installed at locations where “Enhancer LED Pedestrian Signals” were supposed to have been installed. This report documents the results of analyzes based on fifteen countermeasures excluding the pedestrian enhancer. The summary of the effectiveness of these countermeasures are as follows:
| 1) | "Turning Vehicles Yield to Pedestrians" signs: Significant improvement in motorists' yielding behavior, significant reduction in percent of pedestrians trapped in the middle of the street. |
| 2) | Advance yield markings for Motorists: Significant improvement in motorists' yielding behavior. |
| 3) | In roadway knockdown signs: Significant improvement in motorists' yielding behavior, reduction in percent of pedestrians trapped in the middle of the street. |
| 4) | ITS "No-Turn on Red" signs: Significant improvement in pedestrians' compliance. |
| 5) | Pedestrian call button that light up: Significant improvement in pedestrians' compliance, significant reduction in percent of pedestrians trapped in the middle of the street. |
| 6) | Warning signs for motorists: No significant improvement in either motorist or pedestrian MOEs. |
| 7) | High visibility crosswalk treatment: Significant increase in motorists yielding distance, significant improvement in pedestrians yielding behavior. |
| 8) | Median refuge: Significant improvement in motorists yielding behavior, significant increase in motorists' yielding distance, significant improvement in pedestrians yielding behavior |
| 9) | Smart lighting: Significant improvement in motorists' yielding behavior, significant reduction in percent of pedestrians trapped in the middle of the street, significant increase in percent of "diverted" pedestrians. |
| 10) | ITS automatic pedestrian detection devices: Significant improvement in motorists' yielding behavior, significant reduction in percent of pedestrians trapped in the middle of the street, significant increase in percent of "diverted" pedestrians. |
| 11) | Portable speed trailer: Significant increase in motorists' yielding distance. |
| 12) | Pedestrian activated flashing yellow: Significant increase in motorists' yielding distance, significant reduction in percent of drivers blocking crosswalk, significant improvement in pedestrian yielding behavior. |
| 13) | Pedestrian countdown signals with animated eyes: Significant improvement in pedestrians' looking for turning vehicles. |
| 14) | Danish offset: Significant improvement in motorists' yielding behavior, significant increase in motorists' yielding distance, significant reduction in percent of pedestrians trapped in the middle of the street, significant increase in percent of "diverted" pedestrians. |
| 15) | Pedestrian channelization: No significant improvement in either motorists' or pedestrians' MOEs |
| < Previous | Table of Content | Next > |
