DOCSLIB.ORG

AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities Update of the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities Prepared for: The National Cooperative Highway Research Program Transportation Research Board of The National Academies Prepared by: Jennifer Toole, Principal Investigator OCTOBER 11, 2010 The information contained in this report was prepared as part of NCHRP Project 20-07/Task 263, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board. NCHRP 20-07/Task 263 Page 1 Update of the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities Acknowledgements This study was requested by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and conducted as part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 20-07. The NCHRP is supported by annual voluntary contributions from the state Departments of Transportation. Project 20-07 provides funding for quick response studies on behalf of the AASHTO Standing Committee on Highways. The report was prepared by a team led by Jennifer Toole of Toole Design Group. The work was guided by a task group which included George Branyan, Jim Ercolano, Eric Glick, Richard Haggstrom, Thomas Huber, Dwight Kingsbury, John N. LaPlante, Paula Reeves, Brooke Struve, R. Scott Zeller, and Gabriel Rousseau. The project manager was Christopher Hedges, NCHRP Senior Program Officer. Disclaimer The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board or its sponsors. The information contained in this document was taken directly from the submission of the authors. This document is not a report of the Transportation Research Board or of the National Research Council. NCHRP 20-07/Task 263 Page 2 Update of the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities Chapter 1: literature review The following is a compendium of relevant literature that will impact the update to the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities. Although the Pedestrian Guide was published in 2004, the majority of the writing of the Guide occurred earlier. For this reason, the literature search was conducted for relevant publications/studies that were published after 2000. In a few cases, the list includes earlier research that remains relevant and should continue to be the definitive source for certain aspects of the Guide. The literature review is organized in four categories: 1. Relevant national guidance/policy (non-research related) 2. State design guidance (key resources plus others) 3. Local design guidance (key resources plus others) 4. Pedestrian research Short summaries are provided for many resources. Where summaries were already available through abstracts written by resource authors or through PBIC’s walkinginfo.org website, those summaries were included in their original form or in some cases were adapted for this literature review. The sources below are numbered sequentially, in order to correspond to the footnotes in Chapter 3. It is important to note that this team has culled the most important sources that will serve as the best references, rather than include the titles of every document that has been written on this topic in the past ten years. The list below includes over 300 of the most relevant documents for the update to the AASHTO Pedestrian Guide. The order shown below should not be taken as an indication of importance of the source in terms of its use in the upcoming edition of the Guide. 1.1. RELEVANT NATIONAL GUIDANCE AND POLICY This section provides short summaries of various national design guidance and policy documents that are not addressed in other sections of the literature review. A number of the documents listed below are currently under revision and new editions are likely to be published prior to the development of the next edition of the AASHTO Pedestrian Guide. Changes that are made to these documents could have a significant impact on the content of the Guide. 1.American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 5th Edition, November, 2004 (as updated). 2.American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, A Guide for Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design, 2004. 3.American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Roadside Design Guide, 2002 (as updated in 2010). NCHRP 20-07/Task 263 Page 3 Update of the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities 4.Federal Highway Administration, Design Guidelines: Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel – A Recommended Approach, A US DOT Policy Statement on Integrating Bicycling and Walking into Transportation Infrastructure, 2002 5.Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation Policy Statement on Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodation Regulations and Recommendations, 2010. 6.Federal Highway Administration, Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access – Part 1 of 2, Review of Existing Guidelines and Practices, 1999. 7.Federal Highway Administration, Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access—Part 2, Best Practices Guide, September 2001. 8.Federal Highway Administration, Highway Design Handbook for Older Drivers and Pedestrians, May 2001. 9.Federal Highway Administration, Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2009. 10.Federal Highway Administration, Pedestrian Facilities Users Guide, 2002. 11.Federal Highway Administration, Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, 2000. 12.Federal Highway Administration, Planning Design and Maintenance of Pedestrian Facilities, 1989. 13.Institute for Transportation Engineers, Traffic Control Devices Handbook, 2004. 14.Institute for Transportation Engineers, Transportation Engineering Handbook, (as updated). 15.Institute for Transportation Engineers, Transportation Planning Handbook, (as updated). 16.Institute for Transportation Engineers, Urban Street Geometric Design Handbook, (as updated). 17.Public Rights-of-Way Access Advisory Committee. Special Report: Accessible Public Rights-of-Way, Planning and Designing for Alterations. Washington, D.C.: 2007 18.U.S. Access Board, Americans with Disabilities Act – Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Guidelines, 2004. (ADA-ABA-AG) 19.U.S. Access Board, Draft Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines, November 2005. 20.USDOT Memorandum, INFORMATION: Public Rights-of-Way Access Advisory, Federal Highway Administration. January 23, 2006. 21.USDOT, Transportation for Individuals with Disabilities; Adoption of New Accessibility Standards. 49 CFR Part 37 [Federal Register: October 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 209)]. Effective November 29, 2006. 22.Institute of Transportation Engineers, Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 1999. 23.Easter Seals, Accessible Pathways to Bus Stops and Transit Facilities: A Process Guide, 2009. NCHRP 20-07/Task 263 Page 4 Update of the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities 24.American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 1999. 25.Federal Highway Administration, Selecting Pedestrian Safety Improvements: Crash Types/Countermeasures Matrix (as updated). Available Online: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/saferjourney/library/matrix.htm 26.Federal Highway Administration, Designing Pedestrian Facilities For Accessibility Course, Available Online: http://www.in.gov/indot/files/DPFAModule5PedestrianCrossings.pdf, 2008 27.Federal Highway Administration, Signalized Intersections: Informational Guide, 2004. 28. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Roadway Lighting Design Guide, 2005. 29.American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Highway Safety Manual, 2010. 30.ITE, An ITE Proposed Recommended Practice: Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach, 2010 31.Federal Highway Administration in collaboration with the University of North Carolina’s Highway Safety Research Center, Training Course: Designing for Pedestrian Safety, http://www.walkinginfo.org/training/pbic/dps.cfm 32.Federal Highway Administration in collaboration with the University of North Carolina’s Highway Safety Research Center, Training Course: Developing a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan, http://www.walkinginfo.org/training/pbic/dpsap.cfm 1.2. STATE DESIGN GUIDANCE This section provides short summaries of key state design guides and lists others that may be relevant. State DOT Design Guides will be particularly important resources for the next AASHTO Pedestrian Guide, because state transportation officials are a primary audience. New pedestrian guides are published and updated by State DOT’s each year, therefore it will be necessary for the authors of the next AASHTO Pedestrian Guide to review new Guides in addition to those listed below prior to preparing the revised Guide. Key Resources 33.California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in California: A Technical Reference and Technology Transfer Synthesis for Caltrans Planners and Engineers, July 2005. This guide synthesizes information on policies, laws, programs, the planning and design process, guidelines, and best practices. The Technical Reference Section includes concept sheets on pedestrian facilities and traffic calming measures. The concept sheets include descriptive text, references, and many useful pictures,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Download The
    DEVELOPMENT OF AN AGENT BASED SIMULATION MODEL FOR PEDESTRIAN INTERACTIONS by MOHAMED HUSSEIN B.Sc., Ain Shams University, 2004 M.Sc., Ain Shams University, 2010 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Civil Engineering) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) December 2016 © Mohamed Hussein, 2016 Abstract Developing a solid understanding of pedestrian behavior is important for promoting walking as an active mode of transportation and enhancing pedestrian safety. Computer simulation of pedestrian dynamics has gained recent interest as an important tool in analyzing pedestrian behavior in many applications. As such, this thesis presents the details of the development of a microscopic simulation model that is capable of modeling detailed pedestrian interactions. The model was developed based on the agent-based modeling approach, which outperforms other existing modeling approaches in accounting for the heterogeneity of the pedestrian population and considering the pedestrian intelligence. Key rules that control pedestrian interactions in the model were extracted from a detailed pedestrian behavior study that was conducted using an automated computer vision platform, developed at UBC. The model addressed both uni-directional and bi- directional pedestrian interactions. A comprehensive methodology for calibrating model parameters and validating its results was proposed in the thesis. Model parameters that could be measured from the data were directly calibrated from actual pedestrian trajectories, acquired by means of computer vision. Other parameters were indirectly calibrated using a Genetic Algorithm that aimed at minimizing the error between actual and simulated trajectories. The validation showed that the average error between actual and simulated trajectories was 0.35 meters.
    [Show full text]
  • Minneapolis Transportation Action Plan (Engagement Phase 3)
    Minneapolis Transportation Action Plan (Engagement Phase 3) Email Comment Topic Comment # The recommendations in this submission expand on this principle and support the overall Transportation Action Plan goals of designing transportation to achieve the aims of Minneapolis 2040, address climate change, reduce traffic fatalities and injuries, and improve racial and economic equity. In line with these goals, our most significant recommendations for the Prospect Park area are to • Invest in the protected bike network: extending the Greenway over the River, and building the Prospect Park Trail along railroad right-of- way • Transform University Avenue and Washington Avenues • Complete the Grand Rounds and use the Granary corridor to redirect truck traffic Priorities for transportation improvements in Prospect Park 1. Improve pedestrian infrastructure throughout the community including safe crossings of University Avenue SE (Bedford, Malcolm, 29th and 27th), Franklin Avenue SE (Bedford, Seymour) and 27th Avenue SE (Essex, Luxton Park to Huron pedestrian overpass). We encourage the city to narrow residential intersections, particularly in Bicycling, the Tower Hill sub-neighborhood where streets do not meet at right Walking, 1 angles, and crossing distances are significantly longer than needed. Additional Planters and plastic delineators could be used to achieve this ahead of Comments reconstruction. Maintenance and improvements should focus on public safety, adequate lighting and landscape upkeep. Throughout the neighborhood residents have cited safety (particularly at night), sidewalk disrepair, narrowness, snow and ice issues, and have expressed support for full ADA compliance. 2. Complete the Minneapolis Grand Rounds and the Granary Corridor (see Map 2) to enhance community access to city and regional parks and trails as well as to adjoining neighborhoods.
    [Show full text]
  • Selection of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments at Controlled and Uncontrolled Locations
    JOINT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PROGRAM INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PURDUE UNIVERSITY Selection of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments at Controlled and Uncontrolled Locations Suleiman Ashur Mohammad Alhassan SPR-3723 • Report Number: FHWA/IN/JTRP-2015/03 • DOI: 10.5703/1288284315522 RECOMMENDED CITATION Ashur, S., & Alhassan, M. (2015). Selection of pedestrian crossing treatments at controlled and uncontrolled locations (Joint Transportation Research Program Publication No. FHWA/IN/JTRP-2015/03). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University. http://dx.doi.org/10.5703/1288284315522 AUTHORS Suleiman Ashur, PhD, PE Professor of Civil Engineering and Program Coordinator Department of Engineering Indiana University–Purdue University Fort Wayne (260) 481-6080 [email protected] Corresponding Author Mohammad Alhassan, PhD Associate Professor of Civil Engineering and Program Coordinator Department of Engineering Indiana University–Purdue University Fort Wayne ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would acknowledge the help and support provided by the following individuals throughout the study: served as the Project Administrator; and the SAC committee members: Michael Holowaty, Jessica Kruger, and Greg RichardsDana Plattner, from INDOT,who requested Rick Drumm the study from andthe FHWA, served and as the Hardisk Business Shah Owner; from American Shuo Li of Structurepoint, INDOT’s Research Inc. The Office, authors who also acknowledge the assistance of the following students: Jerry Brown, Allee Carlasgrad, Austin Eichman, Elizabeth McClamrock, and Paul Robinson. The authors are thankful for the assistance of Naseera Azad in proofreading the draft of the report. JOINT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PROGRAM The Joint Transportation Research Program serves as a vehicle for INDOT collaboration with higher education institutions and industry in Indiana to facilitate innovation that results in continuous improvement in the planning, https://engineering.purdue.edu/JTRP/index_html design, construction, operation, management and economic efficiency of the Indiana transportation infrastructure.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Impact Assessment of Phase I of the Downtown Crossing Project Promoting Pedestrian and Bicyclist Physical Activity and Safety
    2012 Health Impact Assessment of Phase I of the Downtown Crossing Project Promoting Pedestrian and Bicyclist Physical Activity and Safety Clara Filice, MD, MPH and Gregg Furie, MD April 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Content Page Foreword 1 Acknowledgements 2 Executive Summary 3 Introduction 6 Phase I of the Downtown Crossing Project: Summary of 9 Plan Features Health Impact Assessment of Phase I of the Downtown Crossing 11 Project: HIA Process and Methodology Assessment of Baseline Demographic and Health Conditions in New 14 Haven and the Area Demographics 14 Health Conditions 20 Assessment and Recommendations 24 Projecting Impacts and Providing Recommendations 24 Balancing HIA Recommendations with Other Project Goals 24 Promoting Physical Activity 24 o Existing Conditions Analysis Pedestrian and Bicyclist Environment Mode of Transportation o Projected Impacts and Recommendations Objective 1: Promoting Pedestrian Physical Activity Objective 2: Promoting Bicyclist Physical Activity Promoting Safety and Reducing Unintentional Injury 36 o Existing Conditions Analysis Crash Analysis Fatality Analysis o Projected Impacts and Recommendations Objective 3: Promoting Pedestrian Safety and Reducing Pedestrian Injury Objective 4: Promoting Bicyclist Safety and Reducing Bicyclist Injury Summary of Assessment and Recommendations 42 Limitations 43 Project Impacts and Future Directions 44 Conclusion 46 Appendices 47 FOREWORD The Downtown Crossing project has been the source of intense interest and debate among residents of New Haven. Residents of the surrounding communities and the City as a whole could benefit from the project’s potential to support new development, create jobs, and expand the existing tax base. Furthermore, many residents welcome the possibility that a redeveloped Route 34 East could provide enhanced facilities for all road users, including vehicle users, pedestrians, and bicyclists.
    [Show full text]
  • Pedestrian Scramble Crossings – a Tale of Two Cities
    Pedestrian Scramble Crossings – A Tale of Two Cities by Rajnath Bissessar, City of Toronto & Craig Tonder, City of Calgary ABSTRACT Pedestrian Scramble crossings (also called “exclusive pedestrian phase” or “pedestrian criss-cross”) have been used in a number of cities around the world to enhance the safety and mobility of pedestrians at signalized intersections. A dedicated phase for pedestrians allows them to cross in any direction, including diagonally, without coming into conflict with turning vehicles. In 2008, both Calgary and Toronto implemented pedestrian scramble phases at select downtown intersections. While pedestrian safety can be enhanced, other operational problems can arise, particularly for blind and visually impaired pedestrians who use guide dogs and/or the sound of traffic as cues to cross the intersection. This paper will outline the justification and analysis prepared in advance of the installations, along with the implementation process, including stakeholder consultation, design and education. The paper will also discuss the similarities and differences in the approaches adopted by Calgary and Toronto. Finally, the paper will discuss the findings from the evaluation studies completed for each project. 1 of 27 1. INTRODUCTION A pedestrian scramble phase is a traffic signal phase that provides pedestrians with exclusive access to a signalized intersection while vehicular traffic is stopped in all directions. This form of phasing is useful at intersections with heavy pedestrian traffic and vehicle turning volumes as it serves to reduce vehicle- pedestrian conflicts by providing exclusive phases for pedestrians, and sometimes, for motorists. A scramble phase is generally displayed as a red signal in all directions for vehicles in conjunction with the “Walk” display in all directions for pedestrians.
    [Show full text]
  • Ourhkfoundation Art Book We
    About the Authors Introduction: Our Museums the Hidden Gems of Hong Kong 3 CHANG HSIN-KANG (H. K. CHANG) Professor H.K. Chang received and holds one Canadian patent. In his B.S. in Civil Engineering from addition, he has authored 11 books National Taiwan University (1962), in Chinese and 1 book in English, M.S. in Structural Engineering from mainly on education, cultures and Stanford University (1964) and Ph.D. civilizations. His academic interests in Biomedical Engineering from now focus on cultural exchanges Northwestern University (1969). across the Eurasian landmass, particularly along the Silk Road. Having taught at State University of New York at Buffalo (1969-76), McGill Professor Chang is a Foreign Member University (1976-84) and the University of Royal Academy of Engineering of of Southern California (1984-90), he the United Kingdom and a Member of became Founding Dean of School of the International Eurasian Academy Engineering at Hong Kong University of Sciences. of Science and Technology (1990- 94) and then Dean of School of He was named by the Government Engineering at the University of of France to be Chévalier dans l’Ordre Pittsburgh (1994-96). Professor Chang National de la Légion d’Honneur in served as President and University 2000, decorated as Commandeur Professor of City University of Hong dans l’Ordre des Palmes Académiques Kong from 1996 to 2007. in 2009, and was awarded a Gold Bauhinia Star by the Hong Kong SAR In recent years, Professor Chang has Government in 2002. taught general education courses at Tsinghua University, Peking University, Professor Chang served as Chairman China-Europe International Business of the Culture and Heritage School and Bogazici University in Commission of Hong Kong (2000- Istanbul.
    [Show full text]
  • A Decision Support Tool to Identify Countermeasures for Pedestrian Safety
    UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations 1-1-2006 A decision support tool to identify countermeasures for pedestrian safety Madhuri Uddaraju University of Nevada, Las Vegas Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/rtds Repository Citation Uddaraju, Madhuri, "A decision support tool to identify countermeasures for pedestrian safety" (2006). UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations. 1993. http://dx.doi.org/10.25669/jf5i-dp7b This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A DECISION SUPPORT TOOL TO IDENTIFY COUNTERMEASURES FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY by Madhuri Uddaraju E.I.T Bachelor of Technology Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University - Kakinada, India 2003 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science in Engineering Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Howard R. Hughes College of Engineering Graduate College University of Nevada, Las Vegas December 2005 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 1436806 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Los Angeles Inter-Departmental Memorandum
    CITY OF LOS ANGELES INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM Date: November 19, 2018 To: Honorable City Council c/o City Clerk, Room 395 Attention: Committee Chair From: Seleta J. Reynolds,(ybneral Manager Department of Transportation Subject: Vision Zero Implementation Strategy for the Safety of the Traveling Public (CF 17-1137) SUMMARY This report addresses the Vision Zero prioritization methodology, proposes 20 new Priority Corridors and 60 Priority Intersections, and provides a status update on implementation of improvements on existing Priority Corridors. Per Council direction, the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) re-evaluated how it prioritizes safety projects on the City's High Injury Network (HIN) and proposes a new model for identifying Priority Corridors. LADOT also proposes a list of Priority Intersections consisting intersections where a high number of people have died or been seriously injured across all modes (vehicle, motorcycle, bicycle, and pedestrian). RECOMMENDATION LADOT recommends the Los Angeles City Council: 1. APPROVE the Vision Zero prioritization methodology. 2. APPROVE the list of new Priority Corridor locations. (Attachment 1) 3. APPROVE the list of new Priority Intersections. (Attachment 2) 4. RECEIVE AND FILE the update on Priority Corridors from 2017. (Attachment 3) BACKGROUND In 2015, Mayor Garcetti signed Executive Directive 10 to establish a goal of zero traffic fatalities by 2025 and included a set of policies and programs to achieve this goal. Vision Zero included the development of the City's first High Injury Network, which identified the 6% of city streets that account for 70% of deaths and serious injuries for people walking. Honorable City Council 2 November 19, 2018 In January 2017, the City of Los Angeles identified 40 Priority Corridors, a subset of the High Injury Network, to focus its first round of safety improvements.
    [Show full text]
  • Conditions for Setting Exclusive Pedestrian Phases at Two-Phase Signalized Intersections Considering Pedestrian-Vehicle Interaction
    Hindawi Journal of Advanced Transportation Volume 2021, Article ID 8546403, 14 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8546403 Research Article Conditions for Setting Exclusive Pedestrian Phases at Two-Phase Signalized Intersections considering Pedestrian-Vehicle Interaction Jiawen Wang , Chengcheng Yang , and Jing Zhao Business School, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200093, China Correspondence should be addressed to Jing Zhao; jing_zhao_traffi[email protected] Received 10 January 2020; Revised 11 December 2020; Accepted 23 December 2020; Published 6 January 2021 Academic Editor: Eleonora Papadimitriou Copyright © 2021 Jiawen Wang et al. ,is is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In order to analyze the effectiveness of setting exclusive pedestrian phase (EPP) under different vehicle yielding rates, the effect of EPPs on traffic efficiency is studied and a setting condition of EPP considering pedestrian-vehicle interaction is proposed in this paper. First, the main factors influencing the behavior of vehicles and pedestrians during pedestrian-vehicle interaction are analyzed, and a pedestrian-vehicle interaction (PVI) model at the crosswalk of urban road is established. Second, assuming that vehicle arrival obeys the Poisson distribution, the delay models of vehicle passengers and pedestrians crossing the street at the intersection are established, and taking the total delay of traffic participants as the main index, the setting condition of EPP are proposed. ,ird, based on the video of pedestrian-vehicle interaction at crosswalks, the parameters of the proposed model are calibrated. ,rough sensitivity analysis, the change of the total delay of traffic participants is analyzed under different conditions of pedestrian and vehicle arrival rates.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Motorized Transportation
    CHICAGO METROPOLITAN AGENCY FOR PLANNING | ON TO 2O5O REPORT Non-motorized Non-motorized Transportation Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 2 Safety for pedestrians and bicyclists ..................................................................................................... 2 Initiatives and policies ........................................................................................................................... 20 Trends in bicycling ................................................................................................................................. 24 Trends in walking and the pedestrian environment ....................................................................... 37 Walkability estimate .............................................................................................................................. 44 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................ 48 Non-Motorized Page 1 of 48 Transportation Introduction Enabling safe, convenient, and comfortable non-motorized transportation options for all of our region’s residents will help to create vibrant communities, improve equity and public health, and support local economies. For the purpose of this report, non-motorized transportation refers to two modes—walking and bicycling—which form key elements of the regional
    [Show full text]
  • An Integrated Approach to Estimate Pedestrian Exposure to Roadside Vehicle Pollutants
    An Integrated Approach to Estimate Pedestrian Exposure to Roadside Vehicle Pollutants by Fangzhou Su A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Sciences Department of Civil Engineering University of Toronto © Copyright by Fangzhou Su, 2014 ii An Integrated Approach to Estimate Pedestrian Exposure to Roadside Vehicle Pollutants Fangzhou Su Master of Applied Sciences Department of Civil Engineering University of Toronto 2014 Abstract At many urban intersections, pedestrians and vehicles share the same space, where interactions between pedestrians and vehicles may hinder vehicle turning movements. This changes the amount of emissions generated by the vehicles, to which the pedestrians are exposed. This research investigates the pedestrian-vehicle interaction at the intersection of St. George Street and College Street in downtown Toronto. A microscopic vehicle simulation is integrated with a microscopic pedestrian simulation. Emission generation and dispersion are modelled to obtain concentration maps for emitted pollutants. The spatial-temporal data of the pedestrians are then integrated into these concentration maps to calculate pedestrian exposure to vehicle pollutants. Lastly, this framework is applied to test the effects of implementing a scramble signalling system at the intersection of St. George Street and College Street. It is found that the implementation of a scramble phase would increase exposure to Nitrogen Oxides and decrease exposure to Carbon Monoxide. ii iii Acknowledgements Writing the thesis acknowledgement feels good, because it means the hard work of actually producing the thesis is complete. Looking back through the last 20 months, I realize that my research would not be the same without the support I’ve received from all of these people.
    [Show full text]
  • Pedestrian Scramble
    MEET LOS ANGELES MEET [YOURPEDESTRIAN CITY] SCRAMBLE l u A person walking is 16 times more likely to die in a crash than someone in a car. PedestrianHeading deaths 2have been steadily on the rise since 2015. The City’s Vision Zero initiative has aggressively begun installing safety devices, like pedestrianThis scramble style is operations, called Paragraph to better Textorganize in the the “Paragraph street and eliminate Styles” conflict. pane. l n The pedestrian scramble allows pedestrians to cross in all directions at the same time.Social The currencyscramble operation:knowledge is power bells and whistles, nor your work on this project has been really impactful, and are l2 § increases pedestrian visibility we in agreeance, nor i also believe it’s important for every § reduces conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians member to be involved and invested in our company and § reduces pedestrian crossing time and exposure l3 this is one way to do so blue money. § reduces the buffer zone between vehicles and pedestrians l The City Personalof Los Angeles development first implemented critical mass, the pedestrian so Q1 cannibalize scramble in 1956. SCRAMBLE CONTROLLED BY: After gridlockcross-pollination, conditions arose so duedrink to thelong Kool-aid. queues and I don’t delay, want the operationto drain l SIGNAL W/ DIAGONAL XINGS n SIGNAL W/O DIAGONAL XINGS was abandoned.the whole The swamp, pedestrian i just scramble want has to shoot returned some to Los alligators Angeles, biggershow u ALL-WAY STOP W/ DIAGONAL XINGS and betterpony than pushback. before. Level the playing field can I just chime in on that one, and no scraps hit the floor.
    [Show full text]