Champaign-Urbana Pedestrian Crossing Enhancement Guidelines SEPTEMBER 2017 CUUATS This document was developed for the member agencies of the Champaign-Urbana Urbanized Area Transportation Study (CUUATS), a program of the Champaign County Regional Planning Commission (CCRPC). CUUATS Policy Committee • Joan Dykstra – Village of Savoy, Chair • C. Pius Weibel – Champaign County, Vice-Chair • Bradley Diel – Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District • Deb Feinen – City of Champaign • Diane Marlin – City of Urbana • Craig Emberton – IDOT District 5 • Helen Coleman – University of Illinois CUUATS Technical Committee • Jeff Blue – Champaign County, Chair • Karl Gnadt – Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District, Vice-Chair • John Cooper – Champaign County • Dalitso Sulamoyo – Champaign County Regional Planning Commission • Andrew Johnson – Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District • Dave Clark – City of Champaign • Rob Kowalski – City of Champaign • Bill Gray – City of Urbana • Lorrie Pearson – City of Urbana • Bob Nelson – IDOT District 5 • Brian Trygg – IDOT District 5 • Stacey DeLorenzo – University of Illinois • James Sims – University of Illinois • Richard Helton – Village of Savoy • Levi Kopmann – Village of Savoy CUUATS Staff • Rita Morocoima-Black – Planning and Community Development Director • M. Sharif Ullah – Transportation Engineer (former) • Gabriel Lewis – Transportation Planner September 2017 Cover Photos (left to right, top to bottom): University Avenue at Walnut Street in Downtown Champaign; Broadway Avenue at Walnut Street in Downtown Urbana; Denton Drive at Church Street in Savoy; and Windsor Road at Vine Street in Urbana. 2 CHAMPAIGN-URBANA PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ENHANCEMENT GUIDELINES Contents CHAPTERS 1. INTRODUCTION 5 Pedestrian Crossing Needs 5 Previous Crosswalk Standards 5 Current Crosswalk Request Procedures 6 Crosswalk Installation & Safety 6 Crosswalks & Vulnerable Populations 6 Community Crosswalk Standards 6 Benefiting Agencies 7 2. CROSSING TREATMENT TOOLBOX 8 Pavement Markings 8 Signage 13 Hardscape 14 Lights & Signals 16 3. CROSSING TREATMENT DECISION 19 Best Practices 19 Guidelines for Pedestrian Crossing Treatments 20 Crossing Location Evaluation Procedures & Considerations 24 4. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS 32 Challenges 32 Development Effects on Pedestrians 32 Non-Infrastructure Efforts 32 Conclusion 33 5. SOURCES 34 6. GLOSSARY 35 CHAMPAIGN-URBANA PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ENHANCEMENT GUIDELINES 3 List of Figures Figure 1 University District Crosswalk Markings and Signage Guidebook 2011 Cover 5 Figure 2 Marked Crosswalk Types 9 Figure 3 Standard or Parallel Crosswalk 9 Figure 4 Continental Crosswalk 9 Figure 5 Box for Exclusive Period 9 Figure 6 Continental Crosswalk and Stop Bar Layout 10 Figure 7 Example of Stop Bars at Unsignalized Midblock Crosswalks 11 Figure 8 Bike Crossing, Crosswalk, and Stop Bar Layout 12 Figure 9 Pedestrian Crossing Ahead Sign 13 Figure 10 Pedestrian Crosswalk Sign 13 Figure 11 In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Sign 13 Figure 12 Stop Here for Pedestrians Sign 13 Figure 13 Gateway placement of In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Signs in Michigan 13 Figure 14 Combination Bike and Pedestrian Crossign Sign 14 Figure 15 Trail Crossing Sign 14 Figure 16 Ahead Sign 14 Figure 17 Diagonal Arrow Sign 14 Figure 18 Sidewalk and Curb Ramps with truncated domes 14 Figure 19 Refuge Island across Main Street in Downtown Urbana 15 Figure 20 Curb extension on Park Street in Downtown Champaign 15 Figure 21 RRFB light flashing on Windsor Road at Vine Street 16 Figure 22 RRFB Pushbutton 16 Figure 23 HAWK Signal on Bradley Avenue at the Developmental Services Center 16 Figure 24 Pedestrian countdown signal at Fourth and Green Streets 17 Figure 25 Pedestrian Scramble Phase at Green & Wright Streets 17 Figure 26 Flashing lights and crosswalk across Church Street in Savoy 18 Figure 27 NCHRP 562 Flowchart for Guidelines for Pedestrian Crossing Treatments 20 Figure 28 NCHRP 562 Worksheet 1 21 Figure 29 NCHRP 562 Worksheet 2 22 Figure 30 Crossing Location Evaluation Worksheet 26-27 Figure 31 Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Flowchart 29 List of Tables Table 1 Criteria for Crossing Treatments at Uncontrolled Locations 31 4 CHAMPAIGN-URBANA PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ENHANCEMENT GUIDELINES 1 Introduction Pedestrian Crossing Needs Previous Crosswalk Standards Pedestrians are legitimate users of the transportation From 2000 to 2013, staff from the Champaign-Urbana system, and they should, therefore, be able to use this Urbanized Area Transportation Study (CUUATS) were system safely. also staff for the Campus Area Transportation Study (CATS). The member agencies of CATS included the The decision to walk usually takes into account the City of Champaign, City of Urbana, University of Illinois, distance of the trip, the perceived safety of the route, and Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District (CUMTD). and the comfort and convenience of walking versus an alternative mode. As part of CATS work, the University District Crosswalk Markings and Signage guidelines was developed in In pedestrian-friendly cities, crossing locations are 2007 and updated annually until 2011 (see Figure treated as essential links in the pedestrian network. 1). However, there have never been any crosswalk The Champaign-Urbana region should strive to create guidelines developed for the greater Champaign-Urbana a convenient, connective, and continuous walking community. environment. Transportation engineers, planners, and designers all share a responsibility to find ways for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists to coexist conveniently and safely. At a starting point, roads should be designed with the premise that there will be pedestrians, that they must be University of Illinois able to cross the street, and that they must be able to do University District it safely. The design question is, “How can this task best Crosswalk Markings and Signage 2011 be accomplished?” Prepared by: Rita Morocoima-Black Eunah Kang Marked crosswalks are only one of multiple tools to Gabriel Lewis achieve this task, as discussed further in Chapters 2 and 3. Marking crosswalks serve two purposes: 1. They tell the pedestrian the best place to cross 2. They clarify that a legal crosswalk exists at a particular location April 2011 Figure 1: University District Crosswalk Markings and Signage Guidebook 2011 Cover CHAMPAIGN-URBANA PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ENHANCEMENT GUIDELINES 5 Therefore, striping a crosswalk at a location without Current Crosswalk Request appropriate enhancements can create a false sense of Procedures security for pedestrians, yet can decrease pedestrian safety in reality. Such a crosswalk installation could Marked crosswalk installation requests are analyzed make it less safe for pedestrians than if it had either no on a case by case basis by the City of Champaign, treatment or a higher level of treatment. City of Urbana, University of Illinois, and/or CUUATS, depending on the location of the request. These requests are made by residents and employees in the Champaign- Crosswalks & Vulnerable Urbana area. Populations In Urbana, public requests for marked crosswalks The 2005 FHWA study found that a greater percentage are submitted to Urbana Public Works (UPW). The of older adults and young children chose to cross in requestor is asked to fill out a Traffic Issues/Concerns marked crosswalks on multi-lane roads compared to two- Request (TICR) form. UPW staff reviews the TICR form lane roads. Thus, installing a marked crosswalk at an to determine if a study is needed, and if so, conducts already undesirable crossing location (e.g., wide, high- the study to determine the level of improvement needed volume street) may increase the chance of a pedestrian for the location in question. The completed study with crash occurring at such a site if a few at-risk pedestrians recommendation(s) is presented to the Urbana Traffic are encouraged to cross where other adequate crossing Commission for consideration, at which point public facilities are not provided. comment can be made. This explanation might be evidenced in cities nationwide by the many calls to traffic engineers from citizens Crosswalk Installation & Safety who state, “Please install a marked crosswalk so that we can cross the dangerous street near our house.” Of all road users, pedestrians have the highest risk of Unfortunately, simply installing a marked crosswalk being in a crash with a vehicle because they are the least without other more substantial crossing facilities often protected. does not result in the majority of motorists stopping and yielding to pedestrians, contrary to the expectations of A 2005 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) study many pedestrians. analyzed pedestrian safety at 1,000 marked and 1,000 unmarked crosswalks at uncontrolled locations across the United States. An uncontrolled location is an intersection Community Crosswalk without a traffic signal or all-way stop. Standards According to that study, there was no significant difference in pedestrian crash rates at marked versus A mechanism is needed to evaluate proposals for unmarked crossings under the following conditions: new crosswalks or changes to existing crosswalks that is consistent across all jurisdictions in the urbanized • Two-lane roads area. These guidelines aim to standardize and fairly • Multi-lane roads without raised medians and with determine warrants for installation of pedestrian crossing Average Daily Traffic (ADT) counts below 12,000 improvements. • Multi-lane roads with raised medians and with ADTs This document is intended to