Pedestrian Signal Safety - AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety

and 3.40 ft./sec. for pedestrians older than 60 (based on 44 pedestrians). The study also compared
walking speeds at intersections with two-way left-turn lanes with walking speeds at intersections of
undivided arterials. Pedestrians had higher walking speeds at the intersections with two-way left-turn
lanes (Bowman and Vecellio 1994).
Coffin and Morrall conducted a study of walking speeds for pedestrians older than 60 at six field
locations in Calgary, Canada: two pedestrian-actuated mid-block crosswalks, two crosswalks at
signalized intersections, and two crosswalks at unsignalized intersections. Pedestrians were timed
from when they stepped off the curb until they stepped onto the sidewalk at the other side. The
measured distance for each intersection was the observed most-traveled path of pedestrians using
the crosswalk. After pedestrians crossed the road, they were intercepted and asked if they had time
to answer questions about the intersection. The interviews were used to determine pedestrians’ age.
Only those who consented to the interview were included in the study. MWS at the two signalized
intersection crosswalks was 4.50 ft./sec. and 4.60 ft./sec. The 15th-percentile speed at the two
signalized intersection crosswalks combined was 4.00 ft./sec. MWS at the signalized pedestrianactuated
mid-block crossings was 4.10 and 4.00 ft./sec., with a combined 15th-percentile speed of
3.30 ft./sec. (Coffin and Morrall 1995).
Rouphail summarized the recommendations related to pedestrian characteristics from the companion
volume, Review for Chapter 13, Pedestrians, of the Highway Capacity Manual. This study concluded
that “walking speeds need to be adjusted based on the proportion of older pedestrians at an
intersection.” Rouphail noted that the elderly proportion can materially affect the overall speed
distribution of a facility (Highway Capacity Manual 2000).
Gates, Noyce, Bill, and Van Ee conducted a literature review as well as an analysis of walking speeds
at 11 intersections in Madison and Milwaukee, Wisconsin. They found that pedestrians older than 65
had an MWS of 3.81 ft./sec. and a 15th-percentile speed of 3.02 ft./sec. For pedestrians of all ages
taken together, MWS was 4.60 ft./sec. and the 15th-percentile speed was 3.78 ft./sec. They found
that the 4.00-ft./sec. walking speed was the 58th-percentile walking speed for people older than 65.
Fewer than half of the older pedestrians observed in the study would be accommodated by traffic
signals with pedestrian clearance intervals (PCIs) timed for walking speeds of 4.00 ft./sec. (Gates et
al. 2006).
Gates, Noyce, Bill, and Van Ee found that the traffic control condition had a significant effect on
walking speed. At signalized intersections, pedestrians who began to cross under DON’T WALK
(DW) or flashing DON’T WALK (FDW) indications crossed approximately 0.50 to 0.60 ft./sec. faster
than those who began to cross under the WALK indication. The authors suggested that this finding
indicated that pedestrians understand that the FDW indication implies the impending release of
oncoming traffic and that pedestrians can walk at a slightly faster pace if necessary.
The Gates, Noyce, Bill, and Van Ee study found that there was a statistically significant effect on
walking speed when looking at two variables concurrently—traffic control condition and age. Older
pedestrians walked slowest at stop-controlled crossings; all other ages walked slowest under the
WALK indication of a signalized intersection.
The City of Berkeley, California installed PCD signals between December 2002 and March 2004
at various intersections throughout the city in an effort to enhance pedestrian safety at street
intersections (crosswalks). Because the PCD signals were considered non-standard traffic control
devices, the City of Berkeley was obligated to conduct a study for the California Traffic Control
Devices Committee to evaluate potential impacts of the new signals on pedestrian behavior at the
27