SE Division & Green Line:Overhead Flashing

Pedestrian Sign

By: Vanessa VictorScott Yoshida

Travis HillsLucas Sprague

Site Description Evaluation of Data

◦ Pedestrians◦ Bicyclists◦ Motor Vehicles

Observed Trends Site Comparison Issues/Proposed Solutions

Outline

Intersection: 2 travel lanes, a bike lane, and a bus stop, on each side of the 10 foot wide median

Total crosswalk length= 70 feet w/continental markings

Crossing occurs mid-block w/signalized intersection approximately 300’ to the East and West.

Motor vehicle speed 35 MPH both directions

Site Description

2 “Stop Here for Pedestrian” signs and 2 “Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing” signs as warning

Wide sidewalks for pedestrians from MAX, I-205 multi-use path, and bus stops

Adequate lighting/signage

Site Description

Site Description

Pedestrians and cyclists traveled from 4 to 3 and 3 to 4

Motor vehicles traveled from B to D and D to B

Crosswalk Data Collection Layout

Pedestrians crossed from 3 to 4 and from 4 to 3

Violations◦ Did not push button before crossing◦ IPod or other listening device

During observation period, no pedestrians were seen using cell phones while crossing On-street parking and buses prevent driver from seeing the pedestrians at crosswalk

Pedestrian Evaluation

Pedestrian EvaluationTotal Pedestrian Counts Violation Counts for Not

Using Button

 

From 3 to 4 From 4 to 3

0-15 (min) 14 9

15-30 (min) 5 4

30-45 (min) 2 0

45-60 (min) 7 4

Total 28 17

 From 3 to 4 From 4 to 3

0-15 (min) 2 9

15-30 (min) 0 0

30-45 (min) 2 0

45-60 (min) 1 1

Total 5 10

Five pedestrians from 3 to 4 and three pedestrians from 4 to 3 were seen using a listening device

Violation Data 15/45 = 33.33% did not use signal 8/45 = 17.78% using an iPod or similar

device 23/45 = 51.11% total undertook a

violation 6.33 seconds delay per approach

pedestrian= LOS A 4.8 minutes delay during observation

hour

Pedestrian Evaluation

Bicycle crossed from 3 to 4 and from 4 to 3 Violations

◦ Did not push button before crossing= T on chart◦ Were not wearing a helmet= H on chart

Bicycle Evaluation

During observation period, no cyclists were seen riding on sidewalk or using wrong side of road

On-street parking and buses prevent driver from seeing the cyclists at crosswalk

Bicycle EvaluationTotal Bicycle Counts Violation Counts for

Bicycles

*One cyclist rode from B to D w/o wearing a helmet

 From 3 to 4 From 4 to 3

0-15 (min) 4 6

15-30 (min) 4 8

30-45 (min) 3 3

45-60 (min) 4 2

Total 15 19

    From 3 to 4 From 4 to 3

0-15 (min) T 3 1

  H 0 0

15-30 (min) T 6 1

  H 0 1

30-45 (min) T 0 4

  H 0 0

45-60 (min) T 3 2

  H 0 1

Total   12 10

T= Did not push button, H= No helmet

Violation Data 20/35 = 57.14% did not use signal 3/35 = 8.57% did not wear a helmet 23/35 = 65.71% total undertook a violation

11.9 seconds delay per approach bicycle= LOS B

6.75 minutes of delay during observation hour

Bicycle Evaluation

Vehicles crossed from B to D and from D to B Violations

◦ Vehicle stops abruptly= A on chart◦ Vehicle does not stop for pedestrian= B on chart◦ Vehicle impedes on crosswalk= C on chart

Many drivers did not stop for pedestrian at crosswalk even when signal was flashing

Oregon law states drivers must stop and remained stopped for pedestrians until they have cleared your lane and adjacent lane

Law was violated numerous times

Motor Vehicle Evaluation

Motor Vehicle Evaluation

Violation Counts for Vehicles

A= Abrupt stop, B= No stop, C= Impedes on crosswalk

Pedestrians utilizing crosswalk tended to feel safer when a bus was making stop

Speeding motor vehicles not a concern b/c of controlled adjacent signalized intersections

Traffic “backing up” from intersection led to blind-spots and decreased crosswalk visibility

Majority of pedestrians/cyclists used signal and were cautious throughout

Observed Trends

NE Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Going Street examined

Unsignalized intersection Configuration of this crosswalk was similar to

SE Division and Green Line Vehicles extremely respondent Trend attributed to driver expectation at

crosswalk Drivers expected to yield for pedestrians/

bicyclists

Crosswalk Comparison

Crosswalk Comparison

On-street parking Overhead flashing pedestrian sign

◦ Signal placement◦ Flashing signal length

Crosswalk Issues

Issue: Parked cars on south side of Division preventing drivers from seeing the pedestrians/cyclists

Solution: Remove some on-street parking stalls close to the crosswalk

On-Street Parking

Issue 1 Signal placed above median which is not in the

driver’s line of sight Many drivers do not slow down when signal is

flashing Daily drivers familiar with flashing when no

pedestrians present which leads to behavioral habits such as not slowing down

Drivers did not see signal b/c more concentrated on intersection ahead

Overhead Flashing Sign

Solution 1: Place separate signals above westbound and eastbound lanes

Placement will be in line of sight of the drivers Solution 2: Remove signal and place in-

pavement lighting(shown at right)

Overhead Flashing Sign

Overhead Flashing Sign

Solution 3: HAWK signal for each direction of traffic (shown below)

Issue 2: Signal flashes for two minutes after button is pressed

Solution: Change signal time to 30 seconds MUTCD- design for 3.5 feet per second which

would mean 20 seconds of signal flash for the 70 foot crosswalk.

Overhead Flashing Sign

Questions?