01023214

Component

http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/1982-05

Pedestrians have a wide range of needs and abilities. FHWA’s "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways" includes a walking speed of 4.0 ft/s (1.2 m/s) for calculating pedestrian clearance intervals for traffic signals. It also includes a comment that where pedestrians who walk slower than normal, or pedestrians who use wheelchairs, routinely use the crosswalk, a walking speed of less than 4.0 ft/s should be considered in determining the pedestrian clearance times. A 2005 TCRP-NCHRP study found a 15th percentile walking speed for young pedestrians of 3.77 ft/s (1.15 m/s) and a 15th percentile walking speed for older pedestrians of 3.03 ft/s (0.92 m/s). The study also determined that there is a statistical difference in walking speeds between older (older than 60 years) and younger (60 years and younger) pedestrians. Using population projections and the 15th percentile walking speeds for each population group more than 15 years old, the proportionally weighted 15th percentile walking speed for 2045 is 3.56 ft/s (1.09 m/s). Comparing the findings from the TCRP-NCHRP study with previous work results in the following recommendations: 3.5-ft/s (1.07-m/s) walking speed for timing of a traffic signal; if older pedestrians are a concern, then a 3.0-ft/s (0.9-m/s) walking speed should be used.

01041100

English

pp 21-29

2006

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board

0309099927

Print

Figures (3) ; References (20) ; Tables (7)

Age groups; Aged; Crosswalks; Pedestrian clearance interval (Traffic signals); Pedestrian safety; Population forecasting; Statistical analysis; Walking; Wheelchairs

15th percentile walking speed; Walking speed

Data and Information Technology; Highways; Operations and Traffic Management; Pedestrians and Bicyclists; Safety and Human Factors; Society; I73: Traffic Control; I83: Accidents and the Human Factor

TRIS, TRB, ATRI

Jan 26 2007 3:55PM

• Accessible Pedestrian Signals: Effect of Device Features
• Analysis of Driver and Pedestrian Comprehension of Requirements for Permissive Left-Turn Applications
• Avoiding Biased Interpretation of Bicycle Surveys: Comparing Results from Four Distribution Methods in Winston-Salem, North Carolina
• Causative Factors and Trends in Florida Pedestrian Crashes
• Characteristics Related to Midblock Pedestrian–Vehicle Crashes and Potential Treatments
• Crossing Locations, Light Conditions, and Pedestrian Injury Severity
• Development of an Intersection Prioritization Tool for Accessible Pedestrian Signal Installation
• Development of Bicycle and Pedestrian Detection and Classification Algorithm for Active-Infrared Overhead Vehicle Imaging Sensors
• Estimating Bicycle Usage on a National Cycle Network
• Estimating Cycling Demand for the Journey to Work or Study in West Edinburgh, Scotland
• Exploration of Pedestrian Gap-Acceptance Behavior at Selected Locations
• From TIGER to Audit Instruments: Measuring Neighborhood Walkability with Street Data Based on Geographic Information Systems
• Index for Assessing Pedestrian Safety at Intersections
• Microscopic Parameter Identification of Pedestrian Models and Implications for Pedestrian Flow Modeling
• Motorist Yielding to Pedestrians at Unsignalized Intersections: Findings from a National Study on Improving Pedestrian Safety
• Observational Analysis of Pedestrian, Bicyclist, and Motorist Behaviors at Roundabouts in the United States
• Pedestrian Level-of-Service Model for Urban Arterial Facilities with Sidewalks
• Pedestrian Push-Button Confirmation Increases Call Button Usage and Compliance
• Recommended Walking Speeds for Timing of Pedestrian Clearance Intervals Based on Characteristics of the Pedestrian Population
• Safety in Numbers: Data from Oakland, California
• Sidepath Safety Model: Bicycle Sidepath Design Factors Affecting Crash Rates
• Variation of Walking Speeds on a Unidirectional Walkway and on a Bidirectional Stairway
• Walking in Waikiki, Hawaii: Measuring Pedestrian Level of Service in an Urban Resort District