Changes in road-user behaviours following % of the installation of - PDF document

28 th ICTCT Workshop in Ashdod, Israel Pedestrian injury problem in Israel on 29 th – 30 th October 2015 Changes in road-user behaviours following % of the installation of raised pedestrian 10 % 10 % 11 % 11 % 13 % 13 % 14 % total crossings on urban arterials injuries 33 % 33 % 34 % 34 % 34 % 33 % 42 % % of total Victoria Gitelman, fatalities Roby Carmel, Fany Pesahov, Sarit Chen Previous research: • Over 80% of pedestrian accident sites: on arterial/collector multi-lane streets , in city centers (Balasha et al. 2009) • Infrastructure measures most effective for increasing pedestrian safety Transportation Research Institute (Zegeer and Bushell, 2012) Technion – Israel Institute of Technology Raised pedestrian crossing solution Literature findings Guidelines for speed humps design and application (2002), for local streets : Hawley et al (1992), Australia : installation of raised crossings → a reduction of 40% in the 85-percentile speed Harkey and Zegeer (2004), USA : raised pedestrian crossing → a reduction of the 85-percentile speed from 47 km/h to 42 km/h Hakkert et al. (2002), Israel : on collector residential streets, the mean travel speed on the streets with raised pedestrian crossings was lower than on the comparison streets - 42 km/h vs. 53 km/h Ewing (2008), USA: raised pedestrian crossing → an increase in giving- way to pedestrians, from 20% to over 50% Elvik et al (2009): raised crossing is associated with 65% reduction in injury accidents [-83%;-27%], 42% reduction in pedestrian accidents [-70%;+11%] Current study - Method Study’s sites � Topic: raised pedestrian crossings installed on multi-lane � In 4 medium- and large-sized cities (population 45,000- divided streets , presenting main traffic arterials , with high traffic 200,000), in the center and the north of the country Karmiel volumes and high pedestrian activity, in the crossing areas Site requirements : � Study’s purpose: to examine the impact of the measure on • Dual-carriageway road segment with a built driver and pedestrian behaviors, and to deduce on a possible Netanya median, 2 lanes per direction and a marked impact on pedestrian safety crosswalk Herzlia • Speed limit of 50 km/h Hod Hasharon Method: a controlled field-study, where road • 85-percentile speed above 50 km/h, at least in user behaviors in the crosswalk areas are one direction compared during "after" vs. "before“ periods • Medium to high volume of pedestrian activity No of sites: 8 sites in 4 cities (over 30 crossings per hour) Field observations: speed measurements + • Straight and flat road segment video-recording • Visibility distance of at least 50 meters ahead 8 sites X 2 parts (travel directions) = 16 crosswalks examined

Study sites’ examples: before and after Building a raised crossing - components � Installing a trapezoidal speed hump on the crosswalk � Building a circular speed hump 15-20 m before the crossing � Adding traffic signs Before Before Site 2, Hod Hasharon Site 5, Netanya Example: site 1 (Hod Hasharon, Jabotinsky street), direction from west After After Example: Speed indicators - site 1 (Hod Hasharon) Behaviours examined � Vehicle travel speeds ( speed gun, 100 free-flowing vehicles ) Period - travel Mean sd 85 Percentile % above the direction speed* speed speed limit � Vehicles’ yielding to pedestrians at the crosswalk area Before - to 48.7 7.0 56.0 39% � Pedestrians crossing in the designated area After1 - to West West 26.1 4.3 30.9 0% � Conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles during pedestrian crossings After2 - to West 22.8 5.1 28.0 0% � Pedestrians’ following safe crossing rules Before - to East 43.6 6.5 50.9 15% After1 - to East 25.3 6.0 31.0 0% After2 - to East 24.9 4.8 29.0 0% 3 rounds of observations: *Sig. differences in before-after1, before-after2 comparisons, ANOVA test p<0.001, Tukey HSD p<0.001 Before - prior to installation of the new arrangement After1 - 1-2 weeks after the installation After2 After2 ~ two months after the Cumulative After1 installation, to examine long-term speed behaviour changes Before distributions, site 1 – to west: Each round’s duration (video- recording) : 6 hours, incl. 3 day- and 3 evening hours Road user behaviours before Road user behaviours after Site 3, Herzlia Site 3, Herzlia (After1)

Example: Behaviour indicators - site 1, to west Summary of behaviour changes – speeds* Behavior Indicator Before After1 After2 After1 After2 After2 vs. vs. vs. Study's Site Mean speed, km/h 85-percentile, km/h Before Before After1 ↓ * ↓ % of pedestrians stopped before 48% 32% 33% ns ↓ from 44-49 to 23-25 ↓ from 51-56 to 28-29 Site 1 the crossing ↑ ↑ ↑ ↓ from 46-47 to 26 ↓ from 52-53 to 32-33 % of pedestrians checked the 89% 96% 99% Site 2 traffic before the crossing ↓ from 56-58 to 28-29 ↓ from 64-66 to 36-37 Site 3 ↑ ↑ % of giving-way to pedestrians by 80% 95% 96% ns ↓ from 42-50 to 22-25 ↓ from 50-60 to 29-31 first vehicle, on near lane Site 4 ↑ ↑ ↑ % of giving-way to pedestrians by 63% 91% 98% ↓ # from 43 to 31 ↓ # from 47 to 39 Site 5 first vehicle, on far lane ↓ from 41-46 to 32-34 ↓ from 47-53 to 38-40 ↓ ↓ % of conflicts between pedestrians 2% 2% 0% ns Site 6 and vehicles in the crossing area ↓ from 51-52 to 36-37 ↓ from 60-61 to 44 Site 7 ↑ ↑ ↑ % of pedestrians performed a full 79% 95% 98% ↓ from 51-55 to 29-30 ↓ from 59-65 to 35-37 crossing at the crosswalk area Site 8 ↑ % of pedestrians performed a full 96% 98% 99% ns ns * Sig. differences at p<0.05 # in one direction only or partial crossing at the crosswalk area * Sig. differences at p<0.05, z-test Summary of changes in other behaviours (values)* Conclusions Study's sites % of % of % of giving- % of giving- % of % of ped’s Following the installation of the raised crossings: pedestrians pedestrians way to ped’s way to ped’s conflicts performed a - a significant decrease in vehicle speeds was observed which was stopped checked the by first by first full crossing at before the traffic before vehicle, on vehicle, on the crosswalk maintained over-time crossing the crossing near lane far lane area Site 1 to west ↓ from 48% ↑ from 89% ↑ from 80% ↑ from 63% ↓ from 2% ↑ from 79% - the rate of giving-way to pedestrians improved, the rate of to 33% to 99% to 96% to 98% to 0% to 98% vehicle-pedestrian conflicts decreased (if observed before) ↑ from 86% ↑ from 80% ↑ from 62% ↑ from 75% Site 1 to east ns ns - the percentage of pedestrians conducting a full crossing in the (1/3) to 99% to 98% to 100% (1%-0%) to 87% ↑ from 93% ↑ from 51% ↓ from 4% ↑ from 46% Site 2 to ns ns designated area increased (if was low before) north (1/3) to 95% (93%-97%) to 96% to 0% to 85% ↑ from 41% ↓ from 92% ↑ from 31% ↑ from 60% - no consistent changes in keeping safe crossing rules by Site 2 to ns ns south to 54% to 86% (72%-78%) to 73% (4%-3%) to 90% pedestrians ↓ from 98% ↑ from 96% Site 3 to ns ns ns ns north to 15% (100%) to 100% (100%) (0%) (98%-96%) ↓ from 91% ↑ from 92% Site 3 to ns ns ns ns south to 10% (100%-99%) (100%) (100%) (0%) to 98% ↓ from 16% ↑ from 98% ↑ from 76% ns ns ns Site 4 to north to 6% to 100%** (100%) (100%) (0%) to 85%** ↑ from 97% ↑ from 63% Site 4 to ns ns # ns south (7%) to 100% (98%) (0%) to 87% *Sig. differences at p<0.05 are given in colors **Sig. difference at p<0.1 # not relevant Conclusions � The changes in road user behaviors following the installation of Thank you! the raised crossings were positive and associated with a safety improvement of pedestrian crossing conditions � A positive impact was found for sites with various levels of traffic volumes and of crossing pedestrians � The treatment is recommended for application on arterial/collector urban roads. Positive changes will be more substantial at sites with problematic road user behaviors in the pre- treatment conditions