Pedestrian Crossing Specification and Guidance

Transcription

1 Pedestrian Crossing Specification and Guidance April 2011

2 1 Pedestrian Crossing Provision Introduction Types of Facility Requests for a Pedestrian Crossing Assessing the Need for a Pedestrian Crossing Assessment On site Assessment Site Survey Traffic Survey Crossing Need Assessment Justification for a Crossing Choosing the Most Appropriate Form of Pedestrian Crossing Forms of Crossing Uncontrolled Crossing at a Refuge Island Zebra Controlled Crossing Signal Controlled Crossing School Warden Crossing Patrol Design and Installation of a Pedestrian Crossing Visibility Positioning Relative to Side Road Crossing Width Road Markings and Signs Lighting Skid Resistance of Road Surface Drainage at the Crossing Dropped Kerbs and Tactile Paving Guard Railing Specific Zebra Crossing Issues Specific Signal Controlled Crossing Issues Toucan Crossings Standard Detail Drawings and Specification References Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Pedestrian Crossing Site Assessment... A1 Pedestrian and Vehicle Count Survey Summary... B1 Pedestrian Crossing Need Assessment... C1 Worked Example of Pedestrian Crossing Assessment... D1 Typical Crossing Times for Signalised Crossings... E1

3 1 Pedestrian Crossing Provision 1.1 Introduction This document is intended as good practice guidance for the provision of pedestrian crossings within 50km/h or 60km/h speed limits on national roads. Pedestrian facilities at signal controlled junctions are not covered by this document. Pedestrians need adequate gaps in traffic to cross a road. In relatively low speed urban environments (up to around 50km/h) a gap of 4 6 seconds is adequate for most able bodied adult pedestrians to cross a 7m wide two lane road. Child and elderly pedestrians may have more difficulty judging speed and safe gaps in traffic and therefore will require longer gaps. Visually impaired pedestrians, wheelchair users and people with walking difficulties will require longer gaps of around seconds. The number of safe gaps decreases with the increase in traffic volume and hence different forms of crossing are appropriate for different sites. The availability of safe gaps can be determined by site survey and compared with crossing demand. 1.2 Types of Facility Crossing facilities fall broadly into three types; Uncontrolled crossing, often with a central refuge island Controlled Zebra crossing, with black & white road markings and amber flashing beacons Controlled Signalised crossing, with a pushbutton facility for the pedestrian These types are described in more detail in Chapter 3. It should be noted that crossings are an amenity to aid access and make it easier to cross a road. The provision of a controlled crossing will not necessarily reduce collisions and may even lead to an increase in collisions. Where a controlled crossing is present some pedestrians assume that the appearance of the green man display, or the act of stepping onto a zebra crossing, gives an assured safe crossing opportunity and do not keep alert for approaching vehicles. However some drivers do not always stop when required to do so and occasionally pedestrians are injured on the crossing, or there are nose to tail shunt accidents on the approaches as drivers brake suddenly. The provision of good inter visibility between pedestrian and driver (see Section 4.1) and high friction surface (see Section 4.6) can help to minimise this. Figure 1.1 Pedestrian crossing 1.3 Requests for a Pedestrian Crossing The first step to take after receiving a request for a crossing is to assess the need at that location for a crossing facility. The assessment will firstly consider whether there is a need for any facility at all, and then will determine which is the most appropriate form of crossing to provide. This will ensure that crossing facilities are provided at the most suitable locations for pedestrians to be able to cross in safety. Existing warrants for pedestrian crossings are contained in RT206 Warrants for Pedestrian Crossing Facilities 1 published in While these warrants were based only on pedestrian and traffic flow and collision history, it is now considered more appropriate to include other factors in assessing the need for a crossing. Accordingly the warrants in RT206 are superseded by the criteria and procedures set out in Chapter 2 of this guidance. April

4 2 Assessing the Need for a Pedestrian Crossing 2.1 Assessment Once a request for a crossing has been received, an experienced engineer should visit the proposed site of the crossing and carry out an Assessment of Need for the crossing. This will involve: an on site survey of the physical environment and the nearby amenities and generators of pedestrian traffic as described below, traffic and pedestrian surveys to determine the crossing demand and the traffic environment at the site. 2.2 On site Assessment The engineer should examine the site and decide on the best location for a possible crossing. This should be located as close to the pedestrian desire line as possible but should avoid obvious points of conflict with nearby side roads and vehicle accesses. Once installed, a controlled pedestrian crossing will become a focus of concentration for drivers. As their attention is directed to the crossing itself, drivers are not always fully aware of what is occurring within the 50m length of road on approach to the crossing. This area is thus a potentially hazardous place for pedestrians to cross the road. Therefore particular care should be taken to avoid placing the crossing in a location where the desire lines may result in pedestrians crossing the road within the 50m approach length. Issues to take into account include: Good pedestrian/driver inter visibility should be available. The approaches should be clear of trees, bushes and street furniture which could block this visibility or cause obstruction of the footpath for wheelchair users or visually impaired pedestrians. The location of the crossing relative to side roads must be carefully considered, to take account both of pedestrian desire lines and of crossing visibility for drivers emerging from the side road. This matter is discussed further in section 4.2. Figure 2.1 Crossing site with good pedestrian/driver inter visibility It is not advisable to provide a controlled crossing on a side road close to its junction with the main road. It is preferable to provide an uncontrolled crossing point as shown in Figure 2.2. Traffic turning into and out of the side road will tend to yield to pedestrians crossing the side road at this location. If a controlled crossing is to be provided across the side road then it must be positioned a minimum of 20m from the junction mouth. Uncontrolled crossing Carriageway Footpath Figure 2.2 Uncontrolled crossing position at junction mouth The site must be reviewed at night time to assess the existing standard of street lighting. Vehicles should not be allowed to use the dropped kerbs at the pedestrian crossings to gain access to property or to park on the footpath. April

5 The placing of refuge islands should allow for the swept paths of turning vehicles at any nearby junctions and accesses. 2.3 Site Survey The engineer should carry out a site survey over a length of approximately 50m either side of the proposed crossing location. It may be necessary to survey a number of different lengths if there is no single specific crossing desire line. The site survey should include the following items: Photographs of the proposed site. Details of the road and footpath layout and widths. The visibility for approaching drivers of the proposed crossing location and of pedestrians approaching the crossing. The visibility for pedestrians at the proposed crossing point of vehicles approaching the crossing. Local traffic facilities or restrictions such as speed limit, street lighting, loading and parking restrictions, public transport stops, nearby side roads and accesses, nearby pedestrian crossings and school crossing warden locations. Surrounding vehicle and pedestrian movement generators such as schools, shops, public transport stops or stations, hospitals, doctor s surgeries, sheltered housing, disabled persons meeting and living centres, leisure facilities and community facilities. Road collision history in the surrounding area. Number and type of pedestrians who will use the crossing, identifying age and ability (see section 2.4). The difficulty of crossing and the crossing delay (see section 2.4). Speed of vehicles passing the proposed location (see section 2.4). Number and type of vehicles approaching the proposed crossing location (see section 2.4). Site survey form PCS A1 is included as Appendix A. 2.4 Traffic Survey The traffic survey consists of a pedestrian survey and a vehicle survey. The surveys are generally undertaken over the 12 hour period 7am 7pm. This will cover the morning and evening peak hours plus lunch times and any other busy periods such as school starting and finishing times and local peaks for movements relating to employment, leisure and shopping facilities. A shorter survey period can be undertaken if required but it should include all potential main pedestrian movement times. These surveys should be carried out either by trained and experienced staff or by a specialist traffic counting firm. Vehicles The vehicle traffic survey should count the numbers of vehicles and the results should be summarised into 15 minute blocks, split by direction of travel. Cyclists, buses and heavy goods vehicles should be identified separately. Traffic speeds (85 percentile) should also be determined. The vehicle survey can either be undertaken manually or by automatic counters, illustrated in Figure 2.3. Automatic counts, if done, should preferably be over a one week period. Pedestrians The pedestrian survey should count the numbers of pedestrians crossing and the results should be summarised into 15 minute blocks. The number of people with pushchair or pram, elderly people, unaccompanied young children, visually impaired, people with walking difficulties, wheelchair users, able bodied pedestrians and cyclists should be identified separately. Crossing Difficulty If a road is difficult to cross the survey will find that existing numbers of pedestrians crossing are low, particularly in the case of the more April

6 vulnerable road users, thus artificially suppressing the measured crossing demand. The recording of crossing difficulty will automatically highlight this situation in the survey. The crossing difficulty should be measured by noting the average length of time that pedestrians spend waiting at the kerb for a reasonable gap in traffic before crossing. Separate values should be noted for ablebodied and for elderly or disabled people. A numerical rating of between 1 and 5, as described in Form PCS A1 can then be assigned to the location according to these lengths of time. Usually surveys should be carried out on a typical weekday during school term time. If the perceived need for the crossing occurs outside this time period, such as weekend shopping hours, then the appropriate hours and days should be covered in the survey. Pedestrian and vehicle count survey summary forms PCS B1 and PCS B2 are included as Appendix B. Figure 2.3 Two types of automatic traffic counter 2.5 Crossing Need Assessment Once the surveys are complete, the need for a crossing can be determined using the NRA Pedestrian Crossing Assessment Method. This method is based on the numerical PV 2 method, which measures the existing conflict between vehicles and pedestrians, but also includes an evaluation of latent demand and of the other indicators of crossing need that have been collected in the Site Survey. Calculating PV 2 As a first step a numerical value of PV 2 is calculated using the values of P (number of pedestrians crossing per hour) and V (number of vehicles passing each hour) gathered in the traffic survey. Higher values indicate a greater need for a crossing. P = pedestrians crossing per hour V = two way vehicle flow per hour A single value of P and a single value of V are determined for each hour of the survey period. The P value for each hour is weighted to account for the increased need if there is a large number of unaccompanied children under 16 years old, elderly pedestrians and disabled pedestrians. The V value for each hour is also weighted to account for high proportions of heavy vehicles and buses. The values of these weightings are shown in the Pedestrian Count Summary Sheet PCS B1 and Vehicle Count Summary Sheet PCS B2 in Appendix B. A value of PV 2 is then calculated for each hour. The 2 highest hourly values should be identified and averaged to give one value. Latent Demand Evaluation The very act of providing a crossing facility can often lead to a substantial increase in pedestrian flows. Therefore the next step in the assessment involves adding weightings to the calculated value to account for factors that cannot be measured in the traffic survey but may be a source of latent pedestrian crossing demand. For each of the following pedestrian generators an additional PV 2 value of 10 x 10 6 should be added to the value derived from the survey: route to/from a school route to/from shops April

7 route to/from sheltered housing, hospital or doctor s surgery route to/from rail or bus station or stop route to/from leisure facilities route to/from community facility the difficulty of crossing the latent demand The higher the value of the final PV 2 greater the need for a crossing. the Crossing Difficulty If a crossing difficulty rating of 4 or 5 is assigned to the location then an additional PV 2 value of 10 x 10 6 should be added to the value derived from the survey. Pedestrian Crossing Need Assessment summary forms PCS C1 and PCS C2 for the calculation of the final PV 2 value are included as Appendix C. 2.6 Justification for a Crossing The final calculated PV 2 value will include elements evaluating: the pedestrian/traffic conflict the vulnerability of the road users The final PV 2 value can be either set against a value for justification or used as a way of ranking a number of different possible crossing sites in priority order. If, after all the weightings are accounted for, the total PV 2 value is less than 100 x 10 6 then a signal controlled or Zebra crossing would not generally be justified. A worked example of a full Pedestrian Crossing Assessment, including Site Assessment, Pedestrian and Vehicle Counts and Crossing Need Assessment for a site is included as Appendix D. April

8 3 Choosing the Most Appropriate Form of Pedestrian Crossing 3.1 Forms of Crossing There are 3 forms of at grade pedestrian crossing generally available for use on national roads: Uncontrolled crossing, often with a central refuge island. Controlled Zebra crossing, with black & white road markings and amber flashing beacons. Controlled Signalised crossing, with a pushbutton facility for the pedestrian. This section gives advice on the selection of the most appropriate type of crossing for the proposed location being investigated. offer pedestrians the benefit of being able to cross streams of traffic separately with a safe haven in the middle of the road. A typical island is shown in Figure 3.1. Refuge Islands have limited pedestrian storage capacity and therefore are not suitable for high pedestrian volumes or locations where large groups of pedestrians cross together. Refuge islands should be located sufficiently far from side roads and accesses to allow for the swept paths of vehicles. Bus stops may need to be relocated. Parking or loading facilities may need to be provided to prevent vehicles obstructing the refuge island or the road. There are no definitive levels of traffic flow that one can say require particular types of crossing. It is the combination of the number and type of pedestrian movements, the road width, traffic speed, traffic volumes, etc. The presence of significant numbers of vulnerable road users such as unaccompanied children, elderly people, visually impaired pedestrians and wheelchair users may require a controlled crossing regardless of traffic volumes. 3.2 Uncontrolled Crossing at a Refuge Island Pedestrians crossing a single carriageway road without a refuge island have to wait for a gap in traffic in both directions of traffic movement. Often there is a gap in one direction but not the other. On busy roads this can lead to problems with pedestrians feeling that it is unsafe to cross, or making risky crossing movements such as standing unprotected in the middle of the road. Children, the elderly and disabled people can find it very difficult to cross wider and busier roads and feel in danger. Refuge islands are a comparatively cheap form of uncontrolled crossing facility. They Figure 3.1 Refuge Island Additional lighting of the crossing point should also be considered. The ducting and access chamber arrangement to be provided is shown in the drawings in Chapter 5 and is designed to provide for possible future upgrade to a zebra or signal controlled crossing. Not all roads are wide enough to accommodate refuge islands. Refuge islands should generally be at least 2.1m wide where possible but this can be reduced to an absolute minimum of 1.5m for narrower roads. If a substantial volume of cycles is present on the road and cycles and other traffic are expected to be able to travel side by April

9 side past the refuge island then the running lane widths should be a minimum of 5m. However such large road widths are not generally available, and if cycle flows are low it is usually acceptable to create a short pinch point at the refuge island where overtaking of cycles is not possible. The preferred width of the running lane in this situation is 3.5m, which is narrow enough to deter any attempt at the parallel passing of cycles and other traffic. Hence a minimum road width of 9.1m is required to install a refuge island of a comfortable size, but a narrow refuge island can be installed within an absolute minimum road width of 8.5m if necessary. The narrow width refuge island should not be used where there are large numbers of pedestrians or where wheelchairs or pedestrians with pushchairs or prams regularly cross. A refuge island is often a good option for low pedestrian crossing volumes where there is little demand from unaccompanied children, elderly, visually impaired or people with walking difficulties. 3.3 Zebra Controlled Crossing A zebra crossing can be more expensive than a refuge island but is still a comparatively cheap form of crossing. A simple Zebra crossing is shown in Figure 3.2. hour two way with a refuge island). They are not suitable for areas of high pedestrian movements such as busy shopping streets or near train stations, as high or continuous pedestrian flows can cause excessive traffic delay. Where a road is wide enough a zebra crossing with a refuge island should be provided as this will improve both safety and traffic flow. Under such circumstances the zebra crossing is divided and is effectively 2 separate crossings. Zebra crossings should be located sufficiently far from side roads and accesses to avoid conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians (see section 4.2). Zebra crossings require the use of zigzag markings to prevent parking or loading in the vicinity of the crossing point. Bus stops may have to be relocated away from the crossing and zigzag markings to make sure that they do not block pedestrian/driver intervisibility. Additional lighting of the crossing point should be provided. Details of and specifications for the specific lighting required for crossings are given in the drawings in Chapter Signal Controlled Crossing A signal controlled pedestrian crossing is suitable for a wider variety of pedestrians and traffic flows but is more expensive to install and maintain than a zebra crossing. It offers pedestrians the advantage of a more positive form of control with a signalled green man crossing period where traffic is held on red. Visually impaired pedestrians often prefer using signal controlled crossings because of the tactile push button units and audible bleepers. Figure 3.2 Zebra crossing A zebra crossing is suitable for low approach speeds (up to 50km/h) and low traffic volumes (less than 500 vehicles per hour two way without a refuge island or 750 vehicles per The style of signal controlled pedestrian crossing recommended is known as a Puffin Crossing, as shown in Figure 3.3. It offers the advantage of advanced pedestrian detection technology that can vary the time that traffic is held if there are large groups of pedestrians such as schoolchildren or slower moving April

10 pedestrians such as the elderly or people with walking difficulties. This type of crossing also incorporates detection to cancel the calling up of a pedestrian stage if gaps in traffic become available and pedestrians choose to cross the road before the pedestrian phase begins. This prevents unnecessary delays for traffic. Figure 3.3 Puffin style crossing This type of signal controlled crossing can also be more traffic efficient than both the Zebra crossing and the traditional type of signalised crossing (Pelican) used in the past as it can be set to give vehicles a minimum green time. The engineer can decide on the correct balance between pedestrian and vehicle priority and set the controller to best suit the crossing site. A Puffin is particularly good for crossing sites that have higher traffic volumes and it can also cope with high pedestrian crossing volumes. If speed detection loops are included it can cope with higher approach speeds by increasing intergreen time, and in busy town centre areas it can be linked to adjacent traffic signal junctions to minimise delays to traffic. Additional lighting of the crossing point should be provided. Details of and specifications for the specific lighting required for a pedestrian crossing are given in the drawings in Chapter 5. Toucan crossings are of the same design as Puffin crossings, but with a wider crossing walkway to allow for the crossing of both pedestrians and cyclists at the same time. A Toucan has two separate pushbutton units at each side of the road, one for cyclists and one for pedestrians. 3.5 School Warden Crossing Patrol A school warden crossing patrol point is not a general pedestrian crossing as it is only in operation for specific short time periods. There are specific road markings that indicate the position of a school warden crossing patrol and these are shown in the drawings in Chapter 5. April

11 4 Design and Installation of a Pedestrian Crossing 4.1 Visibility Visibility is a key safety issue at pedestrian crossings. It is important that drivers approaching a crossing have good visibility of the crossing and of any pedestrians about to cross. Similarly, pedestrians must be able to see approaching vehicles. Any trees, bushes, street furniture or other objects that could restrict visibility should be removed or re located. Single narrow columns and poles that obscure vision only momentarily can be left in situ. If removal of objects is difficult then footpath build outs to improve visibility could be considered as an alternative. Vehicles parking and loading on the approaches will block visibility and the parking restrictions indicated on the drawings in Chapter 5 will need to be implemented to prevent this. Visibility requirements for crossings are given below. Driver visibility to crossing: Drivers must have good visibility of the crossing from an adequate distance on the approaches. This distance varies with the ambient speed of vehicles on the road and is defined in table 4.1 below. This applies to visibility of signal heads, Belisha beacons, the crossing area and the footpath at the crossing. It also applies equally to uncontrolled crossings. Table 4.1. Driver visibility requirements 85%ile approach speed (km/h) Visibility (m) Pedestrian visibility to approaching vehicle: Pedestrians should have good visibility of approaching vehicles from an x distance of 2m back from edge of road on each side of the crossing. The required visibility distance to approaching vehicles is y as shown on the diagram below. The y value is the same as the driver visibility distance given in table 4.1. Figure 4.1 Pedestrian visibility If the visibility criteria cannot be met but a crossing is still considered to be beneficial then permanent signs warning of the crossing should be erected. Reference should be made to the Traffic Signs Manual 2 for details of the signs. If there are parking spaces marked out on the approaches to a crossing point then footpath build outs as illustrated in Figure 4.2 should be provided to ensure that pedestrians waiting to cross are brought forward to maintain good pedestrian/driver intervisibility. Figure 4.2 Build outs at refuge island April

12 4.2 Positioning Relative to Side Road If the crossing is to be positioned close to a side road then the following minimum distances, illustrated in Figure 4.3, should be maintained between the stop line marking for the crossing and the position of a driver waiting at the side road stop or yield line: for a Zebra crossing, 5m for a signal controlled crossing, 20m The above distance for a signal controlled crossing may be reduced if the engineer considers that site circumstances allow this and that locating the crossing elsewhere would not be as beneficial. Circumstances that may allow this include: low vehicle flows on the side road good general pedestrian/driver intervisibility around the crossing from both main road and side road approaches good visibility of the signal heads for drivers turning out of the side road crossing immediately at the junction, where it is within the immediate vision of the driver on the side road pulling up to the stop line. 4.3 Crossing Width The minimum width of the crossing walkway, shown in Figure 4.4, should generally be 2.8m, although this can be reduced to 2.4m width at difficult sites if necessary. Wider crossings can be provided up to 5m width in areas of high pedestrian crossing movements (over 600 pedestrians per hour). Figure 4.4 Crossing walkway Minimum distance 5m (zebra) 20m (signal) Figure 4.3 Position of crossing relative to vehicle waiting on side road Wherever a controlled crossing of the main road is to be located near a busy side road junction the preferred position is to the right hand side of the side road, as illustrated in Figure 4.3. Crossings positioned to the left hand side can cause visibility problems, as drivers turning left out of the side road tend to look only to their right for approaching traffic, and do not look to their left hand side until the left turn manoeuvre is already underway. If the pedestrian desire line is in this position then it is preferable to place the If refuge islands are being installed as an uncontrolled crossing these also should allow for a minimum crossing width of 2.8m. They can then be more easily upgraded to zebra or signal controlled crossings in the future if required. 4.4 Road Markings and Signs The road marking and sign requirements for each type of crossing are detailed on the drawings in Chapter 5. When a new crossing is installed temporary signs should be provided indicating a new road layout for refuge islands or new pedestrian crossing for zebra and signal controlled crossings. These temporary signs should be removed after six months, when the term new pedestrian crossing is no longer appropriate. Zigzag markings should be provided on both the approaches to and exits from Zebra April

13 crossings and signal controlled crossings. In most cases eight zigzag markings, covering a distance of approximately 16m should be provided on each approach and exit. This is to prevent parking which may restrict pedestrian/driver inter visibility. However conditions on site such as parking space needs may make this difficult to achieve, and in such cases the designer should consider the circumstances and design the most suitable layout. At Zebra crossings this minimum can be reduced to 2 markings on the crossing exits if absolutely necessary, but the approaches must be kept at 8 markings. All signs and road markings should comply with the Traffic Signs Manual Lighting If the existing street lighting is not sufficient then additional lighting should be provided at pedestrian crossing points, as illustrated in Figure 4.5. This additional lighting throws a band of light across the road at the crossing location and shines directly onto pedestrians waiting at the kerb, ensuring that there is good visibility of pedestrians on and approaching the crossing during the hours of darkness. Figure 4.5 Additional lighting at a crossing If existing street lighting has already been upgraded to cater for pedestrian traffic then it may not be necessary to provide additional lighting. The drawings in Chapter 5 indicate the additional lighting options that are available for designers. Lamp columns can either be located at the rear of the footpath, up to a maximum of 3m from edge of road, or for zebra crossings they can be combined with the Belisha beacon pole as shown in the drawings in Chapter 5. Specification for the lamp unit is also given in these drawings. A suitably qualified and experienced street lighting engineer should be consulted on any queries regarding the provision of lighting. 4.6 Skid Resistance of Road Surface Approaches to crossings are generally high stress areas with frequent braking action. If vehicles cannot stop in time there is a greater risk of collisions with a pedestrian on the crossing or of rear end shunts on the approaches. Consequently the approaches need to provide a high level of skid resistance. This can be achieved in a number of ways: Provision of a new wearing course incorporating a high Polished Stone Value chipping material. Application of proprietary high friction surface. The high level of skid resistance should be provided for a minimum length of 50m on approaches to zebra and signal controlled crossings in 50km/h speed limits. If approach 85%ile speeds are greater than 50km/h then a longer length would be required. A rule of thumb for the length is 1m per 1km/h of approach speed. However, there are locations where traffic conditions may justify longer lengths, for example where the length of queues regularly exceeds the calculated length for high friction surface and thus braking occurs before vehicles reach this length. It is preferable to use high friction surfacing with a colour contrast to the road surface. The high friction surfacing should start at the vehicle stop line and extend back along the approach. If it were to be laid from the walkway line, extending back through the stop line, the block of colour could mislead approaching drivers about the position of the stop line, thus increasing the risk of vehicles overshooting into the pedestrian area. April

14 If needed, high friction surface that is coloured grey and does not contrast with the colour of the road surface can be laid over the short length between stop line and crossing walkway line. An example of grey coloured high friction surface on the entire approach length to a crossing is shown in Figure 4.6. Refuge islands when used on their own are uncontrolled crossings and buff tactile paving should generally be used, as shown in Figure 4.7. This will provide a good colour contrast with most footpath surfaces. Alternatively, grey tactile paving can be provided if the colour of the footpath is similar to the buff tactile paving. Figure 4.6 Grey high friction surface on approach to Puffin crossing (UK) Figure 4.7 Tactile paving at a refuge island 4.7 Drainage at the Crossing Unless the crossing is well constructed there may be drainage problems leading to ponding at the crossing points which could be a particular problem in wet or icy conditions. Crossing points should therefore be well drained but care should be taken not to place any drainage gullies within the crossing walkway, as these could be a trip hazard for pedestrians. Red tactile paving should not be used at uncontrolled crossings. A stem to the rear of the footpath should not be provided at uncontrolled crossings. 4.8 Dropped Kerbs and Tactile Paving Dropped kerbs should be provided at all crossings to ensure good access for mobility impaired pedestrians and those with pushchairs or prams. The kerb upstands should be flush with the carriageway up to a maximum of 6mm. The footpath crossfall at these locations should preferably be 1:20, with a maximum of 1:12, to allow ease of use. Tactile paving should be provided for visually impaired pedestrians. Detailed specification and drawings of tactile paving layouts are given in Chapter 5. Figure 4.8 Tactile paving at a controlled pedestrian crossing At Zebra and signal controlled crossings red tactile paving in an L shape should be used, as shown in Figure 4.8. The stem of the tactile paving should extend to the rear of the footpath. The red paving will provide a good colour contrast with most footpath surfaces. In historic areas or for improvement schemes with special footpath materials red is still preferred in order to maintain good colour contrast but buff or grey can be used if April

15 absolutely necessary. This use of buff or grey for controlled crossings should be exceptional and the approval of the relevant roads authority must be sought. Signal controlled crossings do not have tactile paving in the central refuge, if one is provided. Pedestrians are signalled to walk across the full width of the road in one go, and putting tactile paving in the refuge island under these circumstances could confuse visually impaired people. The exception to this is for a staggered crossing arrangement where two separately controlled crossings are provided with a large central refuge island. The stem of the L shaped tactile paving is designed to lead visually impaired pedestrians to the push button units. The push button units on signal controlled crossings are generally located on the right hand side of the pedestrian waiting at the crossing because this is the side from which traffic approaches. This is so that sighted pedestrians about to cross are facing oncoming traffic when they press the push button. On wide crossings an additional push button can be provided on the left hand side of the waiting pedestrian. On one way streets the L shaped tactile paving, push button and pedestrian display units should still be installed on the right hand side of the waiting pedestrian as this is where a visually impaired person would expect to find the push button. However an additional push button should be provided on the left hand side of the waiting pedestrian, where sighted pedestrians would be facing oncoming traffic. More detailed guidance on tactile paving is provided in Chapter 13 of the Traffic Management Guidelines Guard Railing Many collisions on pedestrian crossings occur on the approaches to the crossing when pedestrians cross the road a few metres away from the crossing, in its shadow. Guard rail can help to prevent this and can provide useful guidance for visually impaired pedestrians. The effectiveness of the guard rail will be reduced if gaps are left for vehicular access or loading of goods and these should therefore be avoided wherever possible. Where guard rail is used it should be of the offset infill bar type, as shown in Figure 4.9, to ensure that there is good inter visibility between child pedestrians and drivers. Figure 4.9 Offset infill bar pattern to improve visibility of child pedestrians Guard rail should only be used where it is needed to prevent hazardous crossing, as it creates an uncomfortable environment for cyclists who can get squeezed against it. Long lengths of guard rail provide little extra pedestrian benefit and should be avoided. Guard rail should tie in to the Belisha beacons of zebra crossings or the signal posts of signal controlled crossings. If guard rail extends past the beacons or signal posts then it can obstruct the use of the crossing. If guard rail falls short of beacons or signal posts then pedestrians may be tempted to walk through the gap between them and may be at risk as they are unlikely to then follow the route of the crossing walkway, which is where drivers expect them to be Specific Zebra Crossing Issues A zebra crossing should be located a minimum of 5m from a side road, as described in section 4.2. Zebra crossings can be located adjacent to low usage private accesses but the dropped kerbs at the pedestrian approaches to the crossing April

16 should not be used by vehicles for access purposes. At roundabouts the zebra crossing should be positioned away from the flared area of the approach but as close to the pedestrian desire line as possible. Where possible signal controlled crossings near roundabouts should be of the staggered type so that the crossing of the exit lane is further from the roundabout than that on the entry lane. This can help to reduce the risk of queues on the exit lane blocking the circulatory area. Signal controlled crossings can be located adjacent to low usage private accesses but the dropped kerbs at the pedestrian approaches to the crossing should not be used by vehicles for access purposes. The controller cabinet and any feeder pillars for electricity should be located at positions where they do not obstruct footpaths, pose a trip hazard or where they would obscure pedestrian/driver inter visibility. Figure 4.10 Two lane approach to zebra crossing Where a zebra crossing has 2 or more lanes on any approach, as illustrated in Figure 4.10, there is a risk that vehicles in adjacent lanes will block a driver s view of a pedestrian on the crossing, resulting in a higher risk of a collision. The risk of this can be reduced by increasing the distance between the yield line and the crossing walkway line, as shown in the drawings in Chapter 5, to prevent blocking of visibility by vehicles in adjacent lanes Specific Signal Controlled Crossing Issues A signal controlled crossing should be located a minimum of 20m from a side road, as described in section 4.2 At roundabouts there is a risk that a signal controlled crossing could be mistaken for a signal controlled roundabout approach, which could lead to drivers failing to yield at the roundabout. Such a crossing should thus be a minimum of 25m away from the roundabout yield line. Unfortunately this often results in the crossing being positioned away from the pedestrian desire line. In this case provision of guard rail can help direct pedestrians to the crossing. In a Puffin type crossing the red and green man pedestrian displays are located on or adjacent to the push button units, rather than on the opposite side of the road. The reason for this is to encourage pedestrians to look towards oncoming traffic before crossing. It also helps to overcome pedestrian hesitation problems that occur when pedestrians are mid crossing at the time that the green pedestrian symbol starts to flash. On crossing detection is provided to ensure that slow moving pedestrians or large groups of pedestrians, such as school children, have adequate time to cross before vehicles are given a green signal. Figure 4.11 shows an oncrossing detector as well as a kerbside pedestrian detector. Figure 4.11 Pedestrian kerbside and on crossing detectors April

17 Additional pedestrian detection is provided at the kerbside to allow cancelling of the pedestrian demand if pedestrians cross the road in gaps in the traffic flow that become available before the pedestrian phase begins, thus negating the need for traffic to be stopped. A range of different pedestrian push button units are used in Ireland. These incorporate different types of tactile and audible facilities for visually impaired pedestrians. Any of these can be used in conjunction with the Puffin style pedestrian display units (pdu) which incorporate the red and green man displays adjacent to the push button unit, as shown in Figure Alternatively, specific standard Puffin crossing combined push button and pdu equipment, as shown in Figure 4.13, can be used if preferred. the primary pdu, at around 1m above ground level, is blocked from view by a pedestrian standing next to it, then there is an alternative pdu on view at a higher level for other pedestrians waiting to cross. The push button units need to be adjacent to where pedestrians will wait to cross. This is particularly important for visually impaired road users who may not be able to see or find the exact location of the push button unit. They should be around 500mm from the kerb edge and 500mm from the nearest edge of the crossing walkway. On wider roads it may be preferable to split the crossing movement into two separate stages, to reduce the time that traffic is stopped. In this case a staggered crossing arrangement must be used, details of which can be found in Chapter 12 of the Traffic Management Guidelines 3. Signal controlled crossings require cyclic maintenance to ensure that they are in good working order. An annual regime of inspection and testing should be provided for such crossings. Figure 4.12 Puffin style pedestrian display unit with alternative type of push button unit Details of typical crossing times for Puffin crossings and Toucan crossings are given in Appendix E. These notes for guidance on Puffin type crossings are based on utilising the detection facilities of the UK Puffin crossing and adapting them for use on signal controlled pedestrian crossings in Ireland. Further detailed guidance can be found in the UK documents Puffin Good Practice Guide 4 and Local Transport Note 2/95 The Design of Pedestrian Crossings Toucan Crossings Figure 4.13 Puffin style push button and pedestrian display units Additional high level pdus are incorporated into the Puffin crossing layouts shown in the drawings in Chapter 5. This is to ensure that if Toucan crossings allow pedestrians and cyclists to cross at the same time without requiring cyclists to dismount and walk across the road. This would typically be used where an off road cycleway crosses a road at the same location as pedestrians do. April

18 The design of a Toucan crossing is in general the same as that of a Puffin crossing. The main differences are: A greater crossing walkway width is needed to accommodate both pedestrians and cyclists. 4m minimum is preferred, but this can reduced to 3m in exceptional circumstances. Red/green cycle symbols are used in conjunction with the red/green man symbols in the pdu, as shown in Figure Figure 4.14 Toucan crossing display unit April

19 5 Standard Detail Drawings and Specification Drawing no. Title PCS 001 Uncontrolled Crossing Road Markings and General Layout PCS 002 Uncontrolled Crossing With Refuge Island Road Markings and General Layout PCS 003 Zebra Crossing Road Markings and General Layout PCS 004 Zebra Crossing With Refuge Island Road Markings and General Layout PCS 005 Puffin Crossing Road Markings and General Layout PCS 006 Puffin Crossing With Refuge Island Road Markings and General Layout PCS 007 School Warden Crossing Patrol Point Road Markings and General Layout PCS 008 Lighting Detail All Types of Crossing PCS Lane Approach to Zebra Crossing, Visibility Requirements PCS 010 Uncontrolled Crossing Construction Detail for Refuge Island PCS 011 Zebra Crossing Construction Detail for Refuge Island PCS 012 Puffin Crossing Construction Detail for Refuge Island PCS 013 Uncontrolled Crossing Tactile Paving Detail PCS 014 Zebra Crossing Tactile Paving and Road Markings Detail PCS 015 Puffin Crossing Tactile Paving and Road Markings Detail PCS 016 Refuge Island Pole Detail PCS 017 Belisha Beacon Pole Detail PCS 018 Puffin Crossing Signal Pole Detail PCS 019 Retention Socket System L shaped 114mm PCS 020 Retention Socket System L shaped 140mm PCS 021 Retention Socket System Base Plate Retention Socket System PCS 022 Retention Socket System T shaped 114mm PCS 023 Retention Socket System T shaped 140mm PCS 024 Access Chamber Detail April

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44 6 References 1. RT206 Warrants for Pedestrian Crossing Facilities, 1981, Environmental Research Unit. 2. Traffic Signs Manual (2010), 2010, Department of Transport. A copy can be downloaded from 3. Traffic Management Guidelines, 1999, Department of Environment/ Department of Transport. 4. Puffin Good Practice Guide, 2006, Department for Transport (UK)/ County Surveyors Society. A copy can be downloaded from 5. Local Transport Note 2/95 The Design of Pedestrian Crossings, Department for Transport (UK) A copy can be downloaded from April

45 Appendix A Pedestrian Crossing Site Assessment Appendix A Pedestrian Crossing Site Assessment Form PCS A1 April 2011 A1

46 Appendix A Pedestrian Crossing Site Assessment SITE ASSESSMENT FORM PCS A1 Page 1 of 2 Name of Site Location description Attach a plan Grid ref Carriageway type Carriageway width Single 1 way 2 way Dual No of lanes: Dimensions: Comments: Footpath width Dimensions: Comments: Refuge island (if existing) Dimensions: Dimensions in accordance with PCS section 3.1? Comments: Yes / No Road lighting standard Lighting type: Inspection by Lighting Engineer needed? Comments: Yes / No Visibility Dimensions: All inter visibility adequate in accordance with PCS section 4.2? Comments: Yes / No Loading and parking restrictions Sketch existing restrictions on plan Existing restrictions cover proposed crossing and its approaches? Comments: Yes / No Bus stops Mark bus stops on plan Bus stops located near proposed crossing site? Bus stops need re siting to avoid blocking of crossing or visibility? Comments: Yes / No Yes / No Skidding resistance of surface Existing surface type: Is high friction surface needed? See PCS section 4.5 Comments: Yes / No April 2011 A2

47 Appendix A Pedestrian Crossing Site Assessment SITE ASSESSMENT FORM PCS A1 Page 2 of 2 Nearby junctions and accesses Distance from crossing to vehicle in side road / access: Comments: Other pedestrian crossings close by If present: Comments: Distance to nearest crossing: Type of crossing: School Warden crossing nearby Sketch location on plan If present: School crossing warden site? Yes / No Signs and markings present? Yes / No Comments: Time to cross the road Able pedestrians (sample) seconds Elderly or disabled people (sample) seconds Difficulty of crossing Indicate degree of difficulty 1 5: 1 No difficulty, 1 or 2 second wait at peak times 2 Wait of 3 20 seconds for gap at peak times (able person) 3 Wait of seconds for gap at peak times (able person) 4 Wait of more than 40 seconds at peak times (able person) 5 Impossible to cross safely at all times Surrounding facilities likely to generate pedestrian demand Route to/from a school? Route to/from shops? Route to/from sheltered housing/ hospital/ doctor s surgery? Route to/from rail / bus station or stop? Route to/from leisure facilities? Route to/from community facility? Comments: Yes / No Yes / No Yes / No Yes / No Yes / No Yes / No Speed of traffic Summary of pedestrian flow at peak times (Form PCS B1) Summary of vehicle flow at peak times (Form PCS B2) Mark location of these facilities (if present) on plan Posted speed limit km/h 85 percentile speed at peak times: km/h 85 percentile at free flowing times km/h Adult Adult with pram/pushchair/buggy Unaccompanied child less than 16 years old Elderly/ Disabled Peak Time Car/ van Lorry/ Bus Cycle/ Motor cycle per hour per hour per hour per hour per hour per hour per hour April 2011 A3

48 Appendix B Pedestrian and Vehicle Count Survey Appendix B Pedestrian and Vehicle Count Survey Summary Form PCS B1 Form PCS B2 April 2011 B1

49 Appendix B Pedestrian and Vehicle Count Survey Appendix B Pedestrian and Vehicle Count Survey Summary Forms This appendix contains Form PCS B1 and Form PCS B2 for the pedestrian (P) and vehicle surveys (V) that should be carried out at a potential crossing site. Pedestrian and vehicle surveys should be done between 7am and 7pm during a typical day. Weekend and holiday periods should be avoided unless these are likely to lead to busier pedestrian or traffic conditions. Similarly, counts when the weather is poor may artificially suppress demand for the crossing and should be avoided if possible. The results should be summarised into 15 minute periods and the respective values of P and V calculated accordingly. For the pedestrian flows the more vulnerable groups such as children under the age of 16, elderly and disabled people (wheelchair users or people walking with aids such as a stick, crutches or walking frames) should be identified separately as they may need a longer gap in traffic to cross the road. A weighting multiplication factor of 2 should be applied to these groups. For vehicle flows buses and trucks should be identified separately as they take up more road space and a weighting multiplication factor of 2 should be applied. Motor bikes and bikes take up less road space and a weighting multiplication factor of 0.5 should be applied. Once the summary forms have been completed then the PV 2 values can be calculated, using the forms in Appendix C, for each 15 minute period and the two highest hourly values identified. The average of these should be calculated to produce the PV 2 value. See Section 2 of the Notes for Guidance for more detailed explanation. April 2011 B2