Vehicle-pedestrian conflicts were reduced by 89 percent in the first half of the crossing and 43 percent in the second half with automated pedestrian detection at intersections in Los Angeles, California; Rochester, New York; and Phoenix, Arizona.
Los Angeles,California,United States; Phoenix,Arizona,United States; Rochester,New York,United States
Three sites in the United States were used to compare reductions in vehicle and pedestrian conflicts at intersections between push-button activated crosswalk signals, and push-button with automated detection. The three sites were Los Angeles, Rochester NY, and Phoenix. Overall, there was an 81 percent decrease in the number of pedestrians crossing during a DON'T WALK with the addition of automated detection to intersections with operational push buttons. Conflicts encountered by pedestrians during the first half of the crossing were reduced 89 percent while conflicts for the second half were reduced 42 percent. Conflicts associated with right turning vehicle were reduced 40 percent. All other conflicts were reduced 76 percent. Most of these reductions are attributed to reliable detection and signal extension for pedestrians in the process of crossing, not those waiting at the curb to cross.
Additional data were collected at the Los Angeles site with the intent to evaluate pedestrian perceptions when the push-button was taped-over (i.e. automated detection only) just after the automated detection system was initially installed. The results indicated that when the button was taped-over, pedestrians were five times more likely to begin crossing during the displayed DON'T WALK phase compared to the period when the manual push-button and detection system were both present and functioning. The author attributed this behavior to pedestrian perceptions that the system was unreliable when the push-button was taped over, even though appropriate WALK, flashing DON'T WALK, and steady DON'T WALK signals were displayed.
Hughes, Ronald, et.al., Evaluation of Automated Pedestrian Detection at Signalized Intersections, Prepared by the University of North Carolina (Highway Safety Research Center) for the U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-RD-00-097. Washington, DC: August 2001.
ITS and Pedestrian Safety at Signalized Intersections
Author: Hughes, Ronald, et al.
Published By: ITS Quarterly
Source Date: Spring/Summer 1999
Other Reference Number: Volume 7, Number 2
Average User Rating
Typical Deployment Locations