Skip to contentUnited States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration FHWA Home
Research Home
Report
This report is an archived publication and may contain dated technical, contact, and link information
Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-04-100
Date: September 2005

Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations Final Report and Recommended Guidelines

PDF Version (3.21 MB)

PDF files can be viewed with the Acrobat® Reader®

REFERENCES

  1. Uniform Vehicle Code and Model Traffic Ordinance, Millennium Edition, National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances, Evanston, IL, 2000.
  2. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices-Millennium Edition, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 2000.
  3. Herms, B., "Pedestrian Crosswalk Study: Crashes in Painted and Unpainted Crosswalks," Record No. 406, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 1972.
  4. Zegeer, C., Stewart, J., and Huang, H., Safety Effects of Marked versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations: Executive Summary and Recommended Guidelines, Report No. FHWA-RD-01-075, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, March 2002.
  5. Gibby, A.R., Stites, J.L., Thurgood, G.S., and Ferrara, T.C., "Evaluation of Marked and Unmarked Crosswalks at Intersections in California," Chico State University, Report No. FHWA/CA/TO-94/1, June 1994.
  6. Gurnett, G., Marked Crosswalk Removal Before and After Study, Los Angeles County Road Department, Los Angeles, CA, November 1974.
  7. Los Angeles County Road Department, Marked Crosswalks at Non-Signalized Intersections, Traffic and Lighting Division, Los Angeles, CA, July 1967.
  8. Toby, H.N., Shunamen, E.M., and Knoblauch, R.L., Pedestrian Trip Making Characteristics and Exposure Measures, DTFH61-81-C-00020, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 1983.
  9. Ekman, L., On the Treatment of Flow in Traffic Safety Analysis, Bulletin 136, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden, 1996.
  10. Ekman, L. and Hyden, C., Pedestrian Safety in Sweden, Report No. FHWA-RD-99-091, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, December 1999.
  11. Yagar, S., "Safety Impacts of Installing Pedestrian Crosswalks, " Proceedings of the Effectiveness of Highway Safety Improvements Conference, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY, March 1985.
  12. Katz, A., Zaidel, D., and Elgrishi, A., "An Experimental Study of Driver and Pedestrian Interaction During the Crossing Conflict," Human Factors, Vol. 17, No. 5, 1975, pp. 514-527.
  13. Knoblauch, R.L., Nitzburg, M., and Seifert, R.F., Pedestrian Crosswalk Case Studies: Richmond, Virginia; Buffalo, New York; Stillwater, Minnesota, Report No. FHWA-RD-00-103, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, August 2001.
  14. Knoblauch, R.L. and Raymond, P.D., The Effect of Crosswalk Markings on Vehicle Speeds in Maryland, Virginia, and Arizona, Report No. FHWA-RD-00-101, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, August 2000.
  15. Van Houten, R., "The Influence of Signs Prompting Motorists to Yield Before Marked Crosswalks on Motor Vehicle-Pedestrian Conflicts at Crosswalks with Flashing Amber," Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 24, No. 3, 1992, pp. 217-225.
  16. Campbell, B.J., Zegeer, C.V., Cynecki, M.J., and Huang H., A Review of Pedestrian Safety Research in the United States and Abroad, Report No. FHWA-RD-03-042, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, January 2004.
  17. Ekman, L., Pedestrian Safety in Sweden, Report No. FHWA-RD-99-091, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, December 1999.
  18. Davies, D., Research, Development, and Implementation of Pedestrian Safety Facilities in the United Kingdom, Report No. FHWA-RD-99-089, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, December 1999.
  19. Van Houten, R., Canadian Research on Pedestrian Safety, Report No. FHWA-RD-99-090, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, December 1999.
  20. Cairney, P., Pedestrian Safety in Australia, Report No. FHWA-RD-99-093, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, December 1999.
  21. Hummel, T., Dutch Pedestrian Safety Research Review, Report No. FHWA-RD-99-092, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, December 1999.
  22. Zegeer, C.V., Seiderman, C., Lagerwey, P., and Cynecki, M., Pedestrian Facilities User's Guide: Providing Safety and Mobility, Report No. FHWA-RD-01-102, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 1999.
  23. Lalani, N., Alternative Treatments for At-Grade Pedestrian Crossings, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Pedestrian and Bicycle Task Force, Washington, DC, 2001.
  24. Ewing, R., Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, ITE/FHWA Report No. FHWA-RD-99-135, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, August 1999, available online at http://www.ite.org/traffic/tcstate.htm, accessed July 30, 2004.
  25. Huang, H.F., C.V. Zegeer, R. Nassi, and B. Fairfax, The Effects of Innovative Pedestrian Signs at Unsignalized Locations: A Tale of Three Treatments, Report No. FHWA-RD-00-098, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, August 2000, available online at http://www.walkinginfo.org/task_orders/to_11/3signs00.pdf, accessed July 30, 2004.
  26. McCullagh, P. and Nelder, J.A., Generalized Linear Models, Second Edition, Chapman and Hall, London, UK, 1989.
  27. Hilbe, J., "Log Negative Binomial Regression Using the GENMOD Procedure," Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual SAS User's Group International Conference, Vol. 14, 1994, pp. 1199-1204.
  28. Lawless, J.E., "Negative Binomial and Mixed Poisson Regression," The Canadian Journal of Statistics, Vol. 15, 1987, pp. 209-225.
  29. SAS Institute Inc., SAS OnlineDoc®, Version 8, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, 1999.
  30. Garder, P., Personal correspondence, October 7, 1999 and March 2000.
  31. Bowman, B. and Vecellio, R., "Effects of Urban and Suburban Median Types on Both Vehicular and Pedestrian Safety ," Record No. 1445, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 1994.
  32. Garder, P., "Pedestrian Safety at Traffic Signals: A Study Carried Out With the Help of a Traffic Conflicts Technique," Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 21, October 1989, pp. 435-444.
  33. Safety of Vulnerable Road Users, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), August 1998.
  34. Van Houten, R., "The Effects of Advance Stop Lines and Sign Prompts on Pedestrian Safety in Crosswalks on a Multilane Highway," Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, Vol.21, 1988.
  35. Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities: A Recommended Practice, Institute for Transportation Engineers, March 1998.
  36. Zegeer, C. and Seiderman, C., Chapter 19, "Designing for Pedestrians," The Traffic Safety Toolbox, Institute for Transportation Engineers, 1999.
  37. Pedestrian Safety: Analyses and Safety Measures, Danish Road Directorate, Division of Traffic Safety and Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark, June 1998.
  38. Making Streets That Work-Neighborhood Planning Tool, City of Seattle, WA, May 1996.
  39. Zegeer, C.V., Opiela, K.S., and Cynecki, M.J., Pedestrian Signalization Alternatives, Report No. FHWA-RD-83-102, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, July 1985.
  40. Cameron, A.C. and Trivedi, P.K., Regression Analysis of Count Data, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1998.
  41. Belsley, D.A., Kuh, E., and Welsch, R.E., Regression Diagnostics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1980.

Previous | Table of Contents

ResearchFHWA
FHWA
United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration