Citation

Hubbard S, Bullock D, Thai J. ITE J. 2008; 78(10): 32, 37-41.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2008, Institute of Transportation Engineers)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

A leading pedestrian interval (LPI) provides pedestrians with exclusive use of the crosswalk for a few seconds at the beginning of the pedestrian phase while all conflicting vehicle movements have a red light. This paper applies a process for evaluating pedestrian crossing outcomes to an evaluation of a trial LPI deployment in Anaheim, California. This suburban intersection serves pedestrian and vehicle traffic for a convention center and Disneyland. To evaluate pedestrian service provided with an LPI compared with pedestrian service provided without an LPI, each pedestrian crossing was categorized as either compromised (pedestrian is delayed or changes travel path due to a turning vehicle) or nonconflicting (pedestrian is able to cross the street without being impacted by turning traffic). Video of the intersection operating with and without LPI pedestrian service was collected and analyzed. Findings show that the LPI did not provide the intended benefit of reducing the impact of right-turning vehicles on pedestrians trying to get off the curb. The proportion of compromised pedestrian crossings instead increased after the LPI was deployed. These findings indicate that the reported advantages of an LPI in an urban area may not be fully transferable to crosswalks in a suburban environment if there is no restriction of right turn on red.