The safety of pedestrian crossing

More than half of all severe traffic accidents in which pedestrians or cyclists are involved, occur during road crossing. In this chapter insights, based on previous studies and literature, concerning requirements for safe and comfortable crossing facilities are discussed. In order to develop notions of needs, abilities and motives, different pedestrian groups with similar physical and cognitive characteristics have to be defined. Research has shown that children under 11 and elderly above 75 years old are the most vulnerable pedestrian groups. Based on the development of cognitive capacities, such as attention, inhibition, planning and risk perception, in children a subdivision of four different age groups is proposed: children from 0 to 4 years old, children from 5 to 7 years old, children from 8 to 12 years old and children from 13 to 17 years old. Besides children, also people aged over 65 represent a vulnerable group of pedestrians, due to physical as well as functional constraints. In general elderly have a reduced physical fitness and -resistance, lower workload capacity and a reduced peripheral field of vision. Another group of pedestrians that deserve special attention are handicapped road users, either being physically or cognitively disabled. Whereas healthy adults are the least vulnerable, suboptimal situations in environmental design, crossing facilities and specific traffic circumstances may still create conditions that exceed the limits of normal human functioning. Irrespective of the specific pedestrian group, good walking conditions are required to have people at least consider the option of walking. With respect to road crossing, it is especially relevant whether a crossing facility is safe and inviting (Convivial), comprehensible (Conspicuous) and whether facilities are sufficient in number and quality (Convenient). Since crossing involves a complex set of actions, providing pedestrians with crossing facilities can reduce cognitive load. In general an unsignalised crossing is more dangerous than a crossing that is signalised with traffic lights. The presence of other crossing facilities, such as a median or a zebra can help to increase (feelings of) safety. Whether safety is actually increased by these measures, is dependent on many factors such as the facility’s location, its visibility and traffic density. Besides general requirements, specific pedestrian groups have distinct preferences and needs. For example, a green light period should be adapted to the walking speed of older people or physically disabled people in order to make them feel safer. For younger people a relative short green light period causes impatience and therefore a higher risk potential. Therefore, in designing facilities for pedestrians, it is valuable to investigate which people will probably be mostly present. In the final part of this chapter, conflict patterns and measures to reduce conflicts and accident severity are discussed. The most important conflict partner of the pedestrian is the car (65%). In the Netherlands 84% of all pedestrian accidents with severe injuries occur within urban areas. Whereas in an absolute sense, most pedestrian crashes occur in daylight, crash rates are higher during the night, when controlled for exposure and vehicle flow. Measures to reduce conflicts can concern measures on the behavioural level (education, public campaigns) as well as changes in traffic rules (speed limits), infrastructural design (separation of road users differing in mass, speed and direction and vehicle design (pedestrian-friendly car fronts, side-underrun-protection). Based on above findings it can be concluded that the development of safe and comfortable crossing facilities first of all requires insights in pedestrian needs and abilities. Moreover, the specific needs of specific groups of pedestrians have to be taken into account. The benefit of such an approach is two-fold. To start with, gaining insight in these aspects makes traffic-engineers more conscious of the necessity to systematically meet pedestrian needs in our traffic system, in order to develop a safe and convenient pedestrian environment. Secondly, it provides us with concrete knowledge on which factors at which locations have to be taken into account when designing crossing facilities.