FHWA-SA-07-007

July 2007

i

Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No.

FHWA-SA-07-007

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle

Pedestrian Road Safety Audit Guidelines and Prompt Lists

5. Report Date

July 2007

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s) 

Dan Nabors, Margaret Gibbs, Laura Sandt, Sarah Rocchi, Eugene 

Wilson, and Martin Lipinski

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

 Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.

 8300 Boone Blvd., Suite 700

 Vienna, VA 22182-2624

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

11. Contract or Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Federal Highway Administration Office of Safety

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

Final Report

2-005-2007

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary Notes

This report was produced under the FHWA contract DTFH61-05-D-00024 , Technical Support for Office of 

Safety. The Task Manager was Gabe Rousseau (FHWA). Subcontractors were Opus Hamilton, Universtity of 

North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, and PerformTech. The project team gratefully acknowledges 

the input provided by the technical working group over the course of this project. These individuals include: 

Sany Zein, Louisa Ward, Craig Allred, Michael Ronkin, Cara Seiderman, Barbara McMillen, Lois Thibault, and 

Richard Nassi. Significant contributions were also made by Charlie Zegeer, Daniel Rodriguez, Kelly Kennedy, 

David Anspacher, and Ryan Malloy. Report layout and design was performed by Michelle Scism of VHB.

The team also recognizes students who participated in an RSA workshop to help develop the prompt lists 

including Audrey Bowerman, Nicolas Estupinan, Carrie Fesperman, Ann Hartell, Anna Leos-Urbel, Peter 

Ohlms, and Jennifer Valentine.

16. Abstract

A road safety audit (RSA) is a formal safety examination of a future roadway plan or project or an in-service 

facility that is conducted by an independent, experienced multidisciplinary RSA team. All RSAs should include 

a review of pedestrian safety; however, some RSAs may be conducted to improve an identified pedestrian 

safety problem. The Pedestrian Road Safety Audit Guidelines and Prompt Lists provides transportation 

agencies and teams conducting an RSA with a better understanding of the needs of pedestrians of all abilities. 

The Guide has two primary sections: Knowledge Base and the Field Manual. The Knowledge Base section 

discusses the basic concepts with which the RSA team should be familiar before conducting an RSA, such as 

understanding the characteristics of all pedestrians, analyzing pedestrian crash data, pedestrian considerations 

in the eight-step RSA process, and use of the Guide. The Field Manual section includes the guidelines and 

prompt lists. The guidelines provide detailed descriptions of potential pedestrian safety issues while the 

prompt lists are a general listing of potential pedestrian safety issues. The guidelines and prompt lists will help 

familiarize RSA teams with potential pedestrian issues and help them identify specific safety concerns related 

to pedestrian safety throughout the RSA process. 

17. Key Words:

pedestrian safety, road safety audits, engineering 

treatments

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions.

19. Security Classif. (of this report)

 Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this page)

 Unclassified

21. No. of Pages

128

22. Price

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72)

Reproduction of form and completed page is authorized
ii
iii

Table of Contents

SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... v

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Purpose ................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Scope of these Guidelines .................................................................................................. 1

1.3 Organization of the Guidelines ........................................................................................ 2

1.4 Background: Pedestrian Safety Risks ............................................................................... 2

1.5 Addressing Pedestrian Safety ........................................................................................... 3

1.6 Road Safety Audits ............................................................................................................ 3

1.7 Knowledge Base for Conducting RSAs ........................................................................... 4

Chapter 2: BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ................................................. 7

2.1 Walking as a Mode of Travel ............................................................................................. 7

2.1.1 Factors that Influence the Decision to Walk ............................................................ 7

2.1.2 Barriers to Walking ...................................................................................................... 8

2.2 Pedestrian Characteristics ................................................................................................. 8

2.3 Factors that Contribute to Pedestrian Crashes ............................................................... 9

2.3.1 Behavioral Crash Factors .......................................................................................... 10

2.3.2 Location Factors ......................................................................................................... 10

2.3.3 Physical Crash Factors .............................................................................................. 11

2.4 Using Crash Data for an RSA .......................................................................................... 12

Chapter 3: PEDESTRIANS IN THE ROAD SAFETY AUDIT PROCESS ............................ 13

3.1 What is an RSA? ................................................................................................................ 13

3.2 What Should be Audited? ............................................................................................... 13

3.3 Who Should Conduct RSAs? .......................................................................................... 14

3.4 When Should RSAs be Conducted? ............................................................................... 14

3.5 How is an RSA Conducted? ............................................................................................ 15

3.6 Anticipated Challenges in Conducting Pedestrian-Oriented RSAs .......................... 19

Chapter 4: USING THE GUIDELINES AND RSA PROMPT LISTS .................................... 21

4.1 Purpose of the Guidelines and Prompt Lists ................................................................ 21

4.2 Organization of the Guidelines and Prompt Lists ....................................................... 21

4.3 When to Use the Guidelines and Prompt Lists ............................................................ 24

4.4 How to Use the Guidelines and Prompt Lists .............................................................. 24

Chapter 5: GUIDELINES—DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS OF PROMPTS ........................... 27

Universal Considerations................................................................................................... ... 29

A. Streets....................................................................................................................................35

B. Crossings...............................................................................................................................53

C. Parking Areas / Adjacent Developments..........................................................................77

D. Transit ...................................................................................................................................89

References ...................................................................................................................................101

Appendix A: Prompt Lists

Appendix B: Supplemental Information 
iv
v

SUMMARY

A road safety audit (RSA) is a formal safety examination of a future roadway plan or project 

or an in-service facility that is conducted by an independent, experienced multidisciplinary 

RSA team. All RSAs should include a review of pedestrian safety; however, some RSAs may 

be conducted to improve an identified pedestrian safety problem.

The purpose of the Pedestrian Road Safety Audit Guidelines and Prompt Lists is to provide 

transportation agencies and RSA teams with a beer understanding of the needs of 

pedestrians of all abilities when conducting an RSA. This pedestrian-specific guide presents 

a broad overview of the RSA process and how pedestrians should be considered in that 

process. The FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines (Publication FHWA-SA-06-06) should be 

referenced for more details on RSAs in general.

RSA teams should include safety experts with experience in developing the various aspects 

of a roadway and pedestrian facility. Expertise is needed to apply an understanding of 

pedestrian issues and their potential effects on pedestrian safety.

The Guide is divided into two primary sections: Knowledge Base and the Field Manual. An 

appendix providing supplemental information for RSAs is also included. The information 

provided and use of the primary sections in the conduct of an RSA is described in this 

summary.

The Knowledge Base section discusses the basic concepts with which the RSA team should 

be familiar before conducting an RSA, such as understanding pedestrian characteristics, 

pedestrian crashes, pedestrian considerations in the eight-step RSA process, and use of the 

Guide. 

The Field Manual includes the guidelines and prompt lists. The guidelines provide detailed 

descriptions of potential pedestrian safety issues; the prompt lists are a general listing 

of potential pedestrian safety issues. The guidelines and prompt lists are designed to 

familiarize RSA teams with potential pedestrian issues and to help them identify specific 

safety concerns related to pedestrian safety throughout the RSA process. The guidelines and 

prompt lists are designed for RSA team members with varying levels of experience and skill 

sets; the more detailed guidelines may be useful to less-experienced RSA team members. 

RSA team members with more experience may find the less detailed prompt lists of more use.

The Guide provides two prompt lists: the master prompt list and the detailed prompt lists. 

The master prompt list (following page) presents the least detailed prompts and is the key to 

the Guide’s organization. It is a general listing of safety topics by facility type. The detailed 

prompt list presents more specific issues to be considered. Appendix A provides both 

prompt lists. 

The guidelines portion of the document (Chapter 5), present the most detailed description of 

the prompts. Illustrations and RSA examples provide a more detailed understanding of the 

potential issues that may be found during an RSA.
vi

RSA Master Prompt List

Universal Considerations 

(For Entire RSA Site)

I. Needs of Pedestrians: 

Do pedestrian facilities 

address the needs of all 

pedestrians? 

II. Connectivity and 

Convenience of 

Pedestrian Facilities: Are 

safe, continuous, and 

convenient paths provided 

along pedestrian routes 

throughout the study area?

III. Traffi c: Are design, 

posted, and operating 

traffi c speeds compatible 

with pedestrian safety? 

IV. Behavior: Do 

pedestrians or motorists 

regularly misuse or ignore 

pedestrian facilities?

V. Construction: Have the 

effects of construction 

on all pedestrians been 

addressed adequately?

VI. School Presence: Is 

the safety of children in 

school zones adequately 

considered?

Universal Considerations 

(For Entire RSA Site) Topic Subtopic

RSA Zones

A. Streets B. Street 

Crossings

C. Parking 

Areas/Adjacent 

Developments

D. Transit Areas

Pedestrian 

Facilities

1. Presence, 

Design, and 

Placement

Sidewalks, paths, 

ramps, and buffers

Crossing treatments, 

intersections Sidewalks and paths

Seating, shelter, 

waiting/loading/

unloading areas

2. Quality, 

Condition, and 

Obstructions

Sidewalks, paths, 

ramps, and buffers

Crossing treatments 

(see prompts in A)

Sidewalks and paths 

(see prompts in A)

Seating, shelter, 

waiting/loading/

unloading areas (see 

prompts in A)

3. Continuity 

and 

Connectivity

Continuity/ 

Connectivity with 

other streets and 

crossings

Continuity/connectivity 

of crossing to 

ped network; 

channelization of 

peds to appropriate 

crossing points

Continuity/connectivity 

of pedestrian 

facilities through 

parking lots/adjacent 

developments

Connectivity of ped 

network to transit 

stops

4. Lighting Pedestrian lighting 

along the street Lighting of crossing

Pedestrian level 

lighting in parking 

lots/adjacent 

developments (see 

prompts in A and B)

Lighting at and near 

transit stop

5. Visibility Visibility of all road 

users

Visibility of crossing/

waiting pedestrians 

and oncoming traffi c

Visibility of 

pedestrians and 

backing/turning 

vehicles; visibility of 

pedestrian path

Visibility of 

pedestrians/ waiting 

passengers and 

vehicles/buses

Traffi c

6. Access 

Management

Driveway placement 

and design along 

streets

Driveway placement 

next to intersections

Driveway placement 

and use in relation to 

pedestrian paths

n/a*

7. Traffi c 

Volume and speed 

of adjacent traffi c, 

confl icting conditions

Volume and speed 

of traffi c approaching 

crossing, confl icting 

movements

Traffi c volume and 

speed in parking lots 

and developments, 

confl icting conditions

Volume and speed of 

adjacent traffi c and 

traffi c at crossings to 

bus stops, confl icting 

conditions

Traffi c 

Control 

Devices

8. Signs and 

Pavement 

Markings

Use and condition 

of signs, pavement 

markings, and route 

indicators

Use and condition 

of signs, pavement 

markings, and 

crossing indicators

Use and condition 

of signs, pavement 

markings for travel 

path and crossing 

Use and condition 

of transit-related 

signs and pavement 

markings

9. Signals n/a*

Presence, condition, 

timing, and phasing of 

signals

n/a* See prompts in B

*Some of the topics in the matrix have listings that state “n.a.” or “not applicable.” This does not mean that there are no 

issues associated with a specific topic in a particular zone, rather there are no checks for the corresponding topic and 

RSA zone. 
FHWA Office of Safety 1

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose 

The purpose of the Pedestrian Road Safety Audit Guidelines and Prompt Lists is to provide 

transportation agencies and road safety audit teams with a beer understanding of the needs 

of pedestrians in the transportation system when conducting a road safety audit (RSA). An 

RSA is a formal safety examination of a future roadway plan or project or an existing facility, 

and is conducted by an independent, multidisciplinary team. 

This document is an expansion of the pedestrian-related material in the FHWA Road Safety 

Audit Guidelines previously published by FHWA. The application of the RSA process outlined 

in these pedestrian-specific guidelines can assist agencies in beer identifying the safety needs 

of pedestrians in their jurisdictions. 

1.2 Scope of these Guidelines

The aforementioned FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines (Publication FHWA-SA-06-06, 

available online at hp://safety.wa.dot.gov/rsa/rsaguidelines/html/documents/FHWA_

SA_06_06.pdf) contains detailed information about the RSA process, how to implement an 

RSA program, as well as general prompt lists that show RSA review items for various project 

stages. This pedestrian-specific guide presents a broad overview of the RSA process and how 

pedestrians should be considered in that process. The FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines

should be referenced for more details on RSAs in general. 

The Pedestrian Road Safety Audit Guidelines and Prompt Lists (hereaer referred to as the Guide) 

presents RSA team members with issues they should consider when conducting a pedestrian 

RSA. While the authors have made every aempt to be as thorough as possible, persons 

performing RSAs are reminded that conditions vary from site to site and additional issues 

not documented herein may arise. That said, agencies should tailor prompt lists to their 

individual needs. Not all prompts included in this guide will be applicable for all areas. For 

example, the prompt “Will snow storage disrupt pedestrian access or visibility?” will not 

apply to all jurisdictions, and therefore should not be included as part of those areas’ prompt 

lists. 

RSA team members with an understanding of the RSA principles and process can use this 

publication to conduct an effective pedestrian oriented review of a facility. However, an RSA 

involving all modal facilities will require the use of both this guide and the FHWA Road Safety 

Audit Guidelines, with the pedestrian-specific guidelines helping the RSA team ensure that the 

pedestrian component of the RSA is adequately considered. 

The focus of this guide is to help the RSA team identify potential pedestrian safety issues. It 

is not intended as a countermeasure selection guide. Other resources described in Section 1.7 

and Appendix B provide state-of-the-practice information on selecting countermeasures. 
2 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

1.3 Organization of the Guidelines

This guide is organized into several sections, including: 

Chapter 2: BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY—provides an overview of the 

basic principles of pedestrian safety considerations, and where pedestrian issues are likely to 

occur. 

Chapter 3: PEDESTRIANS IN THE ROAD SAFETY AUDIT PROCESS—answers basic 

questions about conducting RSAs and how that process is applied to effectively assess and 

enhance pedestrian safety. 

Chapter 4: USING THE GUIDELINES AND RSA PROMPT LISTS—explains the structure 

of the prompt lists and field manual, and describes how to effectively use them when 

conducting a pedestrian safety audit. 

Chapter 5: DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS OF PROMPTS—presents the guidelines portion 

of the field manual, which provides detailed descriptions of the prompts, with examples of 

issues that may be encountered. 

Appendix A: PROMPT LISTS—contains the prompt lists to use when conducting an RSA.

Appendix B: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION—contains descriptions of other existing 

RSA tools and checklists that are used by various agencies. 

The RSA Field Manual is the basic toolkit the RSA team will use when performing an RSA to 

include reviewing plans, conducting the field review, and writing the RSA report. 

1.4 Background: Pedestrian Safety Risks 

Walking is the oldest and most fundamental form of transportation, one that nearly every 

person uses on a daily basis. In fact, walking is not only a mode of travel in itself, but it is 

the mode that connects all other modes. Despite this, there remains a significant safety risk 

that detracts from the more widespread use and appeal of walking. In 2005, 4,881 pedestrians 

lost their lives and more than 64,000 were injured in the U.S. These figures may seem small 

in comparison to the number of motor vehicle occupant fatalities and injuries suffered each 

year (approximately 33,000 and 2,494,000, respectively) (1,2). However, when exposure (i.e., the 

amount of time spent walking where there is potential of contact with a potentially harmful 

event) is taken into account, the relative risk by travel mode paints a far bleaker picture for 

pedestrians on a nationwide scale. The Surface Transportation Policy Project documented in 

a 2004 report that “although only 8.6 percent of all trips are made on foot, 11.4 percent of all 

traffic deaths are pedestrians”(3), underscoring the fact that pedestrians are among the most 

vulnerable users of the transportation system. The report also noted that in 2001—the last 

year all data were available—the fatality rate per 100 million miles traveled for pedestrians 

was more than 15 times higher for pedestrians than for motorists. Another study comparing 













Knowledge Base Field Manual Supplemental

Information
FHWA Office of Safety 3

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

fatality trends by mode—measured in terms of the number of deaths per 10 million hours 

traveled—reported that “the nationwide fatality rate for 2001 is estimated to be 4.94 deaths 

per 10 million hours for walking and 2.90 deaths per 10 million hours for motoring” (4). 

Regardless of whether exposure is measured by distance traveled or by time spent traveling, 

the evidence is clear that the pedestrian mode of travel faces significantly more risk relative to 

motor vehicle travel. 

1.5 Addressing Pedestrian Safety

Increasing Pedestrian Infrastructure Investments

Highway agencies, decision makers, and developers are recognizing the importance of 

considering pedestrians in transportation projects and investing in appropriate infrastructure. 

Many agencies are establishing goals and objectives that focus on increasing usage of 

alternative modes, such as walking, as well as improving safety and connectivity for these 

modes. As a result, transportation and land use planning initiatives, and infill development, 

are oen explicitly considering pedestrian infrastructure requirements in addition to roadway 

improvements. 

This shi in emphasis is further illustrated by the language in FHWA policy calling for the 

routine inclusion of pedestrians and bicyclists in all projects. This has led to increasing 

emphasis on pedestrians in the latest editions of nationally accepted engineering publications, 

such as the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). More documents that focus 

on pedestrians have been developed as well, such as the AASHTO Design Guide for Pedestrians

(2004). Additionally, the federal government has made positive steps toward supporting more 

pedestrian transportation investments.

Improving Understanding of Pedestrian Issues through RSAs

Increases in pedestrian facility investment by developers and local, state, and federal 

transportation agencies are certainly helping to address safety issues and reduce pedestrian 

risks. However, even with the support provided by governments, national guidelines, and 

local and regional plans, many agencies and localities still have a difficult time knowing how 

to approach inclusion of pedestrians in their transportation plans and improvement projects. 

RSAs are a cost effective method to proactively identify safety issues and make suggestions on 

measures and facilities to improve pedestrian safety. 

1.6 Road Safety Audits

An RSA is a formal safety examination of an existing or future roadway that is conducted by 

an independent, multidisciplinary team. By “independent,” it is meant that the RSA team 

will not be the same as the party charged with the development of the original plans or the 

facility owner. (The term “owner” will be used throughout this document to refer to the 

person or agency that owns or is responsible for the project). If a person associated closely 

with the development of a project or plan (i.e., not an independent auditor) wishes to review 

and evaluate the pedestrian safety elements of a project, it is still a valuable process but not 

a formal RSA. See the FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines, Section 3.2, for a description of 

various types of design and construction review processes.
4 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Objectives

The main objective of an RSA is to address the safe operation 

of roadways and crossings to ensure a high level of safety 

for all road users. The RSA can be conducted at any stage of 

a project, from the project planning stage to the final design 

stage, or on existing projects, though earlier in the project 

process there are more opportunities for effective and efficient 

solutions to safety concerns. Conducting an RSA on an existing facility represents a major 

portion of the roadway network where pedestrian safety can be retroactively improved, given 

that many older projects have not been designed with adequate consideration of the needs of 

pedestrians or where pedestrian use has increased since construction. 

The Evolution of RSAs

RSAs have been used for decades to examine the safety of a future or existing roadway, and 

much information is available on conducting RSAs. The recent Road Safety Audit Guidelines

provides the knowledge base for starting an RSA program in various agencies. RSA 

guidelines and prompt lists (sometimes known as checklists) have been created and employed 

by a variety of agencies in the U.S. and abroad, most notably Canada and Australia. These 

guidelines oen provide detailed information about current RSA processes, the objectives of 

these tools, the parties responsible for implementing them, and major issues to consider in 

the RSA. However, many of the RSA documents already available cover the RSA process and 

contain only high level information about technical topics. Given that many traffic engineers 

have lile training or experience in determining pedestrian safety needs and methods to 

safely accommodate pedestrians of all abilities, the needs of pedestrians may not be explicitly 

or adequately considered in transportation projects or in RSAs. Nearly all transportation 

projects have some degree of pedestrian activity, even those in rural areas, where pedestrians 

may face a higher risk because they are less expected by drivers. These factors make it critical 

to develop tools to assist RSA teams in identifying potential pedestrian safety issues and 

suggesting countermeasures.

Accordingly, this document and companion prompt list are intended to provide skilled safety 

practitioners with the necessary tools to identify pedestrian safety issues in an RSA.

1.7 Knowledge Base for Conducting RSAs

Before conducting RSAs, it is critical that RSA team members have a working knowledge 

of pedestrian design requirements as well as an 

understanding of the relative safety various design 

features may provide. The following sections outline 

national standards, guidelines, and safety resources that 

are important for the RSA team to understand. This list 

of materials is by no means comprehensive, but the RSA 

team should be aware of the content of these resources 

as a minimum before conducting an RSA. This will 

help the RSA team members check for conditions where 

combinations of minimum standards may render a 

facility difficult or hazardous for pedestrians, especially 

RSAs are not intended to be a review 

of design standards or policies, but 

rather a review of site elements that, 

alone or combined, could contribute 

to safety concerns.

RSA teams should include safety experts 

with experience in developing the various 

aspects of a roadway and pedestrian 

facility. For example, at least one person 

on the team should be familiar with the 

Americans with Disabilies Act (ADA) 

requirements so as to understand how 

these affect design opons, and how 

safety concerns for all road users can 

be addressed while meeng the ADA 

requirements. 
FHWA Office of Safety 5

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

those with limited sensory and mobility abilities, or under challenging conditions (such as 

night or high vehicle speeds).

 Standards

The RSA team should be familiar with national and State guidelines and standards when 

conducting an RSA. These standards are covered in:

AASHTO A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and 

Streets (Green Book) hps://bookstore.transportation.org/

item_details.aspx?ID=110

ADA Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) hp://www.

access-board.gov/adaag/html/adaag.htm

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 

hp://mutcd.wa.dot.gov/ser-pubs.htm

Applicable State-specific documentation, such as State 

statutes and laws governing pedestrian and motorist 

responsibilities

 Best Practices

An understanding of best practices of pedestrian facilities is also necessary. Guidance on 

recommended practices is described in:

FHWA Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access, Part I, A Review of Existing Guidelines 

hp://www.wa.dot.gov/environment/sidewalks/

FHWA Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access Part II, Best Practices Guide hp://www.

wa.dot.gov/environment/sidewalk2/

FHWA Accessible Sidewalks and Street Crossings - An Informational Guide (FHWA-SA-03-

019) hp://www.bikewalk.org/pdfs/sopada_wa.pdf

AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities hps://

bookstore.transportation.org/item_details.aspx?id=119

AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities hps://bookstore.transportation.

org/Item_details.aspx?id=104These documents and tools provide valuable information 

about potential countermeasures that can mitigate pedestrian safety concerns for an 

audited roadway or facility.



















The ADAAG describes minimum 

designs of elements providing 

accessibility for pedestrian use. 

The ADAAG is a minimum design 

standard (the starng foundaon), 

however, not a best pracce 

document. Many situaons require 

addional measures to ensure 

safety, especially in high use areas as 

well as situaons where pedestrian 

travel is not ancipated by motorists 

in suburban and rural areas. 

The ADAAG describes minimum 

designs of elements providing 

accessibility for pedestrian use. 

The ADAAG is a minimum design 

standard (the starng foundaon), 

however, not a best pracce 

document. Many situaons require 

addional measures to ensure 

safety, especially in high use areas as 

well as situaons where pedestrian 

travel is not ancipated by motorists 

in suburban and rural areas. 
6 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

 Safety Resources

Documents

A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Pedestrians (NCHRP Report 500) 

hp://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_500v10.pdf

Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations 

(HRT-04-100) hp://www.trc.gov/safety/pubs/04100/index.htm

How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (FHWA-SA-05-12) 

hp://www.walkinginfo.org/pp/howtoguide2006.pdf

Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings (NCHRP Report 562) 

hp://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_562.pdf

Road Safety Audits: Case Studies (FHWA-SA-06-17) 

Tools

PEDSAFE: The Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System 

(FHWA-SA-04-003) hp://www.walkinginfo.org/pedsafe/

Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash Analysis Tool (PBCAT) 

hp://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bc/pbcat.cfm

The documents and tools listed above should be used in concert with the safety resources 

during project planning and design. Facility design and operations are affected by one 

another, as is safety, and a change in either aspect of a facility could have an effect on safety. 













FHWA Office of Safety 7

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 2: BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

Chapter 2: BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

This chapter provides a brief background and synthesis of pedestrian safety principles that 

RSA teams need to understand in order to beer evaluate the pedestrian environment and 

improve the quality and safety of facilities that support the pedestrian mode of travel. 

2.1 Walking as a Mode of Travel

Although it is frequently under-accounted for in transportation planning models and 

processes, walking remains a major mode of transportation. Trips made primarily by walking 

(based on 2001 National Household Transportation Survey data) account for between 6 and 16 

percent of all trips(5). While walking is oen a recreational activity, a large portion of walking 

trips are “utilitarian,” and include travel made for work, education, and shopping purposes. 

Walking is also an important connector between different travel modes. While some trips 

are made entirely by walking, others may involve walking as only one component of a trip, 

such as walking to catch a bus to school, walking from home to the car on the way to work, or 

walking from a vehicle parked in a lot to the grocery store. Walking trips to transit or between 

modes are typically not counted as walking trips, but are included in part of trips made by 

other modes. Hence, walking trips may be underrepresented, and pedestrians’ exposure 

to risk may be higher than can be assumed from transportation surveys. As such, there is a 

need to accommodate pedestrians safely and to provide access and mobility at all types of 

transportation facilities. 

2.1.1 Factors that Influence the Decision to Walk

The decision to walk is usually based on a complex interaction of factors, including but not 

limited to some of the following: 

Distance and Access to Desired Destinations—Many factors affect walking 

distance and access such as land use paerns, and directness of pedestrian facilities, 

connectivity of the sidewalk network, and the presence of barriers to walking. 

Locations with high density and mixed land uses can reduce trip distances by 

providing a variety of destinations within a compact area. Road networks based on a 

grid—with short blocks and intersections that facilitate pedestrian crossing—provide 

more opportunities for direct and fast pedestrian connections to destinations. Areas 

where pedestrian facilities do not provide direct access to destinations or where there 

are critical gaps discourage walking.

Necessity—Voorhees states “walking remains the cheapest form of transport for all 

people, and the construction of a pedestrian-friendly environment provides the most 

affordable transportation system any community can plan, design, construct, and 

maintain.(6)” Eight percent of Americans live in a home without access to a car (7), and 

even in households with vehicle access, there are people without the ability to drive 

due to age, limited financial resources, medical conditions, or other factors. 

Safety and Comfort—Actual and perceived safety concerns can influence the decision 

and ability of people to walk, including high traffic speeds, lack of separation from 

vehicular traffic, inadequate walking and crossing facilities, and time. Low speeds, 

wide walkways that are separated from traffic traveling at low speeds, large numbers 





8 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

of pedestrians, and well-lit spaces tend to encourage walking by providing a greater 

sense of safety and security. 

Health—Just as a health condition can limit a person’s ability to drive, it can also limit 

the ability to walk. At the same time, walking may be chosen by some road users as a 

form of exercise having substantial health benefits.

Weather—Inclement weather can not only affect a person’s decision to walk, it can 

affect the path they choose to take. Pedestrian facilities not resistant to changes in 

weather can cause pedestrians to take paths that may conflict with vehicular and 

bicycle traffic.

2.1.2 Barriers to Walking

Physical, social and perceptual, and organizational issues may discourage people from 

walking: 

Physical Barriers—These consist of unprotected street crossings, lengthy crossings, 

crossings that are spaced too far apart, interchanges, partial or nonexistent walking 

paths, poor quality walking surfaces, nonexistent or inappropriate crossing treatments, 

and high speed traffic. 

Social and Perceptual Barriers—These include a perception that motorists disregard 

or are uninformed of pedestrian rights, that walking is a risk to personal safety, or that 

there is insufficient time to make a walking trip. 

Organizational Barriers—These make walking more difficult by affecting decisions 

that influence the ease of a walk, including land use paerns that result in long trip 

distances, greater priority given to other modes (such as at intersections), and lack of 

recognition of the importance of providing pedestrian facilities.

The RSA team should understand these factors that influence people’s decisions to walk and 

the barriers they may face if and when they decide to walk. A clear understanding of these 

concepts can help the RSA team beer identify these barriers through the RSA process and to 

be able to suggest changes that can effectively reduce or eliminate such barriers and improve 

pedestrian safety.

2.2 Pedestrian Characteristics

Pedestrians have a wide range of characteristics and needs, such as walking speed, spatial 

needs, mobility issues, and cognitive abilities. However, facilities for a “typical” pedestrian 

may not accommodate a significant portion of users, including older adults, people with 

disabilities, and children. It is crucial to understand the characteristics of the full range of the 

pedestrian population that may use the facilities to ensure the design of pedestrian facilities 

accommodates the range of pedestrian abilities.

Walking Speed—While the average pedestrian walks at about four feet per second, 

many older adults, children, and people with mobility impairments walk more slowly. 

Pedestrian crossing times at signalized intersections and available gaps at unsignalized 

intersections must take into account the presence of slower walkers. 

Spatial Needs—Where sidewalks and crosswalks cannot accommodate high 













FHWA Office of Safety 9

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 2: BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

pedestrian volumes, pedestrian traffic may move very slowly or some people may 

walk in the street. Even in less crowded areas, street furniture or landscaping may 

reduce the sidewalk space available for pedestrians. Since walking is oen a social 

activity, many pedestrians traveling in groups will walk in the street or along the grass 

in order to stay side by side. Pedestrians using wheelchairs require additional space to 

navigate sidewalks. Work zones may not adequately provide for the spatial needs of 

pedestrians, especially those with disabilities.

Mobility—Many pedestrians, especially young children, people with disabilities, and 

some older adults, have lower mobility levels. They also may have reduced motor 

skills that limit their ability to walk at certain speeds, turn their heads in certain ways, 

and see all signs, signals, and markings. Young children or people in wheelchairs may 

be less visible because of their lower height and in turn may not be able to see some 

vehicles. 

Vision—Pedestrians with limited vision may be the group at the largest disadvantage 

on the road network, as vision is needed to perceive nearly all communication and 

cues from the roadway environment. Age-related vision loss is a common cause of 

low vision and blindness, and with the cohort of older Americans growing rapidly, 

limited vision will continue to increase as a pedestrian safety concern.

Cognitive Abilities—Many pedestrians, particularly children under 12 years old, may 

not have the developmental ability or experience to judge vehicle speed and distance 

accurately. Road users of any age may be temporarily impaired by illness, drugs, 

or alcohol. Pedestrians, like drivers and other road users, do not always give full 

aention to the traffic environment, or may be distracted. 

Crossing Choices and Waiting Times— Pedestrians usually prefer to travel in the 

most direct route possible. If blocks are excessively long, or if crossings do not provide 

safe and accessible routes that directly connect the destinations people want to reach, 

many pedestrians will walk or cross outside the provided pedestrian infrastructure. 

Similarly, pedestrians who must wait for an excessive amount of time to cross a street 

(some studies have found that more than 30 seconds is too long) may walk against a 

pedestrian signal or cross at another location. 

Other pedestrian characteristics include the ability or likelihood of changing direction quickly 

or unexpectedly (especially children). This, along with lighting, affects the ability of motorists 

to see the pedestrian and have sufficient time to react to pedestrian movements. The RSA 

team should always keep in mind these types of pedestrian characteristics when performing 

an RSA and consider how they would be affected by various conditions and influence the 

safety of the pedestrian environment.

2.3 Factors that Contribute to Pedestrian Crashes 

As mentioned in the introduction to this guide, pedestrian crashes with motor vehicles are a 

major cause of highway injuries and fatalities each year. Yet, it is likely that pedestrian crashes 

are still vastly underreported(8) due to crashes that occur in non-roadway locations (such as on 

private property or shared use paths) and the number of crashes that do not involve police. 

Various behavioral, location, and physical conditions that contribute to a pedestrian crash can 

oen be determined from historical crash records. This section describes these conditions of 

which an RSA team should be aware when conducting an RSA.







10 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

2.3.1 Behavioral Crash Factors

Driver and pedestrian behaviors are coded in crash reports to help understand events that 

contributed to a crash. Driver behaviors include failure to yield right of way, driving too fast, 

and inaention to name a few; pedestrian behaviors include, but are not limited to, improper 

crossing, failure to yield right of way, and darting into the road. There have been many 

studies that have looked at behavioral typing of crashes to gain a beer understanding of 

potentially hazardous behaviors of both drivers and pedestrians. However, behavioral crash 

factors derived from crash reports may be misleading as many jurisdictions cite pedestrian 

behaviors as a contributing factor to a crash without considering the facilities afforded to 

pedestrians. A classic example is where a pedestrian struck by a vehicle while crossing an 

intersection is found to have been crossing improperly, yet there are no pedestrian signal 

heads at the intersection.

2.3.2 Location Factors

It is important for the RSA team to have an understanding of locations where pedestrian 

crashes may occur. Several studies have aempted to analyze pedestrian crash data in an 

aempt to determine locations where pedestrians are at the highest risk. A 1995 FHWA study 

identified and analyzed locations related to pedestrian fatal and injury crashes(9). The study 

developed fieen major sub groups of pedestrian crash types, as shown in Table 1. The crash 

types listed in Table 1 are organized in order of most common crash type subgroups (such 

as intersection crashes where drivers violated a traffic law). The highlighted rows in the 

table group intersection-related and midblock related crashes to demonstrate the relative 

occurrence of pedestrian crashes at intersection and midblock locations. There are four 

general areas where a crash can take place:

At an intersection (where pedestrian is crossing).

At a midblock location (where pedestrian is crossing).

Along the road (where pedestrian is not trying to cross).

Not in the roadway.

In terms of location, almost one-third of the crashes studied occurred within 50 feet of an 

intersection. Collisions with turning vehicles and “other” intersection incidents were the most 

prevalent intersection-related crashes (62 percent of intersection-related crashes). Another 

7.2 percent of all crashes (or 22 percent of intersection-related crashes) occurred due to an 

intersection dash—when the driver’s view of the pedestrian was impeded until just before the 

crash or when the pedestrian was running. In addition, 5.1 percent of all crashes (16 percent of 

intersection-related crashes) occurred due to a driver violation at an intersection.

Midblock crashes were the second largest subgroup of pedestrian crashes, accounting for 

almost 27 percent of all pedestrian crashes. The most prevalent type of midblock crash was the 

midblock dash, in which a pedestrian crossed the road and the driver’s view was not blocked, 

but the driver may not have had time to stop. Midblock darts occur when the motorist’s view 

was obstructed until just before impact with the pedestrian. Midblock dart/dashes crashes 

accounted for nearly 14 percent of all crashes. 

1.

2.

3.

4.
FHWA Office of Safety 11

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 2: BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

Other, more recent studies and reports on pedestrian crashes have reported similar locational 

trends to the ones above10. Knowledge of these studies may help the RSA team assess the 

relative risks of walking by location and ensure that potential safety concerns in all areas are 

addressed. 

Table 1: Percent of Crashes by 

Major Pedestrian Crash Type Subgroups9

Pedestrian Crash Type 

Subgroup

Percent of 

Pedestrian 

Crashes

Midblock dart/dash 13.3

Other midblock 13.2

Other intersection 10.1

Vehicle turning at intersection 9.8

Not in road 8.6

Walking along roadway 7.9

Miscellaneous 7.8

Intersection dash 7.2

Backing vehicle 6.9

Driver violation at intersection 5.1

Working/playing in roadway 3.0

Disabled vehicle related 2.4

Driverless vehicle 2.1

Other vehicle-specific 1.9

Bus-related 0.9

Midblock-related Intersection-related 

2.3.3 Physical Crash Factors

The physical qualities of the roadway and pedestrian network may affect pedestrian safety. 

Below are some characteristics of the travel network that should be considered in an RSA:

Vehicle Speed—The geometric design of streets may allow drivers to feel comfortable 

at higher speeds than originally intended. Though pedestrian fatalities occur when 

vehicle speeds are low, increased speed increases the likelihood of severe injuries and 

fatalities if struck. In addition, high speeds increase the potential of other roadway 

environment factors, such as low skid resistance, contributing to crashes.

System Connectivity (or lack of a system altogether)—While the volumes of 

pedestrians in rural, suburban, and urban areas can differ substantially, it is important 

to provide pedestrian provisions in all environments where pedestrians will or will 

likely be using the roadway. Pedestrian activity may make it necessary to provide 

sidewalks along both sides of the road. Potential conflicts between pedestrians and 

vehicles may necessitate providing marked crosswalks and other treatments at 

intersections. All pedestrian facilities should be continuous, consistent, and connected 

along direct routes to major pedestrian traffic generators. Urban designs with short 

blocks and high densities tend to support pedestrian connectivity beer than rural 

areas. People in rural areas tend to rely more on the automobile for mobility than 



12 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

those in urban areas. While this leads to fewer potential conflicts between vehicles 

and pedestrians, it reduces motorist expectation of encountering pedestrians at 

intersections and driveways or walking along the side of the road. While it may not 

be feasible to provide a sidewalk along a rural road, some basic pedestrian provisions, 

such as a walkable shoulder, should be provided.

Crossings—Compared to motorists, pedestrians are oen exposed to greater risks of 

injury, and risks increase in relationship to motor vehicle speeds. The challenge is to 

protect pedestrians where they are most vulnerable—at roadway crossings. Each time 

a pedestrian crosses a street, there is a potential conflict with traffic. These conflicts can 

be the result of legal traffic movements, such as permissive le turns and right turns 

on red. They can also be the result of illegal movements such as running a red light or 

crossing against a walk signal. 

Transit Stop Placement—Since much pedestrian traffic is generated by bus passengers 

traveling to and from bus stops, these crossing locations deserve additional 

considerations and coordination among transit and highway agencies. A well-planned 

transportation network can use intersection elements (e.g., crossing distance and signal 

timing) to reduce the potential conflicts while accommodating all modes. 

Access Management—Vehicles turning into and out of driveways will conflict with 

pedestrians walking along roadways, presenting opportunities for crashes. These 

conflicts can be reduced by consideration of pedestrians during the planning stages of 

a project, and by consolidating existing driveways. Driveways close to intersections, in 

addition to the safety risks they present to vehicular traffic, can increase the workload 

on pedestrians that have to focus their aention on traffic from multiple directions. 

2.4 Using Crash Data for an RSA

For an RSA of an existing facility, crash data may be available. Crash data can be used 

to identify locations where there are safety concerns; however, it may not be possible to 

determine any consistent paern in pedestrian crashes as reported pedestrian crashes tend 

to be rare. Therefore, more than three years crash data may be needed to see any trends. 

Even then an area may have few pedestrian crashes because few pedestrians choose to walk, 

especially those whose modal choices are more limited – older people, people who have 

vision and cognitive impairments, and children. 

When apparently reliable crash data are available, the RSA team should consider the data 

carefully, and try to determine if land use and other roadway characteristics have changed. 

This is more difficult to do when dealing with pedestrian crashes as pedestrian traffic can 

change drastically without any evidence of roadway changes. For example, store closings 

can drastically affect pedestrian traffic, relocation of bus stops, and many other events that 

are difficult to determine. Furthermore, as described in Section 2.3.1, assessments of fault 

should be carefully reviewed in crash reports, since fault is oen inappropriately assigned to 

pedestrians regardless of conditions. 

The RSA team should fully understand these data constraints, realizing that a review of crash 

data alone is generally not sufficient to comprehensively identify and address pedestrian 

safety issues. A thorough understanding of pedestrian safety issues requires a site visit as 

described in more detail in Section 3.5.





FHWA Office of Safety 13

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 3: PEDESTRIANS IN THE ROAD SAFETY AUDIT PROCESS

Chapter 3: PEDESTRIANS IN THE ROAD SAFETY AUDIT 

PROCESS 

This section provides the user with detailed information pertaining to pedestrians in the 

RSA process. More detailed information about RSAs, to include creating RSA policies 

and procedures and generalized prompt lists, are included in the FHWA Road Safety Audit 

Guidelines released in 2006. 

3.1 What is an RSA? 

As described in Chapter 1, an RSA is a formal safety examination of a future roadway plan or project or 

an in-service facility that is conducted by an independent, experienced multidisciplinary RSA team. 

The primary focus of an RSA is safety (as opposed to mobility, access, aesthetics, etc.), 

although other aspects are considered. The intent of an RSA is to consider the potential 

safety issues of all users under all conditions. The RSA may be applied to any type of facility 

and can examine the potential safety issues for any type of road, throughout the project 

development process, and on completed facilities.

 

The RSA is not a simple standards check. Standards checks are part of the design process to 

ensure adherence to standards and guidelines. Although the RSA team may identify safety 

issues by comparing items of concern to standards, it is generally done with the intention of 

identifying areas where combinations of minimum standards may interact with road user 

behaviors to generate a potential safety issue. 

The RSA team has no mandate to change a design that is being audited. The RSA team 

is charged with reviewing a project to identify its safety implications, and suggesting 

measures (for the design team’s or responsible agency’s consideration) that can reasonably be 

implemented within the project schedule and available budget.

3.2 What Should be Audited?

In addition to using the traditional RSA as a tool to improve safety performance of facilities 

under their jurisdiction, public agencies may wish to conduct pedestrian-oriented RSAs. 

Though all RSAs could include a review of pedestrian and bicycle safety, a pedestrianoriented RSA may be undertaken to improve an identified pedestrian safety problem which 

may have resulted from inadequate consideration of pedestrian needs in the planning and 

design process. 

A pedestrian-oriented RSA may also be conducted on projects in the planning or design stage. 

Examples of projects with a substantial pedestrian component include projects near significant 

pedestrian generators, such as transit stations, multi-family housing, schools, school bus 

stops, assisted living facilities, or in a downtown area or commercial district. Other areas that 

may benefit from an RSA include:

Work zones.

Arterial streets.

Off-street paths (including walkways or pedestrian/bicycle bridges).





14 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

While the focus of a pedestrian-oriented RSA is to identify pedestrian safety concerns, it still 

considers the safety of all modes, especially how they relate to each other. When one mode is 

given preference over another, safety issues oen arise. The tools in this guide are designed to 

be used in both traditional and pedestrian-oriented RSAs. 

3.3 Who Should Conduct RSAs?

An increasing number of state departments of transportation (DOTs) are using RSAs as a 

proactive tool for improving safety. Many pedestrian issues occur on arterial roadways which 

are typically owned by state DOTs. This guide can be used by state DOTs to help ensure 

pedestrian safety is integrated into the RSA process.

Pedestrian safety is a major concern for many local agencies and as such, 

they may find a greater need for conducting a pedestrian-oriented RSA. 

The challenge is to assemble an independent team given the staffing 

limitations of most local agencies. Since independence is a requirement of 

an RSA, the local agency should contact the state DOT, the Local Technical 

Assistance Program (LTAP) center, the FHWA division office, or the 

FHWA resource center for assistance in finding team members. The local 

agency may also find it helpful to contact adjacent local agencies directly 

to put together an independent team; however they must ensure that the team has adequate 

training and experience. Considerations for the RSA team responsibilities, skills, and size are 

discussed in Section 3.5 of this report.

3.4 When Should RSAs be Conducted? 

RSAs can be conducted at any one of several stages of a project: Pre-construction (planning, 

preliminary design, final design); Construction (work zone traffic control plan, pre-opening); 

and Post-construction (existing roads open to traffic). Agencies should strive to start an RSA 

at the earliest feasible stage of a project. An RSA in the early stages of planning and design 

can identify issues when they can most easily be rectified. RSAs on existing projects are 

helpful in identifying pedestrian safety issues in that many agencies devote less resources 

to understanding pedestrian issues and 

therefore may be unaware of problems 

or may not be experienced with detailed 

pedestrian facility design. It is a common 

perception that public officials may think a 

pedestrian problem may not exist based on 

a review of pedestrian crashes. However, as 

discussed in Section 2.3, we know that many 

pedestrian crashes go unreported, or there 

are no pedestrian crashes because there are 

no pedestrians and no pedestrian facilities. 

RSAs can help agencies beer understand 

pedestrian issues in their jurisdiction. RSAs conducted on new pedestrian facilities during 

or after the construction stage can evaluate the 

effectiveness of permanent and temporary traffic control 

devices.

More detailed 

informaon on how 

a local agency can 

assemble an RSA 

team can be found in 

NCHRP Synthesis 321, 

Roadway Safety Tools 

for Local Agencies.
FHWA Office of Safety 15

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 3: PEDESTRIANS IN THE ROAD SAFETY AUDIT PROCESS

3.5 How is an RSA Conducted? 

The typical eight steps followed in conducting an RSA at any stage of a project are described 

in this section. Suggestions for ensuring pedestrians are adequately considered in this process 

are provided.

Responsibilities

Project 

Owner/ 

Design 

Team

RSA Team

Typical 8 RSA Steps

Step 1 Identify project or existing road for RSA 

Step 2 Select multi-diciplinary RSA team 

Step 3 Conduct start-up meeting to exchange information 

Step 4 Perform field reviews under various conditions 

Step 5 Conduct RSA analysis and prepare report of findings 

Step 6 Present RSA findings to Project Owner / Design Team 

Step 7 Prepare formal response 

Step 8 Incorporate findings into project when appropriate 

The responsibilities of the project owner/design team and the RSA team vary during the course of an RSA.

Step 1: Identify Project or Existing Road for RSA

The project owner identifies the project(s) to be audited. The owner should develop 

clear parameters for the RSA. The parameters should define the RSA scope, schedule for 

completion, RSA team requirements, required tasks and requirements on the content and 

format of the RSA report, and how responses to the RSA report will be handled. 

Step 2: Select Multi-diciplinary RSA Team

The project owner is responsible for selecting the RSA team or the RSA team leader. The 

RSA team must be independent of the project being audited. The RSA team’s independence 

assures that there is no potential conflict of interest and a fair and unbiased evaluation will be 

conducted. The project owner may select a set of qualified individuals from within its own 

organization, another road authority, or hire an outside group. If a consultant is selected to 

conduct the RSA, the project owner may want to also provide input into the desired RSA team 

skills. 

The project owner should also ensure that the RSA team represents a group of individuals 

that, combined, possess a set of skills that will ensure the most critical aspects of the project 

are addressed. RSA team members should have a background in road safety, traffic operations 

and/or road design. For RSAs with a significant pedestrian component and in particular, 

pedestrian-oriented RSAs, a pedestrian specialist should be included on the RSA team. A 

pedestrian specialist’s insight and knowledge will assist the RSA team with identifying issues 

that are not obvious to team members having general or other areas of expertise. Ideally, the 

pedestrian specialist will have experience in planning and designing pedestrian facilities, 
16 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

and will have formal training on accessibility and pedestrian-specific design. Individuals 

representing other specialty areas, such as transit operations, enforcement, and emergencyresponse personnel may be aware of constraints and problems that affect pedestrians. Persons 

with independent local knowledge from neighborhood pedestrian organizations may also 

provide valuable insights into potential safety issues affecting pedestrians. 

The size of the RSA team may vary. While three members may be adequate for some projects, 

that number may not be sufficient for larger, more complex projects. The best practice is to 

have the smallest team that brings all the necessary knowledge and experience to the process.

Step 3: Conduct Start-up Meeting to Exchange Information

The purpose of the pre-audit meeting is to:

Hand over all relevant data, information, and drawings to the RSA team.

Review the scope and objectives of the RSA.

Delegate responsibilities.

Agree upon a schedule for the completion of the RSA. 

Set up lines of communication between the RSA team leader, the project owner, and 

the design team.

Communicate maers of importance to the RSA team.

If possible, the project owner/design team should provide data describing pedestrians such 

as pedestrian crash data, pedestrian traffic volumes, peak and off peak hours of pedestrian 

travel, locations of key pedestrian generators, and citizen requests and complaints. The design 

team should inform the RSA team of design constraints, standards used, results of previous 

RSAs, and any issues arising, if applicable. The RSA team must also be aware of local traffic 

laws, statutes, and customary usage affecting pedestrians. The design and operation of 

pedestrian facilities should be consistent with local laws and customs governing issues such 

as pedestrians in unmarked crosswalks. At the end of the meeting, all parties should have 

a clear understanding of the scope of the RSA to be undertaken and each of their roles and 

responsibilities. 

Step 4: Perform Field Reviews Under Various Conditions

Design drawings and other project information should be reviewed prior to and aer the 

field review. Field reviews should be conducted for each RSA stage and type of RSA but are 

particularly useful in post-construction or RSAs of existing facilities. During the site visit, 

members of the RSA team should review the entire site, noting issues. Issues identified in the 

review of project data should be verified in the field. 

A thorough site review for an RSA with a significant pedestrian component will include the 

following actions as a minimum:

Include a walk-through. The RSA team should include both daytime 

and night-time observations to experience conditions from not only 

the perspective of a pedestrian, but from all other roadway users. 

This is very important in identifying elements that may increase the risk of collision 

for pedestrians. Ideally, the RSA team will walk the most traveled pedestrian paths 















The field review 

is a key task 

in the RSA 

process.
FHWA Office of Safety 17

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 3: PEDESTRIANS IN THE ROAD SAFETY AUDIT PROCESS

and note potential issues in not only facility design, but also pedestrian behavior and 

behavior of other modes. The field review should also include visits during both peak 

and non-peak traffic conditions. Pedestrian safety, mobility, and access are heavily 

influenced by traffic conditions and different issues may be present under different 

traffic conditions.

Consider a wide range of pedestrian abilities. A wide range of pedestrian experience 

and capabilities must be accommodated. Pedestrian designs should accommodate 

child pedestrians who lack experience and development judging vehicles and safe 

gaps for crossing, as well as adults with differing hearing, vision, cognitive, and 

mobility levels.

Consider visibility of pedestrians, especially at night. Pedestrians may enter the 

road at locations when drivers are focused on other tasks. Pedestrians may also have 

very limited visibility relative to motor vehicles, especially at night. These factors 

increase the risk of collision, especially in situations where drivers are watching for 

potentially conflicting vehicles, such as 

where right-turns-on-red are permied 

at channelized right turn lanes. Where 

risk factors are identified, measures 

to increase motorists’ visibility of 

pedestrians, or reduce motor vehicle 

speeds on the approach to conflict 

points, may be beneficial.

Examine the treatment and transition 

of pedestrian facilities at the project 

limits. Pedestrian facilities should be 

designed with aention to connecting 

facilities at the project limits and during 

construction. Discontinuities in facilities 

can result in pedestrians being forced to 

share the road with vehicles, exposing 

them to increased risk of collisions. It 

is also important to become aware of 

pedestrian and driver behaviors beyond 

the project limits. Designs outside of 

the project limits may have a significant 

effect on pedestrian and driver behavior. An example of this is a traffic calming project 

that diverts cut-through traffic from a neighborhood, increasing the volume on main 

streets. If this volume leads to congestion, it could increase frustration of both drivers 

and pedestrians.

The Field Manual, consisting of the prompt list instructions (Chapter 4), the guidelines 

(Chapter 5), and the prompt lists (Appendix A) are designed to be used during the field 

review to remind the RSA team to look at all aspects of pedestrian safety. This is done by 

the RSA team reviewing the prompt lists in the field for each type of pedestrian facility 

encountered and annotating any issues on paper. A more detailed description of the 

organization of the guidelines and prompt lists and how to use them is provided in Chapter 4.







The median pictured above seems to adequately 

protect pedestrians from through traffic. However, 

review of the same site at night reveals that there are in 

fact safety concerns for pedestrians in the crosswalk. 

Street lighting is blocked by trees, which may reduce 

visibility of pedestrians in the crosswalk, especially to 

vehicles turning left from the side street (not pictured, 

to the right of the photo).
18 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

Step 5: Conduct RSA Analysis and Prepare Report of Findings

The RSA team prepares an analysis of the safety issues identified based on the field visit and 

the review of documents. Prior to preparing a report, the team may meet with the project 

owner/design team to discuss preliminary findings. The purpose of this meeting is to 

establish a basis for writing the RSA report and to insure that the report will address issues 

that are within the scope of the RSA process.

The RSA report is a concise document, typically only a few pages in length. It should include 

a brief description of the project, a listing of the RSA team members and their qualifications, 

a listing of the materials used in conducting the RSA and a summary of findings/suggestions. 

It should include pictures and diagrams that may be useful to further illustrate points made. 

The Field Manual will help the RSA team prepare the RSA report to ensure all points are 

covered. RSA examples are provided as an illustration of how problems can be identified and 

how suggestions can be made.

Oen the RSA report may include a crash risk assessment of each issue which can be used to 

identify a priority. This assessment is based on the expected crash frequency and the expected 

severity of a crash. Expected crash frequency is qualitatively estimated on the basis of 

expected exposure (how many road users will likely be exposed to the identified safety issue) 

and probability (how likely is it that a collision will result from the identified issue). Expected 

crash severity is qualitatively estimated on the basis of factors such as anticipated speeds, 

expected collision types, and the likelihood that vulnerable road users will be exposed. These 

two risk elements (frequency and severity) are then combined to obtain a qualitative risk 

assessment on the basis of the matrix shown in Table 2.

Speed greatly affects the severity of the crash when a pedestrian is involved. At 40 mph, 

there is an 85 percent chance of a pedestrian fatality; the fatality rate drops to 45 percent at 

30 mph, at 20 mph the fatality rate is only 5 percent(11). Based on these data, it is clear that 

vehicular collisions involving pedestrians will tend to have higher severity ratings than for 

vehicular-only collisions, typically in the serious to fatal range. This type of qualitative rating 

scheme underscores the vulnerability of pedestrians, but it is not the only rating method that 

can be applied. It is up to the RSA team to agree upon an assessment method suitable to the 

purposes of the RSA being conducted. The method should consider the relationship between 

speed and severity described above.

Table 2. Crash Risk Assessment

FREQUENCY 

RATING

SEVERITY RATING

Minor Moderate Serious Fatal

Frequent Moderate-High High Highest Highest

Occasional Moderate Moderate-High High Highest

Infrequent Low Moderate Moderate-High High

Rare Lowest Low Moderate Moderate-High
FHWA Office of Safety 19

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 3: PEDESTRIANS IN THE ROAD SAFETY AUDIT PROCESS

Step 6: Present RSA Findings to Project Owner/Design Team

The RSA team presents the results of the RSA to the project owner/design team. This is a 

further opportunity for discussion and clarification and the project owner/design team may 

wish the RSA team to present additional detailed information on the RSA findings. 

Step 7: Prepare Formal Response

Once the project owner and the design team have reviewed the RSA report, they should 

jointly prepare a wrien response to its findings. The response should outline what actions 

the project owner and/or design team will take to each safety concern listed in the RSA report. 

A leer report format, signed by the project owner, is a valid method of responding to the 

RSA report. Since pedestrian issues typically have a high degree of public involvement, 

particularly at the local level, presenting the RSA findings in a public meeting or making 

the report available to the public may help garner support for the RSA process and the RSA 

findings.

Step 8: Incorporate Findings into the Project when Appropriate

Aer the response report is prepared, the project owner/design team implements the agreedupon safety improvements or creates and documents a plan for implementation of the safety 

improvements. An important consideration is to develop a program to evaluate the RSA 

program and share ‘lessons learned’ within the organization. 

3.6 Anticipated Challenges in Conducting Pedestrian-Oriented 

RSAs

While the number of agencies implementing RSA programs is increasing, there are numerous 

challenges faced by organizations to achieve the full integration of RSAs in their pedestrian 

safety programs. The following are some of the key challenges:

Identifying the projects that are prime candidates to be audited. In many cases, 

the issue of pedestrian safety is not given a high priority—for example, on building 

construction projects that close sidewalks. Procedures need to be established that 

ensure that pedestrian issues are addressed in all projects. Using the RSA for those 

projects that are identified as having a significant impact on pedestrian flows can 

potentially have major benefits. Refer to Section 3.4 for additional information on the 

types of projects for which pedestrian RSAs should be considered. 

Using the RSA process at schools. Schools pose unique pedestrian safety problems 

because of the age of pedestrians and the mix of pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular 

traffic. Potential issues are exacerbated with the increasing number of students 

driven to school, thereby increasing the number of drop-off and pick-up points. 

Because of the uniqueness and complexity of a school’s problems, a review by an 

independent RSA team helps assure that a balanced approach is taken to address 

safety. School officials and parents are closely involved with the problems and are 

acutely aware of day-to-day operation of the school facility and have strong opinions 

regarding problems and their solutions. The value of the RSA team’s findings is in the 

independent perspective of the task and the need to consider a variety of stakeholder 

viewpoints and perceptions in the process.



20 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

Convincing agencies of the need for an independent, experienced auditor on 

pedestrian focused projects. Many communities have been conducting RSAs or 

similar environmental assessments with untrained or informal auditors such as 

community members. While local community members who oen use the facilities 

being audited have a strong awareness of many problems observed on those facilities, 

they may not have the background knowledge necessary to identify relationships to 

the built environment and potential solutions. Another problem with local community 

members using the RSA is that they may be used to certain situations and not perceive 

them as threatening and potentially risky as an outside trained auditor might; “fresh 

eyes” may be needed to take into consideration a variety of safety concerns and 

provide innovative recommendations to mitigate issues. Although outside RSA team 

members may not have an institutional memory of the facilities being audited, they 

may 1) carry less bias in terms of considering safety issues, 2) be beer trained to 

comprehensively assess the environment and identify relationships between safety, 

behavior, and the physical and social environment, and 3) be in a beer position to 

coordinate findings with the responsible parties to promote change and implement 

improvements.

Ensuring the needs of all roadway users are considered. Whereas the focus of this 

guide and materials is on pedestrians, it is paramount that the needs of all users 

are considered when conducting an RSA. This includes not only understanding 

design principles, but also the laws that affect all users. Failure to consider all users 

appropriately may result in potential safety issues going unnoticed by the RSA team 

or inappropriate suggestions being made for all road users. For example, installation 

of a sign or signal for one type of user may create sight distance issues for another 

type. The intent of this guide is to assist RSA teams in considering potential pedestrian 

issues, not to lead teams to place any lower priority on other road users.

Understanding the different relationships 

between agencies and the public in 

pedestrian-oriented RSAs. Pedestrianoriented RSAs may involve local pedestrian 

and community groups either as part of the 

RSA team, or as advocates for specific issues 

or concerns. Members of these groups 

may be able to add more details on the 

pedestrian’s perspective of facilities, thus 

further ensuring the needs of users are met. 

Sometimes an RSA may even be initiated at 

the request of such a group. It is important 

for the RSA team to consider the role these 

organizations may play in the improvement 

process when planning an RSA and 

suggesting mitigation strategies. 







Many pedestrian issues, such as closing a 

driveway to reduce pedestrian-vehicle conflicts, 

require local agencies to work with private land 

owners.
FHWA Office of Safety 21

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 4: USING THE GUIDELINES AND RSA PROMPT LISTS

Chapter 4: USING THE GUIDELINES AND RSA PROMPT LISTS 

4.1 Purpose of the Guidelines and Prompt Lists

The intent of both the guidelines and prompt lists is to familiarize RSA teams with potential 

pedestrian issues and to help them identify specific safety concerns related to pedestrian 

safety. The prompt list is a useful tool to help RSA teams identify the range of design, 

operational, and policy elements that may affect pedestrian safety. Users should not rely 

on the prompt list as a simple yes/no checklist. It is a tool to “prompt” their thoughts and 

judgment when looking at a road user characteristics, design issues, environmental factors, 

and policies affecting pedestrian safety. The prompt lists may not cover all issues affecting 

pedestrian safety, and experienced team members can contribute to the success of RSAs. The 

prompt lists are not a product of an RSA, rather they are a means by which that product can 

be created. Findings from the RSA should always be described in an RSA report as discussed 

in Section 3.5.

4.2 Organization of the Guidelines and Prompt Lists 

The guidelines (Chapter 5) and prompt lists (Appendix A) are designed for RSA team 

members with varying levels of experience and skill sets. The guidelines and prompt 

lists have different levels of detail to meet the needs of the users different skill levels. The 

hierarchical structure of these tools, shown in increasing levels of detail, is as follows:

Master Prompt List.

Detailed Prompt List.

Guidelines.

The master prompt list presents the least detailed prompts. It is a general listing of topics 

while the detailed prompt lists presents more specific issues that need to be considered. The 

master prompt list serves as an index for guidelines and prompt lists, also called the Field 

Manual. The master prompt list consists of two basic elements: the universal considerations 

and the matrix of pedestrian prompts (see Figure 1). The RSA matrix consists of 3 major topic 

areas, 9 subtopic categories and 4 RSA zones. Typically, RSA teams will review the prompts in 

all 9 subtopic categories for each RSA zone encountered during the RSA. 

1.

2.

3.
22 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

*Some of the topics in the matrix have listings that state “n.a.” or “not applicable.” This does not mean that there 

are no issues associated with a specific topic in a particular zone, rather there are no checks for the corresponding 

topic and RSA zone. 

The master prompt list (i.e., both the universal considerations and the RSA matrix) of 

pedestrian prompts are potential issues that should be considered at all times when 

conducting an RSA. They apply to the RSA area as a whole and how the system of pedestrian 

facilities interfaces with other transportation components. 

Detailed descriptions of the universal considerations are included in the guidelines. The 

RSA matrix has a more detailed prompt list in Appendix A and a detailed explanation of 

the prompts in the guidelines. The detailed prompts are referenced from the RSA matrix by 

RSA zone (column), identified with a leer A-D, and the subtopic area (row), identified by 

a number 1-9. For example, the RSA matrix in Figure 1 shows in that lighting (4) on streets 

(A) should be investigated by the RSA team during the RSA. More detailed description 

of the prompt is provided in the detailed prompt list and is referenced by the code A.4. 

Likewise, the most detailed explanation of these prompts for this category can be found in the 

guidelines (Chapter 5) under A.4. Figure 2 shows an explanation of the detailed prompt lists.

RSA Master Prompt List

Universal Considerations 

(For Entire RSA Site)

I. Needs of Pedestrians: 

Do pedestrian facilities 

address the needs of all 

pedestrians? 

II. Connectivity and 

Convenience of 

Pedestrian Facilities: Are 

safe, continuous, and 

convenient paths provided 

along pedestrian routes 

throughout the study area?

III. Traffi c: Are design, 

posted, and operating 

traffi c speeds compatible 

with pedestrian safety? 

IV. Behavior: Do 

pedestrians or motorists 

regularly misuse or ignore 

pedestrian facilities?

V. Construction: Have the 

effects of construction 

on all pedestrians been 

addressed adequately?

VI. School Presence: Is 

the safety of children in 

school zones adequately 

considered?

Universal Considerations 

(For Entire RSA Site) Topic Subtopic

RSA Zones

A. Streets B. Street 

Crossings

C. Parking 

Areas/Adjacent 

Developments

D. Transit Areas

Pedestrian 

Facilities

1. Presence, 

Design, and 

Placement

Sidewalks, paths, 

ramps, and buffers

Crossing treatments, 

intersections Sidewalks and paths

Seating, shelter, 

waiting/loading/

unloading areas

2. Quality, 

Condition, and 

Obstructions

Sidewalks, paths, 

ramps, and buffers

Crossing treatments 

(see prompts in A)

Sidewalks and paths 

(see prompts in A)

Seating, shelter, 

waiting/loading/

unloading areas (see 

prompts in A)

3. Continuity 

and 

Connectivity

Continuity/ 

Connectivity with 

other streets and 

crossings

Continuity/connectivity 

of crossing to 

ped network; 

channelization of 

peds to appropriate 

crossing points

Continuity/connectivity 

of pedestrian 

facilities through 

parking lots/adjacent 

developments

Connectivity of ped 

network to transit 

stops

4. Lighting Pedestrian lighting 

along the street Lighting of crossing

Pedestrian level 

lighting in parking 

lots/adjacent 

developments (see 

prompts in A and B)

Lighting at and near 

transit stop

5. Visibility Visibility of all road 

users

Visibility of crossing/

waiting pedestrians 

and oncoming traffi c

Visibility of 

pedestrians and 

backing/turning 

vehicles; visibility of 

pedestrian path

Visibility of 

pedestrians/ waiting 

passengers and 

vehicles/buses

Traffi c

6. Access 

Management

Driveway placement 

and design along 

streets

Driveway placement 

next to intersections

Driveway placement 

and use in relation to 

pedestrian paths

n/a*

7. Traffi c 

Volume and speed 

of adjacent traffi c, 

confl icting conditions

Volume and speed 

of traffi c approaching 

crossing, confl icting 

movements

Traffi c volume and 

speed in parking lots 

and developments, 

confl icting conditions

Volume and speed of 

adjacent traffi c and 

traffi c at crossings to 

bus stops, confl icting 

conditions

Traffi c 

Control 

Devices

8. Signs and 

Pavement 

Markings

Use and condition 

of signs, pavement 

markings, and route 

indicators

Use and condition 

of signs, pavement 

markings, and 

crossing indicators

Use and condition 

of signs, pavement 

markings for travel 

path and crossing 

Use and condition 

of transit-related 

signs and pavement 

markings

9. Signals n/a*

Presence, condition, 

timing, and phasing of 

signals

n/a* See prompts in B

The RSA team should 

familiarize itself with the 

prompts so that they 

understand that there is 

a certain degree of cross 

checking required between 

zones and topics on the 

RSA matrix. For example, 

if auditing a parking area/

adjacent development, 

RSA teams should 

understand that they need 

to not only check RSA 

Zone “C: Parking Area/

Adjacent Development”, 

but also “A” for any streets 

on-site, “B” for street 

crossings, and “D” for 

transit accessing the site. 

Figure 1. Pedestrian RSA Master Prompt List
FHWA Office of Safety 23

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 4: USING THE GUIDELINES AND RSA PROMPT LISTS

B. Street Crossings

Master Prompt Detailed Prompt

RSA Stages

planning design construction post- construction

B.1 Presence, 

Design, and 

Placement

B.1.1 Do wide curb radii lengthen pedestrian crossing distances and encourage high-speed right turns?  

B.1.2 Do channelized right turn lanes minimize confl icts with pedestrians?   B.1.3 Does a skewed intersection direct drivers’ focus away from crossing pedestrians?   B.1.4 Are pedestrian crossings located in areas where sight distance may be a problem?   B.1.5 Do raised medians provide a safe waiting area (refuge) for pedestrians?   B.1.6 Are supervised crossings adequately staffed by qualifi ed crossing guards? 



B.1.7 Are marked crosswalks wide enough?  B.1.8 Do at-grade railroad crossings accommodate pedestrians safely?  B.1.9 Are crosswalks sited along pedestrian desire lines?   

B.1.10 Are corners and curb ramps appropriately planned and designed at each approach to the crossing?  

B.2 Quality, 

Condition, and 

Obstructions

See prompts in Section A for potential issues on obstructions and protruding objects that apply to street crossings

B.2.1 Is the crossing pavement adequate and well maintained?



The detailed prompt list presents more detail concerning specific issues or characteristics. A discussion of each is found in the guidelines (Chapter 5).Some detailed prompts are the same across different pedestrian zones and are referenced in the matrix and detailed prompt list.

Figure 2. Detailed Prompt List Format (excerpt from Appendix A)

The master prompts are a general listing of topics that the RSA team should consider. These make up the RSA matrix and apply to the audit area as a whole and how the system of pedestrian facilities interact with other transportation components. All master prompts should be checked for all RSA stages. An experienced RSA team may be able to use only the master prompt list.
24 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

The Field Manual parallels the prompt list and provides a more detailed explanation of the 

potential issues that may arise. Each prompt has a more detailed explanation and oen 

examples of areas of concern that help illustrate potential issues.

4.3 When to Use the Guidelines and Prompt Lists 

The pedestrian guidelines and prompt lists can be used as part of all RSAs for all projects with 

a pedestrian component. Pedestrians are oen road users for projects, whether facilities are 

designed accordingly. For this reason, the RSA team should anticipate that pedestrians will be 

users of the project they are auditing even if they are not the primary focus. The pedestrian 

needs identified in the prompt lists will help to ensure adequate consideration of pedestrian 

safety issues. The RSA team can use the prompt lists during:

The review of project information and design drawings. 

Field reviews and site visits.

Review of RSA results and suggestion development.

Report writing.

The detailed prompt list indicates the stage of project which the prompts need to be 

considered. Generally, all items on the master prompt list should be checked for all RSA 

stages. The level of information and design details increases as projects become more defined. 

Projects in the planning or preliminary design stages are less detailed, with the result that the 

RSA team addresses only general pedestrian issues (such as whether sidewalks or pedestrian 

signals will be provided). As the design progresses, more detail is available in the design 

drawings, so the RSA should include more detailed considerations (such as actual sidewalk 

width or the adequacy of pedestrian signal timings). For RSAs of existing facilities, the RSA 

team must consider these same detailed considerations, as well as review the condition of 

existing pedestrian infrastructure (such as the condition of the sidewalk, or whether accessible 

pedestrian signal heads are correctly oriented, operating properly and adequately 

maintained). These levels of detail have been accommodated in the prompt lists in this 

document.

4.4 How to Use the Guidelines and Prompt Lists

The prompt lists and guidelines are designed to accommodate RSA team members with 

varying degrees of experience in pedestrian safety issues. Inexperienced RSA team members 

can find detailed descriptions of safety issues in the guidelines section (Chapter 5). RSA team 

members with slightly more experience may choose to use only the detailed prompt list. 

RSA team members with even more experience may focus on the master prompt list. Very 

experienced RSA team members may choose to use a combination of the master prompt list 

and the category and subcategory columns of the master prompt list (these reflect the prompts 

which have the least detail). Before conducting an RSA, all RSA teams should familiarize 

themselves with the prompt lists and guidelines. 

As RSA team members become more familiar with pedestrians issues, the safety issues 

associated with the guidelines and prompt lists will become an accepted practice in ensuring 







FHWA Office of Safety 25

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 4: USING THE GUIDELINES AND RSA PROMPT LISTS

that the RSA does not overlook important safety issues. RSA team members using the prompt 

lists for the first time will want to thoroughly review the detailed prompt list and guidelines; 

aer several uses they will have a beer understanding of the detailed issues and be able to 

use the general prompt list to remind themselves of the facility characteristics that need to be 

checked.

The RSA team is reminded that these prompt lists are intended to provide guidance to help 

the RSA team address pedestrian safety. The prompt lists are not checklists that provide a 

simple listing of all pedestrian items to be considered in an RSA. For this reason, the RSA 

team should not use the prompt lists as a checklist, either in the RSA process or in the RSA 

report. Rather, the prompt lists are provided to identify the types of pedestrian-related issues 

that the RSA team should be aware of to promote pedestrian safety in the audited project. It 

is the responsibility of the RSA team to address pedestrian safety in a realistic and thoughtful 

manner, using the prompt lists as a guide to help them address the potentially wide range of 

pedestrian issues.
26 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 
FHWA Office of Safety 27

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Chapter 5: GUIDELINES—DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS OF PROMPTS

Chapter 5: GUIDELINES - DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS OF 

PROMPTS

This section provides information to help users understand the underlying issues that the 

questions in the prompt lists bring up and be able to beer identify concerns during the 

RSA process. The descriptions will help the RSA team gain a more detailed understanding 

of conditions and other issues that are likely to affect pedestrian safety. The structure of this 

section parallels that of the prompt lists. The guidelines are divided into five parts: 

Universal Considerations—describes potential issues that need to be considered 

throughout the study area at all times regardless of the type of facility being reviewed 

or observed. 

Streets (Section A)—describes potential issues on sidewalks, trails, or any path that 

may be used by pedestrians. 

Street Crossings (Section B)—describes potential issues on a pedestrian facility that 

crosses a facility for another mode of travel such as intersections or rail crossings.

Parking Areas/Adjacent Developments (Section C)—describes potential issues 

at areas outside of the public right of way that may have safety issues or influence 

pedestrian and driver behavior on the public right of way. Many of the issues that 

are outside of the public right of way are covered in the Streets and Street Crossings 

sections; however, more detailed site specific issues are covered in this section. 

Transit Areas (Section D)—identifies potential issues specific to transit locations (i.e., 

bus stops and light rail stops), emphasizing issues at bus stops (e.g., the mode most 

used and where most problems exist). 

At the beginning of each section is a brief overview and a discussion of terms used in the 

section. The numbering of the detailed descriptions of prompts in this section corresponds to 

the numbering of the actual prompts in the prompt lists in Appendix A. This will enable the 

RSA team to easily relate the prompt list items to the guidelines. 

The guidelines will help an RSA team gain a beer understanding of what to look for 

when conducting an RSA at any stage of a project. The RSA team is cautioned, however, 

that issues may arise that are unique to a specific area and that may not be covered in the 

guide—the guidelines are not exhaustive. Furthermore, the prompts that are included 

in this document should not be used as a “yes or no” checklist. The RSA team is also 

reminded to review the prompts in similar or overlapping areas. For example, pedestrian 

issues at driveways are described in Section A: Streets and Section C: Parking Areas/Adjacent 

Developments. References to such similar areas are included in the detailed description of the 

prompts. 

Guidance in this section is provided in two formats:

Detailed description of prompt.

RSA Examples.

The detailed descriptions of the prompt may include the following:













28 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

Problem description to include situations where issues arise and potential specific 

consequences.

Special considerations for the RSA team.

Photographs illustrating the problem.

The RSA examples serve to further illustrate issues as they may be described in an RSA report. 

The structure of the examples is presented below:

RSA Examples

Issue: Brief one-sentence issue 

description – General description of 

issue with examples of potential unsafe 

conditions, especially considering 

conflicts with other modes and potential 

consequences.

Detailed description of issue in photograph.

The RSA examples will contain more site-specific information than can be found in the 

descriptions in the detailed prompts.







Photograph of example
FHWA Office of Safety 29

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Universal Considerations

UNIVERSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Overview

Unlike the prompts in Sections A-D, which are intended 

to be considered when auditing specific areas of the 

pedestrian network, the prompts in this section should 

be considered throughout the entire RSA area regardless 

of the project stage. These “universal” prompts are not 

location specific and should influence every consideration 

of pedestrian safety. For example, the potential issues 

prompted by the question “Do pedestrian facilities 

address the needs of all pedestrians?” (Prompt 1) should 

be considered at all times and for all areas that the 

RSA covers. The Universal Considerations prompts are 

included in the master prompt list.

I. Needs of Pedestrians: Do pedestrian facilities address the 

needs of all pedestrians?

Pedestrians can vary greatly in their abilities, as described in Chapter 2. The RSA team should 

consider whether pedestrian facilities are designed to take into account all user groups. The 

RSA team should determine if there is a predominance of a particular user group due to the 

presence of facilities such as hospitals, schools, parks, and multi-modal centers (including 

airports, rail stations, intercity bus terminals, and water ports), since pedestrians associated 

with these facilities may have specific needs that may not be adequately accommodated by the 

application of minimum standards alone. 

 

Seniors may walk more slowly than other adult pedestrians and therefore may need 

more time at crossings. Are sufficient gaps in the traffic available, or are pedestrian 

signals timed, to allow slower pedestrians to safely cross?

Children have a limited ability to recognize danger, may be more impulsive in their 

movements, and are oen more difficult 

for motorists to view because of their 

height. Are there obstructions that would 

prevent a driver from seeing a child 

at and approaching intersections and 

driveways? How are facilities perceived 

by a young child?

People in wheelchairs, scooters, with strollers 

or dollies require curb ramps, continuous, 

smooth surfaces, and sufficient space to 

operate and wait. Where these are not 

provided, they may find it necessary to 

travel in the street or may be delayed 

when clearing a crosswalk. Are curb 

ramps that line up with crosswalks 







Terminology used in this section:

Pedestrian “desire lines” are the 

preferred paths of pedestrians in 

a roadway network. Pedestrian 

desire lines often trace the 

shortest or most convenient 

paths between two points or 

more specifically, significant 

pedestrian generators. One sign 

that pedestrian facilities are 

needed is the presence of worn 

paths (though the absence of a 

worn path does not necessarily 

mean that a sidewalk or path is not 

needed).

The level landings for each of these ramps on this 

refuge island do not connect, making it difficult for 

pedestrians with vision or mobility restrictions.
30 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

provided? Do curb ramps on islands or other refuge areas line up with each other?

People with visual impairments may need tactile or audio cues to warn them of upcoming 

conflict points or obstructions. Are these cues provided at appropriate locations? 

Non-English speaking pedestrians and children may not be able to read or understand 

text or complex signing. Do signs convey a simple, clear meaning?

II. Connectivity and Convenience of Pedestrian Facilities: 

Are safe, continuous, and convenient paths provided along 

pedestrian routes throughout the study area?

The “connectivity” of a pedestrian network describes the continuous nature of a network that 

is free of gaps or obstacles. An example of good connectivity would be a marked pedestrian 

crosswalk connecting two sidewalks, with well-positioned curb ramps to allow wheeled 

pedestrians to stay entirely within the bounds of the sidewalks and crosswalk at the transition 

between them. 

The “convenience” of a pedestrian network describes the qualities that make it comfortable 

and easy to use. Some characteristics of a pedestrian network that contribute to its 

convenience include its geometry (for example, flat grades), its passability under all weather 

conditions, and how directly it follows pedestrian desire lines.

Inconvenient or poorly connected pedestrian facilities can cause pedestrians to choose 

alternative routes, which may put them into conflict with vehicles and cyclists. The RSA team 

should evaluate the convenience and connectivity of the pedestrian network within and at 

the limits of the RSA area, and consider areas where connectivity and convenience are oen 

deficient:

Interchanges in urban areas.

Private developments, especially those where buildings are separated from the street 

by parking facilities (see Section C).

Large arterial roadways.











An adequate number of crossings should be provided for all 

pedestrians. Crossings should take into account the abilities, 

speeds, and other behavioral characteristics of pedestrians and 

should meet pedestrian demands and desire lines. 
FHWA Office of Safety 31

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Universal Considerations

RSA Example

Continuity: The pedestrian 

network should be continuous 

for all users. A continuous 

walkable surface that is 

accessible to all users, including 

those with limited mobility 

and vision, promotes the use 

of the pedestrian network 

and helps keep pedestrians 

out of roadways, where they 

may conflict with cyclists and 

vehicles.

A paved sidewalk (foreground) transitions to an unpaved footpath 

in an urban area. Pedestrian volumes are significant along 

the footpath, which serves a bus stop. The footpath may be 

impassable for all users when wet or icy, and provides an uneven 

surface that may render it difficult for pedestrians with low vision, 

in wheelchairs, or pushing strollers. The RSA team may suggest 

installing an adequate sidewalk.

III. Traffic: Are design, posted, and operating traffic speeds 

compatible with pedestrian safety?

High traffic speeds can increase the risk and severity of a pedestrian collision, as well as make 

the pedestrian environment less aractive. As described in Chapter 2, research has shown 

speed has a significant impact on mortality rates in collisions between pedestrians and motor 

vehicles. The RSA team should consider traffic speeds and their effect on pedestrian safety on 

all RSAs. 

IV. Behavior: Do pedestrians or motorists regularly misuse or 

ignore the pedestrian facilities?

The RSA team should observe if pedestrians or motorists are misusing or ignoring pedestrian 

facilities. Typically, this will point to the presence of other issues. For both design-stage 

RSAs and RSAs of existing facilities, the RSA team should assess whether existing pedestrian 

facilities follow pedestrian desire lines. For RSAs of existing facilities, the RSA team should 

also consider the following questions:

Do pedestrians cross at uncontrolled locations because marked or controlled crossings 

are dangerous, inconvenient, or not placed appropriately?

Do pedestrians disobey pedestrian channelization devices and signage intended to 

prohibit travel by foot in specific areas?

Do motorists observe traffic control devices (e.g., signals, stop signs, etc.)?

Do motorists look for and yield to pedestrians at crossings?







32 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

V. Construction: Have the effects of construction on all 

pedestrians been addressed adequately?

Construction or reconstruction of roads, 

pedestrian facilities, buildings, or other 

developments may affect pedestrian safety. 

Pedestrians of all ability levels should have 

continuous pedestrian routes through or 

around the construction area. Pedestrian 

routes should be separated from traffic, clearly 

marked, signed, and lighted, and adequately 

maintained. Specifically, the RSA team should 

investigate the following:

Are designated pedestrian detour 

routes provided, and are they separated 

from traffic and clearly marked and/or 

signed?

Are detour routes free from adverse 

environmental effects (e.g., mud, water, 

etc.) and adequately lighted for nighttime use?

Are detour routes part of a continuous 

network of pedestrian facilities?

Are detour routes, alternate routes, and 

temporary pedestrian routes accessible 

to pedestrians with all abilities (e.g., 

are stable curb ramps provided)?









A good example of a temporary curb ramp is one made of 

a stable material such as asphalt or concrete, not sand or 

wood.

Inappropriate signage and channelization fails to 

effectively convey safe travel paths for pedestrians. 

In the photo above, the wrong signing fails to direct 

pedestrians to the proposer crossing.

Pedestrian paths should be continuous, even during 

periods of construction. In the photo above, an 

alternate accessible path around construction has not 

been provided, leaving a gap in the sidewalk.
FHWA Office of Safety 33

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Universal Considerations

VI. School Presence: Is the safety of children in school zones 

adequately considered?

Schools oen generate a significant amount of pedestrian activity by children, especially 

schools located in residential areas. Children walking to and from school share the road 

environment with school buses and private vehicles picking up or dropping off students. 

The visibility, practical experience, and physical and mental capabilities of child pedestrians 

are substantially different from those of adults, requiring the RSA team to consider the 

functionality and safety of pedestrian facilities from a child’s perspective. The RSA team 

should consider the following:

Are pedestrian facilities adequate in 

the area surrounding the school (e.g., 

do sidewalk widths accommodate 

peak periods of pedestrian traffic)?

Is pedestrian signing near schools 

adequate and effective?

Do pedestrian facilities provide 

connectivity to residential areas or 

transit facilities?

For children that take the bus, do 

sidewalks provide direct access from 

the bus loading area for the school, 

without crossing parking lots or 

traffic lanes?

Are drop-off/pickup lanes separated from bus lanes to minimize confusion and 

conflicts?

Are school gates appropriately located to provide convenient and direct access for 

pedestrians?

Are crossings in school zones marked as school crossings?













34 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 
A. Streets

FHWA Office of Safety 35

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

A. STREETS

Overview

The prompts in this section are intended to help the RSA 

team identify pedestrian safety problems along streets. 

To promote a safe environment for walking, pedestrians 

must be provided space to walk along the public right of 

way. Pedestrian pathways can take many forms. In urban 

and suburban areas where pedestrian volumes may be high, 

sidewalks are typically the most appropriate facility. In 

rural areas, where pedestrian traffic might be less frequent, 

walkable shoulders may be sufficient. Trails or shared-use 

paths can safely convey pedestrians along parkways. 

Pedestrian facilities should provide accessible, safe, and 

continuous links to adjacent destinations regardless of 

facility type. Missing segments in the pedestrian network 

can leave pedestrians stranded, cause pedestrians to travel 

in the street, and increase conflicts between pedestrians 

and other modes. Without a continuous and connected 

pedestrian network, pedestrians are more likely to walk in 

the street and cross the street at unexpected points, such as 

at midblock locations. Furthermore, pedestrian sidewalks 

and paths should be as direct as possible, built along 

pedestrian “desire lines” that provide direct access to major 

origin and destination points. 

This section of the guidebook provides a more detailed 

description of the prompts for pedestrian safety along 

streets. The section numbers correspond to the numbered 

prompt lists.

A.1 Presence, Design, and Placement

A.1.1 Are sidewalks provided along the street?

Sidewalks are the primary facility type for pedestrians along streets. As such, the presence 

of sidewalks is one of the primary considerations for the RSA team. Failure to provide 

adequate sidewalks, or another adequate facility (see prompt A.1.2), increases exposure of 

pedestrians walking along the road to other travel modes using the roadway.

On existing streets, sidewalks may not be provided because of inadequate right of way. This 

may occur on existing streets with low volumes of pedestrians where the road has grown 

to fill the available right of way. Sidewalks may also be missing in rural communities, oen 

adjacent to rural highways. These potential challenges should be understood and addressed 

by the RSA team.

Terminology used in this 

section:

Sidewalks–Sidewalks are formal 

pedestrian facilities located 

adjacent to a roadway. They can 

be paved (such as concrete, 

asphalt, or brick) or unpaved 

surfaces that are maintained. 

Informal gravel/dirt pathways 

(also referred to as “goat trails”) 

that are not maintained are not 

considered sidewalks since 

they may not provide the safest 

route for pedestrians. 

Trails and shared-use paths–

Trails and shared-use paths 

can be important pedestrian 

linkages. Many of the concerns 

for sidewalks are also concerns 

for trails, meaning that many 

of the prompts in this section 

can be used to conduct an 

RSA on a trail. However, the 

RSA team may wish to consult 

publications that specifically 

discuss trail design to better 

assess trail safety issues.

Buffers–A buffer is a linear 

space provided between the 

sidewalk and the road to help 

separate pedestrians from other 

road users, especially motor 

vehicles.
36 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

A.1.2 If no sidewalk is present, is there a walkable shoulder (e.g. wide enough to 

accommodate cyclists/pedestrians) on the road or other pathway/trail nearby?

Streets without sidewalks can adequately accommodate pedestrians if there is sufficient space 

outside the vehicle travel lanes. These “walkable” shoulders should be paved and are oen 

found along rural roads where there are few pedestrians. 

If a walkable shoulder is present, the RSA team should also consider the following:

Are shoulders wide enough to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle volumes, 

considering pedestrians of all abilities (prompt A.1.4)?

Are shoulders continuous and provide links to other pedestrian facilities?

Are shoulders adequately maintained (i.e., free of mud, severe pavement deterioration, 

and plowed snow)?

Are shoulders clearly delineated by clear and well-maintained pavement markings?

 Photo by Michael Ronkin

The photo on the left shows a walkable shoulder. The safety of this shoulder, especially for children, 

may be a concern depending upon vehicular traffic volume, composition, and speed, pedestrian volume 

and composition, bicycle traffic, and the presence of lighting. The photo on the right shows a walkable 

shoulder which is separated from traffic by a wide pavement marking stripe. This wide stripe appears to 

offer a wider buffer between pedestrian and vehicular traffic. However, the safety of this shoulder may be 

a concern if it is frequently used by children since they may not always exhibit the safest behavior. As the 

photo illustrates, these children are walking with their backs to the traffic, which is not the recommended 

practice. Shoulders should not be relied upon as the only pedestrian facility near a school. 

If neither a sidewalk nor a walkable shoulder is present, a nearby parallel trail or shared-use 

path may be present. If such a facility is present, the RSA team should determine the adequacy 

of this facility in connecting pedestrians to nearby land uses.

A.1.3 Are shoulders/sidewalks provided on both sides of bridges?

Narrow bridge structures (including structures which constrain the width of the roadway, 

such as tunnels or culverts) are common problem areas for pedestrians in both urban and 

rural environments. The best time to incorporate pedestrian facilities on bridges is before 

bridge construction is completed. During the planning and design stage of a project it is 

important to ensure that walkable paths are provided on both sides of the bridge and that the 

width is adequate to accommodate both existing and future pedestrian volumes.







A. Streets

FHWA Office of Safety 37

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Underestimating current or future pedestrian volumes on bridges may result in inadequate 

walking facilities on existing bridges. Since bridge expansions are costly, measures to widen 

travel lanes may be made at the expense of the pedestrian facilities. As a result, pedestrian 

pathways may be provided on one side of the bridge only. While such a design can be made 

to accommodate pedestrians, the RSA team should assess the connectivity of pedestrian links 

to the bridge. Pedestrians crossing the street at or near the ends of the bridge are undesirable, 

not only because driver and pedestrian expectancy is violated, but because the bridge 

structure may obstruct sight lines between drivers and pedestrians. 

The photo on the left shows pedestrians walking along an unpaved shoulder where no sidewalk or paved 

pathway is provided. The narrow shoulder at a culvert forces pedestrians to walk in the road. The photo on 

the right shows a bridge that has been retrofitted with exclusive pedestrian and bike lanes.

A.1.4 Is the sidewalk width adequate for pedestrian volumes?

Minimum widths specified in the ADAAG are oen inadequate to meet the needs of 

pedestrians. When large groups of pedestrians are present on the sidewalk, and sufficient 

space is not provided, pedestrian traffic will move slowly, causing some people to walk in 

the street, or cross to the other side of the street, violating driver expectancy. Even in less 

crowded areas, pedestrians may walk in the street if the sidewalk is not wide enough, or they 

may decide to cross the street at an unsafe location to reach a sidewalk with less traffic. Since 

walking is oen a social activity, many pedestrians traveling in pairs or groups will walk in 

the street or along the grass in order to stay side by side with others. 

The RSA team should determine if the width of the usable sidewalk is adequate to meet 

pedestrian volumes. The RSA team should observe peak pedestrian volumes that are specific 

to certain times of day (such as school-related peaks), certain days of the week (such as near 

a sports field used on the weekends), or certain times of the year (such as near a seasonal 

vendor area, park, or “university” town). On planning or design stage RSAs, the RSA team 

should note adjacent land uses and their potential to generate substantial pedestrian volumes.

When assessing the width of a sidewalk, the RSA team should consider its usable width. 

Pedestrians rarely use the foot and a half of the sidewalk closest to the roadway or a building 

face. The RSA team should also pay aention to “choke points” that narrow the effective 

sidewalk width (e.g., street furniture, utility poles, poor transitions between developments, 

etc.).
38 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

A.1.5 Is there adequate separation between vehicular traffic and pedestrians?

Buffers can positively enhance both the perceived and actual safety of sidewalks by providing 

lateral separation between pedestrians and vehicular traffic. Since pedestrians typically prefer 

to be separated from traffic as much as possible, they may take alternate parallel paths when 

buffers are inadequate. Sometimes this results in pedestrians walking through landscaped 

areas where there is lile danger to pedestrians. However, other times this results in 

pedestrians walking in parallel access roads and through parking areas.

Buffers can also improve accessibility by providing space for level sidewalk crossings across 

driveways. When landscaped, buffers may also deter pedestrians from crossing roads at 

unsafe locations. Wide buffers reduce pedestrian 

exposure to vehicle spray (as well as puddle splash) 

during wet weather, and also provide space for 

snow storage, both of which promote pedestrians’ 

use of the sidewalk.

Oen bridges are designed with only a curb 

separating pedestrians on the sidewalk from 

vehicular traffic. This measure alone is oen 

inadequate as the curb does not form an adequate 

barrier between vehicular and pedestrian traffic. 

Vehicles traveling at speeds over 25 mph can mount 

a curb at relatively flat impact angles(12). 

The RSA team should consider the adequacy of the 

width of the buffer. Roadways with higher traffic 

speeds, several lanes, and greater traffic volumes 

should have wider buffers than narrow, low volume 

and low speed streets. 

Parking lanes and bicycle lanes may help buffer 

pedestrians from vehicular traffic. The RSA team 

should consider potential unintended consequences 

resulting from all buffers, such as:

Large trees may be undesirable where lateral clearance to traffic is limited, or where 

traffic speeds are high. In these cases they can form obstructions that limit sight 

distance to crossing pedestrians or to vehicles exiting driveways and intersecting 

streets, or can become fixed object hazards for motorists that depart from the travel 

lanes.

Pedestrians crossing midblock from on-street parking spaces can increase the risk 

of dart-out crashes. This risk may be particularly high in areas where children are 

present. 





Although a narrower sidewalk might be adequate 

for many pedestrian uses, school children may 

require additional space since they often walk 

in groups. Insufficient sidewalk width can be a 

particular concern for younger children, who 

are easily distracted. In such situations, a wider 

sidewalk can greatly improve safety. This photo 

shows that a 5 foot wide sidewalk is barely 

sufficient for even a small group of school 

children, though the landscaped buffer strip 

provides additional separation from traffic.
A. Streets

FHWA Office of Safety 39

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

Photos by: Dan Burden / www.pedpikeimages.org

The photo on the left shows a deep buffer with large trees that offers a safe and pleasant walking 

environment. The RSA team should check whether buffers such as this form sight distance obstructions 

to vehicles exiting driveways and intersecting streets. The photo on the right shows how curbside parking 

can effectively buffer the sidewalk from the travel lanes. The RSA team should check to see if traffic 

speeds may increase crash potential for this type of buffer.

A.1.6. Are sidewalk/street boundaries discernable to people with visual impairments?

Having a clearly defined walkway helps define pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle travel zones, 

and can reduce conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians with visual impairments. The RSA 

team should assess whether cues are present that indicate the boundary between the sidewalk 

and travel lane, such as detectable warnings that include color changes, tactile changes at 

crossings (see prompt B.1.10), and buffers. Discernable boundaries may be a particular issue 

on walkable shoulders, as there is no buffer between the travel way and shoulder and it may 

be difficult to provide tactile changes.

Photo by: ITE Pedestrian Bicycle Council

The picture on the left shows a sidewalk with a clear boundary between the sidewalk and street. The 

picture on the right shows a street where the sidewalk is made of the same material as the street, providing 

little contrast between the street and sidewalk, which may increase the potential of a conflict between 

pedestrians and vehicles.
40 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

A.1.7 Are ramps provided as an alternative to stairs?

Since stairs can be a problem for pedestrians with mobility impairments, the RSA team should 

evaluate whether alternatives, such as ramps, are provided and whether they are safe. Good 

designs include:

Level landings at the top and boom (and, for long ramps, at intermediate intervals) 

where people in wheelchairs can stop or turn around.

Gradual, consistent slope. 

Free from cracks or breaks.

Side rails where desirable or necessary.

RSA Examples

Buffers/pedestrian 

desire lines: Pedestrians 

generally use the shortest 

or most convenient path 

(along “pedestrian desire 

lines”), or pathways that 

provide a comfortable 

separation from traffic. Where 

pedestrian desire lines or 

other alternative pathways 

do not follow pedestrian 

facilities (such as sidewalks), 

pedestrians may cross 

roadways at potentially unsafe 

locations, or locations where 

drivers do not expect them. Pictured above, a narrow sidewalk is provided adjacent to the 

roadway. A parallel worn path or “goat trail” where many 

pedestrians prefer to walk is clearly visible about 20 feet from 

the sidewalk. Pedestrians may choose to walk here instead of 

the sidewalk for a greater degree of separation from traffic, or 

convenience to other pedestrian attractors/generators. Future longterm plans should consider formalizing a pedestrian path separated 

from the roadway.







A. Streets

FHWA Office of Safety 41

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

RSA Examples (continued)

Sidewalk width: Sidewalks 

should be wide enough 

to safely accommodate 

pedestrians of all ability types 

traveling in both directions. 

Narrow sidewalks may be 

insufficient to accommodate 

two passing pedestrians, or 

to allow faster pedestrians 

to pass slower pedestrians. 

Where the sidewalk is narrow, 

some pedestrians may step 

into the roadway, where they 

may conflict with drivers or 

cyclists.

A pedestrian with a walker requires most of the sidewalk width 

provided. A pedestrian approaching from the opposite direction 

would have trouble passing on the sidewalk. Pedestrians were 

observed walking on the street and crossing mid-block upstream of 

this pedestrian to provide her with sufficient walking room.

Absence of sidewalk: 

Well-designed, accessible 

sidewalks should be provided 

on both sides of the street 

to minimize exposure of 

pedestrians to vehicular 

and bicycle traffic. Where 

pedestrian facilities cannot be 

provided (either in the short 

term or long term), alternative 

facilities should be provided 

and pedestrians should be 

clearly directed to them.

A pedestrian is walking in the roadway on a high speed arterial. A 

sidewalk is missing from this side of the roadway because of lack of 

available right of way. Although a sidewalk is provided on the other 

side of the road, pedestrians were not observed to cross the street 

to reach the sidewalk because of the lack of a safe crossing. A 

short- term suggestion could be to widen the median (where there is 

overhead lighting and sight distance) to provide an adequate refuge 

so pedestrians can cross one direction of traffic at a time to reach 

the sidewalk on the other side. A long-term recommendation may 

be to revise lane and median widths so a sidewalk protected by a 

rigid barrier can be incorporated within the available cross-section.
42 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

A.2 Quality, Conditions, and Obstructions 

A.2.1 Will snow storage disrupt pedestrian access or visibility?

The RSA team should consider whether snow storage could block sidewalks or reduce 

pedestrian visibility. In particular, bus stops and curb cuts at street crossings should be clear 

of snow. 

A.2.2. Is the path clear of both temporary and permanent obstructions?

Obstructions affect all pedestrians, but are particularly hazardous to pedestrians with mobility 

restrictions who may require additional space to navigate the sidewalk, or to pedestrians with 

limited vision who may fail to see the obstructions. The RSA team should consider whether 

obstructions prevent a wheelchair or other mobility aid (such as a walker, scooter, or stroller) 

from geing by.

There are two basic types of obstructions:

Movable and temporary (such as illegally parked cars, newspaper stands, delivery 

trucks, trash cans/dumpsters, portable signs, landscaping, or water/snow)–

Temporary obstructions may also include legal parking, such as a vehicle bumper 

overhanging the sidewalk, which may be addressed through design. These are 

typically addressed through maintenance, policy, and enforcement. 

Fixed (such as utility poles, street furniture, street and commercial signs, objects 

projecting from buildings or phone booths)–Fixed obstructions can be more difficult 

to move. These can be addressed through design and policy. 

The RSA team should consider all types of obstructions and potential seasonal and event 

variations (in relation to temporary parking signs, etc.) when conducting an RSA.



A. Streets

FHWA Office of Safety 43

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

RSA Examples

Surface obstructions: Pedestrians, especially those with vision impairments or mobility 

restrictions, do not expect protruding objects on the sidewalk and may trip and fall as a 

result. If a pedestrian with disabilities has knowledge that such a protrusion exists, they 

may elect to avoid such a route in favor of a seemingly safer route.

 

The sidewalk pictured may present a significant 

hazard to a pedestrian, because of (1) street 

furniture and equipment reducing the usable width 

of a sidewalk, and (2) an uneven sidewalk surface 

(with bricks, basement access doors and a manhole 

cover) that may be a challenge for mobility- and 

sight-impaired pedestrians. Consideration should 

be given for creating straight, uninterrupted paths 

free of obstacles that conform to pedestrian desire 

lines.

The sidewalk is partly obstructed by a fire hydrant 

(foreground) and utility pole (background). 

Although the sidewalk has been widened behind 

the hydrant, the usable sidewalk width may still 

be insufficient to accommodate a wheelchair. 

In addition to the minimum sidewalk clearance 

provided, the sidewalk is also near the maximum 

grade for wheelchair users. These compounding 

factors significantly increase the risk to pedestrians 

in wheelchairs. Further widening of the sidewalk 

can be considered.

A.2.3 Is the walking surface too steep?

Steep walking surfaces (both grades and cross 

slopes) can affect pedestrian stability and 

control, especially for persons with disabilities. 

Therefore, sidewalks should be designed to 

minimize slopes or provide intermient level 

landings. The following two components of 

walking surface should be reviewed by the RSA 

team:

Grade—The slope of the walkway 

parallel to the roadway. 

Cross slope—The slope of a sidewalk 

perpendicular to the roadway oen 

becomes a problem at driveways, 

especially for pedestrians in wheelchairs 

who must maintain a straight path. 





This combination of maximum cross slopes and 

roadway curvature can present a difficulty, especially 

for someone with limited visual abilities or in a 

wheelchair. The hazard is compounded by the fact that 

it provides access to a driveway.
44 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

A.2.4. Is the walking surface adequate and well-maintained?

Pedestrians may avoid or be unable to use poor walking surfaces. On existing facilities, 

the RSA team should determine if unsafe conditions exist, such as uneven surfaces, poor 

drainage, slippery surfaces, tripping hazards, or poor maintenance. More specifically, the RSA 

team should consider the following:

Surface smoothness–Abrupt changes 

in level can create several problems for 

pedestrians, including tripping hazards. 

Even minor uplis or lips in the pavement 

surface, can create challenges to accessibility 

for pedestrians using wheelchairs, canes, or 

pedestrians with limited visibility. 

Drainage–Sidewalks with poor drainage 

can create slippery surfaces that can be 

especially dangerous for the elderly and 

persons with disabilities. Drainage problems 

may be observed on existing facilities by 

the presence of puddles or, if the site visit 

is conducted in dry weather, accumulated 

sediment le from evaporated puddles. 

Maintenance–Poorly maintained sidewalks 

can cause injury to pedestrians. Cracked 

walkways with heavy tree roots, loose 

sand and debris, worn or slippery steps or 

ramp surfaces, and snow and ice all cause 

problems for pedestrians, and should be 

noted by the RSA team. Obstructions 

such as encroachment of overgrown trees 

or shrubs on walkways are seasonal and 

require regular maintenance. 







Brick sidewalks can be susceptible to changes in 

level.

The photo on the left shows a depression in the sidewalk where there is an evaporated puddle. 

The picture on the right shows an existing puddle.

Maintenance is important for maintaining 

accessibility of walking facilities.
A. Streets

FHWA Office of Safety 45

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

A.3 Continuity and Connectivity

A.3.1 Are sidewalks/walkable shoulders continuous and on both sides of the street?

The RSA team should assess the continuity of the pedestrian network for a range of users. A 

discontinuous network can be impassable to wheelchairs, scooters, strollers, or to all users 

if it ends in an unpaved or unmaintained area that is wet, icy, muddy, or snowy. Where the 

pedestrian network is discontinuous, pedestrians may be diverted onto the roadway, where 

they may conflict with motorists and cyclists, or through paved parking areas where they may 

conflict with parking, entering, and departing vehicles. Discontinuities include the following:

Missing sidewalks or gaps.

Abrupt changes in sidewalk width.

Obstructions on sidewalks (see prompt A.2).

Frequent, abrupt changes in direction.

Sidewalks are sometimes provided only on one side of the street. When there is sidewalk only 

on one side of the street, pedestrians may cross the street at places where motorists are not 

expecting them or may walk in the street where they are more likely to conflict with vehicular 

traffic. 

A.3.2. Are measures needed to direct pedestrians to safe crossing points and 

pedestrian access ways?

In areas with high-speed or high-volume traffic, there may be a need to channelize pedestrians 

to safe crossings to mitigate the potential of a severe pedestrian-vehicle crash. Pedestrians can 

be channeled by physical barriers, such as fencing, bollards, shrubs and other buffers, and/or 

by signs which direct them to appropriate crossings. Fencing should not pose a hazard to 

motorists (e.g., horizontal rails should not have the potential to spear a vehicle if struck) or 

bicyclists. The RSA team should also note whether shrubs and other plantings used to direct 

pedestrians could obstruct visibility or pose hazards to motorists.







46 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Examples

Gaps and discontinuities: Transitions for pedestrian facilities are often neglected, 

especially at project limits and between developments. Roadway transitions at project 

limits are usually carefully considered to ensure continuity and connectivity 

for motor vehicles. Less consideration may be given to pedestrian transitions (even on 

pedestrian-oriented projects) resulting in gaps, awkward elevation/alignment changes, or 

unnecessarily risky crossings that may occur in sidewalk and path networks. Alternatively, 

new pedestrian facilities may be introduced where no connecting facilities are provided at 

all, resulting in an abrupt sidewalk end.

The sidewalk in this photo ends abruptly just before 

the driveway, however a worn path or “goat trail” 

created by pedestrians can be seen continuing 

parallel to the roadway. Lack of connectivity such 

as this are impassable to wheelchairs, scooters, 

and strollers, and are especially susceptible to 

environmental changes, resulting in muddy paths 

or snowy conditions that divert pedestrians into the 

roadway or adjacent parking area, where they may 

conflict with motorists. The RSA team may suggest 

extending the sidewalk to close the gaps.

In this photo, a sidewalk is provided to access the 

bus stop in the foreground, but the sidewalk ends just 

beyond the driveway. The gap in the sidewalk network 

reduces pedestrian safety, comfort, and convenience. 

Pedestrians with disabilities or those who are pushing 

a stroller would be forced out onto the street, resulting 

in conflicts with motor vehicles. Extending the 

sidewalk could be suggested. 
A. Streets

FHWA Office of Safety 47

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

RSA Examples (continued)

Connectivity: Transition areas from a 

walkable shoulder to a sidewalk are often 

inadequate. Transitions that are not clear 

may result in situations where pedestrians 

and drivers may not expect to share the 

roadway.

A sidewalk ends at a driveway without providing 

an accessible connection to the walkable shoulder 

in the distance. Pedestrians, especially during and 

after rain storms, are forced to walk in the right 

turn lane as the landscaped area between facilities 

is sloped toward the open channel. The RSA team 

may provide suggestions for improving the safety of 

this connection.

Sidewalk connectivity: Adequate, 

continuous sidewalks provide walking 

space for pedestrians and a clear, typically 

safer path. Gaps in sidewalks may direct 

pedestrians into the roadway, where they 

may conflict with motorists and cyclists. Gaps 

may also make sidewalks impassible to 

pedestrians with disabilities.

The sidewalk in this photograph terminates in a right 

turn lane. Pedestrians must contend not only with right 

turning traffic, but traffic crossing their paths at the 

two access points located off of the lane. Motorists 

exiting these driveways are focused on finding a gap 

in traffic and avoiding conflicts with right turning 

vehicles and may not see pedestrians walking along the 

side of the road. The RSA team may suggest providing 

a continuous, level sidewalk through this area.

A.4 Lighting

A.4.1 Is the sidewalk adequately lit?

Street lighting can improve pedestrian visibility and create a sense of security. In urban areas, 

lighting should be provided continuously. In rural areas, it may only be necessary to provide 

lighting at pedestrian crossings such as intersections and mid-block crossings (see prompt 

B.4.1).

For RSAs of existing roads, the RSA team should conduct a nighime site visit to assess the 

adequacy of pedestrian lighting. Obstacles such as trees may reduce the amount of light at 

street level or create interruptions in lighting, especially when light poles are taller than the 
48 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

trees. Adequate lighting is especially important on narrow pedestrian paths, underpasses and 

bridges where nighime security is an issue. 

A.4.2 Does street lighting improve pedestrian visibility at night?

In urban areas where pedestrians are more likely to cross mid-block (especially where 

on-street parking exists), lighting along the roadway is critical for helping motorists see 

pedestrians at marked and unmarked crossing points. The RSA team should evaluate the 

adequacy of the lighting along the roadway with respect to pedestrian volumes. The potential 

for jaywalking should be evaluated based on traffic generators, age of pedestrians, and social 

environment (e.g., are there drinking establishments/bars in the vicinity?).

A.5 Visibility

A.5.1 Is visibility of pedestrians walking on the sidewalk/shoulder adequate?

Visibility is a concern at crossings (see prompt B.5), driveways (see prompt A.6.1) and on 

walkable shoulders and sidewalks where there is no barrier between motorists, bicyclists, and 

pedestrians. Streets with on-street parking should also be checked for visibility of pedestrians 

on the sidewalk, since parked vehicles may not always be present. 

A.6 Driveways

A.6.1 Are the conditions at driveways 

intersecting sidewalks endangering 

pedestrians?

Driveways oen create multiple conflicts between 

pedestrians and motorists because drivers 

typically watch for other motor vehicles, not 

pedestrians. For instance, motorists seeking to 

make a right turn out of a parking lot may be 

looking for traffic approaching from the le and 

not look for pedestrians approaching from the 

right. Additionally, motorists that are backing 

out of a driveway may not be able to clearly see 

a pedestrian walking behind the car. There are 

several factors that increase the hazard potential 

for pedestrians at driveways; the most significant 

include:

Visibility–In residential areas the RSA team should check for overgrown landscaping, 

fences, signs, and mailboxes around driveways, which may obstruct sightlines 

between pedestrians and drivers. Additionally, in commercial areas, the RSA team 

should assess whether buildings and dumpsters block driver and/or pedestrian 

sightlines. Visibility at driveways can also be reduced by parked vehicles (both legal 

and illegal). 

Vehicle Speed–High vehicle speeds increase the likelihood and severity of pedestrianvehicle crashes at driveways. Vehicle speed is a function of driveway design. 





A motorist backing out of the driveway would 

have a difficult time viewing pedestrians walking 

on the sidewalk. 
A. Streets

FHWA Office of Safety 49

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Driveways with large corner radii may promote higher vehicle 

speeds into and out of the driveways, and increase the exposure 

of pedestrians to conflicting traffic by increasing the driveway 

crossing distance. The RSA team should review driveway radii 

with reference to the needs and safety of all road users (see 

prompt B.1.1).

Driveways are a particular concern in areas with significant populations 

of younger pedestrians, such as around schools, playgrounds, parks and other areas 

frequented by children. When considering safety at driveways, the RSA team should take a 

‘child’s eye’ perspective and consider visibility at heights of 3 to 4 feet. 

Cross slope issues at driveways are discussed in prompt A.2.3.

A.6.2 Does the number of driveways make the route undesirable for pedestrian travel?

Closely spaced driveways can deter pedestrians from walking on sidewalks. Instead, 

pedestrians may take unexpected paths which may put them into conflict with vehicular 

traffic in the roadway or on other routes. This is especially a problem in areas with high traffic 

volumes and high speeds, such as commercial areas. The RSA team should assess how the 

density of driveways affects pedestrian safety.

RSA Example

Pedestrian Visibility: Since drivers 

frequently do not expect pedestrians, 

they may fail to look for and 

accommodate them. Drivers typically 

watch for other motor vehicles at 

driveways and other access points, 

which are more visible because of 

their size and use of headlights. 

Drivers tend to be less observant of 

pedestrians, who are typically less 

visible and who can enter the roadway 

at unexpected locations and from 

unexpected directions. 

A sidewalk crosses a driveway where entering and exiting 

drivers must watch for conflicting traffic and where 

drivers’ sightlines are partly obstructed by parked vehicles, 

landscaping, and a railing (circled, far side of driveway). 

The steep grade and lack of visibility of traffic can draw a 

motorist’s attention away from pedestrians walking along 

the sidewalk, creating a potentially high-risk conflict. 

Removal of one of the factors that decrease visibility (e.g., 

railing or grade) would help improve safety. In this case 

replacing the railing with a more transparent design could 

be suggested.

Some commercial 

developments have no 

clearly defined driveways. 

More about potenal 

issues related to access into 

developments can be found 

in Secon C.
50 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

A.7 Traffic Characteristics

A.7.1 Are there any conflicts between bicycles and pedestrians?

Conflicts between pedestrians and bicyclists may occur on streets, sidewalks, at crossings 

(see Section B), and at driveways (see prompt A.6.1). Bicycle/pedestrian collisions may 

result in substantial injury to both parties. Cyclists may be more likely to use sidewalks 

where roadway cycling is hazardous or unpleasant (such as where traffic volumes or 

speeds are high, or there is continuous on-street parking), or where the cyclists are young 

and inexperienced (such as around schools). The RSA team may look for elements that will 

contribute to the risk of bicycle/pedestrian conflicts, including high volumes of cyclists on the 

sidewalks, narrow sidewalks that cannot safely accommodate both modes of travel, locations 

where pedestrian facilities (sidewalks and crosswalks) intersect bicycle facilities such as bike 

paths and bike lanes, and mixed-use facilities where cyclists and pedestrians use adjoining 

sections of pavement. 

A.8 Signs and Pavement Markings

Signs and pavement markings enhance the safety and comfort of the pedestrian environment. 

The standards for signing and pavement markings for pedestrians are described in the 

MUTCD. Knowledge of these standards is essential for the RSA team; however, the team is 

reminded that an RSA is not a standards check. The MUTCD does include a provision for 

state and local agencies to develop and install warning signs not specified in the MUTCD(13). 

Common issues with signs and pavement markings along streets are described in this section. 

Signs and pavement markings related to crossings are described in Section B.

A.8.1 Are pedestrian travel zones clearly delineated from other modes of traffic through 

the use of striping, colored and/or textured pavement, signing, and other methods?

The RSA team should assess how clearly distinguished pedestrian travel zones are from other 

travel modes. Considerations for pedestrian travel zones are as follows:

Pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks. Wayfinding signs are the most common sign 

used on sidewalks. These should clearly direct pedestrians on safe paths and crossings.

Special pedestrian routes such as footpaths and other shared-use facilities or 

roadways. In rural areas, striping can be used to separate walkable shoulders 

from vehicular travel lanes. On shared-use paths, striping can be used to separate 

pedestrians from bicyclists.

Special pedestrian zones such as school zones. Signage that is specific to school 

zones alerts drivers to the presence of school children. School zone signage includes 

lower speed limit signs for those times when school children are likely to be present, 

pavement markings, and yellow school ‘pentagon’ signs marking crosswalks. 

The RSA team should also determine if posted signs still serve the intended purpose, i.e., they 

are not obsolete.





A. Streets

FHWA Office of Safety 51

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

A.8.2 Is the visibility of signs and pavement markings adequate during the day and 

night?

Signs and pavement markings are only effective if they are readily visible to road users, 

especially at night when the visibility of pedestrians is diminished. Pedestrian sign visibility 

may be limited if signs are laterally positioned far from the travel lane, if they are placed aer 

a horizontal or vertical curve, or if they are obstructed by other signs. Pedestrian pavement 

marking visibility (i.e., shoulder markings when no sidewalk is present) may be limited 

if markings are faded or worn, or do not provide a high degree of reflectivity. In RSAs of 

existing facilities, the RSA team may also identify poor sign visibility resulting from the 

following: 

Damage.

Vandalism.

Poor maintenance.

Obstruction by vegetation or other structures.

Sign conspicuity may also be compromised if pedestrian signage must compete with adjacent 

commercial signage.







52 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 
FHWA Office of Safety 53

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

B. CROSSINGS

Overview

The prompts in this section are intended to help the RSA

team identify pedestrian safety problems at crossings, 

which include both intersection and mid-block 

crossings. 

Generally, prompts in this section will help the RSA 

team address the following: 

Is the visibility of pedestrians while in the 

crossing adequate?

Does traffic control at crossings address the 

needs of all users?

How do pedestrians interact with other modes of 

traffic at crossings?

This section of the guidebook provides a more detailed 

description of the specific prompts found in the prompt 

list for pedestrian safety at crossings. The section 

numbers correspond to the numbered prompt lists.

B.1 Presence, Design, and Placement

B.1.1 Do wide curb radii lengthen pedestrian crossing distances and encourage highspeed right turns? 

The RSA team should evaluate whether curb 

radii are appropriate for given/anticipated 

pedestrian volumes and traffic mix. Wider 

radii may reduce the safety of the pedestrian 

environment by:

Encouraging high-speed right turns.

Increasing the crossing distance for 

pedestrians.

Reducing the pedestrian waiting area.

Creating an environment where 

pedestrians and motorists find it difficult 

to see each other.

Reducing visibility of stop signs due to greater offset from travel lanes.

Failing to effectively direct traffic due to the wide paved area. 

Curb radii balance the requirements of pedestrian safety with the needs of large vehicles and 

emergency service vehicles, which may require wide curb radii to turn. Curb radii should 



















Terminology used in this section 

include:

Formal pedestrian crossings

Intersections, both signalized 

and unsignalized- Intersection 

crossings are almost always 

considered formal, legal crossings 

because there is an implied 

crosswalk for pedestrians at every 

intersection, whether or not the 

crosswalk is marked.

Midblock- Formal midblock 

crossings are marked with 

a crosswalk and may have 

additional features that identify 

them as crossings, such as signs, 

curb extensions, and curb ramps.

Informal pedestrian crossings

Locations where it is obvious that 

pedestrians are crossing regularly 

but where markings and possibly 

curb ramps are absent. 

This illustration shows the effect of curb radius on 

crossing distance. Smaller curb radii shorten the 

crossing distance and provide a tighter turn.
54 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

accommodate vehicles that commonly use the intersection, as well as emergency vehicles. 

The RSA team may wish to consult local emergency services, especially if an emergency 

response facility is in or close to the study area or the RSA team is aware that curb radii may 

be an issue. 

B.1.2 Do channelized right turn lanes minimize conflicts with pedestrians?

Channelized right turn lanes can enhance pedestrian safety by allowing pedestrians to cross 

the right-turn lane separately, using the channelizing island for refuge. However, significant 

pedestrian safety issues may arise if the channelized right turn lane is designed to favor the 

movement of vehicular traffic by including geometric features that facilitate high-speed turns 

by right-turning traffic, such as:

A wide turn radius.

Flat entry angle entering and/or leaving the right turn.

Exclusive receiving lane.

Wide lanes.

The RSA team should check for the following issues when 

evaluating the safety of a channelized right turn lane:

High Traffic Volumes–Oen, channelized right turn 

lanes are created to increase the right turn capacity at 

an intersection. As a result, turn volumes may be high 

giving pedestrians lile opportunity to safely cross. 

Traffic Speeds–The geometry may promote higher vehicle speeds, which makes it 

difficult for pedestrians to judge gaps in traffic and increases the potential for a severe 

crash. 

Driver Aention Focused to the Le Side, not Front, of Vehicle–Drivers turning from 

a channelized right-turn lane typically look leward for gaps in through traffic, and 

may fail to observe pedestrians approaching or entering the crosswalk from their right. 

B.1.3 Does a skewed intersection direct drivers’ focus away from crossing pedestrians? 

Intersecting roads meeting at an angle other than 90 degrees are called skewed intersections. 

The greater the intersection skew, the more drivers must turn their heads to observe crossing 

traffic. Drivers looking far to one side may fail to observe pedestrians in the crosswalk, or 

entering the crosswalk from the other side of the street. The risk of collision may be increased 

where driver and pedestrian movements are not controlled by a traffic signal and where 

vehicles are permied to turn right on red. 

B.1.4 Are pedestrian crossings located in areas where sight distance may be a 

problem?

Sufficient stopping sight distance should be available on the approaches to all pedestrian 

crossings. Even where stopping sight distance meets the minimum AASHTO policy values, a 

greater sight distance may be desirable to improve pedestrian safety where:















Some channelized right turns act as 

free-flow right turn lanes, potentially 

creating pedestrian-vehicle conflicts. 

The crossing pedestrian in the 

photograph must walk between 

vehicles in the right-turn traffic flow.

S h li d i ht t t
FHWA Office of Safety 55

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

Pedestrian visibility is limited by poor lighting.

A substantial number of child pedestrians are expected.

Pedestrian crossings are infrequent and therefore unexpected by drivers.

Areas of particular concern include crest vertical curves and horizontal curves, where sight 

distance is oen limited.

The RSA team should consider the location of crossings with respect to the geometric 

alignment, especially in areas where minimum geometric standards may not be consistently 

met or maintained, and in rural areas where pedestrians are less common.

RSA Examples

Curb radii / crosswalk markings: Pedestrians 

waiting to cross streets should be afforded 

waiting areas outside of the travel paths of 

vehicles. Wide curb radii may result in a wide 

expanse of pavement where pedestrian and 

vehicle pathways are not clear. Poorly placed 

crosswalk markings can exacerbate this 

problem, creating a false sense of security for 

pedestrians. The street and crosswalk design at the stopcontrolled intersection in this photo creates 

potential conflicts between vehicles and 

motorists by encouraging pedestrians to wait 

in the street when crossing both legs of the 

intersection as shown. The RSA team may 

suggest placing a channelized island with 

pedestrian refuge or reducing the curb radius 

to reduce crossing distance and slow down 

right turn traffic.





56 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Examples (continued)

Curb radii/crossing distance: Curb radii 

should adequately consider all users. 

Curb radii should be designed to consider 

expected traffic mix, volumes, and types.

Curb radii should accommodate common 

vehicle types turning right without mounting 

the corner curb, not the exceptional 

vehicle. Consideration should be given to 

expected pedestrian volumes and abilities of 

pedestrians. The smaller curb radii reduce 

pedestrian crossing distances and slow 

vehicles turning right.

The curb radii at the intersection in this photo 

are small, minimizing the crosswalk length and 

reducing pedestrian exposure to vehicular traffic. 

This residential street, with young and elderly 

pedestrians, is a good location for short curb radii. 

Access for emergency vehicles has been maintained 

by utilizing a low curb profile on the corners with 

pavers, which allows emergency vehicles to mount 

the curb.

Location of pedestrian crossings: Crosswalks and other designated pedestrian 

crossings should be located so that they are readily visible to approaching drivers. The 

RSA team should review crossing locations with reference to their visibility under all 

weather and lighting conditions, and at all seasons. Crossing points that are readily 

apparent during the day may be less apparent at night. Seasonal factors (such as 

summer foliage or winter snowbanks) may also compromise visibility. The RSA team 

should also consider visibility at “unofficial” crossings that reflect pedestrian desire lines, 

but are not necessarily marked or otherwise designated.

The crossing is positioned beyond a horizontal curve. Drivers such 

as the one in the photo are unlikely to see the crossing (which is 

not marked by signs or pavement markings) until they are exiting 

the curve, at which point drivers are typically accelerating. The 

curve also limits the distance at which headlights would illuminate 

the crossing, so the risk of a pedestrian crash is increased at night. 

Also, a pedestrian crossing toward the camera is facing away from 

vehicles approaching around the curve, and may consequently be 

less aware of them. Finally, the curb ramps are offset, increasing 

exposure of pedestrians and increasing the difficulty of the crossing 

for someone with visual limitations. The RSA team may suggest 

moving this crossing away from the curve and place the curb ramps 

directly across from each other.

A well-marked crosswalk (far side) 

ends at a sidewalk that is partly 

obstructed by a signal pole and 

terminates at a barrier curb with 

no ramp. Wheelchair users have to 

share the road with vehicles to get 

around the island and are not able to 

reach the push button (circled). Even 

pedestrians without visible mobility 

restrictions avoided this island.
FHWA Office of Safety 57

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

B.1.5 Do raised medians provide a safe waiting area (refuge) for pedestrians ? 

Raised medians or crossing islands are areas that separate lanes of traffic. They provide a safe 

waiting place for pedestrians, reduce the crossing distance and separate the crossing into two 

or more phases. This helps reduce the complexity of the crossing and pedestrian exposure to 

traffic, especially at midblock crossings, where motorists may not expect pedestrians. 

If a raised median or island is present, the RSA team should assess whether the median refuge 

is:

Accessible to all pedestrians (e.g., has curb ramps or 

cut throughs and appropriate widths for wheelchair 

users).

Large enough to accommodate peak pedestrian 

volumes.

Large enough to accommodate a waiting or turning 

wheelchair on a level area.

Utilized by pedestrians.

At signalized intersections where pedestrian signals 

must be activated by a push buon, an accessible push 

buon should be placed on the median to accommodate 

pedestrians waiting there.

B.1.6 Are supervised crossings adequately staffed by qualified crossing guards? 

Supervised crossings can be an effective means of increasing pedestrian safety, especially in 

school zones. If a crossing is supervised, the RSA team should evaluate the following: 

Are crossing guards wearing appropriate aire or carrying appropriate devices to be 

readily visible (including at dawn or dusk, if the crossing is supervised during lowlight conditions)?

Are crossing guards following established 

procedures?

Are crossing guards able to communicate 

effectively with motorists and pedestrians?

Do crossing guards command the respect 

of both pedestrians and motorists?

Is the crossing supervised during the 

critical period for pedestrian traffic? 

Is the crossing supervised during the peak 

period of vehicular traffic? 

Are vulnerable users considered? The 

RSA team should evaluate the intersection 

during both supervised and unsupervised 

periods to identify all issues.























The raised median above is accessible 

to all pedestrians and provides a large 

waiting area.

Stop signs and vests are important cues to inform 

drivers about a supervised pedestrian crossing.
58 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

B.1.7 Are marked crosswalks wide enough?

At marked crossings, especially signalized intersections where pedestrians queue until 

released, pedestrians oen walk in groups and in opposite directions. The RSA team should 

evaluate whether crosswalk widths are sufficient so that pedestrians do not have to walk 

outside of crosswalk. In areas with many pedestrian destinations the crosswalks may need 

to be wider. Insufficient crosswalk widths can be a greater problem in locations with heavy 

traffic congestion or a significant number of turning movement conflicts, or in intersections of 

complex design.

B.1.8 Do at-grade railroad crossings accommodate pedestrians safely?

Pedestrian-train crashes are nearly always fatal, so the potential for such crashes should be 

investigated by the RSA team. In areas where pedestrians must cross a railroad track, the RSA 

team should consider the following:

At controlled crossings, do barriers, gates, lights, and/or bells activate in time for 

all pedestrians (including pedestrians with disabilities) to clear the tracks? At 

uncontrolled crossings, is sufficient sight distance available to allow pedestrians to 

clear the tracks before an approaching train? Clearance time may depend in part 

on train speeds and the width of the crossing (especially where multiple tracks are 

present). 

At controlled crossings, can pedestrians exit the track area aer barriers or gates have 

been lowered?

Are deaf or hearing-impaired pedestrians safely accommodated?

Is the pedestrian path across the tracks clear for sight-impaired pedestrians? Can 

pedestrians with low vision reasonably be expected to safely negotiate the uneven 

walking surface?

Are the track surroundings slippery when wet, due to the materials used or to the 

presence of oil products?

Do informal footpaths cross the railroad tracks at uncontrolled locations?

Is there fencing/signage that restricts pedestrians from certain areas and are any 

pedestrians not obeying these restrictions?

Do gates prevent pedestrians from crossing the tracks (from both sides of the street)?

Where tracks cross the pedestrian pathway at an angle, can wheelchair users align 

their wheels at a right angle to the tracks when crossing, so that wheels are not caught 

in the space between the pavement and tracks?

 

















FHWA Office of Safety 59

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

B.1.9 Are crosswalks sited along 

pedestrian desire lines?

The RSA team should determine whether 

painted crosswalks are located along 

pedestrian desire lines. Painted crosswalks 

aligned with pedestrian desire lines 

encourage pedestrians to cross within the 

crosswalk, where drivers are more likely 

to expect them, and help pedestrians with 

vision impairments to more easily cross 

within the marked crosswalk. Poorly 

located crosswalks, such as that shown at 

right, may increase the risk of a pedestrian 

collision where vehicles are permied to 

turn right on red.

B.1.10 Are corners and curb ramps 

appropriately planned and designed at 

each approach to the crossing?

Curb ramps are sloped sections at curbs that provide a smooth transition from the sidewalk 

height to street level. They increase the safety and accessibility of sidewalk and crossing 

facilities for children, pedestrians with disabilities, and those with strollers. The RSA team 

should ask the following questions:

Are curb ramps provided for each crossing?

Are curb ramps located within the crosswalk markings, so that pedestrians using the 

ramp do not need to go outside the markings when entering or exiting the crosswalk?





Pedestrians may fail to use marked crosswalk that are 

not aligmed with pedestrian desire lines. In this example, 

the pedestrian is following the alignment of the sidwalks, 

avoiding the inconveniently located crosswalk. In addition 

to being inconvenient, the location of this marked crosswalk 

may increase the collision risk for pedestrians using it. 

The crosswalk is set back from the intersection, and is 

consequently well outside the cone of vision for drivers 

turning right or left at the intersection. Drivers waiting in the 

intersection to turn may not observe the crosswalk set back, 

and therefore may fail to anticipate pedestrians crossing.

The photo at left shows a railroad crossing with lights and gates extending across the nearside travel 

lanes and sidewalk. For a pedestrian approaching the crossing from the far side of the track (i.e., walking 

toward the camera, on the same side of the road as the photographer), the gate in the photograph is 

positioned beyond the railroad crossing, and only the back of the signal is visible. Consequently, a 

pedestrian (especially one with a visual impairment) may unintentionally walk into or wait within the track 

area when the crossing is activated. The photo on the right shows tactile warnings that help pedestrians 

with impairments identify the crossing.
60 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

Are ramps aligned with the crosswalk, so that pedestrians (especially those with low 

vision) are correctly oriented when entering the crosswalk from the ramp?

Is a level area of sufficient size provided at the top of the ramp to allow wheelchair 

users (or persons using wheeled dollies) to wait or maneuver without the risk of 

rolling into the roadway?

 

Curb ramps and cut throughs are oriented directly in line with the crosswalks, so that pedestrians do not 

need to walk outside the crosswalk markings when entering or leaving the crosswalk. The ramps correctly 

orient pedestrians with low vision along the crosswalk alignment when they are entering the crosswalk. 

RSA Example

Peak pedestrian traffic: Pedestrian 

facilities should accommodate regular 

pedestrian peaks. The RSA team should 

be aware of land uses in the area that 

could regularly generate transient peaks 

in pedestrian volumes, such as schools, 

theaters, bus and transit stations, or 

workplaces that employ a shift-based 

workforce. At signalized intersections, 

sidewalks and crosswalks must 

accommodate waiting pedestrians who 

accumulate during the pedestrian “Don’t 

Walk” phase and cross as a large group. 

Sidewalks and crosswalks may need to 

accommodate dismounted cyclists with 

bicycles, which require substantially more 

space than a pedestrian.

The narrow crosswalk likely meets minimum 

requirements for crosswalk width, but cannot 

accommodate three pedestrians walking abreast. The 

crosswalk markings should align with the ramp at the 

far side of the intersection, so that pedestrians entering 

the roadway from the ramp are within the crosswalk 

markings. The RSA team may suggest applying highvisibility crosswalk markings of sufficient width to 

accommodate pedestrian volumes.



FHWA Office of Safety 61

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

B.2 Quality, Condition, and Obstructions

The issues described in prompt A.2 apply to obstruction and protruding object considerations 

at crossings.

B.2.1 Is the crossing pavement adequate and well maintained?

The RSA team should consider whether walking surfaces are adequate and well-maintained, 

such as:

Are crossings free from poor drainage/puddles, slippery surfaces, and cracks or other 

discontinuities in the pavement that could trip pedestrians or snag wheelchairs?

Is non-slip material used for the pavement marking associated with the pedestrian 

facilities?

Does the crown in the road adversely affect pedestrians with mobility impairments 

who are crossing the road?

Do steep grades, either perpendicular or parallel to crossings, cause problems for 

pedestrians, especially those in wheelchairs?

B.2.2 Is the crossing pavement flush with the roadway surface?

The RSA team should verify that curb ramps are flush with street 

surfaces and that gaps and discontinuities are avoided at each 

crossing. Material changes between the street and the curb may 

leave a gap or crack that may be a tripping hazard, or obstruct a 

wheelchair, stroller, or dolly. Gaps or cracks can be especially critical 

at an unsignalized crossing where pedestrians have difficulty finding 

gaps in traffic, since efforts to get over or around a gap may increase 

the crossing time, increasing the pedestrian’s exposure to conflicting 

traffic.









Photo by Michael Ronkin

Surfaces that are not flush 

can present an obstacle to a 

person in a wheelchair and 

also a tripping hazard to other 

pedestrians.
62 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Examples

Sidewalk-street transitions/yearround accessibility: Pedestrian 

facilities should be usable 

under all weather conditions. 

Most pedestrian facilities must 

accommodate pedestrians 

continually. Consequently, they 

should be able to accommodate 

users in all seasons and under all 

weather conditions. Sidewalks, 

crosswalks, median breaks and 

refuges, and grade-separated 

facilities should be reviewed to 

determine whether they are usable 

year-round, and in rain or snow.

Poor drainage results in an accumulation of water at the foot 

of the pedestrian ramp. Pedestrians attempting to avoid the 

water may enter or leave the crosswalk outside the markings. 

In cold weather, the water may form ice, generating a risk of 

slipping for pedestrians as they enter or leave the roadway. 

Pedestrians using this ramp will not be properly aligned with 

either crosswalk (a potential risk for blind pedestrians who 

cannot see the crosswalk alignment). 

Maintenance issues: Pedestrian 

facilities should be well maintained 

to keep travel surfaces smooth 

and clear. Pedestrian facilities 

that have been poorly maintained 

may be difficult or impossible to 

use, particularly for pedestrians 

with mobility, visual, and hearing 

impairments. Pedestrian 

facilities that should be reviewed 

for adequate maintenance 

include sidewalks, curb ramps, 

pedestrian signal heads and 

push buttons, median refuges 

and breaks, grade-separated 

pedestrian crossings (including 

access to them), and driveway 

crossings. Maintenance issues 

are particularly common at road 

and driveway intersections, where 

pedestrian facilities such as 

sidewalks and push buttons are 

subject to strikes or loading by 

turning vehicles.

These curb ramps are cracked and rough, probably from 

loading by vehicles turning right at the intersection. The 

cracked surface presents a tripping hazard for all pedestrians, 

and may make it more difficult for pedestrians in wheelchairs 

to maneuver on the sloped sidewalk.
FHWA Office of Safety 63

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

B.3 Continuity and Connectivity

B.3.1 Does pedestrian network connectivity continue through crossings by means of 

adequate waiting areas at corners, curb ramps and marked crosswalks?

Safe pedestrian networks include well-connected and continuous pedestrian facilities at 

crossings. Discontinuities at crossings may cause pedestrians to cross away from the desired 

crossing point and put them into conflict with vehicles and bicyclists. When evaluating 

crossings, the RSA team should determine the following:

Is the waiting area sufficient to accommodate 

pedestrians, including those in wheelchairs or using 

strollers, during peak pedestrian times?

Are ramps provided in accessible locations on the 

sidewalk?

Do ramps direct pedestrians into the crosswalk, if 

present?

Are pedestrians allowed to cross all legs of an 

intersection? If pedestrians are not allowed to 

cross a leg because of safety reasons, are they 

clearly directed to a convenient alternative crossing 

location?

Are there marked crosswalks? See prompt B.1.7 and 

B.8 for more details on marked crosswalks.

B.3.2 Are pedestrians clearly directed to crossing points and pedestrian access ways?

Pedestrian crossings should be clear and direct. Large suburban areas may require signing 

and channelizing fencing to direct pedestrians to safe crossings and obstruct unsafe crossings. 

Fencing and other directional treatments must not pose a hazard to motorists.











Photo by Mike Cynecki

The photo above shows a good example 

of a sidewalk with an appropriate waiting 

area for pedestrians and an adequate curb 

ramp. A stand-back line has been painted 

to direct pedestrians where to wait to 

reduce the risk of conflicts with rightturning vehicles (including school buses, 

which require a larger turning radius) and 

passing pedestrians.
64 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Examples

Pedestrian network continuity: The components of a pedestrian network should 

allow pedestrians to follow direct and continuous paths without unnecessary and unsafe 

diversions. 

A sidewalk ends in the right through lane on the exit leg of an intersection. Pedestrians wanting to cross 

the intersection to their left (to the right in the photograph) must walk in the roadway on the exit leg before 

crossing the channelized right-turn lane, where no crosswalk has been provided.

Accessibility: Pedestrian facilities may not be accessible to all users. Persons with 

disabilities, and elderly or very young pedestrians, may have special needs. The RSA 

team should assess pedestrian facilities with regard to the needs of all road users.

A visual warning has been provided at this curb 

ramp to facilitate crossings by visually-impaired 

pedestrians. However, the grate, which represents 

a hazard or obstacle to these pedestrians, has not 

been relocated. The grate can catch the tip of a cane 

or wheelchair casters. The RSA team may suggest 

placing two ramps on this corner, each directed 

across one leg of the intersection. The grate may be 

able to remain in between the two ramps. 

As seen in the photograph, the accessible ramp 

is not aligned with the crosswalk and newspaper 

stands obstruct the section of the sidewalk in 

the path of the crosswalk, forcing pedestrians to 

walk outside of the crosswalk. This problem is 

exacerbated by the number of vehicles observed 

stopping beyond the stop bar and in or near the 

crosswalk.
FHWA Office of Safety 65

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

B.4 Lighting

B.4.1 Is the pedestrian crossing adequately lit?

Visibility of pedestrians is typically at its lowest at night. Many pedestrians, especially 

children, are unaware of their own limited visibility. Adequate lighting can improve 

pedestrian visibility during the nighime, and can improve the visibility of other road users 

(including cyclists) for pedestrians. The RSA team should assess lighting conditions at night to 

determine whether lighting allows drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians to readily see one another 

on the approaches to, and in, pedestrian crossings. When assessing lighting, potential issues 

an RSA team should consider are as follows:

Is overhead lighting activated by a photocell or an automatic timer? Lights activated 

by photocells are responsive to ambient light levels, and may consequently be more 

reliable at dawn and dusk.

Is lighting adequate during both peak and non-peak traffic 

conditions (applies especially during winter months)?

Could lighting from adjacent commercial premises distract drivers, 

create glare, or compete with overhead lighting to reduce the 

effectiveness of the roadway lighting?

Is “smart lighting” in proper working order (e.g., are pedestrians 

detected automatically and is response fast enough to capture 

pedestrian crossing)?

B.5 Visibility

B.5.1 Can pedestrians see approaching vehicles at all legs of the intersection/crossing 

and vice versa?

The RSA team must consider visibility from the perspective of all roadway users at crossings, 

especially children and persons in wheelchairs, who may be lower to the ground. Sight lines 

between all users must be free from obstructions. Visibility can be obstructed by a multitude 

of features that can be man made, natural, temporary, or permanent. The RSA team should 

consider the following:

Do permanent fixed objects reduce visibility of pedestrians? These include:

Buildings.

Fences and barriers.

Signs and utility poles.

Bus shelters.

Could temporary objects reduce visibility of pedestrians? These include:

Legally and illegally parked or loading vehicles.

Retail displays.

Dumpsters or other garbage receptacles.

Newspaper boxes.

Could seasonal changes create conditions that may reduce visibility of pedestrians? 

These include:

Snow storage.

Seasonal changes in landscaping.



































Smart lighng is lighng 

that increases intensity 

when a pedestrian uses 

a crossing equipped 

with this technology. 

Smart lighng may be 

pushbuon acvated or 

can be employed using 

automac pedestrian 

detecon devices.
66 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

The risk associated with obstructed sightlines may be aggravated by a high driver workload, 

driver distraction (especially for drivers turning le or right), or failure to expect pedestrians. 

B.5.2 Is the distance from the stop (or yield) line to a crosswalk sufficient for drivers to 

see pedestrians?

Stop or yield lines positioned too close to a crosswalk may result in limited pedestrian 

visibility as follows: 

Vehicles in adjacent lanes may obstruct drivers’ view of pedestrians in the 

crosswalk. Stop or yield lines should be placed far enough from a crosswalk to allow 

an approaching driver to see a pedestrian crossing even when a vehicle is stopped in 

an adjacent lane. 

Truck drivers stopped close to the crosswalk may fail to see pedestrians in the 

crosswalk in front of their vehicle, due to the height of the cab. Stop or yield 

lines should be placed far enough from the crosswalk to allow truck drivers to see 

pedestrians, especially children or people in wheelchairs, passing or stopped in front. 

B.5.3 Do other conditions exist where stopped vehicles may obstruct visibility of 

pedestrians?

Similar to the conditions described in prompt B.5.2, other typically less common conditions 

may arise where stopped vehicles may obstruct visibility of pedestrians. For example, on 

roads with wide lanes or shoulders a vehicle stopping for a pedestrian may be passed without 

the driver in the passing vehicle realizing a pedestrian is in the roadway. This is especially 

hazardous at unsignalized intersections, where the following driver may think that the front 

vehicle has stopped to wait for a gap to make a le turn.

RSA Examples

Pedestrian visibility− 

intersections: Objects at 

the side of the road or in the 

median may obstruct sightlines 

between approaching drivers and 

pedestrians entering the roadway. 

Objects may include trees and 

other landscaping, street furniture 

such as signal cabinets and 

transit shelters, utility poles, signs, 

buildings, and snow banks. The 

risk associated with obstructed 

sightlines may be aggravated by 

driver distraction. Objects may 

also be transient or temporary, 

such as parked vehicles and 

stopped buses. 

In the intersection shown above, a tree partially obstructs 

the view of pedestrians waiting to cross the street. 

Motorists approaching this intersection to turn right focus 

their attention on finding a gap in traffic by looking for 

approaching conflicting vehicles to their left.



FHWA Office of Safety 67

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

RSA Examples (continued)

Pedestrian visibility—midblock 

crossings: Pedestrians are not 

always clearly visible or expected 

by motorists at midblock pedestrian 

crossing locations. A number of 

transient conditions or events could 

obscure the visibility of pedestrians 

to vehicular traffic. Lighting, 

seasonal growth of vegetation, 

traffic congestion, and stopped 

vehicles or buses are just a few 

conditions that can temporarily 

increase the risk to pedestrians 

crossing a street by creating a sight 

obstruction. The risk associated 

with obstructed sightlines may be 

aggravated by driver expectance 

or distraction. Safety at pedestrian 

crossings must consider all 

permanent and transient conditions 

that may exist.

The line of sight between vehicles and pedestrians standing at 

this midblock crosswalk (picture taken standing at the end of 

the ramp leading to the crosswalk) is blocked by the bus at the 

bus stop. When there are no buses present at the stop, there 

do not appear to be obstructed sight lines. The RSA team may 

suggest moving the bus stop to the far side of the crossing.

Pedestrian visibility−stopped 

vehicles: Multiple lane facilities 

and two-way streets where same 

direction passing occurs can create 

a situation where a stopped vehicle 

obstructs the view of crossing 

pedestrians to a same direction 

passing vehicle.

Motorists rarely yield to pedestrians waiting to cross 

this unmarked crossing. When a motorist does yield to 

pedestrians at the crossing, following drivers sometimes pass 

the stopped vehicle, increasing the risk of a multiple threat 

pedestrian collision. The width of the lane (over 15 feet) may 

encourage drivers to pass since they will not conflict with 

oncoming traffic. Due to traffic speeds, the RSA team may 

suggest placing a crosswalk, pedestrian warning signs, other 

pavement markings, and advance yield lines as a short-term 

measure, and a signalized crossing as a long-term measure.
68 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Examples (continued)

Pedestrian visibility/other obstructions: Pedestrian visiblity can be compromised by 

other factors such as guardrails and buildings.

Buildings sometimes extend to the edge of or 

beyond the property line, obstructing sight 

lines around corners. Drivers and crossing 

pedestrians may have a very limited view 

of one another. Motorists and pedestrians 

should have clear, unobstructed sight lines 

along the entire crosswalk. Vehicles turning 

right from this high-speed arterial may not 

be able to stop in time to avoid a crash with 

a pedestrian in the crosswalk. The RSA 

team may suggest installing a bulb out and 

moving the crosswalk to where the building 

will not obstruct visibility of pedestrians in 

the crosswalk.

Guardrail, especially when combined with vertical and 

horizontal curvature, can obstruct visibility of pedestrians, 

particularly children and those in wheelchairs. This pedestrian 

waiting to cross can just barely see approaching vehicles 

(circled) over the guardrail from his location. The fact that the 

pedestrian is trying to cross a free-flow right turn lane increases 

the risk of collision. 

B.6 Access Management

B.6.1 Are driveways placed close to crossings?

Driveways may create multiple conflicts between pedestrians and motorists because entering 

and exiting drivers typically watch for other motor vehicles, not pedestrians. Driveways that 

are in close proximity to street crossings create multiple conflict points within a small area and 

can cause confusion between pedestrians and motorists. The RSA team should look for the 

following conditions that may occur when driveways are placed close to crossings:

 Crossings at Intersections

Motorists cuing through corner properties with driveways on two legs may generate higher 

driveway volumes and speeds than expected, increasing the potential for a crash. 
FHWA Office of Safety 69

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

Midblock Crossings

Driveways placed between the stop bar and pedestrian 

crossing at mid-block crossings can be especially hazardous 

to pedestrians. Vehicles waiting to turn right from a

driveway in such a location may be focusing their aention 

to the le to look for gaps in approaching traffic. When the 

approaching traffic has to stop for a red signal, the motorist 

could quickly turn into the path of pedestrians using the 

crossing.

B.7 Traffic Characteristics

B.7.1 Do turning vehicles pose a hazard to pedestrians?

Turning movements at intersections can be one of the most 

significant hazards to pedestrians. Potential hazards the RSA 

team should look for are as follows:

Are turning vehicles yielding to pedestrians?

Is sufficient timing provided to allow pedestrians and 

turning vehicles to clear the intersection?

The RSA team should to consider how signal phasing, timing, 

and turn movements affect pedestrian safety.

B.7.2 Are there sufficient gaps in the traffic to allow 

pedestrians to cross the road?

Traffic volumes, signal timings, and the presence of highvolume driveways determine whether there are sufficient 

gaps in the traffic to allow pedestrians to safely cross the 

street at midblock locations. Raised medians and islands can 

allow pedestrians to cross the road halfway when gaps in 

traffic exist in one direction (see prompt B.2.2). The RSA team 

should assess whether there are sufficient gaps in traffic for 

pedestrians to safely cross at unsignalized intersections and 

midblock locations.

B.7.3 Do traffic operations (especially during peak 

periods) create a safety concern for pedestrians?

Traffic conditions such as limited gaps, high turning volumes, long queues, and high speeds 

may create safety issues for pedestrians. Traffic operations should be considered at various 

times of the day (such as commuter peaks), days of week (for example, near a shopping 

center), and seasons (for example, in a resort community). Operational issues affecting safety 

may vary at different times at a single location. For example, high turning volumes and long 

queues at an intersection may affect pedestrian safety during commuter peaks, whereas high 

speeds may affect pedestrian safety during off-peak times at the same intersection. 





Motorists leaving the access near this 

signalized midblock crossing may not 

expect pedestrians to be in front of them 

after executing the right turn. 

Left-turning and right-turning traffic 

often conflicts with pedestrians crossing 

at signalized intersections. These 

conflicts can be the most significant 

hazard to a pedestrian crossing the 

intersection.
70 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

Conditions may be observed in the field (RSAs of existing facilities), or estimated by referring 

to anticipated volumes or traffic simulations (design-stage RSAs).

 

RSA Examples

Traffic congestion (right): Traffic 

congestion can often be so severe that 

vehicles are trapped on crosswalks. 

Traffic may not only block crosswalks at 

signalized intersections, but also may block 

unsignalized intersection crossings and 

midblock crossings. 

Impact of traffic operations on 

pedestrians (bottom): Traffic operations 

may affect pedestrian safety. Even in 

the presence of well-designed and wellmaintained pedestrian facilities, the 

operational characteristics of traffic may 

compromise pedestrian safety. Typical 

operational issues include high traffic 

speeds, and long queues or high turning 

volumes that interfere with pedestrian 

movements. These operational impacts 

may be specific to peak or off-peak periods. 

A traffic queue extends through the intersection, 

obstructing the crosswalk during the pedestrian 

WALK interval. Pedestrians in or entering the 

crosswalk may conflict with drivers attempting 

to clear the intersection as the queue clears. In 

addition, the queued vehicles obstruct sightlines 

between pedestrians crossing the intersection and 

passing vehicular traffic.

 

The two photos show a vehicle making a permissive left turn in front of oncoming traffic and nearly hitting 

pedestrians in a crosswalk during the WALK interval. The RSA team may suggest providing a protected left 

turn that does not conflict with the pedestrian WALK interval.

B.8 Signs and Pavement Markings

Signs and pavement markings may enhance the safety and comfort of the pedestrian 

environment(14). The standards for signing and pavement markings for pedestrians are 

described in the MUTCD and state supplements. While knowledge of these standards is 

critical for the RSA team, the team is reminded that an RSA is not a simple standards check. 

Common issues with signs and pavement markings are described in this section. 
FHWA Office of Safety 71

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

B.8.1 Is paint on stop bars and crosswalks worn, or are signs worn, missing, or 

damaged?

Signs and pavement markings are important elements of pedestrian safety, since they advise 

drivers of the presence of pedestrians on the road, and delineate pedestrian pathways in and 

close to the roadway, such as walkable shoulders and crosswalks. Worn pavement markings 

and faded, damaged, or missing signs may fail to serve their intended purpose when drivers 

cannot see them. Worn signs and pavement markings may be particularly difficult for drivers 

to see at night (if the retroreflectivity of the sign is limited) or in wet weather (when a film of 

water can reduce the visibility and reflectivity of pavement markings). The RSA team should 

endeavor to observe signs and pavement markings under these conditions to assess their 

visibility.

B.8.2 Are crossing points for pedestrians properly signed and/or marked? 

The RSA team should determine whether pavement 

marking and signing is appropriate at crossings (consult 

also prompt B.9.1 for signalized crossings). Signing and 

pavement markings should consider vehicle speeds, volume 

of pedestrians and vehicular traffic volumes. The RSA 

team should also determine if there are signs or pavement 

markings that are confusing to motorists or pedestrians, or 

that are not obeyed. For example, “No Pedestrian Crossing” (R9-3) signs, and signs directing 

pedestrians where to cross, may not prevent pedestrians from crossing at unsafe locations. 

Other examples of what the RSA team should look for are described as follows:

Signs

Regulatory signs, such as “Yield Here to Pedestrians,” inform 

motorists and pedestrians of their legal responsibilities on the 

road. However, signs alone are typically insufficient to address 

safety issues. The RSA team should determine if regulatory signs 

have been used to aempt to solve a safety problem on an RSA of 

an existing facility.

Warning signs, such as “School Bus Stop Ahead” or Pedestrian 

Warning Signs, are intended to advise motorists of the presence of 

pedestrians. Overuse of signs, or signs that are no longer relevant, 

diminish the effectiveness of all similar signs, even in other 

locations. 

Guide signs and street signs provide directional and location 

information to both motorists and pedestrians, and should be 

visible to pedestrians as well as motorists.







A pedestrian crossing at an intersecon 

can be either marked (e.g., designated 

by paint) or unmarked. An unmarked 

crossing is defined as the extension of 

the sidewalks at the intersecon. 

Regulatory signs may 

also be illuminated signs 

which operate only under 

specific conditions or 

specific times of the day.
72 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

Pavement Markings

The RSA team should determine whether pavement marking (both crosswalk markings and 

pavement word markings) are clearly visible to pedestrians to help direct pedestrians to 

intended crossings. Marked crosswalks should also be direct to minimize pedestrian exposure 

to traffic.

The RSA team should also look at pavement markings from a driver’s perspective. Standard 

pavement markings may fade quickly, and are oen not noticed or understood by motorists. 

Textured pavement crosswalk markings can also be less visible to motorists and can easily be 

mistaken for an area that has been repaired.

The photo on the left shows a textured pavement crosswalk (detail on the right) that is similar in color to 

the adjacent road pavement. The textured pavement is visible to pedestrians, but drivers may mistake the 

crosswalk treatment for a utility cut or other pavement patch. 

RSA Example

Crosswalk markings: Marked crosswalks should be placed along pedestrian desire lines 

in clearly visible, straight paths.

The crosswalk in this photo does not follow a straight path through the intersection. This not only increases 

crosswalk length, increasing exposure of pedestrians, but it also is difficult for pedestrians with visual 

impairments to follow the intended crosswalk path. The RSA team may suggest repainting the crosswalk 

straight across the intersection using continental or ladder markings or place a refuge island between the 

right turn and through lanes.
FHWA Office of Safety 73

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

B.9 Signals

B.9.1 Are pedestrian signal heads provided and adequate?

Pedestrian signal heads provide important guidance to assist pedestrians in crossing an 

intersection safely. At intersections without pedestrian signal heads, pedestrians must rely 

on vehicle signals that do not accommodate pedestrian clearance requirements (which 

are substantially longer than vehicle clearance intervals). Furthermore, traffic signals may 

include complex phasing with traffic movements (such as lagging le turn movements) that 

pedestrians do not anticipate.

Typically, pedestrians benefit from pedestrian signal heads at signalized locations. Pedestrian 

signal phasing may need no activation or may be activated using pedestrian detectors (in 

which case push buons are not necessary), or may be activated by manual push buons. 

 Pedestrian Signal Heads

Pedestrian signal heads should be easily visible to pedestrians. The RSA team should 

determine if the following may be issues with the signal head placement:

Are pedestrian signal heads reasonably in line with pedestrian travel paths?

Are pedestrian signal heads large enough to be clearly seen from the opposite side of 

the street?

Is the pedestrian signal head clearly visible along the entire length of the crosswalk?

Is the pedestrian signal head placed at an appropriate height (not too high or too low)?

Does background commercial lighting compete with the pedestrian signal display or 

render it inconspicuous?

Is there confusion with pedestrian signals at the two-stage crossings?

Do street signs or landscaping obstruct the visibility of pedestrian signals?

 Push Buttons

The RSA team should determine if the following may be issues with the push buons:

Are pedestrian push buons placed in locations accessible to all pedestrians?

Are push buons placed in locations and oriented so that they clearly indicate the 

crossing to which they apply?

Is signage needed to explain their function and use?

B.9.2 Are traffic and pedestrian signals timed so that wait times and crossing times are 

reasonable? 

Signal timing that causes excessive delay for pedestrians increases the likelihood that they 

will choose to disobey the signal. There are two components of traffic signal timing that affect 

pedestrians: wait time (the interval between a pedestrian’s arrival at the intersection and the 

start of the applicable green or WALK signal phase) and crossing and clearance time (the time 

available for a pedestrian to cross the street). The RSA team should consider the following 

when evaluating signal timing for pedestrians:



















74 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

 Wait Time

The wait time for a pedestrian is dependent upon the traffic signal cycle length and phasing. 

The longer the cycle length, the longer the average wait time for a pedestrian. Pedestrians 

oen walk against the signal when the signal cycle length or activation interval is too long.

 Crossing and Clearance Time

Pedestrian clearance intervals (typically the interval during which the flashing DON’T 

WALK display is shown) are oen based on an assumed walking speed of 4 feet per second. 

However, many pedestrians move at considerably slower speeds, including elderly people, 

children, people with disabilities, and people using strollers. Roadway features may also 

affect walking speeds, such as grade (see prompt A.2.3).

Crossing times may not be adequate when pedestrians:

Frequently are caught in the crosswalk when the pedestrian signal shows a steady 

DON’T WALK display.

Consistently must hurry to cross the street before the signal changes.

B.9.3 Is there a problem because of an inconsistency in pedestrian actuation (or 

detection) types?

Use of different pedestrian signal actuation types (i.e., automatic detection, push buon 

actuation, or no actuation) within a small geographic area or along a single corridor may 

cause pedestrian confusion. For example, pedestrians may not perceive the need to actuate 

a push buon-actuated signal in an urban area where most other pedestrian signals require 

no actuation. When a push buon-actuated pedestrian signal is not activated, pedestrians 

may not receive a WALK display and may aempt to cross without the pedestrian signal. 

The RSA team should evaluate the consistency of pedestrian signal actuation and its effect on 

pedestrian safety.

B.9.4 Are all pedestrian signals and push buttons functioning correctly and safely?

For RSAs of existing facilities, the RSA team should verify that all pedestrian signals and push 

buons are functioning properly. The RSA team should evaluate the following:

Do all phases of the pedestrian signal light up properly?

If an audible pedestrian signal is provided, do all audible signals operate?

If a countdown signal is present, does the countdown skip numbers (especially with 

the onset of an emergency pre-empted signal phase)?









FHWA Office of Safety 75

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

B. Crossings

Push Buttons

Is the push buon properly aached to a pole?

Is the push buon operational? The RSA team should activate each push buon to 

observe whether it calls a WALK phase.

If an audible and/or tactile pedestrian push buon is provided, are these features 

operational?

Is the push buon inaccessible due to poor sidewalk maintenance or poorly 

maintained landscaping?

B.9.5 Are ADA accessible push buttons provided and properly located? 

The RSA team should determine if all signal push buons, including those on medians and 

pedestrian refuge islands, are placed in locations accessible to all users. The team should 

consider the following:

Is the activation buon for a 

pedestrian signal located in a place 

that is easily found and reached by 

all users, including mobility- and 

vision-impaired pedestrians? 

Is access to the push buon 

obstructed by street furniture, 

landscaping, bus shelters, or 

moveable obstructions such as 

newspaper boxes?

Are they located along pedestrian 

desire lines (i.e., does a pedestrian 

need to change their direction of 

travel or backtrack to reach a push 

buon)?















Pedestrian push buttons may be placed in locations that 

are far from the pedestrian crossing, which may discourage 

push button use and cause pedestrians not to notice if a 

push button is present. 
76 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Examples

Location of pedestrian push buttons: Push buttons may be placed in locations where 

the crossing they control is unclear, or placed in positions where they cannot be used by 

all pedestrians. RSAs of new facilities should include a field review of pedestrian signal 

heads (which should be properly mounted and oriented) and push buttons (which should 

be located so that they are readily seen, convenient to use, and accessible to all users).

This photograph shows a pedestrian push button 

inconveniently located about a foot off the ground. 

In addition to being awkward to activate, the push 

button may be hidden by growing vegetation, 

damaged by mowing equipment, or covered by snow.

These push buttons appear to control the same 

crossing. Pedestrians may fail to use the correct 

push button for the desired crossing which may 

result in pedestrians crossing without a WALK 

signal.

This photo shows a long pedestrian crossing on a major arterial with a median push button. The timing was 

set to allow most people to be able to cross the entire street. For those who needed extra time to cross, a 

push button was provided midblock (circled), but is inaccessible to pedestrians with mobility impairments. 

This pedestrian, who was still in the crosswalk when the pedestrian crossing phase was over, was unable to 

activate the pedestrian push button.
FHWA Office of Safety 77

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

C. Parking Areas / Adjacent Developments

C. PARKING AREAS/ADJACENT DEVELOPMENTS

Overview

The prompts in this section provide a more detailed description of some of the specific issues 

that may be present in parking areas and adjacent developments, which oen are privately 

owned. The design of parking areas and adjacent developments can significantly affect 

pedestrian safety and the ability to access commercial, civic, or other spaces. Pedestrians may 

avoid a designated crossing or path because the connection to a parking area or adjacent 

development is perceived as dangerous or is nonexistent. Proper planning and design can 

reduce conflicts with automobiles for pedestrians walking through parking lots, accessing 

developments adjacent to the street or pedestrian network, or crossing driveways that connect 

parking lots to the street. 

Transportation facility designs are sometimes second to architectural designs in parking areas 

and adjacent developments. These transportation facilities oen favor vehicular traffic and 

do not always apply standard roadway design, signing, and pavement marking principles. 

Pedestrian facilities may be scarce, situated away from pedestrian desire lines, or designed 

without proper consideration for pedestrian safety. The driving task is complicated by drivers 

looking at stores and trying to find parking spaces, puing pedestrians at higher risk for being 

hit by distracted drivers in these areas. These conditions may promote unsafe pedestrian and 

motorist behaviors. 

The section numbers correspond to the numbers found in the prompt lists. Many of the 

prompts applicable to streets and at crossings (Sections A and B) will apply to these 

facilities and should also be consulted.

C.1 Presence, Design, and Placement

C.1.1 Do sidewalks/paths connect the street and adjacent land uses?

Pedestrian facilities between the street and adjacent developments/parking areas are 

sometimes neglected. Pedestrian destinations, such as commercial, institutional, and office 

buildings, should have delineated walkways between the major entrance(s) and the street. 

Schools should have clearly marked pathways that provide direct access between sidewalks 

and the entrance so that students do not have to cut across drop-off/pickup lanes. 

C.1.2 Are the sidewalks/paths designed appropriately?

The RSA team should ensure pedestrian facilities are designed to accommodate existing and 

future demands by considering the following:

Are sidewalks or paths wide enough for existing or anticipated peak pedestrian 

volumes and types?

Are sidewalks or paths placed so that they are protected from vehicles and other 

modes of travel?

Are appropriate crossings provided?





78 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

C.1.3 Are buildings entrances located and designed to be obvious and easily accessible 

to pedestrians?

Paths to entrances should be reasonably direct, to encourage their use. When building 

entrances are not obvious, pedestrians may travel longer distances to find the entrance, 

potentially increasing their exposure to conflicts with other traffic modes. Inaccessible 

entrances may require pedestrians with disabilities to take longer paths, as well as paths that 

conflict with other traffic modes. 

RSA Examples

Absence of pedestrian facilities: Building arrangements often require pedestrians 

to take awkward paths though parking lots. Many large commercial parking areas 

are designed with only vehicular traffic in mind, and have no marked travel paths for 

pedestrians needing to cross the parking lot or walk to and from their vehicles or transit 

stops. Parking lots are frequently characterized by distracted drivers, erratic vehicle 

maneuvers (including backing), and uncontrolled intersections, all of which increase the 

risk to pedestrians walking on the roadway.

Pedestrians in the parking lot of a shopping mall 

are walking in the roadway where they may conflict 

with vehicles. The absence of sidewalks or clear 

pedestrian pathways exposes pedestrians to the risk 

of collision with drivers who are often distracted by 

the need to find a parking spot. 

Pedestrian facilities should be provided to 

accommodate pedestrian demand and desire lines. 

In this photograph, pedestrians have worn a direct 

path between a parking area and a large pedestrian 

generator. No roadway crossing facilities are 

provided for this “unofficial” pathway, with the 

result that pedestrians using it must cross an 

unlighted, curved interchange ramp access where 

drivers may not expect pedestrians.
FHWA Office of Safety 79

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

C. Parking Areas / Adjacent Developments

C.2 Quality, Condition, and Obstructions

C.2.1 Do parked vehicles obstruct pedestrian paths?

Legally or illegally parked vehicles may obstruct pedestrian pathways, including marked 

crosswalks. Obstruction of pedestrian pathways by parked vehicles oen occurs:

Where parking supply falls short of demand, so drivers park in any available area.

Near major building accesses, where vehicles parked for passenger pickup/drop-off 

or for convenience interfere with pedestrians 

entering and exiting the building.

Where parking areas are too close to 

pedestrian facilities, with the result that 

vehicle overhangs intrude on pedestrian 

pathways.

Where parking facilities are inconvenient, 

causing drivers to park in unoccupied or 

more convenient areas reserved for pedestrian 

use.

The RSA team should evaluate parking generators 

during periods of peak parking demand on an RSA of 

an existing facility.

RSA Example

Drivers may park where their 

vehicles obstruct pedestrian 

facilities: Parked or waiting 

vehicles may partly or entirely 

obstruct pedestrian facilities such 

as sidewalks and crosswalks. 

Motorists may knowingly or 

unknowingly block pedestrian 

paths. When pedestrian paths are 

blocked, pedestrians may take 

paths that put them in conflict with 

vehicular traffic. 

Vehicle overhangs partly block a sidewalk. The sidewalk 

width appears to still be sufficient to accommodate a 

wheelchair, but some of the pedestrians walking in a group 

have entered the roadway at the narrowed part of the 

sidewalk. The RSA team may suggest placing parking stops 

and signs at the front of the parking space to encourage 

drivers to pull completely into parking spaces.









Vehicles can form obstructions to pedestrians. 

Statutes and regulations are required to support 

enforcement of policies such as no parking on 

sidewalks. Here an automobile dealer used the 

sidewalk to store excess vehicle inventory.
80 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

C.3 Continuity and Connectivity

C.3.1 Are pedestrian facilities continuous? Do they provide adequate connections for 

pedestrian traffic?

Pedestrians accessing a destination may travel by car, transit, or entirely on foot. The 

pedestrian network should provide a continuous pathway for pedestrians accessing the 

destination by these modes. Continuity should be provided:

Along the pedestrian facilities connecting areas within the destination (including 

between areas used for transit, parking, and pickup/drop-off).

To connect the destination with adjacent developments.

To connect the destination with the adjacent transportation network. 

C.3.2 Are transitions of pedestrian facilities between developments/projects adequate? 

Pedestrian transitions between private developments, and between a private development 

and the public right of way, are sometimes disregarded. The RSA team should evaluate 

the adequacy of pedestrian facilities at transitional locations at all phases of development 

to ensure they are easily accessible to all users, including those with visual and mobility 

disabilities.

RSA Examples

Transition areas between projects: 

The absence of smooth transitions is 

sometimes a particular problem for private 

pedestrian facilities. As a result, pedestrians 

may have no safe and accessible path 

between developments, which can result in 

pedestrians taking paths that will put them 

into conflict with vehicles.

In this photograph there is an abrupt transition 

between the sidewalk serving this public bus stop 

and the adjacent private sidewalk. Pedestrians 

with mobility impairments will have a difficult time 

traveling between the bus stop and the adjacent 

development and may have to travel in the street 

where motorists may not expect to encounter them.





FHWA Office of Safety 81

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

C. Parking Areas / Adjacent Developments

RSA Examples (continued)

Poor connectivity & signage: Pedestrians should be provided clear, direct paths that 

minimize exposure. Signage can be used to help clearly indicate these paths. A wellsigned facility alone is not enough to get pedestrians to properly use sidewalks and other 

facilities; the design must also include logical travel paths that lead conveniently to major 

destinations.

A covered walkway has been provided to connect 

a major shopping center and transit station, but 

the walkway does not follow pedestrian desire 

lines. As a result, pedestrians frequently shortcut 

through the shopping center parking lot (as shown 

in the photograph), where no designated pedestrian 

pathway is available.

This shopping facility has a frontage road parallel 

to a busy, arterial highway. Pedestrian facilities 

and signage creates a circuitous route, which 

does not follow pedestrian desire lines and puts 

pedestrians in conflict with traffic on the frontage 

road. As is seen in this photograph, pedestrians 

will often ignore the pedestrian facilities and 

walk instead in the frontage road closer to the 

commercial establishments.

An absence of continuity is apparent in this photograph, where a marked pedestrian crosswalk over a 

circulating road in a commercial development ends in a landscaped area. No connecting walkway is provided, 

so pedestrians must walk in the street.
82 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Examples (continued)

Good connectivity of pedestrian facilities: A well-designed system of sidewalks with 

ramps connecting even to the farthest parking spaces provides clearly separated, safe 

paths for pedestrians.

.

This parking lot for an event center effectively separates vehicle and pedestrian traffic. People parking in 

any aisle have a fully accessible sidewalk at the end of the aisle leading directly to the main facility building. 

Landscaping from the sidewalk to the parking lot is well-designed, as it not only does not block visibility of 

pedestrians, but also channels them to cross at aisles. The RSA team may suggest adding sidewalk lighting 

and marked crosswalks at the pedestrian access points to enhance pedestrian conspicuity.

Accessibility for all pedestrians: Parking areas should accommodate all pedestrians. 

Although pedestrians with disabilities are typically accommodated in close-in parking 

stalls, they may be required to park in non-designated stalls if designated stalls are 

occupied or if they have no authorization to use them (such as if they are temporarily 

disabled).

 

A pedestrian crosswalk with a curb ramp is provided to help direct pedestrians through a commercial parking 

area to a sidewalk. However, the sidewalk width is reduced to about 18 inches where an electrical box and 

protective bollards are located. Pedestrians unable to pass in the narrow width (especially those pushing 

strollers, in wheelchairs, or carrying packages) must walk in the parking lot, where they risk conflicting with 

vehicles. The obstruction may also present an obstacle for a visually-impaired pedestrian. The RSA team may 

suggest widening the sidewalk around the transformer.
FHWA Office of Safety 83

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

C. Parking Areas / Adjacent Developments

C.5 Visibility

The presence of numerous vehicles and pedestrians operating in close proximity to each other 

makes visibility especially important in parking areas.

C.5.1 Are visibility and sight distance adequate?

Pedestrian safety is improved when drivers and pedestrians have clear and unobstructed 

views of each other in and on the approaches to areas where they may conflict. The RSA 

team should observe potential conflict points to assess whether visibility of both vehicles and 

pedestrians is adequate, and whether clear and unobstructed sightlines are maintained. 

Obstructions may reduce sightlines between 

pedestrians and drivers in parking areas and near 

driveways. Sightline obstructions may be permanent, 

seasonal, or transient, and might include: 

Hard and so landscaping features, such as 

trees, bushes, ornamental plants, decorative 

walls/fences, and fountains.

Parked vehicles and loading/unloading vehicles.

Columns and other architectural elements.

Transit shelters.

Commercial signing.

Temporary or seasonal displays, such as holiday 

decorations.

Outdoor retail activities, such as food stands, 

merchandise displays, or sidewalk dining 

areas.

Adequate visibility of vehicles and pedestrians 

promotes drivers’ and pedestrians’ awareness 

of each other. The RSA team should observe 

pedestrian facilities under varying weather and 

lighting conditions to assess:

The need for, or adequacy of, night-time 

lighting.

The visibility of pedestrians and vehicles in 

areas affected by strong shadows (such as 

near the entry to a covered parking area).

The impact of commercial elements such as 

bright lighting or distracting displays.

See Section A.6 for questions related to visibility at 

driveways that apply to sidewalks and walkways at 

off-site or parking lot locations.





















Vehicles in pull-in parking stalls immediately adjacent to a 

marked crosswalk obstruct sightlines between circulating 

vehicles and pedestrians in and approaching the 

crosswalk. The obstruction is transient, since sightlines 

would improve when the stalls are unoccupied. In addition 

to obstructing sightlines, vehicles backing out of the stalls 

may conflict with pedestrians in the crosswalk.

Large columns obstruct sightlines between 

pedestrians approaching marked crosswalks and 

vehicles exiting a parking area. The columns also 

limit the sidewalk width.
84 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Examples

Conflicts with backing vehicles: Pedestrians should be directed away from areas where 

they may conflict with vehicles entering and exiting parking spaces, especially backing 

vehicles. The risk of collision is increased where tall vehicles, such as trucks or SUVs, 

block sightlines for a driver backing out of an adjacent stall. 

A pedestrian walkway is marked through a major 

truck terminal. The walkway is well marked, and 

pedestrians in this facility are required to wear highvisibility clothing. However, pedestrian crossings 

are long and unlit, and pedestrians are subject 

to conflicts from a variety of through and turning 

movements by vehicles approaching from several 

directions. A higher level of visibility for pedestrian 

crosswalks, and more positive measures to ensure 

that drivers are aware of crosswalk location and 

occupancy, would improve pedestrian safety.

The intended path for pedestrians in this photograph 

is marked with ladder style pavement markings 

that put pedestrians directly in the path of backing 

vehicles. Pedestrians may feel a false degree of 

safety walking in a marked path, which cannot be 

seen by a backing motorist. This path would be 

safer if placed on the other side of the parking area 

(off to the right side of the photo).
FHWA Office of Safety 85

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

C. Parking Areas / Adjacent Developments

RSA Examples (continued)

Driver distraction: Drivers entering and 

exiting a parking facility may be distracted 

by wayfinding or payment activities. 

Distracted drivers may fail to anticipate 

pedestrians, increasing the risk of a 

pedestrian/vehicle conflict. In addition, 

drivers entering or exiting a covered 

parking area (such as a parking garage) 

may fail to see pedestrians as their vision 

adjusts to darker or brighter conditions. 

Pedestrian accesses and pathways 

should be clearly marked, well separated 

and protected from traffic, and easily 

accessible to pedestrians.

A pedestrian enters an underground parking facility 

using the vehicle driveway, rather than an indoor 

pedestrian elevator that was not well signed from the 

street. Drivers entering or exiting the parking facility, 

where sightlines are restricted and lighting is limited, 

may fail to anticipate a pedestrian in the driveway.

C.6. Access Management

C.6.1 Are travel paths for pedestrians and other 

vehicle modes clearly defined at access openings?

Access points leading to and from parking areas should 

effectively direct entering and exiting vehicles along 

well-defined paths to minimize interference with 

pedestrians. Uncontrolled accesses that are poorly 

defined may generate issues associated with:

Higher speeds–Wide and/or poorly delineated 

accesses may encourage higher speeds among 

entering and exiting drivers. A wide access area 

may be used to accelerate or decelerate when 

entering or leaving the adjacent road. High 

speeds may increase the risk and severity of a 

pedestrian collision.

Driver and pedestrian expectancy–Wide 

and/or poorly delineated accesses provide 

lile guidance to drivers concerning the 

appropriate place to enter or exit a property to 

limit interference with pedestrians crossing the 

access point or walking in the parking area. As 

a result, the potential for conflict is increased, 

increasing the risk of a pedestrian crash.





A wide driveway with no defined entry or exit points 

exposes pedestrians on the sidewalk to interference 

from drivers accessing the commercial premises over 

a large, undefined area. Drivers can enter or leave 

the driveway at a shallow angle, and consequently 

at a high speed, increasing the risk of collision with 

pedestrians on the sidewalk or in the parking area.
86 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

C.6.2 Do drivers look for and yield to pedestrians when turning into and out of 

driveways?

Drivers entering and exiting a driveway have a high driver workload, since they must monitor 

traffic on the main road, traffic in the driveway or parking area, pedestrians crossing the 

driveway, and pedestrians in the parking area. Since pedestrian visibility is generally limited 

relative to vehicle visibility, drivers may fail to observe pedestrians, increasing the risk of 

conflicts. Several factors may increase the risk and severity of pedestrian-vehicle conflicts:

High vehicle and/or pedestrian volumes (including recurring peaks, such as near a 

school or theatre).

High volumes or speeds on the through road that focus drivers’ aention on avoiding 

traffic (rather than pedestrian) conflicts.

Sightline obstructions or poor night-time lighting that limits drivers’ view of 

pedestrians.

C.7 Traffic Characteristics

C.7.1 Does pedestrian or driver behavior increase the risk of a pedestrian collision? 

Drivers and pedestrians may behave differently in parking areas, where pedestrians and 

vehicles mix more freely, speeds are oen low, and there is typically no enforcement. The RSA 

team may observe behavior issues such as:

Vehicle speed–Is traffic operating at 

inappropriately high speeds? If so, what 

elements (such as wide lanes, generous driveway 

geometry, or long aisles) may contribute to 

higher speeds?

Pedestrians in travel lanes–Do pedestrians 

typically walk in vehicle travel lanes? If so, the 

RSA Team may use the prompts in this section to 

assess whether adequate pedestrian facilities are 

provided. 

Disregard for traffic controls–Do drivers or 

pedestrians disregard traffic control devices 

such as signs and pavement markings? If so, 

the RSA team may consider whether the nonstandard design and installation of these devices 

is an issue, and whether devices are adequately 

maintained.

C.7.2 Are buses, cars, bicycles, and pedestrians separated on the site and provided 

with their own designated areas for travel?

Pedestrian conflicts with motor vehicles should be minimized by providing appropriate 

sidewalks and crossing facilities, especially at schools. Several issues that the RSA team 

should consider are:













Motorists exiting driveways are often focused 

on finding gaps in traffic rather than pedestrians 

walking along the street.
FHWA Office of Safety 87

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

C. Parking Areas / Adjacent Developments

Are drop-off and pickup zones separated from walking routes? 

Is a pedestrian network provided so that pedestrians do not have to walk for extended 

distances in parking lanes or circulating aisles?

Do sidewalks lead in a reasonably direct and efficient manner to all the destinations 

that pedestrians want to access?

C.8 Signs and Pavement Markings

C.8.1 Are travel paths and crossing points for pedestrians properly signed and/or 

marked?

The RSA team should assess signs and pavement markings to confirm that they provide 

adequate guidance and warning to drivers and pedestrians in and on the approaches to 

potential conflict points. Consideration should be given to:

Use of appropriate signs and pavement markings–A range of standard signs and 

pavement markings can be used to provide guidance and warning to drivers on the 

approach to crosswalks. Standard signs and markings, such as STOP signs, pedestrian 

crossing signs, and crosswalk markings are generally more easily recognized and 

understood by drivers, and are consequently preferable to non-standard traffic signs 

and markings in parking areas. 

Proper installation of signs and pavement markings–Appropriate installation 

promotes the visibility and conspicuity of signs and pavement markings. Signs should 

be installed at an appropriate height and lateral offset, and should not be obstructed 

by columns, landscaping, stopped or parked vehicles, or other obstructions. Adjacent 

commercial signing, lighting, or displays should not distract drivers’ aention from 

pedestrian signage. Signing and pavement markings should be installed where they 

are clearly visible on the vehicle to the intended user.

Maintenance of existing signs and pavement markings–On RSAs of existing facilities, 

the RSA team should observe existing signs and pavement markings for damage, 

fading, and wearing. 

The RSA team may consult the MUTCD (Parts 2 and 3) for guidance on the types, proper use, 

and correct installation of standard pedestrian-related signs and markings.

In addition to vehicle signs and markings, pedestrian signing may be reviewed. Pedestrian 

signing may be necessary to guide pedestrians (for example, to transit facilities, crossing 

locations, or specific destinations), or warn pedestrians of potential conflict points.











88 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Example

Adequate signing and 

pavement marking: Signing 

and pavement markings should 

be properly designed and 

implemented in parking areas. 

Signs and pavement markings 

in parking lots often fail to follow 

requirements in the Manual of 

Uniform Traffic Control Devices 

(MUTCD) since they are not on 

public roads. Consequently, 

signs and markings may 

be missing, misplaced, or 

contradictory. Since drivers 

expect consistency in the 

placement and meaning of signs 

and pavement markings, whether 

they are in a public road or 

parking area, signs and pavement 

markings should follow MUTCD 

guidelines in parking areas as 

well as public roads.

Inappropriate pavement markings may increase the risk of 

pedestrian collision. The stop bar has been placed beyond 

the brick crosswalk in the center of the photo, with the result 

that vehicles stop in the crosswalk. A second crosswalk has 

been painted beyond the stop bar in an attempt to mitigate the 

situation, but the painted crosswalk has no curb ramps and 

is consequently less accessible to pedestrians in wheelchairs, 

scooters, or pushing strollers.
FHWA Office of Safety 89

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

D. Transit

D. TRANSIT

Overview

The prompts in this section are intended to help the RSA team identify pedestrian safety 

problems at transit and school bus stops. Because buses represent the most common type of 

transit in most U.S. jurisdictions this section focuses on bus transit issues (including school 

bus service), but some of the principles will apply for light rail service provided on streets. 

The RSA team should also understand the context in which each of these is sited when 

assessing safety and providing suggestions for improvement. Light rail service may change 

the least whereas school bus stops may change most frequently.

Potential issues that may arise from connecting pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks and 

adjacent crossings are discussed in Sections A and B, and transit-specific issues on these 

facilities will be described and reinforced in this section. The section numbers correspond to 

the numbers found in the prompt lists. 

D.1 Presence, Design, and Placement

D.1.1 Are bus stops sited properly?

Bus stops should be located next to pedestrian traffic generators or along pedestrian desire 

lines. When they are not, pedestrians may take unsafe paths to reach transit stops or neglect 

to pay adequate aention to traffic. Potential 

issues the RSA team should consider when 

evaluating the placement of transit stops 

include the following: 

Far-side stops–At busy intersections 

bus stops are oen placed aer the 

intersection (“far-side”), so that 

alighting passengers do not cross 

in front of the bus. However, it is 

important to position the bus stop far 

enough from the intersection so that 

buses do not block the intersection or 

crosswalk.

Near-side stops–If transit stops are 

located before the intersection (“near 

side”), alighting passengers may be at 

risk if they cross the street in front of the 

vehicle since they may be outside of the 

driver’s sightlines.

Midblock–Midblock transit stops 

can encourage passengers to cross at 

unmarked midblock crossings, violating 

driver expectancy.







Bus stops may be sited without adequate consideration of 

pedestrian desire lines. The illustration above shows a poor 

placement of bus stops with respect to pedestrian crossings. 

Pedestrians using transit would be required to cross three 

intersection legs to reach the opposite side of the street.
90 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

D.1.2 Are safe pedestrian crossings convenient for transit and school bus users?

The RSA team should consider the following when determining if crossings are placed 

conveniently for pedestrians:

Are crossings located reasonably close to school bus and transit stops?

If the bus stop is near an intersection with marked crosswalks, is there a crosswalk on 

the approach closest to the bus stop, or are pedestrians required to cross three legs of a 

four leg intersection to reach the opposite 

side of the street?

To evaluate the crossing itself, the RSA team 

should review the prompt list in Section B: 

Crossings.

D.1.3 Is sight distance to bus stops 

adequate?

Sufficient stopping sight distance should be 

available on the approaches to school bus 

and transit stops, since the stops can generate 

substantial pedestrian crossing volumes. 

Stopping sight distance may meet required 

AASHTO policy values, but due to the limited 

visibility of pedestrians (especially child 

pedestrians and during low-light conditions) and 

potential to violate drivers’ expectations, may be 

insufficient. Areas of particular concern include crest vertical curves and horizontal curves, 

where sight distance is oen limited.

The RSA team should consider the placement of the bus stop in low-density and rural areas 

where minimum geometric standards may not be consistently met or maintained, and 

pedestrians are less frequent.

D.1.4. Are shelters appropriately designed and placed for pedestrian safety and 

convenience? 

The RSA team should evaluate the placement of bus shelters, including how they may affect 

pedestrian traffic. The team should consider the following conditions:

Are the shelter and/or paved area large enough to accommodate waiting riders? 

Could a person using a wheelchair fit completely under the shelter?

Can a pedestrian in a wheelchair fit between the shelter and the bus doors when the 

bus doors are opened?

Can all users enter and exit the shelter without interfering with motor vehicle traffic, 

cyclists, or through pedestrian traffic? 

Is the shelter close enough to the curb that bus drivers easily notice waiting 

passengers, especially at night?















Pedestrians crossing the street to reach the bus 

stop circled in the photograph above will be hidden 

by the crest of the vertical curve.
FHWA Office of Safety 91

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

D. Transit

Does the shelter obstruct the sidewalk or reduce its usable width so that pedestrians in 

wheelchairs, scooters, or pushing strollers may be unable to pass on the sidewalk?

Will pedestrians waiting in shelter be splashed by approaching buses during rainy/

inclement weather?

 

 

Photo on left by PBIC.

The photo on the left illustrates a bus stop with a setback over 8 feet, facilitating access by all pedestrians 

(note that however the fire hydrant may limit access). The photo on the right shows a bus stop with a 

setback of less than 5 feet. Persons in a wheelchair would have a difficult time accessing this bus stop.

RSA Example

Location of transit stops: 

Transit stops may interfere 

with pedestrian pathways or 

facilities. Transit facilities are 

typically provided in conjunction 

with pedestrian facilities, since 

transit riders must walk to and 

from the transit stop. The risk 

of pedestrian collisions may 

increase if pedestrian pathways 

(marked or reflecting pedestrian 

desire lines) conflict with bus 

movements, particularly when 

pedestrians walk close to 

accelerating or turning transit 

vehicles, or pass between queued 

transit vehicles. Adequate 

sightlines, unobstructed by 

waiting transit vehicles or facilities 

(such as bus shelters), should 

always be maintained between 

pedestrians and drivers. Clear 

and unobstructed pedestrian 

pathways should be provided, and 

unsafe pedestrian movements 

should be discouraged.

The picture shows a bus blocking the crosswalk. This not 

only prevents pedestrians from using the crosswalk, but also 

presents a hazard to people alighting the bus. Transit riders 

would not be able to tell where to cross the street. The RSA 

team may suggest provided a clearly marked bus stop in front 

of the crosswalk.



92 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

D.2 Quality, Condition, and Obstructions

D.2.1 Is the seating area at a safe and comfortable distance from vehicle and bicycle 

lanes?

The RSA team should evaluate the placement of seating and how it may affect pedestrian 

use and safety. Seating that is too close to the curb may discourage transit use, or cause 

pedestrians to wait in areas that may put them in conflict with vehicles, bicyclists, or other 

pedestrians. The team should consider the following conditions:

Can a pedestrian in a wheelchair fit between the bench and the bus doors when 

opened?

Can all users use the seating area without interfering with motor vehicle traffic, 

cyclists, or through pedestrian traffic?

Will pedestrians waiting at the seating area be splashed by approaching buses during 

rain/inclement weather?

D.2.2 Do seats (or persons sitting on them) obstruct the sidewalk or reduce its usable 

width?

Seating (as well as persons occupying the seats) should not obstruct pedestrians walking on 

the sidewalk, particularly pedestrians in wheelchairs, scooters, or pushing strollers. 

Additional potential issues the RSA team should look for include:

Do seats (or persons siing on them) pose a hazard to blind pedestrians?

Do seats (or persons siing on them) reduce usable width due to the presence of trees, 

signal cabinets, parked cars, or other obstructions?

D.2.3 Is a sufficient landing area provided to 

accommodate waiting passengers, boarding/

alighting passengers, and through/bypassing 

pedestrian traffic at peak times?

The RSA team should determine whether there is 

sufficient landing area at the bus stop to accommodate 

three groups during peak times: passengers boarding 

and alighting the bus, passengers waiting for other 

buses, and pedestrians walking past the bus stop. If the 

landing area is not sufficient, pedestrians (especially 

disabled pedestrians) may have difficulty boarding, 

alighting, or passing through the waiting crowd, which 

may result in pedestrians bypassing the area.

D.2.4 Is the landing area paved and free of 

problems such as uneven surfaces, standing 

water, or steep slopes?

A well-maintained, level paved surface provides 

secure footing for passengers stepping into and out 











People waiting for the bus on this narrow 

sidewalk completely block access for someone 

passing in a wheelchair.

The landing area at a bus stop is the area 

where waing passengers stand, and the 

surface that passengers exing the bus step 

onto.
FHWA Office of Safety 93

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

D. Transit

of transit and school buses, and a secure area for 

wheelchairs and strollers entering and exiting a 

bus. Poorly maintained walking surfaces (including 

those with uneven surfaces, standing water, ice, 

or steep slopes) generate tripping or slipping 

hazards, and can obstruct or endanger passengers, 

particularly those with visual or mobility 

impairments. Landings that slope toward the street 

can cause strollers and wheelchairs to roll into the 

street.

Prompt A.2 describes sidewalk conditions that also 

apply to transit stops.

D.2.5 Is the sidewalk free of temporary/

permanent obstructions that constrict its width 

or block access to the bus stop?

The RSA team should determine whether there are any temporary or permanent obstructions 

to accessing transit and school bus stops (both bus ingress and egress) and bus shelters. 

Potential issues to consider include:

Do obstructions pose risks for persons with visual impairments?

For all potential users, do street furniture and utilities (such as landscaping, 

newspaper boxes, or fire hydrants) obstruct:

Access to the bus stop or bus shelter?

Entry or exit doors on the bus? 

Could passengers (especially those with vision impairments) have difficulty in seeing 

bus stops due to obstructions such as newspaper boxes, landscaping, etc?

See also prompt A.2.2 on obstructions that applies to sidewalks. 

 

The photo on the left shows access to a bus stop (in the distance) obstructed by a telephone pole. Access 

to the bus shelter on the right is inhibited due to a missing connection between the sidewalk and the bus 

shelter landing. 











A landing area with significant slopes in any 

direction is a safety concern, especially for people 

with disabilities or using strollers.
94 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Examples

Adequate facilities for riders 

at transit facilities: Transit 

facilities should be sufficient to 

allow passengers to enter, exit, 

or wait for transit vehicles in 

comfort and without interfering 

with vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian 

traffic. Pedestrians waiting for the 

bus frequently block the sidewalk 

because the waiting area is not large 

enough to meet demand. This may 

cause pedestrians to walk around 

people waiting and into or near the 

street, increasing conflicts and the 

risk of a collision between a vehicle 

(especially a bus) and a pedestrian.

Transit riders waiting for a bus block the sidewalk. Pedestrians 

may enter the roadway to bypass the waiting passengers, resulting 

in conflicts with vehicles or bicycles in the curb lane. The RSA 

team may suggest extending the curb at this location to provide 

adequate space for waiting passengers. The curb extension can be 

integrated with the on-street parking.

Bus stops on islands with inadequate pedestrian facilities: Bus stops should be 

sufficient to allow passengers to enter, exit, or wait for transit vehicles in comfort and 

without interfering with vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian traffic. 

A transit stop is located on a 3’ wide 

channelizing island (separating through 

and left-turning traffic) on a major urban 

arterial. Traffic passes on both sides of 

the island. Riders waiting for a bus have a 

limited space in which to queue, and riders 

exiting a bus have a narrow space in which 

to alight and wait to cross the travel lanes. 

Buses must load and unload passengers from 

this narrow island adjacent to moving traffic.

A bus stop is located on a right-turn channelizing island. 

Traffic passes on both sides of the island. Riders waiting 

for a bus have limited space in which to queue. Since the 

island is too short to accommodate riders exiting a bus by 

the rear door, riders must enter and exit buses by the front 

door only. Consequently, entering and exiting passengers 

must all be accommodated in a very limited space in, rather 

than at the side of, the roadway.
FHWA Office of Safety 95

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

D. Transit

D.3 Continuity and Connectivity

D.3.1. Is the nearest crossing opportunity free of potential hazards for pedestrians?

An appropriate level of control, signing, and marking should be provided at crossings near 

transit stops. On a low-speed, low-volume, neighborhood street, a nearby intersection with no 

marked crosswalks and no traffic signal may be an appropriate street crossing. The same level 

of control would not be adequate on a higher-speed or higher-volume road. Potential issues 

related to nearby crossing opportunities include:

Sightline obstructions due to roadway geometry (i.e., hills, horizontal curves, etc.).

Steep grades or cross slopes in or on the approaches to the crossings.

Presence of on-street parking that could obstruct sightlines near the crossings.

Proximity to at-grade rail crossings.

Location of the crosswalk and design of curb ramps.

Dangerous traffic conditions, such as high speeds, a high proportion of turning 

vehicles, or a substantial proportion of heavy vehicles.

D.3.2 Are transit and school bus stops part of a continuous network of pedestrian 

facilities?

The RSA team should evaluate the adequacy of pedestrian facilities surrounding a transit or 

school bus stop. Missing or non-continuous sidewalks (or walkable shoulders) effectively 

reduces the bus stop service area for many people, especially for children, the elderly and 

persons with disabilities. Missing or non-continuous sidewalks may cause pedestrians to walk 

on the road to reach the bus stop.

D.3.3 Are transit and school bus stops maintained during periods of inclement 

weather?

Waiting and landing areas at transit and school bus stops may be affected by rain, snow, or 

ice. Bus stop facilities that cannot accommodate pedestrians under these conditions may be 

unusable, with the result that bus drivers and riders may prefer to use adjacent areas that 

are not designed for transit use for waiting, boarding, and alighting. The RSA team should 

determine the following:

Could snow banks from passing snow plows obstruct passengers aempting to board 

or alight a bus?

Could water or ice accumulate in or near the landing area where passengers approach, 

board, or alight the bus?

Are sidewalks, curb ramps, and crosswalks clear of snow?

Is the boarding or landing area sloped or uneven, increasing the risk that passengers 

may slip under snowy or icy conditions as they enter or exit the bus?



















96 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

RSA Examples

Bus stop connectivity: Transition areas from walkable shoulders to a sidewalk may be 

inadequate. Transitions that are not clear may result in pedestrians taking erratic paths 

which may violate driver expectancy.

The bus stop waiting pad pictured does not 

provide an accessible ramp, making it difficult 

for people with mobility restrictions to reach 

the waiting pad. As a result pedestrians with 

mobility restrictions may take unexpected 

paths or wait in the shoulder, potentially 

interfering with bus stop traffic operations and 

cyclists. The RSA team may suggest installing 

an accessible ramp.

A well-used bus stop that serves five bus routes is 

accessed by an unpaved footpath. The unpaved path may 

be difficult for pedestrians with disabilities to navigate, 

particularly when it is wet or icy. The waiting area at the 

bus stop is similarly unpaved, and pedestrians entering or 

exiting a bus must step onto the grassy strip at left, which 

may not provide secure footing (especially when wet). 

Persons using wheelchairs or strollers may also find it 

difficult to board or alight the bus because of the grassy 

strip.

Absence of a sidewalk: Since riders must sidewalk to and from transit stops, adequate 

sidewalks should be provided adjacent to transit facilities. Sidewalks should be wide 

enough to accommodate bus queues and through pedestrian traffic at the same time, as 

well as pedestrian surges associated with an unloading bus.

This pedestrian is walking in a busy street after alighting the bus. The fact that there is no formal walk or 

paved path along the street and that the right lane is wide enough for a vehicle to pass, probably were key 

factors in her decision to walk in the street. The RSA team may suggest placing a sidewalk along the street.
FHWA Office of Safety 97

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

D. Transit

D.4 Lighting

D.4.1 Are access ways to transit and school bus facilities well-lit to accommodate earlymorning, late-afternoon, and evening transit riders? 

The RSA team should determine if school bus stops and transit stops, along with their 

approaches, have sufficient lighting for pedestrians walking to and from and waiting at the 

stop. Lighting conditions at transit stops should be evaluated at night. Specifically, the RSA 

team should evaluate the following:

Is lighting adequate to illuminate pedestrians waiting at the stop so that they can be 

seen by drivers (including bus drivers) and cyclists?

Does lighting illuminate nearby crossing points for pedestrians walking to and from 

the stop?

Does lighting illuminate pedestrian pathways accessing the bus stop, so that 

pedestrians can see potential obstructions or uneven pavement on the path?

Do trees or buildings reduce the amount of light that actually reaches the stop (see 

prompt A.4)?

D.5 Visibility

D.5.1. Are open sight lines maintained between approaching buses and passenger 

waiting and loading areas?

The RSA team should determine whether bus drivers and passengers waiting at transit and 

school bus stops can easily see each other. Several potential issues to consider are:

Do bus drivers have a clear sight line to the bus stop or shelter, so that they have 

sufficient time to see and stop for passengers?

Do passengers waiting at the bus stop and in the shelter have sufficient time to see and 

hail the bus, especially at transit or school bus stops serving more than one route?

Are bus shelters transparent and well lit?

Does the shelter (empty or occupied) obstruct sightlines at an intersection or driveway 

for drivers, cyclists, or through pedestrians?

Does the shelter obstruct roadway signing?

If sightlines are obstructed, bus drivers may stop abruptly when waiting passengers become 

visible, or passengers may wait in or close to the road for beer visibility, where they may 

conflict with drivers and cyclists.

















98 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

D.7 Traffic Characteristics

D.7.1 Do pedestrians entering and leaving buses conflict with cars, bicycles, or other 

pedestrians? 

Passengers approaching and leaving buses may have to cross other pedestrian traffic on the 

sidewalk, cyclists (in bicycle lanes or on the sidewalk), or vehicle lanes. Conflicts with these 

other modes may result in injury. The risk of conflicts is increased by:

Poor sightlines–Sightlines may be obstructed by parked vehicles (including other 

buses), bus shelter walls, or street furniture. 

Higher speeds–Motor vehicles, as well as cyclists in bicycle lanes or on the sidewalk, 

may be traveling a higher speeds, contributing the possible risk and severity of a 

collision with a pedestrian crossing their path.

School bus loading/unloading zones require particular aention, since children are typically 

more difficult to see, are less aware of traffic safety, and behave in a less predictable manner. 

School bus loading zones should be well separated from parent drop-off and pickup areas so 

that children do not cross vehicle paths. 

 

In the photo on the left, buses stop in a no-parking area, while in the photo on the right, buses stop in a 

bus bay. Both stops effectively separate transit riders from other modes of travel.

D.8 Signs and Pavement Markings

D.8.1. Are appropriate signs and pavement markings provided for school bus and 

transit stops?

Signing should be adequate to help identify transit and school bus stops for all users, and 

potentially warn motorists of the possibility for pedestrians where they may not be expected. 

The RSA team should consider the following when evaluating signage for bus stops:

The need for advance warning signs, especially in rural areas.

The potential for pedestrian crossings.

Parking regulations.









FHWA Office of Safety 99

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

D. Transit

Way finding, especially at schools.

Transit service information.

The RSA team should also consider that overuse of signs may reduce overall sign 

effectiveness, so signing should reflect actual hazards or conditions that are likely to cause 

conflicts. Seasonal pedestrian peaks (such as near schools or 

recreational areas) may require temporary signing. 

The RSA team should also determine whether bus stops have 

appropriate pavement markings, considering the experience or 

limitations of likely users. Potential issues the RSA team should 

look for include: 

Do bus stop and bus lane pavement markings alert 

motorists of the presence of pedestrians even when a bus 

is not present?

Are stand-back lines, which are used frequently at 

schools, effective in helping pedestrians to know where to 

stand and keep them separated from bus traffic?







The photo shows an example of standback lines in a bus loading zone. The lines 

help direct pedestrians away from the 

curb when they are waiting or walking 

on the sidewalk. By increasing the 

distance between pedestrians and buses, 

the stand-back lines reduce the risk of 

collision involving buses arriving at or 

departing from the loading zone.
100 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 
FHWA Office of Safety 101

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

References

References:

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Dept. of Transportation 

(US), 2005 .Traffic Safety Facts 2005: Annual Report. hp://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/

nrd-30/NCSA/TSFAnn/TSF2005.pdf Washington, DC.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Dept. of Transportation 

(US), 2005. Traffic Safety Facts 2005: Pedestrians. hp://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd30/NCSA/TSF2005/810624.pdf Washington, DC.

Surface Transportation Policy Project. Mean Streets: How Far Have We Come? (2004). 

Available online at hp://www.transact.org/library/reports_html/ms2004/exec_sum.

asp, accessed October 4, 2006. 

Chu, Xuehao, 2003. “The Fatality Risk of Walking in America: A Time-Based 

Comparative Approach.” Walk 21 (IV) Conference Proceedings. Available online at hp://

www.americawalks.org/PDF_PAPE/Chu.pdf, accessed October 4, 2006. 

Pucher, J. and J.L. Renne. 2003. Socioeconomics of Urban Travel: Evidence from the 2001 

NHTS. Transportation Quarterly57 (3).

Voorhees, 2003. Pedestrian Friendliness Scorecard. Transportation Policy Institute. 

Retrieved March 1, 2006, from hp://activelivingresearch.org/index.php/Tools_and_

Measures/312

Berube, A., E. Deaken, and S. Raphael, 2006. Socioeconomic Differences in Household 

Automobile Ownership Rates: Implications for Evacuation Policy. Retrieved July 12, 2007, 

from hp://socrates/berkeley.edu/~raphael/BerubeDeakenRaphael.pdf

Stus, J.C. and W.W. Hunter, 1997. Injuries to Pedestrians and Bicyclists: An Analysis 

Based on Hospital Emergency Department Data, Publication No. FHWA-RD-99-078. 

Federal Highway Administration, US DOT, Washington DC.

Hunter, W.H., J.C. Stus, and W.E. Pein, 1995. Pedestrian Crash Types: A 1990’s 

Informational Guide, Publication No. FHWA-RD-96-163. Federal Highway 

Administration, US DOT, Washington DC.

Harkey, D.L. and C.V. Zegeer, 2004. PEDSAFE: Pedestrian Safety Guide and 

Countermeasure Selection System, Publication No. FHWA-SA-04-003. Federal Highway 

Administration, US DOT, Washington DC.

UK Department of Transpostation, 1987. Killing Speed & Saving Lives, London, England.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2002. 

Roadside Design Guide., Washington, DC.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2003. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control 

Devices, Federal Highway Administration, US DOT, Washington DC.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 1999. Designing Sidewalks and Trails for 

Access – Part 1 of 2 – Review of Existing Guides and Practices, Washington, DC.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.
102 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 
FHWA Office of Safety 103

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix A: Prompt Lists

Master Prompt List 

RSA Matrix

Universal 

Considerations (For 

Entire RSA Site) Topic Subtopic

RSA Zones

A. Streets B. Street 

Crossings

C. Parking 

Areas/Adjacent 

Developments

D. Transit Areas

I. Needs of Pedestrians: 

Do pedestrian facilities 

address the needs of all 

pedestrians? 

Pedestrian 

Facilities

1. Presence, 

Design, and 

Placement

Sidewalks, paths, 

ramps, and buffers

Crossing treatments, 

intersections Sidewalks and paths Seating, shelter, waiting/loading/unloading areas

2. Quality, 

Condition, and 

Obstructions

Sidewalks, paths, 

ramps, and buffers

Crossing treatments 

(see prompts in A)

Sidewalks and paths 

(see prompts in A)

Seating, shelter, waiting/

loading/unloading areas 

(see prompts in A)

II. Connectivity and 

Convenience of 

Pedestrian Facilities: 

Are safe, continuous, 

and convenient 

paths provided along 

pedestrian routes 

throughout the study 

area? 3. Continuity and 

Connectivity

Continuity/ 

Connectivity with 

other streets and 

crossings

Continuity/connectivity 

of crossing to 

ped network; 

channelization of peds 

to appropriate crossing 

points

Continuity/connectivity 

of pedestrian facilities 

through parking lots/

adjacent developments

Connectivity of ped 

network to transit stops

III. Traffic: Are design, 

posted, and operating 

traffic speeds compatible 

with pedestrian safety? 

4. Lighting

Pedestrian level 

lighting along the 

street

Lighting of crossing

Pedestrian level lighting 

in parking lots/adjacent 

developments (see 

prompts in A and B)

Lighting at and near 

transit stop IV. Behavior: Do 

pedestrians or motorists 

regularly misuse or 

ignore pedestrian 

facilities?

5. Visibility Visibility of all road 

users

Visibility of crossing/

waiting pedestrians 

and oncoming traffic

Visibility of pedestrians 

and backing/turning 

vehicles; visibility of 

pedestrian path

Visibility of pedestrians/ 

waiting passengers and 

V. Construction: Have the vehicles/buses

effects of construction 

on all pedestrians been 

addressed adequately?

Traffic

6. Access 

Management

Driveway placement 

and design along 

streets

Driveway placement 

next to intersections

Driveway placement 

and use in relation to 

pedestrian paths

n/a*

VI. School Presence: Is 

the safety of children in 

school zones adequately 

considered? 7. Traffic 

Characteristics

Volume and speed 

of adjacent traffic, 

conflicting conditions

Volume and speed 

of traffic approaching 

crossing, conflicting 

movements

Traffic volume and 

speed in parking lots 

and developments, 

conflicting conditions

Volume and speed of 

adjacent traffic and 

traffic at crossings to 

bus stops, conflicting 

conditions

Traffic 

Control 

Devices

8. Signs and 

Pavement 

Markings

Use and condition 

of signs, pavement 

markings, and route 

indicators

Use and condition 

of signs, pavement 

markings, and crossing 

indicators

Use and condition 

of signs, pavement 

markings for travel path 

and crossing points

Use and condition of 

transit-related signs and 

pavement markings

9. Signals n/a*

Presence, condition, 

timing, and phasing of 

signals

n/a* See prompts in B
104 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

A. Streets

Master Prompt Detailed Prompt

RSA Stages

planning design construction postconstruction

A.1 Presence, 

Design, and 

Placement

A.1.1 Are sidewalks provided along the street? 

A.1.2

If no sidewalk is present, is there a walkable shoulder (e.g. 

wide enough to accommodate cyclists/pedestrians) on the 

road or other pathway/trail nearby?



A.1.3 Are shoulders/sidewalks provided on both sides of 

bridges? 

A.1.4 Is the sidewalk width adequate for pedestrian volumes? 

A.1.5 Is there adequate separation distance between vehicular 

traffic and pedestrians? 

A.1.6 Are sidewalk/street boundaries discernable to people with 

visual impairments? 

A.1.7 Are ramps provided as an alternative to stairs? 

A.2 Quality, 

Conditions, and 

Obstructions

A.2.1 Will snow storage disrupt pedestrian access or visibility? 

A.2.2 Is the path clear from both temporary and permanent 

obstructions? 

A.2.3 Is the walking surface too steep? 

A.2.4 Is the walking surface adequate and well-maintained? 

A.3 Continuity and 

Connectivity 

A.3.1 Are sidewalks/walkable shoulders continuous and on both 

sides of the street? 

A.3.2 Are measures needed to direct pedestrians to safe 

crossing points and pedestrian access ways? 

A.4 Lighting

A.4.1 Is the sidewalk adequately lit? 

A.4.2 Does street lighting improve pedestrian visibility at night? 

A.5 Visibility A.5.1 Is the visibility of pedestrians walking along the sidewalk/

shoulder adequate? 

A.6 Driveways

A.6.1 Are the conditions at driveways intersecting sidewalks 

endangering pedestrians? 

A.6.2 Does the number of driveways make the route undesirable 

for pedestrian travel? FHWA Office of Safety 105

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix A: Prompt Lists

A. Streets

Master Prompt Detailed Prompt

RSA Stages

planning design construction postconstruction

A.7 Traffic 

Charachteristics A.7.1 Are there any conflicts between bicycles and pedestrians on sidewalks? 

A.8 Signs and 

Pavement 

Markings

A.8.1

Are pedestrian travel zones clearly delineated from other 

modes of traffic through the use of striping, colored and/or 

textured pavement, signing, and other methods?



A.8.2 Is the visibility of signs and pavement markings adequate 

during the day and night? 106 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

B. Street Crossings

Master Prompt Detailed Prompt

RSA Stages

planning design construction postconstruction

B.1 Presence, 

Design, and 

Placement

B.1.1 Do wide curb radii lengthen pedestrian crossing distances 

and encourage high-speed right turns? 

B.1.2 Do channelized right turn lanes minimize conflicts with 

pedestrians? 

B.1.3 Does a skewed intersection direct drivers’ focus away from 

crossing pedestrians? 

B.1.4 Are pedestrian crossings located in areas where sight 

distance may be a problem? 

B.1.5 Do raised medians provide a safe waiting area (refuge) for 

pedestrians? 

B.1.6 Are supervised crossings adequately staffed by qualified 

crossing guards? 

B.1.7 Are marked crosswalks wide enough? 

B.1.8 Do at-grade railroad crossings accommodate pedestrians 

safely? 

B.1.9 Are crosswalks sited along pedestrian desire lines? 

B.1.10 Are corners and curb ramps appropriately planned and 

designed at each approach to the crossing? 

B.2 Quality, 

Condition, and 

Obstructions

See prompts in Section A for potential issues on obstructions and protruding objects that apply to street crossings

B.2.1 Is the crossing pavement adequate and well maintained? 

B.2.2 Is the crossing pavement flush with the roadway surface? 

B.3 Continuity and 

Connectivity

B.3.1

Does pedestrian network connectivity continue through 

crossings by means of adequate, waiting areas at corners, 

curb ramps and marked crosswalks?



B.3.2 Are pedestrians clearly directed to crossing points and 

pedestrian access ways? 

B.4 Lighting B.4.1 Is the pedestrian crossing adequately lit? FHWA Office of Safety 107

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix A: Prompt Lists

B. Street Crossings

Master Prompt Detailed Prompt

RSA Stages

planning design construction postconstruction

B.5 Visibility

B.5.1 Can pedestrians see approaching vehicles at all legs of 

the intersection/crossing and vice versa? 

B.5.2 Is the distance from the stop (or yield) line to a crosswalk 

sufficient for drivers to see pedestrians? 

B.5.3 Do other conditions exist where stopped vehicles may 

obstruct visibility of pedestrians? 

B.6 Access 

Management B.6.1 Are driveways placed close to crossings? 

B.7 Traffic 

Characteristics

B.7.1 Do turning vehicles pose a hazard to pedestrians? 

B.7.2 Are there sufficient gaps in the traffic to allow pedestrians 

to cross the road? 

B.7.3 Do traffic operations (especially during peak periods) 

create a safety concern for pedestrains? 

B.8 Signs and 

Pavement 

Markings

B.8.1 Is paint on stop bars and crosswalks worn, or are signs 

worn, missing, or damaged? 

B.8.2 Are crossing points for pedestrians properly signed and/or 

marked? 

B.9 Signals

B.9.1 Are pedestrian signal heads provided and adequate? 

B.9.2 Are traffic and pedestrian signals timed so that wait times 

and crossing times are reasonable? 

B.9.3 Is there a problem because of an inconsistency in 

pedestrian actuation (or detection) types? 

B.9.4 Are all pedestrian signals and push buttons functioning 

correctly and safely? 

B.9.5 Are ADA accessible push buttons provided and properly 

located? 108 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

C. Parking Areas/Adjacent Developments

Master Prompt Detailed Prompt

RSA Stages

planning design construction postconstruction

C.1 Presence, 

Design, and 

Placement

C.1.1 Do sidewalks/paths connect the street and adjacent land 

uses? 

C.1.2 Are the sidewalks/paths designed appropriately? 

C.1.3 Are buildings entrances located and designed to be 

obvious and easily accessible to pedestrians? 

C.2 Quality, 

Condition, and 

Obstructions

See prompts in Section A for potential issues on obstructions and protruding opbjects that apply to sidewalks and 

walkways at parking areas/adjacent developments

See prompts in Section A for potential issues on surface conditions that apply to sidewalks and walkways at 

parking areas/adjacent developments

C.2.1 Do parked vehicles obstruct pedestrian paths? 

C.3 Continuity and 

Connectivity

C.3.1 Are pedestrian facilities continuous? Do they provide 

adequate connections for pedestrian traffic? 

C.3.2 Are transitions of pedestrian facilities between 

developments/projects adequate? 

C.4 Lighting See prompts in Section A and B for potential issues on lighting that apply to sidewalks and walkways at parking 

areas/adjacent developments

C.5 Visibility C.5.1 Are visibility and sight distance adequate? 

C.6 Access 

Management

C.6.1 Are travel paths for pedestrians and other vehicle modes 

clearly delineated at access openings? 

C.6.2 Do drivers look for and yield to pedestrian when turning 

into and out of driveways? 

C.7 Traffic 

Characteristics

C.7.1 Does pedestrian or driver behavior increase the risk of a 

pedestrian collision? 

C.7.2

Are buses, cars, bicycles, and pedestrians separated on 

the site and provided with their own designated areas for 

travel?



C.8 Signs and 

Pavement 

Markings

C.8.1 Are travel paths and crossing points for pedestrians 

properly signed and/or marked? FHWA Office of Safety 109

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix A: Prompt Lists

D. Transit Areas

Master Prompt Detailed Prompt

RSA Stages

planning design construction postconstruction

D.1 Presence, 

Design, and 

Placement

D.1.1 Are bus stops sited properly? 

D.1.2 Are safe pedestrian crossings convenient for transit and 

school bus users? 

D.1.3 Is sight distance to bus stops adequate? 

D.1.4 Are shelters appropriately designed and placed for 

pedestrian safety and convenience? 

D.2 Quality, 

Condition, and 

Obstructions

D.2.1 Is the seating area at a safe and comfortable distance 

from vehicle and bicycle lanes? 

D.2.2 Do seats (or persons sitting on them) obstruct the sidewalk 

or reduce its usable width? 

D.2.3

Is a sufficient landing area provided to accommodate 

waiting passengers, boarding/alighting passengers, and 

through/bypassing pedestrian traffic at peak times?



D.2.4 Is the landing area paved and free of problems such as 

uneven surfaces, standing water, or steep slopes? 

D.2.5 Is the sidewalk free of temporary/permanent obstructions 

that constrict its width or block access to the bus stop? 

D.3 Continuity and 

Connectivity 

D.3.1 Is the nearest crossing opportunity free of potential 

hazards for pedestrians? 

D.3.2 Are transit stops part of a continuous network of 

pedestrian facilities? 

D.3.3 Are transit stops maintained during periods of inclement 

weather? 

D.4 Lighting D.4.1 Are access ways to transit facilities well-lit to 

accommodate early-morning, late-afternoon, and evening 

D.5 Visibility D.5.1 Are open sight lines maintained between approaching 

buses and passenger waiting and loading areas? 

D.7 Traffic 

Characteristics D.7.1 Do pedestrians entering and leaving buses conflict with cars, bicycles, or other pedestrians? 

D.8 Signs and 

Pavement 

Markings

D.8.1 Are appropriate signs and pavement markings provided for 

school bus and transit stops? 110 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 
FHWA Office of Safety 111

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix B: Supplemental Information

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PEDESTRIAN ROAD SAFETY AUDIT 

AND ASSESSMENT RESOURCES

This bibliography contains information about the known available resources for conducting 

pedestrian oriented RSAs and assessments. Except where noted, these resources are intended 

to be used by professionals with adequate experience in road safety practices and principles, 

as well as some experience in pedestrian safety. The RSA team will probably be familiar 

with the general references; however, the references for pedestrian specific RSAs may not be 

familiar to RSA team members.

General Road Safety Audit Resources

Table 1 presents general RSA resources. These guides provide detailed information about 

the RSA process and are critical to helping engineers understand the objectives of an RSA 

and training auditors to examine safety from the perspective of all road users, including 

pedestrians.

TABLE 1: GENERAL ROAD SAFETY AUDIT RESOURCES

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Road Safety Audits, NCHRP 

Synthesis 336

Purpose: To examine the state of the practice 

of road safety audit review applications 

for U.S. states and Canadian provinces. 

This synthesis also reviews international 

RSA practices.

Number of questions: ~500, many repeated

Assessment Area: all areas

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Wilson, Eugene, and Martin 

Lipinski, Road Safety Audits, 

NCHRP Synthesis 336, 

Transportation Research 

Board, Washington D.C., 

2004.

u Drainage

u Climate conditions

u Landscaping

u Roadway cross section

u Lighting

u Signage

u Delineation

u Pavement markings

u Roadway surface

Name: Road Safety Audit 2nd Edition

Purpose: Draw together current practices in 

Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere 

to provide practitioners and decision 

makers in State highway authorities, local 

government authorities, and consulting 

practices of formally addressing road 

safety issues.

Number of questions: 800 (75 ped oriented)

Assessment area: All areas

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no 

Austroads u General Topic

u Design Issues

u Alignment Details

u Intersections

u Special Road Users

u Signs

u Lighting

u Delineation

u Pavement Markings

u Physical Objects

u Operations

u Traffic Management

u Traffic Signals

u Parking

u Bridges

u Etc. 
112 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

TABLE 1: GENERAL ROAD SAFETY AUDIT RESOURCES

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Road Safety Audit Guidelines

Purpose: Provide transportation agencies 

and independent auditors with a 

sequence of techniques and instructions 

for the undertaking of a road safety audit. 

The document is a composite of current 

practices from various jurisdictions 

tailored to Canadian roads, design 

practices, and operating conditions.

Number of questions: 315 (37 ped oriented)

Assessment area: All areas

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

University of New 

Brunswick

Transportation Group

Department of Civil 

Engineering

Fredericton, New Brunswick

Sponsored by:

Maritime Road Development 

Corporation

National Research Council’s 

Industrial Research 

Assistance Program

u General Observations

u Alignment and Cross 

Sections

u Intersections

u Road Surface

u Visual Aids

u Physical Objects

u Road Users

u Access and Adjacent 

Development

u Parking

Name: Road Safety Audit Guidelines

Purpose: To provide guidance for 

performing road safety audits. 

Number of questions: N/A

Assessment area: All areas

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Federal Highway 

Administration Report 

FHWA-SA-06-06 by: J. 

McGill; B. Malone; O. 

Tonkonjenkov; J. Suggett; B. 

Wemple; and J. Freeman

u Road Safety Audits

u Road Design

u Risk Assessment

u Transportation 

Planning

General Pedestrian RSAs

The RSA resources in Table 2 were generally developed for assessing existing facilities (as 

opposed to design plans or pre-construction facilities). The resources can be divided into two 

major groups based on the purpose of the assessment: the ability of the audit to assess the 

pedestrian environment in terms of 1) its impact on the safety of its users, or 2) its impact on 

“walkability” or the promotion of physical activity. Some of the materials were developed for 

use by a trained or expert RSA team, while others were less formal and were developed more 

for community members to be able to assess their neighborhood conditions.
FHWA Office of Safety 113

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix B: Supplemental Information

TABLE 2: GENERAL PEDESTRIAN ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Systematic Pedestrian and Cycling 

Environmental Scan (SPACES)

Purpose: Measure physical environmental 

factors that may have an effect on 

walking and cycling behaviors in local 

neighborhoods

(i.e., for health promotion)

Number of questions: 37

Assessment area: street segments only; local 

residential areas

Manual included: yes; 28 page user guide

Scoring mechanism: no

University of Western 

Australia; Described in:

Pikora, T., Bull, F., Jamrozik, 

K. et al., “Developing a 

Reliable Audit Instrument 

to Measure the Physical 

Environment For Physical 

Activity,” American Journal of 

Preventative Medicine, 23(3), 

2002, 187-194.

Available online from 

Active Living By Design 

web site http://www.

activelivingresearch.

org/ index.php/SPACES_

instrument/323

u Measures Of Function 

(E.G. Walking/Cycling 

Surface, Streets, And 

Traffic)

u Safety (Personal And 

Traffic)

u Aesthetics (Streetscape 

and Views)

u Destinations

u Subjective Assessment

Name: Sidewalk Assessment Tool

Purpose: Assess the maintenance of 

sidewalks; provide index score for 

comparing different sidewalk conditions

Number of questions: 5

Assessment area: sidewalk segment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: from 1 to 3 for each 

variable

Williams J.E., M. Evans, K.A. 

Kirtland, M.M. Cavnar, P.A. 

Sharpe, M.J. Neet, and A. 

Cook, Sidewalk Assessment Tool, 

Prevention Research Center, 

Arnold School of Public 

Health, University of South 

Carolina.

u Levelness

u Artificial Items Blocking 

the Path

u Natural Items Blocking 

the Path

u Cleanliness

u Surface Condition

Name: Pedestrian Safety and Accessibility 

Audit Checklist

Purpose: Identify inadequate or unsafe 

pedestrian facilities; to improve 

pedestrian safety, accessibility, and 

amenity (i.e., for safety)

Number of questions: 105

Assessment area: sidewalk segment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

“3.11: Pedestrian Safety 

and Accessibility Audit 

Tools,” Traffic and Road 

Use Management Manual, 

Volume 3, Queensland 

Government, Department of 

Main Roads, March 24, 2005, 

available online at http://

www.mainroads.qld.gov.au/

MRWEB/Prod/Content.nsf/

u Land Use and Context

u Footpaths/Sidewalks

u Ped Facilities and 

Accessibility

u Catering For Ped 

Groups

u Traffic Volumes

u Schools

u Traffic and Road 

Environment

u Temporary Roadworks

u Signing/Marking

u Lighting

u Visibility

u Fencing

u Amenities 
114 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

TABLE 2: GENERAL PEDESTRIAN ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: ACES Community Assessment

Purpose: Assess the health of a community 

and identify ways to increase 

opportunities for physical activity in the 

community (i.e., for health promotion)

Number of questions: 68

Assessment area: Pedestrian roadway 

environments

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: point structure for each 

question to calculate a total score to be 

compared against 5 different levels of 

excellence

“Creating Active Community 

Environments (ACEs): 

Community Assessment,” 

Eat Smart, Move More...

North Carolina Web Site, 

NC Department of Health 

and Human Services, 

NC Division of Public 

Health, (no date), available 

online at http://www.

eatsmartmovemorenc.

com/programs/aces/aces_

commassess.pdf.

u Policies and Planning 

for Nonmotorized 

Transportation

u Pedestrian and Bicycle 

Safety and Procedures

u Community Resources 

for Physical Activity

u Schools

u Public Transportation

Name: PEDS Audit Protocol

Purpose: Measure physical environmental 

factors that may have an effect on 

walking behaviors in local neighborhoods

(i.e., for health promotion)

Number of questions: 35

Assessment area: Community-wide walking 

environment

Manual included: yes

Scoring mechanism: no

Clifton, Kelly J., Andrea 

Livi, and Daniel Rodriguez, 

The Development and Testing 

of an Audit for the Pedestrian 

Environment, Draft, no date.

u Environment

u Pedestrian Facilities

u Road Attributes

u Walking/Cycling 

Environment

u Subjective Assessment

Name: Walking Suitability Assessment

Purpose: Assess the suitability of sidewalks 

for walking and roads for bicycling (i.e., 

for health promotion)

Number of questions: 15

Assessment area: sidewalk/path

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: Up to 7-point Likert scale 

to calculate a final suitability score

Emery, J.E., C.E. Crump, 

and P. Bors, “Reliability and 

Validity of Two Instruments 

Designed to Assess the 

Walking and Bicycling 

Suitability of Sidewalks and 

Roads.” American Journal of 

Health Promotion, September/

October 2003, 18 (1), pp. 

38-46.

u Sidewalk Presence, 

Condition, Width, & 

Material

u Ramp

u Lighting

u AADT

u Motor Vehicle Speed

u Buffer Width

u Number of Traffic 

Lanes

Name: Safety Audit Checklist for Dual-Use 

Paths

Purpose: Assess the crash potential and 

safety performance of the road or road 

proposal (i.e., for safety)

Number of questions: 70

Assessment area: walking conditions on both 

sides of the street

Manual included: yes

Scoring mechanism: no

Main Roads, Safety Audit 

Checklist for Dual-Use 

Paths, Western Australia, 

September 1997.

u General Items

u Alignment and Cross 

Section

u Intersections

u Signs 

u Lighting

u Traffic Signals

u Physical Objects

u Pavements
FHWA Office of Safety 115

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix B: Supplemental Information

TABLE 2: GENERAL PEDESTRIAN ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: PEDSAFE Pedestrian Audit

Purpose: To evaluate the general quality and 

safety of the pedestrian environment (i.e., 

for safety)

Number of questions: 45

Assessment area: Roadway as it relates to 

pedestrians

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Lillis, J., and S. 

Pourmoradian, PEDSAFE 

Pedestrian Audit, 2001.

Available online at www.

pedbiketrans.asn.au/

rframset.html

u Levels of Connectivity

u Pedestrian Volumes

u Vehicle Traffic and 

Speed

u Form of Corridor

u Street Crossings

u Footpaths

u Street Furniture

u Signs

u Special Needs Groups

u General Amenity

Name: Street Observation Response Sheet

Purpose: To survey the heart healthy 

environmental supports of a community 

(i.e., for health promotion)

Number of questions: 40

Assessment area: Roadway corridor as it 

relates to pedestrians

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Eisenberg, Bonnie, Street 

Observation Response Sheet, Draft, 

New York State Department 

of Health, Heart Healthy 

Program, 2003.

Contact info: Bonnie 

Eisenberg, NYS DOH, (518) 

(473-0673).

u Sidewalk Observations

u Street Crossing 

Observations

u Street Observations

u General Environment 

and Amenities

Name: Walkability Index

Purpose: To determine the “walkability” or 

foot-friendliness of a neighborhood

Number of questions: 10

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment at 

the census block

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: Provides points for each 

question; final score produces index 

between 0.45 and 2.0

Bradshaw, C., Creating 

and Using a Rating System 

for Neighborhood Walkability, 

Presented to the 14th

International Pedestrian 

Conference, Boulder, CO, 

October 1993.

u Density

u Parking

u Number of Sitting Spots

u Destinations

u Parkland

u Sidewalks

Name: Footpaths, Walkways, and Cyclepaths 

Checklist

Purpose: To assess the quality of 

footpaths, walkways, and cyclepaths 

in a community (i.e. to promote public 

health)

Number of questions: 89 

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment in 

the neighborhood

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

New South Wales Health 

& Centre for Population 

Health, Footpath, Walkway, and 

Cyclepath Checklist, September 

1997.

u Curbs And Ramps

u Steps/Stairs/Ramps

u Driveways

u Width of Footpaths

u Obstructions

u Covers and Gratings

u Setbacks

u Gradients

u Surface Treatments

u Personal Safety
116 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

TABLE 2: GENERAL PEDESTRIAN ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Neighborhood Walking Audit

Purpose: To determine the “walkability” of 

an area

Number of questions: 13

Assessment area: Pedestrian facilities in 

neighborhoods

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: Users rank overall sections 

on scale of 1 to 5

Ross, Author, Neighborhood 

Walking and Bicycling Audits, City 

of Madison, Department of 

Transportation, Madison, 

WI, no date.

u Sidewalk Facilities

u Street Crossings

u Traffic Signals

u Convenience

u Enjoyability

u Etc. 

Name: Walkability Audit Form

Purpose: To determine the “walkability” of 

an area

Number of questions: 29

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

United Seniors of Oakland 

and Alameda County, 

Walkability Audit Form, 

available online at http://

www.transcoalition.org/ia/

pedinfra/14.html.

u Sidewalks

u Street Crossings

u Traffic and Drivers

u Visibility and Signage

u Desirability/Appeal of 

the Area

Name: Community Assessment Tool

Purpose: To determine the “walkability” of 

an area

Number of questions: 110

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

National Center for Bicycling 

and Walking, Community 

Assessment Tool, December 

2002, available online at 

http://www.bikewalk.

org/vision/community_

assessment.htm. 

u Transportation

u Land Use and 

Development

u Schools

u Parks, Recreation, and 

Trails

u Safety, Security, and 

Crime Prevention

Name: Walking and Bicycling Indicators

Purpose: To determine the “walkability” of 

an area

Number of questions: 30

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

National Center for Bicycling 

and Walking, Walking and 

Bicycling Indicators, no date, 

available online at http://

www.bikewalk.org/vision/

community_assessment.htm. 

u Transportation

u Land Use and 

Development

u Schools

u Parks, Recreation, and 

Trails

u Safety, Security, and 

Crime Prevention

Name: PBIC Walkability Checklist

Purpose: To determine the “walkability” of 

an area

Number of questions: 5

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: Rate responses on a scale 

of 1 to 6 and compare to given total scale

Pedestrian and Bicycle 

Information Center, 

Walkability Checklist, 

US Department of 

Transportation, available 

online at http://www.

walkinginfo.org/

walkingchecklist.htm. 

u Sidewalk Facilities

u Ease of Crossings

u Driver Behavior

u Safety Rules

u Pleasantness of Walk
FHWA Office of Safety 117

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix B: Supplemental Information

TABLE 2: GENERAL PEDESTRIAN ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Handout 16: Walkability Checklist

Purpose: To determine the “walkability” of 

an area

Number of questions: 43

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: Rate overall sections on a 

scale of 1 to 5 and compare to given total 

scale

Active Independent Aging, 

Handout 16: Walkability Checklist, 

University of Ottawa and 

the Public Health and 

Long Term Care Branch, 

City of Ottawa, available 

online at http://www.fallschutes.com/guide/english/

resources/handouts/pdf/

WalkabilityChecklist.pdf

u Sidewalks, Stairs and 

Ramps, Winter Safety

u Crosswalks

u Traffic

u Personal Safety

u Walking Routes 

Name: Walkability Audit Tool

Purpose: Assess the walkability surrounding 

a workplace

Number of questions: 9

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment 

around workplace

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: Weighted scoring for all 

9 categories for a total score out of 100 

possible points

Centers for Disease Control, 

Worksite Walkability: Audit Tool, 

available online at http://

www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/

dnpa/walkability/audit_tool.

htm. 

u Pedestrian Facilities

u Pedestrian Conflicts

u Crosswalks

u Maintenance

u Path Size

u Buffer

u Accessibility

u Aesthetics

u Shade

Name: Community Street Audit

Purpose: To determine the “walkability” of 

an area

Number of questions: 9 

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Living Streets Aotearoa Inc, 

Community Street Audit, 

available online at http://

www.livingstreets.org.nz/

pdf/DIY_Street_Audit.pdf. 

u Footway Surfaces and 

Obstructions

u Facilities

u Signage

u Maintenance and 

Enforcement

u Personal Security

u Crossings

u Roadway Design

u Aesthetics

u Traffic

u Economic Environment

Name: The Irvine Minnesota Inventory

Purpose: To measure a wide range of built 

environment features that are potentially 

linked to active living, especially walking

Number of questions: 160

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: yes

Scoring mechanism: some questions contain 

rating scale from 0 to 3; others are yes/no

Day, K., Boarnet, M., 

Alfonzo, M. & Forsyth, 

A. (2006). The IrvineMinnesota Inventory to 

measure built environments: 

Development. American Journal 

of Preventive Medicine, 30(2), 

144-152. 

Available online at: http://

webfiles.uci.edu/kday/

public/index.html

u Accessibility

u Pleasurability

u Perceived Safety from 

Traffic

u Perceived Safety from 

Crime
118 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

TABLE 2: GENERAL PEDESTRIAN ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Creating Walkable Communities: A 

Walkable Guide for Local Governments

Purpose: The document is intended to 

serve as a tool for local governments 

and concerned citizens for guidelines, 

suggestions, and techniques on how to 

make communities more walkable and 

pedestrian friendly.

Number of questions: 275

Assessment area: All areas

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Bicycle Federation of 

America Campaign to Make 

America Walkable

u Design

u Sidewalks

u ADA

u Driveways

u Crosswalks

u Medians

u Parking

u Landscaping

u Lighting, Signs

u Traffic Calming

u Bridges

u Commercial and 

Residential Zoning

Name: City of Phoenix 2005 Pedestrian 

Safety Audit

Purpose: Improve pedestrian safety through 

a periodic review of areas with a high 

pedestrian crash experience.

Number of questions: 15

Assessment area: All areas

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

City of Phoenix Street 

Transportation Department

u Ramps

u Pavement Markings

u Pedestrian Signals

u Warning Signs

Name: Walkable Places Survey

Purpose: To measure barriers to improve 

walkability

Number of questions: no details provided

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment in 

neighborhood

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Shriver, Katherine, Walkable 

Places Survey, The Walkable 

Places Project, 2002, 

available online at http://

www.walkableplaces.com/

audits1.htm

u No Details Provided

Name: Pedestrian Policies and Design 

Guideline 2005

Purpose: To assess the extent to which an 

area is safe, comfortable or a destination.

Number of questions: 88

Assessment area: All areas

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: Each question has a rating 

scale from 1 to 5

Maricopa Association of 

Governments, available 

online at

http://www.mag.maricopa.

gov/detail.cms?item=4906

u Sidewalks

u Crosswalks

u Signal Timing

u Access

u Pedestrian 

Environment

u Pedestrian Amenities

u Driver Behavior

u Transit / Bus

u School Zones

RSAs in School Zones

The resources in the Table 3 focus on assessing existing facilities in school zones. The purpose 

of auditing the school area is to: 1) assess the safety for school children who walk to school, or 

2) assess the school route’s “walkability” to assist in the promotion of physical activity. Most 

of the materials were developed for use by a trained RSA team.
FHWA Office of Safety 119

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix B: Supplemental Information

TABLE 3: SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Safe Routes to School Checklist

Purpose: Examine the school route (for 

safety)

Number of questions: 11

Assessment area: School Route

Manual included: No

Scoring mechanism: No

Roosevelt Elementary, Santa 

Barbara, CA

u Presence of Sidewalk/

Path

u Obstacles

u # of Street Crossings

u Driver Characteristics

u Purpose for Choosing 

Mode and Preferences

u School Drop Off Zone

Name: School Site Assessment for Traffic 

Safety

Purpose: Examine biking and walking 

conditions at the school (for safety)

Number of questions: 73

Assessment area: School site

Manual included: No

Scoring mechanism: No

Florida Traffic and Bicycle 

Safety Education Program

u Administration and 

Policy

u School Traffic Safety 

Teams

u Student Travel Patterns

u School Traffic Design 

at the School Site 

Regarding Drop Off 

Areas, Walkways, 

Crossings, Etc.

u Safety Education 

Programs Including 

Crossing Guards, Safety 

Patrols, and Traffic 

Education

Name: Neighborhood Site Assessment

Purpose: Examine biking and walking 

conditions on the route to school (for 

safety)

Number of questions: 4

Assessment area: School route

Manual included: Provides instructions and 

description of conditions to consider

Scoring mechanism: No

Florida Traffic and Bicycle 

Safety Education Program

u Major Streets and 

Transportation Facilities

u Street Crossings

u Sidewalks

u Safety/Security 

Concerns

Name: Protocol for Walkability

Purpose: Environmental assessment to 

determine how walkable schools are (for 

health)

Number of questions: 48

Assessment area: School route

Manual included: Provides 14 page Home to 

School Observational Coding

Scoring mechanism: No

St. Louis University; Dr. 

Matthew Kreuter

u Sidewalks

u Street Crossings

u Driver Behavior

u Safety

u Visual Appeal
120 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

TABLE 3: SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: School Crossing Safety Audit Form

Purpose: Examine biking and walking 

conditions on the route to school (for 

safety)

Number of questions: 21

Assessment area: School route

Manual included: Provides 7-page School 

Crossing Safety Audit Procedure for assisting in 

performing the audit 

Scoring mechanism: Provides point system 

for each question; 148 points possible 

(higher is worse) on first 19 questions; 

additional points for crash history

City of Phoenix Street 

Transportation Department

u Student Characteristics

u Presence of Sidewalks 

And Other Pedestrian 

Facilities

u Traffic Conditions

u Crossing Characteristics 

(Location, Control, 

Visibility, Etc.)

u Waiting Areas

u Presence of Supervision

u Crash Records

Name: School Crossing Review

Purpose: Examine safety of roadway 

crossings on the route to school

Number of questions: 3

Assessment area: Intersections

Manual included: No

Scoring mechanism: No

City of Phoenix Street 

Transportation Department

u Number of Student 

Crossings

u Unusual Traffic 

Conditions

u Unusual Student 

Conditions

Name: Gregory Heights SW2S

Purpose: Simplify the national SRTS 

materials; student activity for 6 and 7 

grade class(es); one question for parents

Number of questions: 10

Assessment area: Trip to School

Manual included: No

Scoring mechanism: Simple multiple choice

Jere Fitterman via email 

to Nancy Pullen

u Grade and Gender

u Distance of Trip

u Usual Modes and 

Reasons for Mode 

Choice

u Behavioral/Attitudinal 

Questions on Perceived 

Safety

u Parents: Changes 

Before Allow Children 

to Walk/Bike to School

Name: California Walk to School Day 

Walkability Checklist 

Purpose: Promote W2S, identify barriers, 

collect behavioral data

Number of questions: 9

Assessment area: Trip to School

Manual included: No

Scoring mechanism: Simple multiple choice

California Walk to School 

HQ www.cawalktoschool.

com

u General Infrastructure

u Driver Behavior at 

Drop-Off Zone

u Positive Factors

u Mode Preference

u Barriers

u Zip Code

Name: Lexington-Fayette Pedestrian Facility 

Inventory

Purpose: Broad inventory existing conditions

Number of questions: ~35 plus intersection 

diagram

Assessment area: Intersection or street

Manual included: No; definitions of data codes

Scoring mechanism: Checkboxes for presence; 

fill in dimensions

Kenzie Gleason, Bike-Ped 

Coordinator, LFUCG

u Crosswalk and 

Sidewalk Facilities

u Signage

u Street Characteristics

u Amenities; Incl. 

Dimensions
FHWA Office of Safety 121

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix B: Supplemental Information

TABLE 3: SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Maryland Safe Routes to School Audit 

Purpose: Broad assessment of infrastructure, 

operations, attitudes

Number of questions: 43

Assessment area: School site with adjacent 

crossings

Manual included: Yes for Neighborhood Site 

Audit (see Part 2)

Scoring mechanism: Combination checkboxes, 

multiple choice, open ended, diagrams

State of Maryland Council 

on Physical Fitness (on-line)

u Drop Off Area: 

Signage, Student 

and Driver Behavior; 

Loading Zone 

Characteristics

u Sidewalks and Bike 

Routes: Separation 

From Traffic, Rams, 

Lighting, Regularly 

Used

u Adjacent Intersections: 

Traffic Volumes, 

Controls, Signals; Sight 

Distances

u Signs

u Signals.

Name: Maryland Safe Routes to School Audit

Purpose: Broad assessment of infrastructure, 

operations, attitudes

Number of questions: 50

Assessment area: Neighborhood site audit

Manual included: Yes

Scoring mechanism: Combination checkboxes, 

multiple choice, open ended, diagrams

State of Maryland Council 

on Physical Fitness (on-line)

u Crosswalks: Signals, 

Driver Behavior, 

Medians, Traffic 

Calming Facilities, 

ADT Counts, Sketch of 

Intersection

u Road Segment: 

Driveways

u Driver Behavior

u Known Crash History

u Sidewalk Facilities

u Grades

u Buffers

u Security

u Dogs

u Crime

u Loitering

u Fights.

Name: Maryland Safe Routes to School Audit

Purpose: Broad assessment of infrastructure, 

operations, attitudes

Number of questions: 42

Assessment area: Parent survey

Manual included: Yes for Neighborhood Site 

Audit (see Part 2)

Scoring mechanism: Combination checkboxes, 

multiple choice, open ended, diagrams 

State of Maryland Council 

on Physical Fitness (on-line)

u Child Data

u Distance of Trip, Route

u Likert Scale on 

Conditions

u Influences on Decision 

to Allow Oldest Child 

to Walk to School

u Factors that Should 

Change

u Education Outreach 

Programs Interested in 

Learning More About
122 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

TABLE 3: SCHOOL ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Pennsylvania KHR (Keystone Healthy 

Routes)

Purpose: Basis for planning a KHR program

Number of questions: 35 plus school site map 

and traffic count

Assessment area: School site

Manual included: Cover sheet and for each 

subsection

Scoring mechanism: Diagram school site; yes/no 

plus open ended elaboration questions

Keystone Healthy Routes 

website

u Lower Proportion 

of Infrastructure 

Questions, Focus on 

Policy, Education, 

Behavior.

Transit Assessments

Most of the transit assessment materials focus on assessing the environment around bus 

stations (with the exception of the Inventory of Pedestrian Facilities around Transit, which 

includes rail stops). All of the materials in Table 4 focus on assessing existing facilities.

TABLE 4: TRANSIT ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Bus Stop Assessment Sheet

Purpose: Evaluate pedestrian access features 

and connections; assess passenger 

comfort amenities; evaluate safety and 

security features; document information 

features

Number of questions: 42

Assessment area: Bus stops and surrounding 

areas

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Ramond Robinson,

Triangle Transit Authority

u Size, Location, and 

Material of Landing 

Area

u Sidewalk Width and 

Connectivity

u Shelter Attributes

u Seating Adequacy

u Speed Limit

u Traffic

u Parking

u Lighting

u Signage 

Name: Arlington Bus Stop Assessment

Purpose: Describe location, surroundings 

landing area, connections, amenities, 

seating, safety, information

Number of questions: 86

Assessment area: Bus stops and surrounding 

areas

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

NCTR report – Safer Stops for 

Vulnerable Customers 

(Tucker, 2003)

u Adjacent Properties

u Landing Area Size

u Location and Material

u Trip Generators

u Sidewalk Width and 

Connectivity

u Shelter Attributes

u Seating; Trash; 

Newspaper Boxes

u Speed Limit

u Parking

u Travel Lanes

u Lighting

u Pay Phones

u Landscaping

u Information 
FHWA Office of Safety 123

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix B: Supplemental Information

TABLE 4: TRANSIT ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Inventory of Pedestrian Facilities 

around Transit

Purpose: Perform inventory around transit 

stations for MARTA, CCT, C-Tran and 

Gwinnett

Number of questions: 24

Assessment area: Bus stops and surrounding 

areas (half-mile radius)

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Atlanta Regional 

Commission

http://www.atlantaregional.

com/transportationair/

InventSurvey.pdf

u Land Uses

u Sidewalk Characteristics

u Pedestrian Crossing 

Features

Name: Technical Guidelines for the 

Placement of Transit Stops

Purpose: Assist in siting transit stops for 

operations and safety

Number of questions: 0

Assessment area: n/a

Manual included: n/a

Scoring mechanism: n/a

Toronto Transit Commission 

Service Planning 

Department, May 2004

u Stop Spacing

u Selecting the Best 

Location for a Stop

u Site-Specific 

Considerations

u Stop Markers

u Shelters

Name: Local Bus Checklist

Purpose: Evaluate safety and convenience 

issues at bus stops

Number of questions: 13

Assessment area: Bus stops and surrounding 

areas

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Alameda Transit Advocates, 

Alameda, CA 

Contact: Susan Decker, 

decker@avax.net

u Presence or Absence of 

Map

u Schedule

u Shelter

u Bench

u Trash Receptacle

u Sidewalk Width

u Curb Condition

u Sidewalk Condition

u Pedestrian Access to 

Stop

u Quality of Transit 

Information

u Surrounding Land Uses

u Lighting

u Sight Lines

Accessibility Assessments

The resources in Table 5 focus on access to facilities for various pedestrians (older pedestrians, 

pedestrians who are blind, pedestrians who use wheelchairs, etc.). 
124 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

TABLE 5: ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Accessible Sidewalks and Street 

Crossings – An Informational Guide

Purpose: A concise, informal, and illustrated 

booklet of ADA. 

Number of questions: 13

Assessment area: Accessible environment

Manual included: yes

Scoring mechanism: no 

Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA-SA03-019)

u Sidewalks

u Curb Ramps

u Driveway Crossings

u Median Cut-Throughs

u Median Ramps

u Protruding Objects

u Grades

u Etc.

Name: PENNDOT Bicycle/Pedestrian 

Facilities Checklist

Purpose: Assess the design of a sports 

facility

Number of questions: 29

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Pedestrian and Bicycle 

Coalition of Greater 

Philadelphia

http://www.bicyclecoalition.

org/presentations/

padotchecklist.htm

u Curb Cuts

u Slopes

u Signals

u Signage

u Lighting

u Etc.

Name: Kentucky Government ADA 

Checklist

Purpose: Identify architectural and 

communication barriers encountered by 

people with disabilities, assist in planning 

for removal of barriers.

Number of questions: 23

Assessment area: Bus facilities

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Kentucky Department of 

Vocational Rehabilitation

http://ada.ky.gov/

documents/Checklist_2000.

pdf

u Size of Sidewalks

u Location of Signs

u Handrails

u Slopes and CrossSlopes

u Landings

u Gratings

u Etc.

Name: ADA Checklist for New Lodging 

Facilities

Purpose: Help owners and managers of 

lodging facilities identify ADA mistakes.

Number of questions: 20

Assessment area: Lodging facilities

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division

Disability Rights Section

http://www.ada.ufl.edu/

ADAcd/cdpages/PDF_PUBS/

HOTELCK/HSURVEY.PDF

u Size of Sidewalks

u Ramps

u Curb Cuts

u Free of Barriers

u Etc.

Name: Public Rights of Way Design Guide, 

Checklist for Accessible Sidewalks and 

Street Crossings

Purpose: Provide standards for accessible 

rights of way

Number of questions: 0

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

U.S. Access Board 

and Federal Highway 

Administration

http://www.access-board.

gov/prowac/guide/

PROWGuide.htm

u Ramps

u Sidewalk Widths

u Intersections

u Lighting

u Height of Signs

u Drinking Fountains

u Etc.
FHWA Office of Safety 125

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix B: Supplemental Information

TABLE 5: ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Survey Form 4: Ramps

Purpose: Assess ramp safety

Number of questions: 21

Assessment area: Access ramps

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

U.S. Access Board

http://www.access-board.

gov/adaag/checklist/

CurbRamps.html

u Slope

u Visual Contrast

u Textural Contrast

u Transition

u Visibility

u Counter-Slope

u Etc.

Name: Survey Form 29A: Transportation 

Facilities – Bus Stops

Purpose: Assess accessibility to bus stops, 

stations, terminals, etc.

Number of questions: 9

Assessment area: Bus stops

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

U.S. Access Board

http://www.access-board.

gov/ada-aba/checklist/

TransportationBus.html

u Signage

u Shelters

u Connection to Ped 

ROW

u Clear Dimensions

u Etc.

Name: Survey Form 3: Accessible Exterior 

Routes

Purpose: Assess accessibility of exterior 

routes

Number of questions: 25

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

U.S. Access Board

http://www.access-board.

gov/ada-aba/checklist/

ExteriorAccessibleRoutes.

html

u Surface

u Lighting

u Width

u Grates

u Slopes

u Protruding Objects

u Etc.

Name: Pedestrian Task Force Committee: 

Walkability Checklist

Purpose: Assess the quality of the walkable 

environment of certain chosen study 

areas

Number of questions: 6

Assessment area: Facilities

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: 1-5 (awful-very good)

Kalamazoo Non-Motorized 

Transport Plan

u General: Facilities, 

Safety, Security, 

Aesthetics, Pleasure, 

Motorist Behavior, and 

Access to Transit.

u ADA-Related: Curbs, 

Ramps, Width of 

Sidewalk, Sidewalk 

Boundaries, Signals, 

and Timing of Lights

Name: Universal Design Audit Checklist

Purpose: Assess the design of a facility

Number of questions: 99

Assessment area: Facilities

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: Score each item with 1, 2, 

or 3 points

Center for Inclusive Design 

and Environmental Access

www.ap.buffalo.edu/idea or 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/

ddc/pdf/udny/17checklist.

pdf

u Access Points

u Pathways

u Vertical Circulation

u Walking Surfaces

u Building Features

u Amenities
126 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

 

TABLE 5: ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: Access for Disabled People: Access 

Audit of Sports Facilities

Purpose: Assess the design of a sports 

facility

Number of questions: 150+

Assessment area: Sports facilities

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Sport England

www.sprotengland.org/

audit-sheets.pdf

u Arriving at Facility

u Emergency Escape

u External Features and 

Ramps

u Social Areas

u Other Building Specific 

Features 

Name: Accessing the Arts: Access Audit

Purpose: Access of a building

Number of questions: 108

Assessment area: Facilities

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Accessible Arts

www.artsaccessaustralia.org/

pdf/audit.pdf 

u Accessibility of Public 

Transport

u Wheel Chair Access 

to Building Including 

Lights

u Colors

u Tactile Indicators

u Signage

Name: PBIC Walkability Checklist

Purpose: Assess neighbourhood streets

Number of questions: 5

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: Rate responses on a scale 

of 1 to 6 and compare to given total scale

Pedestrian and Bicycle 

Information Center

http://www.walkinginfo.

org/pdf/walkingchecklist.

pdf

u General: Safety, 

Security, Aesthetics, 

Pleasure, Motorist 

Behavior

u ADA-Related: Curbs, 

Size of Sidewalk, 

General State of 

Sidewalk, Timing of 

Lights

Name: Placecheck

Purpose: Assess streets

Number of questions: 100+

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Placecheck 

http://placecheck.info/

placechecklist_full.htm

u Aesthetics

u Functionality

u Accessibility of Public 

Transport

u Safety

u Security

u Landmarks

Name: Access audit check list

Purpose: Accessibility of paths without 

motorized traffic

Number of questions: 17

Assessment area: Paths without motorized 

vehicles

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Sustrans

http://www.sustrans.org.

uk/webfiles/scottland/ff42-

u Surfaces

u Inclines

u Barriers

u Furniture

u Inclines

u Signage

u Steps

u Handrails

Name: Pedestrian network planning and 

facilities design guide

Purpose: Assess the design of a sports 

facility

Number of questions: 150+

Assessment area: Sports facilities

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no 

Land Transport NZ 

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/

consultation/ped-networkplan/appendix2.html 

u Arriving at Facility

u Emergency Escape

u External Features and 

Ramps

u Social Areas

u Other Building Specific 

Features 
FHWA Office of Safety 127

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists

Appendix B: Supplemental Information

TABLE 5: ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENTS

Name and Characteristics Source Topic Areas

Name: ADA Review

Purpose: Assess safety of an intersection

Number of questions: 14 criteria

Assessment area: Intersections

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no 

Florida DOT, received from 

Lexington, KY

u Ramps

u Slopes

u Width

u Landings

u Push Buttons

u Tactile Surface

Name: Lexington-Fayette Pedestrian Facility 

Inventory

Purpose: Assess safety of intersections and 

crosswalks

Number of questions: 3 sections

Assessment area: Intersections and crosswalks

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Lexington, KY u Intersection 

Configuration and 

Facilities

u Signage

u Signals

u Sidewalk

u Ramps

u Drains

u Trash Receptacles

u Speed Limit

u Number of Traffic 

Lanes

Name: Designing Sidewalks and Trails for 

Access Part II of II: Best Practices Design 

Guide

Purpose: Provides guidance to planners, 

designers, and transportation engineers 

on how to design pedestrian facilities for 

all users to include those with disabilities. 

As well as to help develop quantitative 

assessments of the conformance of the 

pedestrian facility network to the ADA 

Guidelines.

Number of questions: 

Assessment area: Accessible facilities

Manual included: yes

Scoring mechanism: no

Federal Highway 

Administration

u Sidewalks

u Curb Ramps

u Driveway Crossings

u Median Cut-Throughs

u Median Ramps

u Protruding Objects

u Grades

u Etc.

Name: Healthy Aging Research Network 

Environmental Audit Tool and Protocol

Purpose: Quantitative and qualitative 

assessment of community-scale and 

street-scale factors associated with 

physical activity in older adults.

Number of questions: 13 pages

Assessment area: Pedestrian environment

Manual included: no

Scoring mechanism: no

Healthy Aging Network

http://depts.washington.

edu/harn

u Types of Land Uses

u Construction Activity

u Sidewalks

u Buffers

u Slopes

u Maintenance

u Obstructions

u Street Amenities

u Signage

u Crosswalks
128 FHWA Office of Safety

Pedestrian Road Safety Audits Guidelines and Prompt Lists