How to Develop a

Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

FHWA-SA-05-12

Revised March 2009

How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

FINAL REPORT

Prepared for:

Federal Highway Administration

Office of Highway Safety

Project Manager: Tamara Redmon

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Project Manager: Leah Preiss

Prime Contractor: BMI-SG, a VHB Company 

Report Authors:

HSRC Authors

Charles V. Zegeer

Laura Sandt

Margaret Scully

Consultant Authors

Michael Ronkin

Mike Cynecki

Peter Lagerwey

HSRC Student Contributors

Helen Chaney

Bastian Schroeder

Emily Snyder

Report Design and Layout: Laura Sandt

Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center

Highway Safety Research Center

University of North Carolina

Campus Box 3430

730 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd

Chapel Hill, N.C. 27599-3430

Original: February 2006

Reprint: May 2008
Acknowledgements

The project team would like to recognize and express appreciation to the numerous individuals who contributed information, case studies, and feedback for the Guide. They include:

•	 Dwight Kingsbury, Assistant State Pedestrian/Bicycle Coordinator, State Safety Office, Florida Department of Transportation. 

•	 Craig Raborn, Program Manager for Technical Information, Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center,

Highway Safety Research Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

•	 Charles Crim, Project Development Engineer, Local Roads and Streets, Illinois Department of Transportation.

•	 Nancy Okasaki, Transportation Planner, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, San Francisco Bay

Area.

•	 Gabriel Rousseau, Transportation Specialist, Office of Safety Programs, Federal Highway Administration,

U.S. Department of Transportation.

•	 Elise Bremer-Nei, Supervising Planner, New Jersey Department of Transportation, Office of Bicycle and

Pedestrian Programs.

•	 Richard Haggstrom, Senior Transportation Engineer, California Department of Transportation.

•	 Dave Bachman, Bicycle/Pedestrian Program Manager, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation.

•	 Kohinoor Kar, Transportation Engineer, Traffic HES (Safety) Section, Arizona Department of Transportation.

•	 Pat Pieratte, Bicycle/Pedestrian Safety Specialist, Florida Department of Transportation.

•	 Ken Kochevar, Safety and ITS Engineer, Federal Highway Administration, California Division.

•	 Gerard Soffian, Office of the Director, Signs and Markings, New York City Department of Transportation.

•	 Jim Ercolano, Pedestrian Specialist, Pedestrian/Bicycle Program, New York State Department of Transportation Headquarters.

•	 Cara Seiderman, Project Planner, Environmental and Transportation Planning Division, Community Development Department, City of Cambridge, Massachusetts.

•	 Jennifer Toole, President, Toole Design Group, LLC, Maryland.

•	 Bill Cowern, Transportation Operations Engineer, City of Boulder.

•	 Ron Van Houten, Professor, Psychology Department, University of Western Michigan.

•	 Megan Hoyt, Pedestrian Safety Specialist, Pedestrian Program, Seattle Department of Transportation.

•	 Erik Landfried, Graduate Researcher, Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, Highway Safety Research Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Photo Credits

The images in this document were provided by a variety of individuals and agencies, including:

•	 Dan Burden

•	 Cara Seiderman

•	 Mike Cynecki

•	 Peter Lagerwey

•	 Michael Ronkin

•	 Ron Van Houten

•	 Jim Ercolano and the NYDOT

•	 The Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center Image Library (http://www.pedbikeimages.org)
Table of Contents

Introduction...........................................................................................................................................1

Chapter 1: Planning and Designing for Pedestrian Safety—The Big Picture..............................7

Chapter 2: Involving Stakeholders ...................................................................................................19

Chapter 3: Collecting Data to Identify Pedestrian Safety Problems...........................................26

Chapter 4: Analyzing Information and Prioritizing Concerns.....................................................38

Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions...............................................................................................54

Chapter 6: Providing Funding.........................................................................................................117

Chapter 7: Creating the Pedestrian Safety Action Plan...............................................................125

References..........................................................................................................................................133

Appendix A: How to Create and Run an Effective Pedestrian Advisory Board ....................141

Appendix B: How to Conduct Pedestrian Counts and Behavior Studies................................144

Appendix C: How to Conduct Pedestrian and Motorist Behavior Assessments....................147

Appendix D: List of Funding Sources..........................................................................................149

Appendix E: Evaluation of a Pedestrian Safety Plan..................................................................154

Appendix F: Reference Guide and Plan Summaries...................................................................157

Appendix G: Pedestrian-Related Land Use Planning Resources...............................................169

Appendix H: Checklist for Engineering and Planning Solutions..............................................171

Appendix I: Checklist for Pedestrian Safety Action Plan Elements.........................................184

1 Introduction

Introduction

The purpose of this guide on “How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan”is to present an overview and framework for state and local agencies to develop 

and implement a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan tailored to their specific problems and

needs. A Pedestrian Safety Action Plan is a plan developed by community stakeholders that is intended to improve pedestrian safety in the community. An objective 

the guide is to help state and local officials know where to begin to address pedestrian

safety issues. It is also intended to assist agencies in further enhancing their existing

pedestrian safety programs and activities, including identifying safety problems and selecting optimal solutions. This guide is primarily a reference for improving pedestrian 

safety through street redesign and the use of engineering countermeasures as well as 

other safety-related treatments and programs that involve the whole community. This 

guide can be used by engineers, planners, traffic safety and enforcement professionals,

public health and injury prevention professionals, and decision-makers who have the 

responsibility of improving pedestrian safety at the state or local level. 

Pedestrian Safety Problem Background

Pedestrian crashes and the resulting deaths and injuries are a serious problem on our 

roadways. In 2004, 4,641 pedestrians were killed in traffic crashes, representing 

percent of all roadway-related fatalities (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2004). In urban areas, pedestrian deaths typically represent 25 to 40 perce

of traffic fatalities. Approximately 70,000 pedestrians were injured on roadways 

2004, and many of these were severe injuries. While reducing pedestrian crashes h

recently gained increasing priority among some state and local agencies as well as the 

U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), more efforts and programs are needed to

develop and implement effective strategies to reduce pedestrian-related injuries and 

deaths.

The safety literature reveals a variety of risk factors that influence pedestrian crashes

and severity. For example, pedestrian crash risk increases on wide roads (four lanes 

more) with high motor vehicle speeds and/or volumes. Intersections are more difFor more crash statistics, see NHTSA’

Traffic Safety Facts: 

2004 Data, available at http://wwwnrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/

pdf/nrd-30/ncsa/

TSF2004/809913.pdf

“ In a society 

that values choice 

and freedom, 

people should 

be able to walk 

safely, whether 

for fun and recreation, errands, 

getting to work 

or school, shopping, or other 

reasons. ”
2 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

ficult to cross when pedestrians encounter wide crossing distances, wide turning radii,

multiple turn lanes, or traffic control that is confusing or complex. Other high-ri

factors include drug/alcohol use by motorists and pedestrians, lack of nighttime roadway lighting, and the lack of walkways along roads. Older pedestrians are much mo

susceptible to serious or fatal injuries because of their frailty, while young children 

(particularly males aged 5 to 9) are more likely to be struck by a motor vehicle after

darting into the street (Campbell, 2004).

Many pedestrian crashes are the result of unsafe motor vehicle driver and pedestrian 

behaviors. Certain roadway designs features can contribute to unsafe behaviors by 

pedestrians and motorists. For example, excessively-wide streets encourage high

motorist speeds. High-volume multilane roads with a lack of safe crossings at regular 

intervals can contribute to pedestrians crossing streets at unsafe locations, particularly 

those who cannot or will not walk great distances to signalized locations. Land use decisions can also result in areas that are unsafe for pedestrians. For example, separating

residential areas from shopping areas with high-volume multilane roads forces some 

pedestrians to cross streets in places that may not be safe. These types of issues must 

also be addressed in long-term solutions for pedestrian safety.

The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO, also called the Green Book)

A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets states: 

“Pedestrians are a part of every roadway environment, and attention 

should be paid to their presence in rural as well as urban areas...

pedestrians are the lifeblood of our urban areas, especially in the 

downtown and other retail areas” (AASHTO, 2001).

The National Cooperative Highway Research Program 

(NCHRP) Report 500, Volume 10, A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Pedestrians, states:

“Walking is a basic human activity, and almost everyone is a pedestrian at one time or another...Even though pedestrians are legitimate 

roadway users, they are frequently overlooked in the quest to build more sophisticated transportation 

systems. Whether building new infrastructure or renovating existing facilities, it should be assumed 

that people will walk, and plans should be made to accommodate pedestrians. Where people aren’t 

walking, it is often because they are prevented or discouraged from doing so” (Zegeer, Stutts, et al.,

2004).

Unfortunately, many of our nation’s streets and highways were primarily built to

facilitate the smooth flow of motor vehicles. Yet, walking is the fundamental mo

of human mobility; everyone is a pedestrian at some point in every journey that they 

take. This includes walking to a bus or walking to a parking lot. It includes people 

all ages from children to older adults as well as pedestrians with visual and mobility 

impairments.

Walking is a basic human activity, and 

pedestrians are the lifeblood of many 

urban areas.
3 Introduction

It is important to recognize that although many people choose to walk instead of

drive as their only or primary mode of transportation, many others do not have the 

choice of driving. According to 2000 Census figures, nearly 15 percent of U.S. households do not own a vehicle. Also, 25 to 30 percent of U.S. citize

do not have a valid driver’s license. This includes children und

age 16, as well as many older and physically-impaired adults. This 

portion of our population should not be prevented from safe and 

reasonable opportunities to walk. 

In a society that values choice and freedom, people should be able

to walk safely, whether for fun and recreation, errands, getting to 

work or school, shopping, or other reasons. Many Americans wa

to be able to walk more if given the opportunity to do so. Ye

many street environments are often inhospitable and unsafe for 

walking.

Pedestrian safety and mobility must be elevated to a top priority for 

the situation to improve substantially. The engineers, planners, and 

other public officials in state and local agencies can leave an important legacy of improved walking conditions and fewer pedestrian 

crashes and injuries for future generations.

There are several objectives that transportation professionals should 

address to improve pedestrian safety and mobility (adapted from A 

Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Pedestrians):

•	 Reduce the speed of motor vehicles.

•	 Reduce pedestrian risks at street crossing locations.

•	 Provide sidewalks and walkways separate from motor vehicle

traffic.

•	 Improve awareness of and visibility between motor vehicles and pedestrians.

•	 Improve pedestrian and motorist behaviors.

A variety of strategies are available to improve pedestrian safety. A comprehensive

approach involving the “three E’s” (Engineering, Education, and Enforcement), as

well as making pedestrian-conscious land use decisions, is recommended. Engineers, 

educators, planners, and enforcement officials all play a role in helping to identify and

implement effective safety improvements 

Guide Contents

This guide contains the following chapters:

•	 Chapter 1: Planning and Designing for Pedestrian Safety—The Big Picture.

•	 Chapter 2: Involving Stakeholders.

•	 Chapter 3: Collecting Data to Identify Pedestrian Safety Problems.

•	 Chapter 4: Analyzing Information and Prioritizing Concerns.

•	 Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions.

Many Americans want to be 

given the opportunity to walk 

more, whether for fun and recreation, errands, shopping, or 

other reasons.
4 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

•	 Chapter 6: Providing Funding.

•	 Chapter 7: Creating the Pedestrian Safety Action Plan.

Chapter 7 provides the framework that state and local agencies can use to develop a 

customized Pedestrian Safety Action Plan. The concepts, principles, and informat

contained in this guide are based on national guidelines, including (among others):

•	 AASHTO

	 •	 Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation o  Pedestrian Facilitie

•	 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

	 •	 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device

	 •	 PEDSAFE: Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection Syste

•	 Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)

	 •	 Traffic Control Devices Handboo

	 •	 Design and Safety o  Pedestrian Facilitie

•	 NCHRP

	 •	 Report 500, Vol. 10, A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Pedestrians

Pedestrian plans and design guidelines from local and state transportation agencies 

throughout the U.S. are referenced throughout this guide. Most of the facility recommendations and design principles given here are based on the latest pedestrian safety 

research, particularly FHWA and NCHRP research. This guide provides a framewo

for 1) reviewing pedestrian problem sites, roadway segments, and other targeted areas

in an organized manner and 2) selecting and implementing appropriate safety measures.
5 Introduction

National Guidelines and Resources

Design Guidelines

For descriptions of 

these documents 

and links to additional resources, 

see Appendix F.
6 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

National Guidelines and Resources

For descriptions of these Countermeasure Selection Tools Research and Policy Tools

documents and links to 

additional resources, see 

Appendix F.
Chapter 1: Planning and Designing for Pedestrian Safety—The Big Picture 7

Chapter 1: 

Planning and Designing 

for Pedestrian Safety—

The Big Picture

The automobile has irrefutably altered the way in which transportation systems and the built environment are designed and constructed, often at the expense of pedestrians. In the majority of crashes between pedestrians and motor vehicles, the pedestrian is trying to navigate in an environment designed primarily for automobile use. 

This chapter explains how some common roadway design practices can have negative 

impacts on pedestrian travel and safety as well as the policies that have led to these 

design practices. It also discusses other major factors that affect pedestrian safety such

as street connectivity, site design, land use, and access management. Next, it suggests 

changes that can lead to improvements in the pedestrian environment. Finally, it discusses the need to institutionalize these changes by reviewing, amending, and adopting 

policies and design guidelines to better accommodate pedestrian travel. It is important to be proactive as well as responsive to pedestrian safety problems. This chapter 

reflects the need to develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan both as a response to

current design issues and as an effort to integrate pedestrians into the design process 

from the beginning to ensure the quality of future developments.

Understanding Pedestrian Characteristics

Good pedestrian safety planning must include an understanding of the characteristics 

of pedestrians. With an understanding of pedestrian needs and characteristics, those

involved in pedestrian safety planning can more effectively understand how new and 

existing facilities must operate, as well as how pedestrians will act when faced with 

certain conditions. Applying a practical understanding of pedestrian characteristics will

provide insights when considering appropriate safety solutions and will particularly 

help ensure that facilities are inviting to pedestrians.

Important characteristics include understanding why and where pedestrians walk, what

types of design features create a safer pedestrian environment, and what types of behavioral decisions pedestrians are likely to make. In addition, pedestrians also consist

of specific populations with different characteristics, including children (who may be

impulsive or unpredictable), persons with mobility impairments (who may require

specific visibility devices or facility features), and senior citizens (who may require additional time for roadway crossings).

“ In the majority of crashes 

between pedestrians and motor vehicles, the 

pedestrian is trying to navigate in 

an environment 

designed primarily for automobile 

use. ”
8 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

The AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities (2004)

includes a comprehensive discussion of pedestrian characteristics and needs.

Transportation Design and Policy Elements that Impact Pedestrian Safety

Several design practices and policies conceived to improve motor vehicle mobility are 

now recognized as barriers to a safe pedestrian environment. There are many factors 

that affect the safety and mobility of the pedestrian transportation network. The major planning, design, and policy elements that impact pedestrian safety include:

1. Street design.

2. Street connectivity.

3. Site design.

4. Land use.

5.	 Access management.

Because this guide includes a large section on improving 

pedestrian safety through street redesign and engineeringrelated crash countermeasures, it provides a more detailed 

focus on the street design elements and those policies 

influencing street design choices. The interrelated subjec

of street connectivity, site design, land use, and access 

management—while major components of a well-built

environment—will be discussed briefly within the context

of providing safer pedestrian environments.

Street Design

The traditional street system is based on a simple hierarchy: most trips originate on local streets; travelers are then 

ferried via collector streets to arterials, which are intended 

to carry large amounts of motor vehicle traffic long distances at higher speeds. This

system is based on the assumption that most trips occur by motor vehicle, so most 

of the facilities are designed primarily for motor vehicle travel. The system results in 

street designs that do not serve pedestrians well for several reasons: 

1. They lack pedestrian facilities: Some collector and arterial streets are built with 

inadequate or no sidewalks or walkways, discouraging or limiting safe pedestrian 

movement along streets. Continuous lighting may not exist to provide adequate 

nighttime pedestrian conditions.

2. They are wide or have multiple lanes that are difficult to cross: Since arterial 

roads are designed to facilitate smooth and efficient motor vehicle flow, they often have multiple lanes in each direction to accommodate high motor vehicle traffic volumes and also multiple turn lanes. The number of lanes a pedestrian must

cross has a direct effect on the complexity of the crossing task and the pedestrian 

crash risk. The pedestrian must find an adequate gap in motor vehicle traffic, a

task that increases exponentially with the number of lanes. 

Many arterial 

streets are designed 

to accommodate 

large volumes 

of fast moving 

vehicles, often a 

risk to pedestrian 

safety.
Chapter 1: Planning and Designing for Pedestrian Safety—The Big Picture 9

3. They have high speeds: Wide streets encourage and allow higher vehicle speeds,

which relate directly to more severe injuries (to motorists and pedestrians) when

a crash occurs; the majority of pedestrian crashes and most fatalities occur on 

higher speed arterials.

4. They have complex intersections: Typically, wide arterial streets have intersections that are even wider due to the addition of multiple turn lanes. They also 

often have large turning radii to allow larger vehicles, such as trucks and buses, to 

make turns easily and quickly. This requires pedestrians to cross longer distances 

and watch for more cars in more lanes, an often challenging and dangerous task. 

Skewed intersection designs and high vehicle right- and left-turn volumes at an intersection can also add complexity to the crossing task. Left turn arrows can also 

be confusing to pedestrians.

5. They create long delays for pedestrians at intersections: Wide intersections

and those with multiple turn lanes create a long wait for pedestrians. At times,

crossing prohibitions may be designated for one or more crosswalks to facilitate 

turning movements. If a crosswalk is closed, the pedestrian is left with three

choices: cross illegally with no signal protection, walk a long distance around the 

intersection, or walk to another location to cross.

6. They provide little “friction” to protect pedestrians: Much of the traffic engineering philosophy of the last few decades has been aimed at stripping roads of 

“friction” (for example, removing trees, etc.) in order to facilitate motor vehicle

traffic flow. This creates a barren, unsafe, and unattractive environment for pedestrians, often with high vehicle speeds.

Many of the solutions and designs proposed for increased pedestrian safety require 

revisiting some of these assumptions. But none of the proposed designs will create a 

less safe environment for motorists or other road users. 

Design Speeds

One important concept to understand is design speeds. According to the AASHTO

Green Book (2001), the design speed of a roadway is the speed that is selected by the

designer for determining the various geometric design features for the road. Althou

design speeds for rural roads are typically higher than for downtown urban streets, it is 

important to provide design speeds that account for the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and other road users. Lower design speeds may be achieved by providing such 

features as narrow street widths, on-street parking, tight turning radii, buffered sidewalks with street trees, short block lengths, short building setbacks, and streetlights. 

It is also important to select a design speed for the type and purpose of the road. F

example, on a low-volume, urban local street, it may be appropriate to provide narrow roadway widths and allow trees fairly close to the road. A suburban arterial stre

might typically have wider lanes, trees and utilities set back further from the road, and 

no on-street parking. Although a design speed may be higher on suburban arteri

streets (compared to urban local or collector streets), it is still important to provide
10 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

pedestrian accommodations on such roads (e.g., well-designed sidewalks, safe street

crossings, adequate lighting), since pedestrians in those situations should also be able

to walk and cross streets safely

Street Design Policies that have Affected Pedestrians

Achieving a Desired Level of Service

Level of Service (LOS) for motor vehicle traffic is usually measured in letter grades

A through F. LOS A describes free-flowing unimpeded motor vehicle traffic; LOS F

is near gridlock. LOS D is typical of congested urban areas where streets are full and

motor vehicle traffic is moving relatively slowly. It is not uncommon for intersections

to operate at LOS F during the peak periods of traffic.

The measurements and calculations needed to predict or determine LOS are quantitative. However, the desired LOS is often a political decision (or policy), based on how

much congestion decision-makers assume the public will tolerate. Those communities 

that have sought to have motor vehicle traffic flow smoothly often have characteristically wide roads with minimal pedestrian accommodations. Consequently, they often 

experience higher crash rates for all roadway users, as both motorists and pedestrians 

suffer from the less safe conditions created to achieve these higher levels of vehicle 

mobility.

Accommodating Special Vehicles

Roadway design is usually predicated on the concept of the 

“design vehicle.” The design vehicle is the largest vehicle

that can be expected to use the road often enough to 

justify designing the roadway to accommodate that vehicle. 

Large design vehicles are commonly trucks and buses, including trash collection trucks, moving vans, school buses, 

and fire trucks. A typical design vehicle for local streets is

known as an SU (Single Unit delivery truck), such as those

used by UPS.

The most critical application of this concept is at intersections, where the radius is made large enough so the design 

vehicle can make a right turn without encroaching into 

the opposing lane. This can have a major negative effect 

on pedestrian safety and comfort, because a large radius 

allows passenger vehicles to make right turns at higher speeds and requires pedestrians 

to cross a longer distance. Large radii at intersections can contribute to a higher pedestrian crash risk as pedestrians are often hit by turning vehicles. 

Street Connectivity

Within the context of the previously described street hierarchy, local streets typically

do not connect well to each other, arterial streets, or destinations such as transit stops 

Careful planning and design assures that 

even narrow streets such as the one pictured here remain accessible to emergency vehicles and other large vehicles such 

as school buses and moving vans.

See the Highway Capacity Manual for more 

on LOS. The HCM 

can be ordered from the 

Web site http://trb.

org/news/blurb_detail.

asp?id=1166.
Chapter 1: Planning and Designing for Pedestrian Safety—The Big Picture 11

or stores. This leads to larger collector 

and arterial streets that convey heavy 

motor	vehicle	traffic.	This	discontinuous pattern of local streets limits travel 

choices for pedestrians to higher-risk arterial streets that reduce both comfort and 

safety.	A	lack	of 	street	connectivity	leads	

to	intersections	that	are	few	in	number—

but	often	large	in	size—that	are	more	difficult	for	pedestrians	to	navigate.		Many	

local streets have curvilinear or cul-de-sac 

designs that:

1.	 Limit	pedestrians’	ability	to	travel	in	the	most	

direct path.

2. May be disorienting.

3.	 Increase	the	distances	to	destinations.

4.	 Increase	pedestrian	exposure	time	to	other	

vehicles on the road.

5.	 Discourage	walking	because	of 	the	added	

travel distance to destinations. 

Fewer	people	walking	reduces	the	motorist’s	expectation of seeing pedestrians along and crossing streets. 

mpacts on motorists as well, increasing drivsponse time for emergency vehicles.

These street designs have some negative i

ing distance and time, and affecting the re

Site Design

Many existing developments do not provide direct, clear, and convenient access for 

pedestrians. Pedestrians wishing to access a site may have to determine their own path 

and navigate through driveways, parking lots, landscaping, and other buildings in order 

to reach the destination. This often leads to confusion and conflicts between pedestrians and motorists, resulting in more pedestrian crashes.

Land Use

The practice and evolution of land use planning is long, complex, and generally 

beyond the scope of this document; however, an acknowledgement of certain issues 

pertaining to pedestrian safety is in order. Land use practices that took shape after 

World War II have typically favored the segregation of land uses (e.g., commercial

and employment areas, schools, and residences) and the concentration of commercial

activities along auto-dominated arterial corridors. This has produced the following 

unintended consequences: 

1. Trip origins and destinations are often far apart. 

2. Longer travel distances lead to fewer people walking and more driving.

Improving Connectivity of Local Streets

Street layout directly impacts the ability to walk or bike. 

Connected local streets, sidewalks, and bicycle facilities help 

reduce walking or biking distances, provide more choices on 

travel, including the use of more local streets, at the same time 

dispersing vehicle traffic. In this example, a path was created 

at the end of a neighborhood cul-de-sac to improve the connectivity of the streets for pedestrian and bicyclist use.
12 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

3.	 More people driving creates more hectic motor vehicle traffic conditions not

conducive to safe pedestrian environments—those who do walk are exposed to

long distances and high levels of risk when they walk along or try to cross busy 

high-speed arterial streets.

4. The premise that most trips will be made by automobile leads to street designs 

intended to accommodate only the automobile, built to handle large volumes of 

motor vehicle traffic; when this occurs, pedestrians are often minimally accommodated only as an afterthought, if at all.

5. Many of the destinations and commercial activities along a roadway corridor are 

also designed to serve motorists, fostering strip development with ample parking 

to capture passing motorists. As most of these destinations are located on arterials, they are hard for pedestrians to acces

The typical land use pattern of concentrating commercial activities along auto-dominated corridors creates generic-looking roads that are hard for pedestrians to cross. 

The safety consequences are evident when one analyzes crash data and sees that many 

pedestrian crashes occur along higher speed suburban corridors with few or no pedestrian facilities and very separated land uses. 

Access Management

According to AASHTO, access management “involves providing (or managing) access

to land development while simultaneously preserving the flow of traffic on the surrounding roadway system in terms of safety, capacity, and speed” (AASHTO, 2001).

It has widely been used to improve the efficiency and flow of motor vehicle traffic by

limiting the number of driveways and intersections on arterials and highways. In some

cases this has improved safety for pedestrians and motorists alike, but in other instances it has had the unintended consequence of 

facilitating the design of larger intersections 

spaced far apart. These intersections are often 

difficult and unsafe for pedestrians to cross

due to their size and large numbers of turning vehicles. Pedestrians wishing to cross at an 

intersection may have to walk long distances 

out of their way.

For communities that do not limit the number of driveways and intersections, the issue 

of intersection size and spacing may not be a 

problem, but an excessive number of driveways can create another problem. For pedestrians, every driveway is a potential conflict

point. Vehicles pull in and out of commercial 

driveways continuously, and when driveways are designed like street intersections, 

turning speeds can be quite high. Too many driveways along a street without proper 

driveway design can also create a challenging walking environment for people with 

disabilities.

Poorly designed 

driveways can 

become conflict 

points for pedestrians and motorists.
Chapter 1: Planning and Designing for Pedestrian Safety—The Big Picture 13

Methods to Improve Pedestrian Safety at the Macro-Level

In addition to improving the compliance of all roadway users with traffic controls and

laws, there are several measures that can be taken to improve conditions for pedestrians within these transportation conventions previously discussed. Improved pedestrian safety can be achieved in a variety of ways, including:

Street Design Improvements

To make streets safer for pedestrians, planners, designers, engineers, and officials need

to focus on:

•	 Slowing vehicle speeds.

•	 Reducing street crossing distances for pedestrians.

•	 Improving the visibility of pedestrians and motorists.

•	 Increasing the level of caution taken by pedestrians and motorists.

•	 Providing pedestrian facilities (sidewalks, crossing islands, etc.) where the needs

and potential crash reductions are the greatest by establishing a routine system to 

identify gaps in the network along streets and highways, particularly in urban and 

suburban areas. 

Achieving one or more of these objectives not only reduces the risk of pedestrian

crashes, but also usually improves safety for motor vehicle drivers and passengers. 

Sometimes a design issue may result in a complication or delay to other roadway users, and transportation officials will have to make a choice to

balance the competing interests. Officials may perceive these

choices to be unpopular or difficult to make, especially for those

whose job has been to move motor vehicle traffic and who may

not be aware of values held by the community. However, most 

often a community will be supportive of improved pedestrian 

safety; it is important to educate and inform people about how 

and why certain choices are made (see Chapter 2 for a discussion on how to involve stakeholders).

To achieve these objectives, some policies may require rethinking or reprioritization. These include:

Achieving a Desired Level of Service

Some effective pedestrian safety measures may increase motor 

vehicle travel time and have a slight negative impact on motor vehicle LOS. A rebalancing of the transportation system

where pedestrian LOS and safety are included may sometimes

mean a change in expectations about the priority that motor 

vehicle LOS is given in design and decision-making. If serious

safety measures are to be achieved, the particular LOS may be

lower for motor vehicles than if those measures were not taken. 

Improvements in capacity can be achieved in other ways: by

Some wide streets are intimidating and unsafe for pedestrians (top 

photo), but wide streets can still be 

designed to work for pedestrians 

(bottom photo).

For additional information on pedestrian-friendly street design, refer to 

the ITE Traffic Calming State of the Practice 

report, available online 

at: http://www.ite.org/

traffic/tcstate.htm.

Other Web sites that 

provide useful information include:

http://www.walkable.

org/ and http://www.

trafficcalming.org/.
14 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

expanding the capacity of other transportation options, re-thinking land use strategies, 

or determining where important destinations—such as schools—are to be located.

Accommodating Special Vehicles

The conflict between vehicle accommodation and pedestrian safety is usually considered a design decision, but it is also a values (policy) decision. An intersection can

be designed with a smaller radius than is typically used for a particular design vehicle, 

thereby increasing pedestrian safety by reducing crossing distance/exposure. The

motor vehicle driver can still make the turn, but the truck will have to maneuver into 

an inside lane to complete the turn. Communities with streets designed around the 

concept of “bigger is better” are communities that often provide poor pedestrian service and typically have poor pedestrian 

safety records. Conversely, communities that place a high priority on pedestrian safety and convenience do more to balance the 

needs of large vehicles with the needs of pedestrians in their 

street designs. This does not mean trucks, school buses, and fire

trucks cannot use the streets—they are accommodated; they

just usually need to travel at a lower speed and take care in making turns. Transportation professionals are asked to carefully 

weigh these factors when making street design decisions.

Street Connectivity Improvements

Increasing street connectivity creates a safer, more pedestrianfriendly street system by:

•	 Reducing walking distances.

•	 Offering more route choices along quiet local streets.

•	 Dispersing motor vehicle traffic with more two-lane, neighborhood commercial streets, which relieves motor vehicle 

traffic from arterials to makes streets safer for pedestrians to

walk along.

•	 Reducing the need for wide, difficult to cross streets and

intersections by providing more connections.

Street connectivity with the transit network is very important. If

people are to use transit, then their role as pedestrians on both 

ends of their trip is important and should be accommodated on 

well-connected streets.

Street connections are vital to pedestrians, and there are many 

things that can be done to improve the connectivity of existing 

street networks and plan for the connectivity of future developments. Here are a few potential solutions:

•	 Improve existing local street connectivity and circulation by adding sidewalks,

paths, stairs/ramps, gates, etc. to link dead-end streets and cul-de-sacs to other

In the top image, the residential 

streets are not well-connected 

and the pedestrian path is very 

long; below, connected streets 

provide a more direct route to 

the school.
Chapter 1: Planning and Designing for Pedestrian Safety—The Big Picture 15

Importance of Pedestrian Facilities in Disaster Preparedness

State of New York

Mass evacuation on-foot is often the only available means for people to quickly escape terrorist attacks, sudden natural disasters, or to cope with other actions or incidents that may cause highway, 

transit and/or commuter rail systems to shut down for an undetermined period. Successful mass 

movement of pedestrians witnessed during the September 11, 2001 attacks in New York City, the 

August 2003 Northeast Power Outage, and the 2005 transit strikes show that walking is the most 

reliable and sustainable mode of transportation for overcoming obstacles.

From a design and operational standpoint, 

at-grade/street-level pedestrian access has 

been found to be the safest design feature 

for expediting pedestrian traffic movements 

when mass evacuation occurs. Inhibitors to 

mass evacuation (that should be avoided) include:

•	 Restricted at-grade pedestrian access due

to longer blocks, fencing, and barriers. 

•	 Pedestrianstructuressusceptibletomovement and/or collapse (partial or total).

•	 Pedestrian tunnels susceptible to flooding or exit/entry obstructions.

•	 Building site and frontage design configurations that impede pedestrian traffic.

While vehicular travel lanes in urban main streets and central business/walking districts may experience surges of pedestrian traffic, adequate pedestrian facilities are still more suitable for use 

during more localized mass evacuations. This is because:

•	 Travel lanes may be clogged or obstructed with abandoned vehicles and/or debris.

•	 On-street and highway motor vehicle traffic may still be active during evacuation.

•	 Motorist panic and general confusion may make pedestrian use of roadways hazardous.

•	 Travel lanes may be restricted to emergency, military, or government uses.

When a major sub-regional or regional catastrophic event occurs, the pedestrian use of travel lanes 

must be included in transportation, law enforcement, emergency management, and military coordinated evacuation planning and recovery action plan efforts. This is important because major 

catastrophic events will involve massive pedestrian traffic surges at critical regional transportation 

bottlenecks and should be fully anticipated and strategically planned. Based on prior experience, 

travel lanes expected to carry the highest pedestrian volumes should be mapped and pre-designated for the quickest removal of any obstructions that might hinder rapid at-grade pedestrian 

evacuation.

This information provided by Jim Ercolano at the NYDOT. For more information, contact Mr. 

Ercolano at jercolano@dot.state.ny.us.
16 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

parts of the street network.

•	 Maintain	a	pedestrian	connection	(e.g.,	provide	a	path	in	the	right-of-way	or	sidewalk	easement)	when	a	street	is	being	severed	(it	is	more	difficult	to	purchase	an	

easement	for	a	connection	later).

•	 Increase	the	number	of 	access	points	to	and	from	neighborhoods	and	other	

destinations, so not all trips are funneled through one or two large intersections or 

access	points.	More	neighborhood	travel	options	means	less	motor	vehicle	traffic	

on any given street.

•	 Design	future	developments	with	improved	circulation	patterns	within	neighborhoods so more neighborhood automobile trips can be taken on local streets, 

reducing	the	need	to	widen	arterials.	This	may	conflict	with	some	traffic-calming	

techniques,	but	speeds	can	be	controlled	through	other	measures	(see	Chapter	5	

for	further	discussion).

Site Design Improvements

Both small-scale and large-scale developments should be directly accessible from the 

sidewalk through a safe and convenient sidewalk or pathway. Many communities are 

achieving better pedestrian safety records by requiring businesses and developments to 

locate close to the street (with parking provided in the

back) in more pedestrian-oriented site developments

that balance auto access with pedestrian needs and 

facilities. This does not mean that auto access is denied; 

it is just managed more appropriately.

These site design goals are achieved by enacting local zoning ordinances, which must be enforced. These 

principles contribute greatly to the safety, comfort, and 

aesthetics of the walking experience. 

Land Use Improvements

Land use planning has often been considered a discipline separate from transportation planning, street design, and traffic engineering, and insufficient emphasis has been

placed on the coordination of the two planning processes. However, the relationship 

between land use and transportation is evident, and the responsibility to coordinate 

between the two is imperative. Some changes to land use patterns that may positively 

influence pedestrian safety include:

•	 Encouraging mixed-use development (such as allowing small-scale retail in neighborhoods or placing schools in the center of neighborhoods) to help create destinations within walking distance of where people live and work.

•	 Designing new neighborhoods in a cluster pattern with many destinations accessible on foot to residents.

Other ideas are detailed in Chapter 5.

Site design matters 

to pedestrians. In 

this example, the 

design of driveways, 

building setbacks, 

parking, buffers, 

and sidewalks all 

contribute to the 

safety of the walking environment.
Chapter 1: Planning and Designing for Pedestrian Safety—The Big Picture 17

Access Management Improvements

One of the most important access management techniques includes reducing conflicts

at driveways to improve the walking environment. Some driveways can be closed—

increasing the safety of both pedestrians and motorists—without impeding access to

local businesses. Access management tools should not be used to reduce public street

connections, especially pedestrian connections to the transportation network. Other

access management goals can work in favor of pedestrians within the context of other 

important planning and policy issues, including:

•	 Constructing medians to control turning movements.

•	 Encouraging clustered development and mixed land uses.

•	 Improving street and neighborhood connectivity.

•	 Converting auto-oriented strip development into more accessible land use

patterns more suitable for pedestrians.

Reviewing Pedestrian Policies and Design Guidelines to Improve Pedestrian 

Safety

A multimodal approach to policy-making is needed. Agencies need to review their

design guidelines and policies to ensure that quality facilities are provided with both 

developer-built and new agency-built roadway projects. New facilities must be fully 

accessible to all pedestrians. Chapter 5 provides a more complete list of common and 

effective practices that may serve as a template for reviewing the current status of 

agency policies and guidelines. It provides policies and design recommendations organized into the following sections:

1.	 Improvements along the road (on sidewalks, at driveways, etc.).

2.	 Improvements for crossing the road (at midblock locations and signalized/unsignalized intersections).

3. Transit improvements.

4. Speed control measures.

5. Land use and site design.

Proper access management can control 

turning movements to 

reduce conflict points, 

encourage cluster 

development, improve 

street connectivity, and 

create more accessible land use patterns 

to improve the overall 

safety of the pedestrian 

environment.
18 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

To list a few examples from the chapter: 

•	 Sidewalks	or	walkways	are	desirable	on	most	urban	and	suburban	roadways,	and	

efforts should be made to establish priorities for adding needed sidewalks.

•	 Pedestrian	signals	(i.e.,	WALK/DON’T	WALK	messages,	symbolic	hand/walking	man	messages)	and	marked	crosswalks	are	desirable	at	all	traffic	signals	where	

pedestrian crossing activity is expected, particularly at wide streets.

•	 Transit	stops	should	be	located	where	pedestrians	can	safely	cross	the	street.

There	are	numerous	other	guidelines	that	can	be	used	to	identify	design	and	traffic	

management practices to incorporate into appropriate agency manuals. The review of 

agency policies and design guidelines for pedestrian facilities should be a priority. Most 

improvements	to	the	street/pedestrian	infrastructure	will	be	gradual	and	implemented	

over many years as a part of future development and roadway reconstruction projects.

Finding the Appropriate Documents to Review

In	most	communities,	the	built	environment	is	governed	by	a	variety	of 	processes.	In	

some communities, public works departments have developed their own guidelines 

for roadway design that may need to be revised to conform to recommended practices.	In	other	localities,	subdivision	ordinances	are	the	key	element	to	be	reviewed	and	

updated	to	ensure	the	development	of 	safe	pedestrian	facilities.	It	may	be	challenging	

to pinpoint what is wrong with those ordinances, what is missing, or what effect they 

are actually having on the built environment, but they provide a starting point for the 

review and comparison of policies and guidelines outlined in this guide. The process 

of 	plan	review	is	also	important,	and	transportation	officials	need	to	know	what	to	

look for in development proposals. This chapter and Chapter 5 provide important 

examples of both macro- and micro-level elements that should be considered in development plans to ensure the highest level of pedestrian safety.

For more information, 

read Dan Burden’s 

essay, “How Can I 

Find and Help Build 

a Walkable Community” at http://www.

walkable.org/article1.

htm.

The image on the left provides the “before” view of a typical arterial street designed primarily for automobile use. In the “after” photo on the right, a digital illustration provides an 

example of how simple changes—access management, a raised median, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and landscaping

—can make such spaces more safe and appealing for pedestria
Chapter 2: Involving Stakeholders 19

Chapter 2:

Involving 

Stakeholders

Stakeholders include people who have a share or an interest in a particular policy, program, or project and may be affected by its implementation. Stakeholder involvement is an essential element in creating publicly supported and trusted policies, 

programs, and projects that reduce pedestrian crashes while creating livable, walkable 

communities. 

Public participation is not an end in itself, but part of a broader process of sustainable 

development. Participation is an important mechanism that can help create trust and 

credibility with stakeholders. The public should be included throughout the planning 

process, and the participation of all interested and affected parties—including vulnerable and disadvantaged persons—must be promoted.

Public stakeholders should be seen as useful partners in bringing helpful information 

and judgment to the table. They often are the on-the-ground scouts who can identify 

problems, needs, and opportunities. Since the professional staff cannot be everywhere 

at all times, the public can serve as additional eyes and ears and be effective resources.

The extent of the processes in which local agencies involve the public will vary according to their size and budget. Some communities are better equipped to implement 

these strategies while others may not have the resources and staff to implement all the 

strategies, so some modification and “tailoring” of these recommendations may be

required.

State and local agencies operate and relate to the public differently, so some modifications of the recommendations in this report will be needed to accommodate these 

differences.

“ Stakeholder 

involvement is an 

essential element 

in creating publicly supported 

and trusted policies, programs, 

and projects that 

reduce pedestrian 

crashes while 

creating livable, 

walkable communities. ”
20 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Public Involvement Through Meetings and Workshops

Denver, CO

The City of Denver held two rounds of four public meetings at key points in the 

process of developing the Pedestrian Master Plan in order to identify all potential 

issues and problem locations within the pedestrian 

environment. A final ninth public meeting was he

prior to finalization of the Pedestrian Master Plan.

During the first round of workshops, citizens were

given the opportunity to comment on the general 

obstacles they faced in the pedestrian system and to 

provide information on ways to improve the infrastructure. During the second round of workshops, 

the public provided feedback on the proposed pedestrian routes, among other issues.

Public input was received not only from the workshops but also from email and facsimile. This input was used to develop policy and 

to prioritize projects. In addition to expert review and monitoring by the Advisory 

Team, input was also solicited from other City officials within various City departments. The plan was reviewed by several special interest groups, internal staff, the 

Planning Board, and the City Council prior to finalizing the Pedestrian Master Plan.

For more information, visit: http://www.denvergov.org/transportation_planning/.

Who are the Stakeholders?

Stakeholders	include	five	distinct	groups:	

1.	 Individual	citizens.

2. Citizen-based organizations.

3.	 Public	employees,	officials,	and	agencies.

4.	 The	private	sector	(including	local	business	owners	and	developers).

5. The media.

All	have	a	unique	role	to	play	and	require	a	different	strategy	for	involvement.

Individual Citizens

Requests from individual citizens are an important way for agencies to learn about 

problems	at	specific	locations.	Typically,	citizens	will	contact	agencies	with	a	request	

for	a	particular	treatment	such	as	a	marked	crosswalk.	While	citizens	may	or	may	

not	have	asked	for	the	correct	solution,	they	are	likely	to	have	identified	a	pedestrian	

problem. Sometimes, the problem citizens perceive is different than an analysis of 

data	reveals.	Consequently,	the	first	step	is	to	figure	out	the	problem	that	the	citizen	is	

trying to solve. Sometimes it is obvious, other times it may require further communication	with	the	citizen,	a	field	visit,	and	an	engineering	study.
Chapter 2: Involving Stakeholders 21

Public Involvement to Develop a Transportation Needs Database

Portland, OR

Portland’s Pedestrian Transportation Program has made use 

of the city’s active and engaged citizenry to help identify, 

develop, and prioritize pedestrian projects and to create its 

1998 Pedestrian Master Plan. 

The city held a series of nine open houses in the spring of 

1995 to solicit comments and needs requests for the Pedestrian Master Plan. Among other activities, attendees were 

offered the opportunity to “pin the tail on the problem” by 

filling out a card to identify a need and marking the location on a map with a numbered sticker. Later, a second 

series of nine Pedestrian Master Plan Workshops were held 

around the city to present the projects proposed in the 

Plan. Throughout the project, presentations were made 

upon request by neighborhoods and other groups in order 

to encourage further participation. 

All the needs, requests, and project suggestions received 

during the open houses, district coalition presentations, 

and workshops for the Pedestrian Master Plan project were 

added to a database of information regarding neighborhood transportation needs. Also included in the database 

were suggestions or complaints collected through phone 

calls, letters, and various public presentations.

For more information, visit: http://www.trans.ci.portland.

or.us/plans/pedestrianmasterplan/default.htm or http://

www.portland transportation.org.

Responding to citizen requests can be a 

time-consuming task. Agencies should develop procedures for quickly determining 

which requests deserve a higher level of 

attention. Time and money are often best 

spent addressing the problems that are 

most likely to reduce pedestrian crashes. 

For example, in Seattle, the staff gets

together once a week to review citizen 

requests to perform a quick assessment 

of needs and priorities, asking questions 

such as:

•	 What is the crash history?

•	 Have there been previous complaints?

•	 Is it a location with a high volume of

pedestrians?

•	 Is it likely that this problem will

cause a crash?

•	 Is there a clear design problem?

•	 Is it a maintenance problem?

•	 Would moving a transit stop eliminate the problem?

•	 Is there already a project in the area

that will address the problem?

Using the collective memory of the group 

with some data, it is often possible to prioritize the requests and identify those that 

require further analysis. Citizens always 

deserve a response whether it is a phone 

call, email or letter. Most agencies already 

have procedures that dictate the appropriate way to respond.

One obstacle to receiving citizen requests and feedback is that citizens often do not

know who they should address their concerns to or how. In a heavily populated

county, there may be several municipalities with jurisdiction over local streets, as well 

as the county and state DOT, each with its own roads. Many citizens have little idea

which agencies actually maintain the roadways and traffic signals and do not know

who to turn to to make a request. One way to obtain more feedback from pedestrians

is to increase and improve Web-based outreach programs. A highly visible link on a

traffic agency Web site can help direct feedback to the best place or provide additional

information. Another technique helpful to citizens may include posting an agency

phone number or Web site on traffic signal controller boxes, typically located near the

corners of signalized intersections, or in areas with high pedestrian activity.
22 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Citizen-Based Organizations 

Citizen-based organizations can roughly be divided into special interest groups such 

as a Pedestrian Advisory Board (PAB), and geographically-based groups where people

are members by virtue of living or having a business in a particular neighborhood. 

Also included in this category are various advocacy and non-profit organizations. All

these groups can play a critical role in creating a better walking environment. 

Pedestrian Advisory Boards

State and local agencies should consider forming a Pedestrian Advisory Board (or

Council or Committee) to obtain ongoing, good citizen input. It is an excellent way to

get a better product while building support for agency policies, programs, projects and 

funding. Meeting times, places, and frequencies will vary depending on whether it is a 

state or local PAB. State PABs tend to only meet several times a year—often at locations around the state to accommodate its members. Local PABs usually meet monthly, often at the same location. It is preferable to have separate pedestrian and bicycle

boards so that pedestrian boards can focus solely on pedestrian issues. If this can’t be

achieved, measures need to be made to ensure that both the pedestrian and bicycle 

modes get equal attention. Creating and running an effective PAB requires a thoughtful, purposeful, and informed strategy. See Appendix A for detailed recommendations

on how to create and run a successful Board.

Geographically-Based Groups

Working with local neighborhood associations is another excellent way to get a better

product while building support for agency policies, programs, projects, and funding. 

As with PABs, it requires a thoughtful, purposeful, and informed strategy.

Citizen’s Pedestrian Advisory Board 

Oakland, CA

The Citizen’s Pedestrian Advisory Committee (CPAC) provided continuous public oversight and 

feedback during the development of the Pedestrian Master Plan. The CPAC was composed of 

district representatives appointed by each City Council member and one mayoral appointee from 

each of the Mayoral Commissions on Aging and Disability. Additional representatives of several community stakeholder groups including the Building 

Owner’s and Manager’s Association (BOMA), the 

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, and 

Urban Ecology also attended meetings. The CPAC 

met monthly for one and a half years to oversee 

the planning process.

For more information, visit: http://www.oaklandnet.com/government/pedestrian/index.html.
Chapter 2: Involving Stakeholders 23

Advocacy and Non-Profit Groups

These organizations may represent a spectrum of interests, from promoting walking 

or advocating for the rights of people with varying disabilities, to protecting the environment or encouraging bicycle facility development. Often, these groups will have

an interest in promoting pedestrian safety in concord with their overall objectives but 

may in other cases be opposed to certain changes. Agencies should be aware of these

groups and work to include them in the public involvement process, forming partnerships when applicable.

Public Employees, Officials, and Agencies

Public employees, elected officials, and local agencies are also stakeholders, but their

level of participation in the public involvement process may differ, depending on the 

level at which the pedestrian safety action plan is meant to be implemented. A regional

plan developed by a state, Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), county, or other similar government will most likely address these stakeholders in a different manner 

than local plans will. Public agencies are important stakeholders to the extent that the 

policies, projects, and programs developed in the plan affect their areas of responsibility. For example, a major arterial project is likely to have a significant impact on

area drainage and therefore will require involvement and buy-in from the agency that 

manages surface water runoff. The same will be true for all major public and private 

utilities. Transit agencies are an important stakeholder group for projects related to 

pedestrian facilities and safety near and at transit stops. Agencies involved with Public

Health may also take an interest in promoting pedestrian safety and be able to provide valuable resources and partnership opportunities. It is in the states’ and localities’

interest to build positive, working relationships with these individuals and agencies. 

Private Sector 

The private sector includes individual business owners (e.g., local businesses or development firms) or more formal business-related organizations. Members of the priva

sector have an interest in the built environment from several perspectives: as members 

of the community, from an investment standpoint, and as users of the environment 

(e.g., employees or customers). Some will be interested in investing more—they m

offer to provide financial resources to make improvements or help out with maintenance. Many businesses are important pedestrian generators that contribute to the life 

of a street and can affect a street’s walkability; therefore, it is valuable to include these

business owners when implementing a pedestrian safety action plan.

There are, of course, regulatory tools that impact the private sector, such as zoning 

or building regulations. Private individuals will be interested in participating in discussions that propose to make changes that will impact them as well.

Involving the business community may require a different approach than traditional

public participation methods. Members of the private sector may not come to public 

meetings but respond better on a one-on-one basis or in forums dedicated to only 
24 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

their participation where they will get a chance to meet and network with elected 

 leaders.

The Media

Media outlets have an interest in public welfare and information. Good working relationships	with	the	media	contribute	to	more	effective	pedestrian	safety	programs.	It	

is important to develop strong lines of communication with media personnel so that 

they	are	able	to	give	an	informed,	accurate	report	on	the	issues.	Agencies	can	actively	

seek media coverage through press releases, news conferences, or other media events 

in order to provide information to the media in a planned and professional way. By including the media as a stakeholder group, state and local agencies will be able to make 

them part of the solution and avoid potential negative or ill-informed media coverage. 

They will gain more accurate publicity to spread awareness of pedestrian safety issues 

as well attention to what is being done at the state and local levels.

General Strategies for Involving Stakeholders

Provide Quality Information

Part of the strategy for working with stakeholders is to provide information that 

invites	good	input.	Informed	citizens	and	other	groups	are	more	likely	to	identify	real	

problems	and	provide	more	constructive	feedback	on	project	proposals.	A	good	Web	

site	along	with	written	information	can	be	helpful.	For	example,	it	is	often	useful	to	

provide	information	on	when,	where,	and	why	marked	crosswalks	are	installed.	An	

informative	Web	site	with	answers	to	lists	of 	Frequently	Asked	Questions	(FAQs)	can	

reduce the number of frivolous or misguided requests or complaints.

Include Both State and Local Agencies

This activity is important for both local agencies and for state projects on state roads. 

Most policy, program, and project initiatives will be an activity for local agencies since 

they involve local residential and arterial streets. This, however, will vary from state to 

state.	In	some	states,	most	arterial	streets	are	state	roads;	in	some	big	cities,	very	few	

arterials are state roads; in small towns, it is not uncommon for the two or three major 

roads running through the city to be state roads. Some cities are multijurisdictional 

(e.g.,	Las	Vegas).	Make	sure	all	concerned	agencies	are	involved.

Consider Neighborhood Plans

Neighborhood	(or	sector)	plans	can	be	an	excellent	way	to	establish	community	priorities and generate support for pedestrian related safety improvements. Many cities have 

named	neighborhood	districts,	each	with	its	neighborhood	plan.	For	example,	Phoenix	

is subdivided into 15 urban villages, each with their own Village Planning Committee. 

In	Seattle,	the	city	has	been	divided	into	38	neighborhood	sub-areas.	When	given	the	

opportunity	to	develop	their	own	neighborhood	plans,	34	of 	these	sub-areas	identified	

pedestrian safety issues as their top priorities. Transportation agencies should always 

look to these plans for guidance when developing policies, projects, and programs beFor more information 

on stakeholder involvement, see the Virginia 

Tech On-line toolbox 

“Partnerships and 

Participation in Planning” at http://www.

uap.vt.edu/cdrom/

intro/index.htm or read 

the FHWA document 

“Public Involvement 

Techniques for Transportation Decision-making” 

at http://www.fhwa.dot.

gov/reports/pittd/cover.

htm.
Chapter 2: Involving Stakeholders 25

cause these plans will only have value if they are used and referenced. More information about the Phoenix and Seattle plans is available in Appendix F. Also see previous

section on Geographically-Based Groups.

Establish Venues for Participation

Stakeholders should have multiple ways to participate. 

Outreach should include opportunities to attend public

meetings, emails, telephone calls, and filling out comment

forms. These approaches will result in a broader, more 

diverse group of citizens providing input that will increase 

project acceptance and success.

Hold Public Meetings or Events

Public meetings and events can be an excellent way to 

solicit public input on plans and projects. They require structure and control in order 

to make progress and remain focused. Public meetings may have different formats or 

elements: 

1.	 Open House with tables with project information—citizens get a chance to look

at plans, write on the plans, ask questions, and talk face to face with project planners, designers, and managers.

2.	 Formal Presentation—citizens hear a formal presentation explaining the project,

typically followed by a question and answer session. 

3.	 Formal Public Testimony—this may be desired or mandatory at certain phases

of a project.

While public meetings have value, it is also important for citizens to have other opportunities for providing feedback. Not everyone is willing or able to attend a public 

meeting. Sometimes hosting forums at different times (e.g., weekends) or providing

childcare can help. Other ways of soliciting general input—such as charettes, walking

meetings, Web surveys, etc.—should also be considered.

Create a Project-Specific Task Force

A task force may be desirable and useful for large, complicated, and/or controversial

projects. Typically, a task force will be more involved in the early stages of planning 

and design. When forming a task force, many of the same principles used for forming PABs will apply. It should represent the community, and roles and responsibilities

should be clear. The task force should include both local residents and members from 

the larger community to provide a balanced representation of the community as a 

whole.
26 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Chapter 3: 

Collecting Data 

to Identify 

Pedestrian Safety 

Problems

Agencies need to know where pedestrian safety deficiencies exist, how extensive thesafety problems are, and what new projects, programs, and polices can provide 

the biggest safety benefit, including those related to engineering, education, and enforcement. As discussed in Chapter 2, stakeholders can be a good resource in identifying safety concerns and deficiencies, and data may be required to verify these problems. Other deficiencies are identified by collecting data and developing procedures

to analyze the data. This process occurs before an action plan can be formulated. 

While collecting and analyzing data are crucial, an agency should not spend excessive

resources on this task to the point where there are no resources available for implementing safety improvements. It is important to know how much data and what types

of data are needed to identify, prioritize, and implement safety projects (discussed in

Chapter 4) as well as evaluate the effectiveness of completed safety improvements

(discussed in Chapter 7).

Types of Safety Projects

Agencies should identify and prioritize the following types of projects for pedestrian

safety improvements: 

1. Spot Locations: individual intersections and non-intersections.

2.	 Corridors: may be roadway sections of 0.8 km to 8 km (0.5 mi to 5 mi) or more

in length.

3.	 Targeted Areas: may be as small as a single neighborhood or business district to a

large area where pedestrian crashes are disproportionately high.

4.	 Entire Jurisdictions: Some types of crashes are frequent but are scattered

throughout an entire jurisdiction (i.e. they are not spot location- or area-specific).

They must be addressed through system-wide changes, such as making it a policy 

to install pedestrian WALK/DON’T WALK signals at all traffic signals.

Agencies should challenge themselves to make safety improvements immediately and

not wait until all data collection efforts are completed. Very little data are needed to 

“ Crash, roadway, traffic, and 

other data are 

essential to identify pedestrian 

safety deficiencies and to select 

the appropriate 

improvements 

to make conditions safer for 

pedestrians and 

other roadway 

users. ”
Chapter 3: Collecting Data to Identify Pedestrian Safety Problems 27

make simple, low-cost improvements such as the installation of advanced stop bars 

on multilane roads, or the upgrade or installation of warning signs where high numbers of pedestrians cross busy streets. Additionally, when there is a known problem

spot location or targeted area, data should be collected immediately without waiting to 

complete larger, more comprehensive computerized databases which can take several 

years to develop. Early improvements will allow the community to understand the 

value of the pedestrian safety program and will encourage elected officials and staff to

make further improvements. 

Information Needed to Identify and Quantify Pedestrian Safety Deficiencies

Crash, roadway, traffic, and other data are essential to identify pedestrian safety deficiencies and to select the appropriate improvements to make conditions safer for

pedestrians and other roadway users. More data and higher quality data will typically 

give an agency more tools to identify and address safety problems. An agency cannot

collect everything; it will have to prioritize its data needs. In some instances, improvements in databases or more accurate or timely data will enhance the ability to identify 

pedestrian deficiencies.

Every effort should be made to create geo-coded pedestrian crash databases that allow for easy identification of problem locations and areas. This is especially important

for large agencies that may need to examine extensive areas and numerous pedestrian 

crash reports. Most crash reports do not include geo-coded location data, so agencies 

may need to rely on their expertise about their jurisdiction to properly geo-code crash 

locations. Once created, databases should be maintained and updated so they retain

usefulness over time.

Pedestrian/Vehicle Crash Data

Oakland, CA

The Pedestrian Master Plan for the City of Oakland includes a lengthy 

description of pedestrian/vehicle crash data. The Oakland plan relies 

upon data collected from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records

System (SWITRS), a database of crash records collected by the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and local police throughout California. The 

document reveals rates of pedestrian crashes and the most common 

causes of pedestrian crashes, including percentages of crashes which 

were primarily the fault of the motorist versus the pedestrian. In addition to providing a map of pedestrian crashes, the plan outlines the 

intersections with the greatest number of pedestrian crashes, senior 

pedestrian crashes, and child pedestrian crashes and specifies which of

the high pedestrian crash intersections are controlled by traffic signals. 

The plan reports groups most at risk of pedestrian injury by age and 

sex and highlights the times of day when pedestrians are most at risk 

of injury. Finally, the plan compares rates of pedestrian/vehicle crashes in Oakland 

with statewide averages.

For more information, visit: http://www.oaklandnet.com/government/pedestrian/

index.html 

The graph above 

from the Oakland 

plan displays the 

pedestrian action 

in vehicle collisions 

by age group.
28 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Agencies need to review their capability to collect data and should ensure that they

have sufficient staffing and training for this task. Data should only be collected if they

will be used. Modest improvements in data may be more effective than collecting large 

quantities of additional data that an agency does not have the ability to manage. The 

following is a list of data that can be helpful in identifying and prioritizing pedestrian 

safety deficiencies.

Crash Data

The most important data are pedestrian crash records. State 

and local agencies should collect and maintain crash data, and 

every effort should be made to include all pedestrian crashes. 

In some cases, pedestrian crash data collection efforts may be

linked with data collection on bicycle crashes, because both 

are often not included in highway safety data. Agencies must

understand the limitations of the state computerized crash 

databases; most only include crashes with motorized vehicles, 

and many non-injury pedestrian crashes or those involving 

minor injuries are unreported. There have been examples of 

agencies collaborating with hospitals to reduce non-reporting, 

but there may be some privacy issues associated with these 

efforts. Statewide crash data need to be timely and accurate so 

an agency can promptly identify and respond to a crash problem and monitor trends. Having to wait several months for statewide computerized 

data can severely hamper an agency’s ability to respond to a crash location, especially

in rapidly developing areas. Collaboration between state and local agencies assures that 

all involved parties have access to current data. 

If there is a long time lag in the availability of crash data, a local jurisdiction may need

to maintain its own interim database to allow for timely identification of problem locations. Furthermore, the police should develop procedures to notify traffic or public

works officials responsible for operating the roadway system when a serious pedestrian

crash occurs in order to immediately assess the conditions. News reporters will often 

contact the traffic department as soon as they learn of a serious pedestrian crash. The

traffic department should have the same timely information as the media.

Police Reports

Computerized pedestrian crash data are essential to efficiently identify high-crash

locations, corridors, and/or larger areas, but individual police reports are essential in

documenting precisely where, how, and why each crash occurred. The most important part of the police crash report is the officer’s narrative, and the police should

thoroughly and precisely document crash details. Care should be taken with some of 

the information included in a police report. Some investigating police officers are not

aware of the legal definition of an unmarked crosswalk, and sometimes a pedestrian

in an unmarked crosswalk will incorrectly be listed “at fault” for not using a crosswalk.

Educating officers in proper terminology and police training on pedestrian legislation

can help reduce such errors. Rather than assign fault, it is better for police crash reElements of a good crash 

database:

• 	 Inclusive of ALL pedestrian

crashes available.

• 	 Timely.

• 	 Accurate (will require a review

of police narrative).

• 	Geo-coded (with programs to

assist in identifying problem 

locations).

For more information, 

refer to the study “Pedestrian and Bicycle Data 

Collection in United 

States Communities: Quantifying Use, 

Surveying Users, and 

Documenting Facility Extent” at http://

www.pedbikeinfo.

org/pdf/casestudies/

PBIC_Data_Collection_Case_Studies.pdf.
Chapter 3: Collecting Data to Identify Pedestrian Safety Problems 29

ports to simply list actions in a neutral manner, such as “failed to yield while turning.”

This makes it easier for analysts to classify and sort the data. Another common error

in crash data is that the nearest intersection is coded when the crash really occurred at 

a midblock location. 

Some information may require follow-up investigation such as issuing citations or 

BAC/drug testing, which may not be recorded on the original police report. For serious injury or fatal crash reports there is often a supplemental police investigation that 

can provide considerably more details on the crash, including witness statements and a 

thorough investigation of roadway, motorist, and pedestrian conditions at the time of 

the crash. 

Pedestrian Crash Data

Miami Dade, FL

The Miami-Dade County MPO has created a series of maps using Geographic Information Systems 

(GIS) software in order to identify high pedestrian crash areas to be addressed with pedestrian crash 

countermeasures. The maps shown below were created by the Miami-Dade MPO in conjunction 

with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) pedestrian safety demonstration 

project, which seeks to reduce the deaths, injuries, and associated crash costs within the county’s 

urban setting. Miami-Dade County had a high number of pedestrian crashes and number of deaths 

and injuries relative to other counties in the state.

For more information, visit: http://www.miamidade.gov/mpo/docs/MPO_ped_plan_2001.pdf.
30 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

System-wide crash data is needed to efficiently identify high crash corridors or areas,

in addition to high crash locations. To identify high crash corridors or areas, three 

years of crash data is ideal, but as little as one year of crash data may be sufficient.

Agencies should also review the types of information available in their computerized

crash database so they have ready access to information such as the age of the pedestrian, physical condition of the pedestrian or motorist, behaviors of the pedestrian 

and motorist prior to the crash, direction of travel, and other details that can be used 

in identifying safety problems.

Smaller agencies can also use the 

low tech method of identifying 

high crash corridors and other 

areas by developing manual pin 

maps or spot maps.

It is important to note, especially

in relationship to crash data, that 

very little is known about pedestrian exposure. For instance, it

is difficult to compare the crash

records of two intersections 

without understanding the respective pedestrian exposures. When

exposure data is not readily available (as it rarely is), many officials

turn to surveys, behavior studies, 

and pedestrian counts to provide 

an approximation of exposure.

In some cases, patterns of pedestrian crashes are not readily 

identifiable using GIS and crash

data analysis alone. Because some 

pedestrian crashes are rarely 

repeatable, other types of data 

should also be used to identify 

where pedestrian safety improvements are needed. Specifically:

Pedestrian Counts and Behavior 

Studies

Ideally, collecting pedestrian

counts and observing crossing 

behavior can be useful in understanding the pedestrian activity 

and in considering needs for facilities. Pedestrian crash data can be 

used to identify high crash locaPedestrian behavior researchers 

have found that 

pedestrians will 

often take the most 

direct route possible if other paths 

are not considered 

more safe or convenient.

Pedestrian Walking Tours

Madison, WI

The Pedestrian Transportation Plan for Madison, Wisconsin includes a hypothetical walking tour to investigate situations pedestrians 

are likely to encounter. It focuses on questions 

such as 1) “Can I walk there?” that examines 

sidewalk access, continuity and connectivity of 

the pedestrian network, missing links, transit 

access, construction projects which close off 

sidewalk access; 

2) “Is walking 

c o n v e n i e n t ? ” 

that examines 

land-use issues, 

street patterns, 

and crossings; 

3) “Is walking 

safe?” a question examining curb ramps, 

sidewalks, and 

street crossings; 

and 4) “Is walking enjoyable?” 

examining buffers between 

motor vehicle traffic and pedestrians and 

neighborhood character. Observing situations 

that pedestrians encounter suggests criteria 

that can be used to evaluate the pedestrianfriendliness of an area and standards that 

should be strived for in making Madison a 

better place to walk.

For more information, visit 

http://www.cityofmadison.com/transp/

PedTransPlanTableOfContents.html.
Chapter 3: Collecting Data to Identify Pedestrian Safety Problems 31

tions, corridors, areas, and jurisdictions; supplemental pedestrian volume and behavioral data can be valuable at those sites to provide insights into specific crash causes

and potential countermeasures. Count and behavior studies are best employed when 

there is a decision (design or operational) to be made that the information can influence (i.e., is a traffic signal warranted?). However, low pedestrian counts should not be

used as a justification to not take any action. If there is a clear indication that pedestrians need access to a destination, but roadway conditions are so intimidating that few 

people are seen walking, then a safety improvement can open up new opportunities 

for pedestrians.

Count and behavior studies (that include observing the number, age, or behavior of

pedestrians) are typically needed to more fully assess pedestrian conditions and determine what type of improvements are needed. Because collecting this data is laborintensive, many agencies do not collect system-wide pedestrian counts or behavior 

data. If the data are collected, it is helpful to maintain the data in an easily retrievable

database. Due to budget constraints, it is acceptable to focus this data collection to

areas of higher pedestrian concern. See Appendix B for details on how to conduct

pedestrian counts and behavioral studies.

High pedestrian volumes do not necessarily result in high numbers of pedestrian 

crashes. In many downtown areas, pedestrian crashes are relatively low despite the

high pedestrian and motor vehicle traffic volumes. This results from lower motor

vehicle traffic speeds, short blocks, and a greater motorist expectation and awareness

of pedestrians. Conversely, pedestrians can often be at greater risk in areas with low 

pedestrian use due to lower motorist expectation and awareness of pedestrians. But 

high pedestrian volumes can be used to justify a higher priority for pedestrian facility 

or traffic control improvements.

Behavior Studies within Crash Site Reviews

Reviewing pedestrian crash reports is another way to identify pedestrian safety deficiencies, but some deficiencies are not readily apparent by reviewing collision or

condition diagrams or by simple field reviews or audits. Behavior studies of motorists

and pedestrians at the particular crash site are needed to determine other factors that 

may be contributing to a pedestrian safety problem.

Assessing Pedestrian Behavior

After a pedestrian crash has occurred, safety officials often ask, “What was the pedestrian doing there? Why did the pedestrian cross there? Why didn’t he or she cross

at the traffic signal or use the crosswalk?” Pedestrians will act according to human

nature, most often taking the shortest or most convenient route between two points. 

Traffic controls that regulate motor vehicle traffic often do not meet the needs of

pedestrians. “Thinking like a pedestrian” can help others to understand why a crash

occurred and how to prevent one in the future by looking at the circumstances from 

the pedestrian’s perspective.
32 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

“Thinking like a pedestrian” is a process that analyzes factors such as the pedestrian

and roadway environment and other conditions as well as the perceptions of safety to 

assess the pedestrian behavior. It also takes into account factors outside of the study

area that may modify or develop pedestrian behaviors (e.g., a lack of sidewalks caus

pedestrians to choose to walk in the roadway). It requires an evaluator to observe pedestrian movements at a site and then emulate those movements. This will give a true 

sense of what the pedestrian experiences. This process may have limitations when a 

pedestrian is intoxicated, under the influence of drugs, or is otherwise disoriented. See

Appendix C for a detailed, step-by-step guide for performing this assessment.

Assessing Motorist Behavior

The same “thinking like a pedestrian” process can be used for motor vehicle drivers. Street designs and traffic controls have been created primarily to facilitate motor

vehicle traffic flow. Motorists respond by driving with the assumption that they will

be able to drive at a reasonable speed with minimal interruptions. Major interruptions 

such as traffic signals at busy intersections are acceptable because the motorists understand the risk associated with the two conflicting traffic flows if controls were not

in place. However, a vulnerable pedestrian is often not seen as a risk and motorists are 

often not willing to slow down or stop to let a pedestrian cross, especially when the 

motor vehicle driver is frustrated or traveling at a high speed. The pedestrian is seen as 

an interruption to smooth motor vehicle traffic flow. Also, a distracted motorist may

not even see a pedestrian in time to slow down.

“Thinking like a motorist” is a process that analyzes factors such as driving environment, facilities, other conditions, and perceptions of safety to assess motorist behavior. It requires an evaluator to observe motorist behavior on site and then emulate

these movements. This gives the evaluator a true sense of what the motorist experiences. The process has limitations in that the professional may assume the motorist 

did what the roadway and traffic control devices expected of them. The process is

also limited when motorists are drunk, under the influence of drugs, fatigued, or distracted, such as talking on a cell phone without paying proper attention to the roadway 

environment. See Appendix C for further details on performing this type of assessment.

Roadway/Sidewalk Inventories

Not all pedestrian deficiencies can be identified by crash data. Since pedestrian crashes

at particular locations are relatively rare and random events in general, roadway infrastructure can be used to identify locations needing pedestrian facility improvements. 

While most pedestrians are not hit while walking along a road, the presence or absence

of a sidewalk often determines when and where a pedestrian will cross a street. It can

be difficult or expensive to create and maintain a database of roadway, sidewalk, and

traffic characteristics for an entire city, county, state, agency, or system. In working to

create such a database, an agency should begin by collecting data for arterial or major 

streets, and then phase in data collection on collector streets. Data collection for local

streets may be limited to school walking routes or walkways near major pedestrian 
Chapter 3: Collecting Data to Identify Pedestrian Safety Problems 33

destinations, such as parks, churches, community centers, senior centers, and medical 

facilities.

Inventories should include the presence (one side or both sides) and quality of sidewalks (width, surface condition, separation from traffic, accessibility, etc.). Roadway

characteristics include street classification; posted speed limits; school zones; number

of lanes; width of lanes; the presence of medians, traffic signals, or marked crosswalks; curb ramps; pedestrian regulatory, warning, and wayfinding signs; streetlights;

and bike lanes. Inventories can also include other features such as school sites, major

school crossings, walking routes, or school-specific signs and marking. Since transit

stops are associated with high pedestrian activity, an inventory of transit stops is also 

useful. Other facilities that generate high levels of foot-traffic include parks, libraries,

churches, community centers, and medical facilities. These inventories can help identify and prioritize where pedestrian improvements should be implemented.

Agencies can start building some of these inventories by reviewing up-to-date aerial

photographs, or they may already exist in other computerized databases. However, 

sidewalk information generally cannot be accurately extracted from aerial photos; this 

information needs to be collected manually or extracted from photo-logs or videologs. Sidewalk inventories can also be completed when pavement inventories are conducted. All the data should be in a GIS database that can be displayed on a computerized map or aerial photograph. 

Traffic Counts and Characteristics

These data include Average Daily Traffic (ADT), peak hour motor vehicle traffic and

the percentage of trucks in the traffic mix. Many agencies maintain motor vehicle

traffic count maps showing flows on all arterial and most collector streets, and this information is generally updated every 

three to five years. Also, some agencies post the motor vehicle

traffic volumes maps on their Web sites and are continuously

updating the ADTs when new counts are made. Speed limit

data files or maps are also maintained and updated by many

agencies. Ideally these databases should be geo-coded and

combined with roadway/sidewalk inventories; they can be

used to help prioritize pedestrian improvements or to assess 

a location, corridor, or area for safety improvements. Jurisdictions can conduct pedestrian volume counts at intersections 

at the same time as they perform vehicle turning movement 

counts. These data are relevant to pedestrian safety as most 

severe injury pedestrian crashes typically occur in areas with 

high motor vehicle traffic speeds and on wide roadways

which often have high motor vehicle traffic volumes.

Other inventories that can be compiled to assist agencies

in keeping track of where pedestrian improvements are or 

should be made include:

Pedestrian Surveys

State of Arizona

The Arizona Department of Transportation gathered information from the 

public regarding walking and bicycling 

through the use of a survey. The survey 

solicited detailed information regarding 

the existing walking conditions and issues, the Plan, and potential improvements to walking and bicycling facilities. 

A summary of the comments received as 

well as a copy of the survey instrument 

are included in the 2003 Arizona Department of Transportation Statewide Bicycle 

and Pedestrian Plan.

For more information, visit: http://

www.azbikeped.org/statewide-bicyclepedestrian-intro.html.
34 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

•	 Street light inventories—single versus double sided lighting, spacing of lights, and

the size of lights (level of illumination).

•	 Crosswalk inventories—location and type of crosswalk markings (especially helpful for maintenance activities).

•	 Inventories of school locations, crosswalk locations, and school-related signs.

•	 Inventories of pedestrian warning signs, and the last dates when the signs were

replaced (to ensure retro-reflective signs are in place).

•	 Inventories of pedestrian generators such as parks, libraries, medical facilities,

senior citizen homes, etc.

Pedestrian Surveys

Travel surveys can provide a measure of pedestrian travel, including origins and destinations, trip purpose, and travel routes. This is especially helpful where an agency does 

not have the resources to conduct pedestrian counts. Travel surveys are generally done 

on a sample of the population and are extrapolated to represent the entire community. Travel surveys are generally conducted for all modes, including pedestrian travel. 

It is important to remember that bus riders are also pedestrians when they walk to

and from transit stops on either end of their trip. Consider the language in which the 

survey is written; some areas (e.g., international areas) may have predominately nonEnglish speaking populations.

Surveys also provide helpful information on the quality of the walking environment 

and unmet pedestrian needs, fears, or other concerns. Safety-related problems can be 

identified by these surveys as well as barriers to walking.

Surveys can be conducted over the phone, in person, or via the internet. Each method 

has advantages and disadvantages, and the surveys can be very labor intensive to 

collect. The length of the survey is important: complex or long surveys may not be 

returned. Short surveys will provide limited information but are more likely to be 

completed and returned.

Census Data Use

Cambridge, MA

The City of Cambridge included 1990 Census data in its 2000 Pedestrian Plan to 

reveal the role that walking plays in the City. The data show that of the city’s 39,405 

households, 11,107 (or 28.2 percent) have no car. The plan also reports Census data 

showing that 25.4 percent of Cambridge residents walk to work and 24.5 percent 

take transit. In addition, of the 107,000 people who work in Cambridge, 13.3 percent 

walk to work, and 21.3 percent take transit.

For more information, visit: http://www.cambridgema.gov/~CDD/et/ped/plan/

ped_plan.html.
Chapter 3: Collecting Data to Identify Pedestrian Safety Problems 35

Another	form	of 	pedestrian	survey	is	a	pre-addressed	mail-back	postcard	that	can	be	

made available at community centers, libraries, on buses, etc. for pedestrians who face 

travel challenges along the sidewalk or at street crossings. They can be used to report 

the	need	for	sidewalk	repair,	curb	ramps,	more	crossing	time	at	a	traffic	signal,	etc.	

This service is ideal for getting feedback from pedestrians with disabilities. This survey 

should have check boxes for the most common problems, and should ask for the person’s	name	and	phone	number	for	follow-up	investigation.	The	public	is	the	“eyes	and	

ears”	for	a	public	agency,	and	this	type	of 	input	from	the	public	should	be	welcomed.	

Each complaint should be investigated, and the person who submitted the card should 

be	contacted	when	the	repair	is	completed.	Other	forms	of 	public	input	are	discussed	

in Chapter 2.

Other Data Sources to Use: Census and NHTS

Information	obtained	from	the	Census	can	be	included	in	a	plan	to	reveal	the	mode	

split for transport to and from work and the rate of auto ownership by census tract. 

The	National	Household	Travel	Survey	(NHTS),	a	joint	effort	by	the	Bureau	of 	

Transportation	Statistics	and	the	Federal	Highway	Administration,	includes	information	on	both	long-distance	and	local	travel	by	the	American	public.		The	joint	survey gathers trip-related data such as mode of transportation, duration, distance, and 

purpose of trip. Both sources also include demographic, geographic, and economic 

data, which can be used for analysis purposes. Census data typically are too coarse to 

identify problem areas, but can be a helpful tool for pedestrian safety advocacy. 

Audits

An	audit	is	another	tool	which	can	be	used	to	assess	the	pedestrian	needs	of 	a	community.	Audits	involve	a	review	of 	all	of 	the	data	for	a	location	or	travel	corridor	

analyzed by a multi-disciplinary team independent of the site or project being audited 

that	will	include	someone	from	the	traffic	and/or	public	works	departments,	police,	

and other agencies that serves pedestrians such as Neighborhood Services, Planning, 

Housing,	or	Development	Services.	A	multi-disciplinary	team	will	often	allow	a	fresh	

look	at	pedestrian	and	motor	vehicle	traffic	conditions	at	a	location	or	along	a	corridor.	A	more	detailed	discussion	on	needs	assessments	and	how	to	develop	countermeasures appears in Chapter 4.

Pedestrian Level of Service

Many of the data collected in the aforementioned methods can be used in a Pedestrian	Level	of 	Service	(PLOS)	model	which	can	determine	areas	where	pedestrian	levels	

of 	service	are	insufficient.	PLOS	models	can	focus	on	intersection	crossings	or	road	

segments.	A	PLOS	model	describes	in	quantitative	terms	what	the	pedestrian	experiences	qualitatively.	It	is	quite	different	from	the	LOS	measures	found	in	the	Highway 

Capacity Manual, which essentially measures delay to the motorist or pedestrian caused 

by	other	vehicles	on	the	road	or	pedestrians	on	the	sidewalk.	Rather,	newer	PLOS	

models developed and used take into account such measures as comfort and safety as 

well as ease of mobility. 
36 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

While typical PLOS analyses are strictly quantitative

(number of lanes, conflicting volume, delay), the

perceived LOS for pedestrians may involve more

qualitative concerns. These qualitative variables—

including the aesthetic quality of land use along the 

roadside or the quality of the sidewalk surface—

may be collected separately in a “Walkability Audit.”

Some qualitative factors can be measured quantitatively such as separation of sidewalk from traffic lanes, the amount of motor vehicle traffic, and

presence of pedestrian enhancements such as shade 

trees and benches. Some PLOS models go further

and include elements of the environment adjacent 

to the right-of-way, such as the presence, type, 

setback, and orientation of buildings. PLOS and

walkability audits may also consider the difficulty of

crossing the street, essentially a form of gap analysis. The greatest obstacles to safe crossings are a 

combination of high motor vehicle traffic speed and

volumes, numerous travel lanes, and wide streets. 

While these measures of comfort or perceived

safety clearly affect pedestrian walking decisions, 

they should be distinguished from the standardized 

LOS procedure to assure objective results.

A comprehensive PLOS measure captures the multifaceted complexity of pedestrian travel, from the ability 

to walk comfortably down a street, with interesting 

things to see along the way, to the ease and safety of 

crossing the street. No standardized PLOS procedure

has yet been adopted. Several states, including Florida

and Oregon, are in the process of developing PLOS

models as one tool to be used to assess pedestrian conditions. The relative weight to place on various factors 

is being debated among practitioners. This process requires substantial field investigation. The process involves listing all factors considered

important to the comfort, convenience, and safety of the pedestrian. Scores are given 

to each factor, weighted as to their relative importance. Typical factors (both quantitative and qualitative) include but are not limited to:

PLOS variables for intersections include:

•	 Presence or absence of marked crosswalks.

•	 Width and quality of the crosswalks.

•	 Volume and speed of conflicting motor vehicle traffic.

•	 Width of street/number of travel lanes.

•	 Traffic control at crossings.

•	 Signal timing and displays.

The sidewalk in the top photo has a LOS 

“A” while the photo below has a LOS “F” 

according to the Highway Capacity Manual

model that is based primarily on delay. 

Clearly, for pedestrians, mobility is not the 

only thing that determines the quality of the 

walking experience. This example illustrates 

the need for new PLOS models to take into 

account other factors such as safety and 

comfort. These factors can be measured 

both quantitatively and qualitatively in various types of PLOS models. 
Chapter 3: Collecting Data to Identify Pedestrian Safety Problems 37

•	 Curb radii.

•	 Existence of median islands or safety islands at crossings.

PLOS variables for road segments include:

•	 Presence or absence of sidewalks.

•	 Width and quality of the sidewalks.

•	 Separation of the sidewalk from moving motor vehicle traffic.

•	 Presence of amenities such as benches and shade trees.

•	 Volume and speed of adjacent motor vehicle traffic.

•	 Width of adjacent street/number of travel lanes.

•	 Accessibility of adjacent land uses.

Level of Service Model for Signalized Intersections for Pedestrians

State of Florida

The Florida Department of Transportation uses a level of service (LOS) model to represent pedestrians’ 

perceptions of crossings at signalized intersections. The model is more quantitative than others, considering geometric characteristics of intersections and adjacent streets. The model incorporates perceived 

safety/comfort (i.e., perceived exposure and conflicts) and operations (i.e., delay and signalization) to provide a measure of the pedestrian’s perspective on how well an intersection’s geometric and operational 

characteristics meet his or her needs. The general model for the Pedestrian LOS at intersections is highly 

reliable, has a high correlation with the average observations (see chart below), and is transferable to the 

vast majority of metropolitan areas in the United States. Studies of the model reveal that primary factors in the PLOS model for intersections include right-turn-on-red volumes for the street being crossed, 

permissive left turns from the street parallel to the crosswalk, motor vehicle volume on the street being 

crossed, midblock 85 percentile speed of the vehicles on the street being crossed, the number of lanes 

being crossed, the pedestrian’s delay, and the presence or absence of right-turn channelization islands 

(Petritsch, 2005; FDOT, 2002).

For more information, see:

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/

safety/ped_bike/ped_bike_

standards.htm.
38 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Chapter 4: 

Analyzing 

Information 

and Prioritizing 

Concerns 

I

mproving pedestrian safety in a community or region is typically the result of implementing different safety treatments and changing agency design policies. Crash countermeasures, or treatments intended to address pedestrian safety concerns, can take 

several different forms: operational and construction projects intended to fix specific

problems; changes in design guidelines to help improve streets and intersections in 

future projects; and education and enforcement programs aimed at achieving changes 

in motorist and pedestrian behavior or attitude. 

Projects involving pedestrian crash countermeasures can be further subdivided into: 

1. Countermeasures for spot locations.

2. Countermeasures for corridors.

3.	 Countermeasures for targeted areas (including neighborhoods).

4. Countermeasures for general problems common to an entire jurisdiction.

This chapter presents methods to categorize concerns, identify locations, and address 

the issues of pedestrian safety through prioritizing improvements and utilizing other 

implementation strategies. A detailed discussion of actual countermeasures is provided

in Chapter 5. 

Categorizing Concerns for Pedestrian Safety

A systematic procedure is needed to identify what (and where) countermeasures

should be implemented to provide for a safer walking environment. There will always 

be more improvements to be made than can be accommodated. Thus, a prioritization 

“ There will 

always be more 

improvements 

to be made than 

can be accommodated. Thus, 

a prioritization 

system needs to 

be developed to 

rank the various 

competing 

projects. ”
Chapter 4: Analyzing Information and Prioritizing Concerns 39

system needs to be developed to rank the various competing projects. Typically, the 

severity of pedestrian crashes is so disproportionately high compared to other motor 

vehicle crashes that the elimination of a few pedestrian crashes will result in a high 

safety dividend and high benefit/cost ratios.

Unlike vehicle crashes, crash rates for pedestrians are typically not used, since pedestrian volumes are usually not known. The crash to volume relationship for pedestrians 

is different than for vehicles. A single pedestrian crash at a low volume location will result in a high rate, while several crashes at a major downtown crossing may correspond 

to a low rate. Additionally, it is uncommon for agencies to invest extensive manpower

to collect the system-wide pedestrian counts that are needed to develop rates; pedestrian crash rates would also need to account for motor vehicle volumes.

Instead, high pedestrian crash locations, corridors, and targeted areas should be

initially identified by comparing the total number of pedestrian crashes. System-wide

concerns for a jurisdiction can be inferred from the sum of all data. 

Another method of identifying and prioritizing high crash locations is by using

weighted pedestrian crash data, giving more weight to severe or fatal pedestrian 

crashes. When identifying and prioritizing high crash locations, three to five years of

computerized crash data should be used. For prioritizing corridors or other targeted

areas, one to three years of pedestrian data are acceptable. 

The first step in determining the right countermeasure is to look at the problem and

determine whether the problem is a spot problem, a problem evident in a targeted 

area or along a corridor, or a broader and more general problem that affects an entire 

jurisdiction.

1.	 A spot location problem is unique to one location.

2.	 A corridor problem may be evident at several sequential intersections or along

the roadside of a corridor; to successfully reduce crashes, countermeasures need 

to be applied throughout the corridor, not just at a single location; fixing one

location may leave other similar areas untreated.

3.	 A targeted area problem may repeat itself in a neighborhood or other area where

conditions are similar throughout. Similar to the corridor problem, the nature of 

the roadway is such that fixing a spot area may leave other potential areas untreated; the solutions are very likely to be the same all around the neighborhood. 

A neighborhood or targeted area problem may be common throughout a local

area due to unique circumstances such as a large university, commercial or business district, or other neighborhood characteristic.

4.	 An entire jurisdiction problem is common to an entire city, county, or state and

is usually caused by an undesirable practice such as failing to routinely install 

sidewalks or paved shoulders for pedestrians or failing to provide streetlights.

Once it has been determined that a problem is one of these types, the next step is to

determine whether the appropriate solution is an operational/construction, general

design, or an education/enforcement countermeasure.
40 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Identifying High Crash Locations, Corridors, Targeted Areas, and 

Jurisdictions

Pedestrian safety problem locations, areas, and jurisdictions are most readily identified

using computerized crash information.

Spot Locations

For spot locations, countermeasures are

most likely going to be operational/construction changes, but they could occasionally be 

changes to education/enforcement programs.

Operational/construction countermeasures

include anything from a change in crosswalk 

striping or signal timing to construction 

projects such as curb extensions, realignment of an intersection approach, or building a pedestrian crossing island. Education/

enforcement solutions include spot enforcement of drivers-yield-to-pedestrian laws or 

education materials aimed at well-defined user

group. Three to five years of pedestrian crash

data are typically beneficial in identifying and

prioritizing high crash locations.

Corridors

For problems that occur along corridors, an

assessment of the entire corridor is necessary. For analysis purposes, study areas can be

subdivided into roadway segments of 0.8 km

to 8 km (0.5 mi to 5 mi) in length. Crashes at

first may seem to occur in undefined, almost

random locations. A more thorough analysis

may reveal patterns such as crashes occurring 

primarily at transit stops or at night. What

seemed like an insurmountable problem can 

be tackled systematically and comprehensively 

by focusing one or two countermeasures 

throughout the corridor. For example, in the

case of a predominance of nighttime crashes, 

improving illumination throughout the corridor may solve many problems. In the case of transit-related crashes, working with

the local transit provider to assess all bus stops may lead to simple solutions such as 

relocating, adding, or eliminating some stops, and implementing countermeasures to 

assist pedestrians in crossing the street at a limited number of critical locations. Two 

to three years of pedestrian crash data are typically sufficient for corridors.

Above is an example of a spot location where closing 

a driveway close to the intersection and constructing 

a sidewalk reduced the potential for pedestrian-motor 

vehicle conflicts.

In this corridor, pedestrian level lights and planter 

boxes have been added to buffer pedestrians from 

vehicle traffic and provide safer and more secure 

nighttime conditions.
Chapter 4: Analyzing Information and Prioritizing Concerns 41

Targeted Areas

When identifying high crash targeted areas within the agency, geographic information

system (GIS) data are important. Small communities or jurisdictions may be able to

manually map pedestrian crashes, but this task is difficult and time-consuming for larger cities with several hundred annual pedestrian crashes. It is important that statewide

computerized crash data systems allow for 

geographically mapping crashes for analyses 

purposes. One to three years of pedestrian

crash data are reasonable to identify area-wide 

problems. 

For targeted area problems occurring throughout a neighborhood, a similar approach to 

that outlined in corridor problems should be 

taken. Are there patterns, similarities, or a predominance of one crash type? Neighborhood

problems may be more amenable to education/enforcement solutions, as the traffic that

goes though a given neighborhood tends to 

be made up of the same travelers nearly every 

day. Engineering improvements can include 

area-wide traffic calming or the installation

of sidewalks or streetlights. In some cases,

changes in local, regional, or state policy may 

be necessary to allow or promote these improvements. 

Jurisdiction-wide Problems 

For a problem that is common throughout an

entire jurisdiction, agencies should ensure that 

their policies, plans, and engineering design 

guidelines adequately embrace the appropriate 

countermeasures. Problems in spot locations, 

targeted areas, corridors, and jurisdictions can 

often reveal a fundamental design flaw in the roadway; solutions then include changes

in design guidelines. Chapter 5 provides a list of design solutions and countermeasures 

that should be incorporated into the agency’s design manuals, practices, and procedures so all future road projects are designed with these safety features at the onset.

High Pedestrian Crash Potential

A lack of pedestrian crashes does not mean that conditions are safe or ideal for pedestrians. Pedestrians may avoid certain areas because they perceive danger. Consequently, 

low pedestrian crash frequencies are not necessarily indicative of a safe facility, but 

may be a consequence of low or zero pedestrian activity. A pedestrian safety analysis

should therefore go beyond just looking at pedestrian crashes. 

Traffic calming techniques, such as chicanes, were 

used in this targeted area to slow vehicle speeds on 

neighborhood streets.

An example of a jurisdictional change is a city-wide 

policy for the installation of ADA-compliant curb 

ramps.
42 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Methods to identify pedestrian deficiencies at low-crash or no-crash locations involve

an analysis of the roadway, traffic, and other agency databases. By looking at the deficiencies that occur at high crash locations, an agency should be able to identify other 

locations with similar deficiencies. Safety improvements that are successful at one

location should be implemented at all similar locations. This requires an inventory of 

spot locations, corridors, or areas to allow an agency to identify those places that have 

similar characteristics as the high pedestrian crash sites. Field reviews and public input

through surveys or workshops can 

help identify these locations. 

Analyzing High Crash Locations, 

Corridors, or Areas

Field Reviews

Once high crash locations, corridors, or areas have been identified,

individual crash reports, complete 

with the police narratives and other 

detailed information, should be 

used when conducting field reviews.

The detailed crash information and 

field reviews can be used to identify

how each pedestrian crash occurred, and what may be done to prevent future similar crashes. The outcome is a list of improvements that can be implemented to address those crashes and enhance safety. For crashes involving severe and fatal injuries,

police investigations are available for in-depth and detailed reviews of how the crash 

occurred and may provide information on what may have prevented it. These typically include witness statements as well as more detailed investigations of motorist and 

In this image, a 

team performs a 

roadway safety 

audit on a local 

roadway.

Identifying Pedestrian Safety Concerns

State of California

Some states,such as California, may have outputreports(SWITRS,TASAS)that can be

provided to assist jurisdictions in indentifying their injury and fatality statistics beyond just numbers (e.g., crashes and victim data by hour of day, day of week, month, 

year, motorist data, vehicle data, victim gender, race, and age, extent of injury). In 

California, this information can be provided by the California Highway Patrol (CHP) 

or Caltrans. This information is easily obtained and analyzed to help further develop 

crash countermeasures. Analyzing the data can be performed with simple EXCEL 

spreadsheets or advanced packaged software, such as Crossroads or Intersection 

Magic, depending on the agency resources. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is working to develop an online toolkit to help Bay Area jurisdictions 

of all sizes to perform collision analyses using available data and to offer a variety 

of countermeasures for consideration. The toolkit is available online at: http://www.

mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/index.htm.
Chapter 4: Analyzing Information and Prioritizing Concerns 43

pedestrian behavior and site conditions at the time of the crash. See Chapter 3 for a 

more detailed discussion of crash site reviews.

Roadway Safety Audits and Reviews

Roadway	Safety	Audit	Reviews	(RSARs)	involve	the	use	of 	a	multi-disciplinary	team	

approach to review and evaluate a location, corridor, or area after it is built or before it 

is	open	to	the	public.	Audit	review	team	participants	should	include	a	variety	of 	transportation	professionals	such	as	a	traffic	engineering	expert,	a	human	factors	expert,	

a police representative, or a Planning-Neighborhood Services specialist. This team is 

provided all of the crash history and other data for the crash location or study area 

such	as	pedestrian	and	motor	vehicle	traffic	counts.	In	order	to	have	the	best	chance	

of observing the pedestrian safety problems, the team should visit the site when 

conditions	best	simulate	the	problems.	For	instance,	if 	crashes	are	happening	at	night,	

the team should visit the site at night. The multi-disciplinary team members visit the 

location or corridor together with each member making their own observations of vehicle,	traffic	and	environmental	conditions.	The	observations	and	suggested	solutions	

are summarized in a report once the team has a chance to compare notes. Pedestrian 

safety improvements implemented at one location can be implemented at other similar 

locations,	even	where	no	pedestrian	crashes	have	occurred.	Roadway	Safety	Audits	

(RSAs)	are	similar	to	RSARs	except	they	are	conducted	before	the	system	is	built.

Pedestrian crashes may continue to occur at locations or along corridors or targeted 

areas where safety improvements have been implemented. This phenomenon may 

occur because more pedestrians are willing to cross at locations with one or more 

engineering enhancements, thereby increasing exposure. This may also be an indication	that	engineering	solutions	alone	will	not	result	in	totally	safe	conditions.	A	proper	

before-and-after evaluation of any treatment is essential to determine how effective it 

has been. 

The occurrence of a seemingly illogical pedestrian crash after the implementation of a 

safety	measure	has	sometimes	been	attributed	to	a	pedestrian’s	lack	of 	understanding	

of 	the	roadway	environment.	It	can	equally	be	attributable	to	the	motorist’s	lack	of 	

understanding	of 	the	roadway	environment.	In	many	cases,	therefore,	education	and	

enforcement	programs	may	be	necessary	to	achieve	a	true	safety	benefit.	There	are	

few engineering projects that can prevent motorists or pedestrians from choosing to 

travel intoxicated or that can stop motorists from willfully breaking the law. Education 

and enforcement programs addressing pedestrian safety problems should also be carefully	implemented	and	evaluated	(see	Chapter	5	for	more	details).	

Roadway Safety Audits

FHWA’s Pedestrian Road Safety Audit Guidelines and Prompt Lists can be used to

assess the safety of pedestrian facilities. 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. For more

information, visit http://www.walkinginfo.org/library/details.cfm?id=3955.
44 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Crash Typing

A crash type describes the pre-crash actions of the parties involved. When crashes 

in a database are “crash typed,” a pattern often emerges that helps safety officials 

identify what the problem is and what countermeasures are generally related to 

each crash type. The following six crash types are some of the most common pedestrian crash experiences:

1. Dart/Dash

The pedestrian walked or ran into the roadway 

at an intersection or midblock location and was 

struck by a vehicle. The motorist’s view of the pedestrian may have been blocked until an instant 

before the impact.

2. Multiple Threat/Trapped

The pedestrian entered the roadway in front of 

stopped or slowed traffic and was struck by a 

multiple-threat vehicle in an adjacent lane after 

becoming trapped in the middle of the roadway.

3. Through Vehicle at Unsignalized Location

The pedestrian was struck at an unsignalized intersection or midblock location. Either the motorist or the pedestrian may have failed to yield.

4. Turning Vehicle

The pedestrian was attempting to cross at an intersection, driveway, or alley and was struck by a 

vehicle that was turning right or left.

5. Through Vehicle at Signalized Location

The pedestrian was struck at a signalized intersection or midblock location by a vehicle that 

was traveling straight ahead.

6. Walking Along Roadway

The pedestrian was walking or running along the 

roadway and was struck from the front or from 

behind by a vehicle.

Other crash types include Working/Playing in roadway, Backing Vehicle, Bus-related, Crossing an Expressway, and Unique Midblock. For more details on the crash 

types and related countermeasures, see Chapter 3 of the “PEDSAFE: Pedestrian 

Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System” or find the “Crash Analysis”

section in the on-line version at http://www.walkinginfo.org/pedsafe.
Chapter 4: Analyzing Information and Prioritizing Concerns 45

Selecting the Appropriate Solutions

Once	crash	locations	have	been	identified	based	on	data	analysis,	crash	patterns	

should	be	determined	by	narrowing	in	on	specific	crash	types	occurring	at	individual	

locations.	If 	a	pattern	is	observed,	then	it	will	be	easier	to	select	the	solution	that	best	

applies	to	the	crash	type	experienced.	The	Pedestrian	and	Bicycle	Crash	Analysis	Tool	

(PBCAT)	is	a	tool	designed	to	assist	transportation	professionals	in	determining	crash	

types	based	on	data	collected	(see	below).	PEDSAFE: Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System	(Harkey,	2004)	is	another	resource	for	comparing	crash	types	

to	appropriate	countermeasures.	It	describes	crash	types	and	provides	pedestrian	crash	

statistics and includes descriptions of 49 different countermeasures or treatments that 

may	be	implemented	to	improve	pedestrian	safety	and	mobility.	Also	included	are	71	

case studies that illustrate the concepts applied in practice in a number of U.S. communities.	Details	about	PEDSAFE	are	contained	in	Appendix	F.

Determining the Extent of Implementation

Once	pedestrian	safety	solutions	have	been	selected,	the	final	decision	is	usually	based	

on a combination of factors: is the project to be implemented in phases or all at once; 

is	the	project	to	be	permanent	or	temporary;	what	are	the	cost	constraints?	

To view PEDSAFE 

online, go to http://

www.walkinginfo.org/

pedsafe. To obtain a 

hard copy of PEDSAFE, please view the 

following link: http://

safety.fhwa.dot.gov/

ped_bike/ped_bike_

order.htm

FHWA’s PBCAT Crash Typing Tool

The development of effective countermeasures 

to help prevent pedestrian crashes is often enhanced through the use of detailed computerized state crash files. Analysis of these data can

provide information on where pedestrian crashes occur (city, street, intersection, two-lane road, 

etc.), when they occur (time of day, day of week, 

etc.), and characteristics of the people involved 

(age, gender, injury severity, etc.). 

FHWA’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash Analysis 

Tool (PBCAT) is a crash-typing software product 

intended to assist state and local transportation 

professionals in improving pedestrian safety 

through the development and analysis of a database containing details associated with crashes 

between motor vehicles and pedestrians or bicyclists. One of these details is the crash type, which describes the pre-crash actions of the parties involved. With the database developed, the software can then 

be used to produce reports and select countermeasures to address the problems 

identified. For further details about crash typing, see page 44.

For more information, visit: http://www.walkinginfo.org/pc/pbcat.htm.

The NCDOT Division of Bicycle and 

Pedestrian Transportation employs 

PBCAT on its Web 

site.
46 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Phasing projects

Phasing projects is most applicable to corridor or neighborhood/targeted problem areas. A desirable countermeasure may be very costly or politically challenging to implement all at once. Phasing allows certain elements to be implemented right away, as 

others wait further funding. There are several ways projects can be phased: geographically, by urgency, by opportunity, or by type of treatment.

Geographically—starting at one end of a corridor and completing it in units. For

example, an 8 km (5 mi) corridor where a sidewalk is planned can be built in five 1.6

km (1 mi) sections over five years. This is a practical method, but may not address the

most urgent needs first. Conversely, safety projects may be disbursed equally in different regions of a state or city so that all areas can share an improved safety for pedestrians and no areas feel slighted.

By urgency—treating the areas with the highest crash numbers or highest pedestrian

activity first. This may seem logical and politically acceptable, but in reality there may

be constraints that make the most needed areas the hardest to address. Reasons may 

include lack of right-of-way or topographical constraints.

By opportunity—if a certain type of treatment is needed up and down a corridor and

it can be piggy-backed onto other planned projects in that corridor (such as maintenance or resurfacing projects), then it makes sense to implement these countermeasures along with the planned work.

By type of treatment—scheduling countermeasures by type of work. For example illumination may come first, as an agreement with the utility company makes it easy to do

so right away. A more controversial countermeasure such as a traffic circle may have

to wait until the political or design issues have been settled. Assuming both treatments

will independently contribute to pedestrian safety, proceeding with one treatment 

while waiting for the other is acceptable.

Duration of Improvement

Projects can be further subdivided into temporary and permanent categories.

In most cases, a permanent solution should be sought. It will cost the most, but will

last for the duration of the roadway. A good estimate for the life of a permanent

treatment such as a sidewalk is 20 years or more, but in reality they typically last much

longer. In some cases, a temporary solution is more appropriate. This is the obvio

choice where it is known a road is to be rebuilt soon, but the pedestrian safety needs 

must be addressed right away. There are other reasons to consider a temporary installation: if the solution is new and untested in the community or if the design cannot 

be finalized based on local conditions. A temporary installation can be used to gauge

public acceptance and can be modified when user observations demonstrate corrections that may be helpful.
Chapter 4: Analyzing Information and Prioritizing Concerns 47

There are a variety of materials and designs that can be used for temporary solutions:

•	 Paint is the cheapest and can give an immediate impression of how the permanent solution will look and affect traffic operations; if simple lines are not

enough to redirect traffic, hashing out areas with zebra stripes is often more

effective at keeping cars out of certain areas; paint is very short term and should 

not be left in place for more than a few months, as it will wear out; nor should 

the experiment be considered a failure if motorists cross over the painted area, as 

there is really no physical barrier preventing them from doing so.

•	 Plastic posts or barrels provide more positive guidance and may last longer than

paint.

•	 Plastic curbs offer a greater opportunity to create a picture of the proposed permanent solution, such as curb extensions or raised median islands.

•	 Concrete curbs can also be laid on the pavement; these are usually referred to as

“wheel stops,” such as those found in parking lots. They are almost never used

in the travel portion of the roadway but can be used as a substitute for a curb 

to protect a walkway. Wheel stops should be firmly anchored and supplemented

with other measures. One potential disadvantage of wheel stops is that they may

cause pedestrians to trip.

Temporary solutions should then be evaluated for their effectiveness. The techniques 

range from a full traffic study to observation and receiving public input. To warrant the time and expense of a traffic study, the temporary installation should closely

resemble the final solution and therefore be made to look substantial—evaluating the

effect of paint will not predict how a raised curb would perform.

Temporary Project Solutions

Bend, OR

The intersection in these photos was reconfigured in stages: first a curb was installed to redirect traffic at a right angle and the striping had to 

be redone to reflect the new geometry. Motorists and pedestrians were aware of the modified

geometry and engineers were able to monitor its 

effect on traffic operations. In the second stage, 

the curbed area was filled with landscaping, offering a more permanent solution. This two-step 

process enabled the city to implement a change 

immediately and at a low cost. The more permanent landscaped solution had to be contracted 

out, a more time-consuming process. Temporary 

projects and strategically-phased solutions allow 

for fast implementation, leaving the agency time 

to consider more permanent alternatives.
48 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Conversely, a temporary installation has its pitfalls, since plastic cones, posts, curbs, 

or orange barrels are usually not aesthetically pleasing, and may generate negative 

reactions just because it “looks cheap” or “ugly.” This can be mitigated by showing

adjacent property owners an artist rendering of the completed project or photos of a 

similar treatment implemented elsewhere. 

A temporary installation helps to identify unintended negative consequences. If the

traffic study or public input indicates a problem, steps can be taken to redesign the

countermeasure to avoid these consequences.

However, temporary installations may generate one major unintended consequence: 

total removal of the countermeasure because of negative public reactions. Complaints 

from a small but vocal minority may cause elected officials to bow to this pressure.

The complaints often stem from the fact that some people simply do not like change, 

or the countermeasure affects their trip, requires them to drive more prudently, or 

creates a slightly longer distance. Opposition may also be generated from a lack of

prior knowledge about the change or test. Garnering public support and buy-in from 

a citizen committee or stakeholders and effectively working and communicating with 

the community prior to implementing countermeasures will go a long way in blunting 

opposition before it is generated (see Chapter 2).

Bowing to pressure, removing the temporary installation, and then not installing the 

permanent countermeasure can have dire consequences for the intended beneficiaries:

pedestrians. Many countermeasures such as curb extensions can be built right the first

time with a great degree of confidence they will work as intended. Some users may

complain, but rarely will an agency remove a permanent and fairly expensive feature if 

it is working as intended.

Safety evaluation results of temporary solutions should be shared with the public 

(area residents and/or business people, elected officials etc.). It should be made clear

that the results may not be the same as the permanent solution, for the reasons cited 

above. 

Prioritizing Pedestrian Improvements

Initial Factors to Consider

After all the steps outlined to this point have been implemented (stakeholder involvement, data collection and analyses, review of problem areas), the list of needed improvements may appear overwhelming at first. Pedestrian safety countermeasures can

be prioritized taking into account the following factors:

Availability of Right-of-Way (ROW)

Most pedestrian safety countermeasures will not require additional ROW, as they usually involve road narrowing, striping, illumination, etc. Occasionally, additional ROW

(or at least an easement) will be required, to create a sidewalk buffer for example.

ROW negotiations can be lengthy, and it is best to start the process as soon as it is
Chapter 4: Analyzing Information and Prioritizing Concerns 49

determined the improvement is needed 

so the project is not unduly held up. A

conceptual design should be enough to 

determine how much ROW will be needed, to help speed things along. Easements 

can often be obtained much quicker and 

at a much lower cost.

Federal and/or State Mandates

Certain countermeasures can be piggybacked to projects scheduled to fulfill

Federal or state requirements. ADA and

curb ramp requirements are one example: 

if a safety countermeasure requires 

changing a corner radius, and the corner is slated for an ADA upgrade (ramp

installation), the two projects can be

combined for efficiency. Some Federal or

state requirements are safety-related, such 

as upgrading deficient bridge guardrails;

these projects should also include pedestrian safety measures.

Public Support

The data collection methods outlined 

in Chapter 3 will often make the most 

problematic areas rise to the surface. 

Yet there are some crashes that strike an

emotional chord in the public, like when 

a child is hit while walking to school. This 

will create tremendous public support 

for a countermeasure that addresses this 

issue. The responsible agency should 

pursue a solution to this problem while 

not losing sight of the goal of making 

improvements where most crashes occur. 

Similarly, the solution should be one that 

improves pedestrian safety and is not a 

response that may make conditions less 

safe for motorists and pedestrians. However, responding positively to an emotionally-charged situation is an opportunity for the agency to pursue funding for 

other needed pedestrian crash countermeasures as well as gain acceptance of a 

fairly progressive countermeasure.

Prioritization of Crosswalk 

Improvements 

Seattle, WA

Over 600 crosswalk locations were surveyed and divided into “compliant,” “possibly compliant,” and “noncompliant” using recommendations from a FHWA 

safety study (Zegeer et al., 2005). The possibly compliant and non-compliant locations were then mapped 

as shown below. It was immediately clear that most of 

the locations were along 12 corridors. This, combined 

with crash data, provided a list of prioritized corridors 

for making improvements. The crosswalk inventory allowed analysts to identify crosswalks with safety concerns and determine feasible safety measures for the 

prioritized list (Hefferan, 2004). 

Legend: yellow dots indicate possibly 

compliant locations and red dots indicate 

non-compliant ones.
50 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Project Prioritization System

Phoenix, AZ and Denver, CO

Phoenix, AZ has a sidewalk retrofit and street modernization program to build missing pieces ofsidewalks

and other street infrastructure improvements in developed neighborhoods. Projects are ranked based on 

various factors including the street classification (collector streets are given a higher priority than a local

street) and the proximity to a pedestrian generator (school, church, park, or medical facility). Projects are 

assigned points in several such categories and are ranked in each of the eight Council Districts so that all 

parts of the City receive some safety and infrastructure improvements rather than all of the funding being 

directed to one area.

The Denver, CO pedestrian plan prioritized potential improvements using several different criteria. This 

criteria included a proximity analysis—an analysis of the presence of sidewalks and the proximity of facilities that are likely to generate pedestrian activity, including light rail transit stations, schools, parks and 

parkways, libraries, and neighborhood destinations. In addition, socio-economic data, existing sidewalk 

conditions, auto-pedestrian crash history, and pedestrian route proximity were used in the prioritization 

of projects. A project scored zero, one, or two points in each criteria or category; the maximum points a 

project could score was ten while zero was the lowest a project could score. This system of scoring projects based upon points they earn for each criteria allowed the Advisory Team to objectively determine the 

level of importance for each project and therefore the priority for project implementation and completion. 

See the image below for a geographical representation of the pedestrian potential model developed.

For more information, visit: http://phoenix.gov/streets/index.html or http://www.denvergov.org/transportation_planning/.
Chapter 4: Analyzing Information and Prioritizing Concerns 51

Travel Demand

Though pedestrian crashes do not always correlate to pedestrian use (pedestrians often

get hit in areas where fewer people walk), countermeasures in an area where there are

many pedestrians will be easier to justify.

Cost of Improvements

This is always an important factor in all decision-making: should an agency try to 

spread available funding to many low-cost countermeasures, or target funds for a few 

high-profile projects? Some of the most expensive countermeasures are not necessarily the most effective. The best examples are pedestrian bridges and underpasses: 

they can cost millions of dollars but get little use because of inconvenience or security 

concerns. Several new pedestrian signals can be installed for the cost of one tunnel or 

bridge. Conversely, inexpensive measures, such as improved striping, can be quickly 

implemented over an entire corridor or neighborhood for comparatively little cost.

Funding

Some funding sources can only be used for limited applications. Many common funds 

can be used only for construction, only for education, or only for enforcement. This 

is not necessarily a limitation, as a typical safety program will involve all three components. If a funding source becomes available, but has limitations, this should not be

an impediment to implementation—every funding opportunity should be seized as it

becomes available (see Chapter 6 for more about funding).

Safety Benefits

Decision-makers want to ensure the maximum cost-effectiveness, so the most effective countermeasures that offer the greatest safety benefits should be considered first.

Some pedestrian safety countermeasure will have benefits for other road users, and

some may have negative consequences for others. These issues need to be weighed 

against all other considerations. This highlights the need to develop a ranking system 

to prioritize projects.

Developing a Ranking System to Prioritize 

Projects

Transportation agencies often develop a ranking system for making improvements 

such as surface preservation, modernization, or safety. Pedestrian safety countermeasures are no different. The idea is to assign scoring to the various criteria, weighting 

each one according to the values of the community, available funding, political climate 

etc. Other scoring factors can be added, and each one needs to be weighted so it represents an agreed-upon value.
52 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Pedestrian Needs Index

The primary input to a Pedestrian Needs Index (also called a Pedestrian Potential

Index or Deficiencies Index) is pedestrian crash data. In addition to crash data, inventories of missing sidewalks, lighting, and other pedestrian facilities can be used to 

identify where upgrades are needed. Lists can be prioritized using pedestrian count 

data or proximity to schools or other pedestrian generators. Projects should be reassessed and reprioritized 

annually, and funding should be assigned so that all 

regions within a state or an agency receive some level of 

pedestrian facility enhancements and all of the improvements are not concentrated in one area. Each agency 

should create its own Pedestrian Deficiency Index based

on the resources available, and develop a point system 

to compare and assess various projects. Pedestrian crash 

history can be an input to this ranking system. 

Any ranking system can be subject to personal bias if

multiple observers or analysts contribute. A standardized form or checklist can enhance objectivity of the 

results. GIS methods can be used to automate the

ranking process for large areas from a database. A scoring system where the total possible points add up to 

100 makes it easier for the public to appreciate how a

proposal fares; it also makes it easier to tweak individually weighted category scoring. Sample categories, with 

sample weightings, could be similar to the ones in the 

table at left.

The first attempt at a scoring and weighting system is

rarely perfect. A Pedestrian Advisory Board (PAB) as

described in Chapter 2 can help develop the ranking system. It should then be field-tested on real-world problem areas so that the results appear rational and those 

projects that are obviously needed score highly. A potential downside is that a problem

the public has identified as a major crisis may score low if it fails in several important

categories. A scoring system created and backed by a PAB that represents the public’s

interests can help deflect criticism. It can also help ensure that projects that solve a

real but ignored problem get the attention they deserve. However, if a scoring system 

is created and the high-scoring projects are not implemented, it may create a liability 

problem for the agency.

Legislative/Public Oversight

As stated in Chapter 2 on stakeholders, prioritizing pedestrian safety projects transparently and based on good data and public input can help an agency make decisions that 

lead to the best projects being selected within their given funding limitations. It also

Category Possible 

Points

Severity of problem (how

many crashes have occurred or 

are likely to occur)

15

Effectiveness of solution 15

Probable use (travel demand) 15

Likelihood of funding 10

Feasibility (constructability:

piggy-backing, available ROW,

etc.)

15

Public support 15

Cost 15

Bonus: achieves other goals 

(motorist/bicyclist safety,

aesthetics)

possible 10

points

Total 100

Above is an example of a ranking system used to establish pedestrian project 

priorities. 
Chapter 4: Analyzing Information and Prioritizing Concerns 53

Chapter 2 describes 

how to proceed with this 

information in a manner 

that ensures maximum 

effectiveness. Jurisdictions 

that have been given 

the responsibility of 

oversight to a Pedestrian 

Advisory Board (PAB) 

should trust the PAB 

to carry out its mission 

with minimal interference.

enables the agency to pursue its charter with assurance that it is accomplishing the 

goals it was set out to achieve: reduce pedestrian crash risks.

Legislative/public oversight helps establish goals, secure funding, etc. But much of

what is known by professionals in the field of pedestrian safety may not be fully understood by the general public. The agency should operate in a climate of open communication and explain to the public, elected officials, and the media what it is doing

as well as how and why. This will help ensure that the agency is allowed to pursue its 

mission and implement the best solutions to the most urgent problems without constant questioning or review. An effective solution that is installed quickly can demonstrate the agency’s overall effectiveness in dealing with pedestrian safety problems and

will facilitate future successes.
54 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Chapter 5:

Selecting 

Safety 

Solutions

J

urisdictions should ensure that all of their policies, plans, and engineering design 

guidelines include considerations for pedestrian safety. The design solutions mentioned in the first part of this chapter should not be viewed only as fixes to spot

problems; they should be incorporated into the agency’s design manuals, practices, and

procedures so all future road projects are designed with appropriate access and safety 

features.

This chapter explores the most commonly used and effective pedestrian crash countermeasures. Each is briefly described with available information concerning its effectiveness. A few other design considerations are also explained. Appendix H complements this chapter, providing a checklist o  things to consider when implementin

crash countermeasures. The chapter is organized into the following topics:

•	 Design Specifications and Guidelines.

•	 Engineering Solutions.

•	 Enforcement and Education Solutions.

•	 Policy and Planning Solutions.

•	 Countermeasures to be Used with Caution.

•	 Consequences of Countermeasures for Other Road Users.

Design Specifications and Guidelines

There are numerous policy, planning, and design guidelines that transportation planners and engineers can use; however, only a few address pedestrian designs thoroughly. 

AASHTO has recently published the Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of 

Pedestrian Facilities. An example of a state pedestrian design guide is Washington DOT’s

Pedestrian Facilities Guidebook; one city/regional example is the Planning and Designing for 

Pedestrians: Model Guidelines for the San Diego Region. Additionally, FHWA has an excellent publication: PEDSAFE: Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System 

(FHWA-SA-04-003). The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) should be

used for selecting appropriate traffic controls: signs, traffic signals, marked crosswalks,

“ Measures to 

improve pedestrian safety should 

not be limited to 

engineering treatments; education 

and enforcement are also 

important for 

pedestrians. ”
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 55

and	other	pavement	markings.	See	Appendix	F	for	more	information on these and other available references.

Many of the above-mentioned pedestrian policy, planning, and 

design	guidelines—along	with	those	in	Appendix	F—were	used	

to develop the following list of some of the more effective 

countermeasures in terms of improving pedestrian safety. They 

should	also	be	used	by	jurisdictions	for	guidance	to	fix	spot	

problems and to update and improve agency design manuals, 

practices, and procedures.

Engineering Solutions

The countermeasures presented here are organized according to 

the type of pedestrian crash.

Walking Along the Road Crashes

Rural environments:

1. Paved shoulders—Paved	shoulders	provide	room	for	

pedestrians	to	walk	separate	from	motor	vehicle	traffic	

in rural areas when providing sidewalks is not a feasible 

option. Paved shoulders also provide room for bicyclists. 

Paved shoulders have many safety and operational advantages	for	motor	vehicle	traffic	as	well.	To	be	effective,	

paved	shoulders	should	be	1.8	m	(6	ft)	wide	or	more;	

1.2	m	(4	ft)	is	considered	the	minimum	acceptable	width	

to	accommodate	pedestrians	(AASHTO	Green	book,	

2001).	Rural	environments	near	large	urban	areas	or	those	

experiencing rapid growth should be considered suburban, where sidewalks are the preferred pedestrian accommodation. Newly-developed communities should provide 

sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities.

Urban and Suburban Environments:

1. Sidewalks—Sidewalks	can	eliminate	most	walking-alongthe-road pedestrian crashes by providing positive separation	from	motor	vehicle	traffic.	Continuous	and	connected	

sidewalks are needed along both sides of streets to prevent 

unnecessary street crossings. Sidewalks generally should 

not be placed immediately adjacent to moving motor 

vehicle	traffic.	Whenever	possible,	they	should	be	buffered with a planter strip, parking lane, shoulder, or bike 

lane. This will increase pedestrian safety and comfort and 

can	make	it	easier	to	meet	the	ADA	requirement	for	a	

level passage through driveways and the requirement for a 

Paved shoulders offer pedestrians on rural 

roadways a safer place to walk.

Sidewalks provide safe spaces for pedestrians to walk.
56 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

clear	passage	around	utility	poles,	posts,	fire	hydrants,	etc.	

(these	can	be	placed	in	a	landscaped	buffer	zone).	Planter	

strips	should	be	1.5	m	(5	ft)	wide	or	greater;	1.8	m	(6	ft)	

is a desirable minimum. Separated sidewalks should also 

be	1.5	m	(5	ft)	wide	or	greater;	1.8	m	(6	ft)	is	a	desirable	

minimum along arterial streets in non-commercial areas. 

Along	arterials	where	there	is	no	buffer,	curbside	sidewalks	

should	be	3.0	m	(10	ft)	wide	or	greater.	Sidewalks	should	

provide a continuous effective width to prevent choke 

points	from	being	created	by	street	furniture.	In	downtown	

areas, considerations must be made for outdoor seating 

for	restaurants.	Rolled	(mountable)	curbs	are	not	recommended. Continuous and connected sidewalks are needed 

along both sides of streets to prevent unnecessary street 

crossings.

2. Driveways—Well-defined	driveways	clearly	mark	the	area	

where	motorists	will	be	crossing	the	pedestrian’s	path.	

Non-defined	vehicle	access	points	with	continuous	access	

to	parking	create	a	long	conflict	area	between	pedestrians	

and motorists. This added area of ambiguity complicates 

the	motorist’s	task	of 	watching	for	pedestrians.	

3. Driveway	design	and	spacing—driveways	should	be	

designed to look like driveways, not street intersections 

(sidewalks	should	continue	through	the	driveway).	Local	

policies should prohibit blocking the sidewalk at driveways 

and	these	policies	should	be	enforced.	Driveways	should	

be kept as narrow as possible. The level of the sidewalk 

should be maintained, and the driveway should be sloped 

so that the motorist goes up and over the sidewalk. This 

will	help	with	a	number	of 	goals:	meeting	ADA	accessibility requirements will be easier, the fact that the pedestrian 

has the right-of-way will be clear, and motorists will need 

to slow down slightly to enter the driveway, which will help 

promote	pedestrian	safety.		Driveways	should	be	located	

away from intersections. The number of driveways should 

be	minimized	(consolidate	whenever	possible)	to	reduce	

the	number	of 	conflict	points	for	pedestrians.		This	access	

management is also a safety advantage for motorists.

4. Illumination—Pedestrian	crashes	disproportionately	occur	at	times	of 	poor	lighting	(mostly	dusk	and	nighttime).	

Illumination	greatly	increases	the	motorist’s	ability	to	see	

pedestrians	walking	along	the	road.	Double-sided	lighting	

should be provided along wide arterial streets to illuminate 

both sidewalks for the security and safety of the pedestrian. Light uniformity along a road is also important. Lights 

Driveways should be designed so that the 

sidewalk continues through the driveway 

in a relatively flat and level alignment.

Pedestrian-level light fixtures increase 

pedestrian visibility at night and provide 

a better sense of security.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 57

should be spaced to minimize or eliminate dark areas along 

the	road	and	sidewalks.	For	midblock	and	intersection	

crossings, it may be helpful to provide extra lighting to 

crossings with high nighttime pedestrian use.

Crossing the Road Crashes

Midblock crashes:

1. Pedestrian crossing island—On	two-way	streets,	a	median	 r

island at uncontrolled locations can help reduce crashes 

by	up	to	40	percent.	The	benefits	are	greatest	on	busy	

multilane	streets	where	gaps	are	few	and	difficult	to	find.	

A	pedestrian	crossing	island	breaks	an	otherwise	difficult	

crossing maneuver into two easier steps: instead of needing	to	find	a	gap	long	enough	to	cross	all	lanes	at	ones,	a	

pedestrian	looks	left,	finds	an	acceptable	gap	in	one	direction	only,	crosses	to	the	island,	then	looks	right	and	finds	a	

second gap.

In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Signs

State of Pennsylvania; State of New York; and Portland, OR

In 2001, the State of Pennsylvania began providing municipalities with in-street pedestrian crossing signs. The in-street crossing signs are incorporated in the MUTCD in Section 2B.12. To date, more than 2,000 signs have been installed. The signs cost about $200 

each and are distributed to municipalities through the DOT regional offices. The signs 

are to be placed at unsignalized crossings on roadways with a speed limit of 56 km/h (35 

mi/h) or less. The signs are typically set 1.5 to 3.0 m (5 to 10 ft) in advance of the crosswalk 

(attached to the pavement) but can be placed as far as 15.2 m (50 ft) from the crosswalk. 

A number of Pennsylvania municipalities have used the signs 

as a visible part of larger pedestrian safety programs, involving education, enforcement, and design components.

A study has been conducted evaluating the effects of pedestrian safety cones placed in streets in upstate New York, Long 

Island, and Portland, OR (Huang, 2000). The in-street pedestrian crossing cones, like the in-street pedestrian crossin

signs, serve the same purpose: to display a consistent and accurate message, i.e., the relevant law for yielding to pedestrians. The study findings confirm that pedestrian safety con

can improve conditions for pedestrians who benefit from

motorists’ yielding to them. Findings suggests that motorists 

were more likely to yield to pedestrians after the signs had 

been placed on the roadway.

For more information, visit: http://www.dot.state.pa.us or http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/

pedbike/pubs/00-098.pdf.

Pedestrian crossing islands provide a 

efuge when crossing wider roads.
58 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

2. Two-stage crosswalk with median fencing—Some	agencies	provide	railings/fencing	in	the	medians	of 	multilane	

roads that channel pedestrians to the right, increasing the 

likelihood that they will look for vehicles coming from 

their	right	in	the	second	half 	of 	the	crossing.	It	should	be	

mentioned, however, that these types of crossings can be 

problematic for pedestrians who are blind and for wheelchair users.

3. Curb extensions—On	streets	with	on-street	parking,	curb	

extensions reduce the total crossing distance. Reducing the 

crossing distance helps pedestrians in two ways: it reduces 

the	time	they	are	exposed	to	moving	traffic,	and	it	makes	it	

easier	for	pedestrians	to	assess	and	find	an	acceptable	gap,	

as the time needed to cross is shorter. They also increase 

visibility: the waiting pedestrian can better see approaching 

motor	vehicle	traffic	and	motorists	can	better	see	pedestrians waiting to cross the road; their view is no longer 

blocked by parked cars. Curb extensions should be designed to accommodate storm water drainage and should 

never	extend	more	than	1.8	m	(6	ft).

4. Illumination—See	discussion	on	page	56	concerning	

 illumination.

5. Crosswalks at uncontrolled locations with advance stop bar 

(or	yield	line)—On	multilane	streets	a	common	and	often	

fatal	crash	type	is	the	“multiple-threat”	crash,	in	which	a	

motorist in one lane stops to let a pedestrian cross, but so 

close to the crosswalk as to mask a motorist in the adjacent 

lane who is not slowing down. The second motorist does 

not have time to react and the pedestrian is struck at a high 

speed.	The	advance	stop	bar	or	yield	line	(accompanied	

with	a	R1-5	or	R1-51a	YIELD	HERE	TO	PEDESTRIANS	sign)	requires	all	motorists	to	stop	back	(30	to	50	ft	

is	desirable);	when	the	first	motorist	stops	at	the	stop	bar,	

it allows the pedestrian to see if a motorist in the second 

lane is stopping. This enables the pedestrian to wait or step 

back if he or she has started to proceed into the second 

lane.	While	the	advance	stop	bar	with	appropriate	signing	

has the potential to reduce the probability of a multiplethreat	crash,	this	is	no	guarantee	that	1)	all	motorists	will	

stop	for	pedestrians	and	2)	all	stopping	vehicles	will	necessarily stop at the stop line, potentially on high-speed roads. 

Therefore, it is important to carefully select locations for 

unsignalized crossings, even if the advance stop bar and 

signing	is	used.	Also,	such	sites	should	be	monitored	to	

ensure that pedestrians are able to cross safely and if not, 

Two-stage crosswalks with fencing help 

direct pedestrians to look for vehicles 

coming from the right.

Curb extensions can increase the visibility of pedestrians and motorists.

Advance stop lines can help prevent multiple threat pedestrian crashes.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 59

Advance Stop/Yield Markings

Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Crosswalks on streets with multilane, uncontrolled approaches are often associated with a type of pedestrian 

crash termed a multiple threat crash. A major factor contributing to this kind of crash is the fact that the yielding 

vehicle stops (or slows) too close to the crosswalk, screening the pedestrian from the view of another motorist fast 

approaching in the lane that the pedestrian is to cross next. 

One treatment that addresses the issue of multiple-threat 

crashes is the use of yield markings placed 9.1 to 15.2 m (30 

to 50 ft) in advance of the crosswalks along with a “YIELD 

HERE TO PEDESTRIANS”sign placed adjacent to the markings (the sign is incorporated in MUTCD in Section 2B.11). 

Data show that this treatment can produce a marked reduction in multiple threat conflicts (Van Houten, 1988; Van

Houten, 1992). 

In a study conducted in Halifax, Nova 

Scotia, Canada, 24 crosswalks were 

randomly assigned to a treatment or 

control condition. Following a baseline measurement period, twelve of 

the streets had advance yield markings and the “YIELD HERE TO PEDESTRIAN” sign installed 7.0 m (23 ft)

to 19.8 m (65 ft) in advance of the 

crosswalk. The remaining half of the 

crosswalks remained in the baseline 

condition and served as control sites. 

Each of the streets used in the study 

included multiple travel lanes in both 

directions or multiple lanes on a oneway street with a posted speed limit of 48 km/h (30 mi/h) (Van Houten, 2001).

The sign and markings increased the percentage of motorists yielding to pedestrians and 

decreased the percentage of motor vehicle/pedestrian conflicts at all 12 sites. For the

control crosswalks, motorist-yielding behavior remained almost unchanged between 

the before- and after-treatment measurements. However, the percentage of motorists 

who yielded to pedestrians at crosswalks with the added sign and markings increased 

from around 70 to 75 percent to around 80 to 85 percent. Further, vehicle-pedestrian 

conflicts remained nearly constant for the control sites but declined from about 10 to 15

conflicts per 100 crossings to under 5 conflicts per 100 crossings at the treatment sites.

Follow-up data collected six months after the markings and signs were introduced show 

no reduction in treatment effectiveness. These data are in accord with previous findings,

which show that effects are maintained over time.

For more information, visit: http://www.walkinginfo.org/pedsafe.
60 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

then	other	treatments	(e.g.,	traffic	signals)	should	be	considered.

6. Traffic	signal	with	pedestrian	signal	displays—On	busy	

multilane	highways	with	significant	volumes,	a	signal	may	

be	the	only	way	to	create	a	gap	for	pedestrians	to	cross.	It	

is	often	difficult	to	meet	the	MUTCD	warrants	for	a	traffic	

signal based solely on existing pedestrian counts; it is often 

necessary to anticipate how many pedestrians might cross 

there	once	the	signal	is	installed.	All	signals	have	associated	

operational and safety concerns that must be addressed, 

including the distance to adjacent signals. 

Nighttime Pedestrian Crashes:

Many nighttime crashes can be prevented through better lighting.	See	previous	discussion	on	illumination	(page	56).

Intersection	Straight-Through	Crashes:

Most of the techniques described under midblock crashes are 

applicable at intersections for straight-through crashes: pedestrian crossing islands, curb extensions, illumination, and advance 

stop bars or yield lines.

Intersection	Right	Turn	Crashes	(Signalized	or	Unsignalized):

1. Tighter radius—Tightening	the	intersection	radius	has	

many	benefits	for	pedestrians:	it	shortens	the	crossing	

distance, brings the crosswalk closer to the intersection, 

increases visibility of the pedestrian or the approaching 

motor vehicle, slows right-turning vehicles, and it makes it 

much	easier	to	install	two	ADA	compliant	curb	ramps	at	

each corner. The choice of a curb radius is dependent on 

the design vehicle and whether the street is a local residential street, a neighborhood collector, or a major arterial. This requires the designer to calculate the appropriate 

radius for each corner of an intersection and to accept 

occasional	difficult	turns	for	the	rare	event—for	example	a	

large moving truck turning onto a local street; this occurs 

seldom	enough	that	there’s	little	reason	to	provide	large	

radii for truck turns onto local streets. The presence of onstreet parking on both intersecting streets can also result in 

the opportunity to tighten the curb radius.

2. Curb extensions—See	previous	discussion	on	curb	extensions on page 58.

Traffic signals with pedestrian signals 

create a gap for pedestrians to cross intersections.

Wide radii (top) allow faster turning 

speeds and create unsafe pedestrian environments. A simple extension (bottom) 

can reduce the turning radius and vehicle 

turning speed as well as provide a safer 

crossing place for pedestrians.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 61

3. Pork-chop islands—While	right-turn	slip	lanes	(also	called	

channelized	right-turn	lanes)	are	often	considered	negative	

facilities	for	pedestrians	(especially	vision-impaired	pedestrians)	due	to	the	emphasis	on	easy	and	fast	motor	vehicle	

travel,	they	can	be	designed	to	be	less	problematic.	Where	

an exclusive right-turn lane is provided, a pork-chop island 

between the right-turn lane and the through lanes can 

shorten the crossing, resulting in less pedestrian exposure 

and improved signal timing. The island also enables pedestrians	and	motorists	to	negotiate	one	conflict	separately	

from	the	others.	A	properly	designed	pork-chop	island	has	

the longer tail pointing upstream to the approaching rightturn motorist; this channelization brings the approaching 

motorist	at	close	to	a	90o	angle,	so	the	motorist	is	looking	

forward at the crosswalk; the crosswalk is placed one car 

length	back	from	the	intersection	proper	(the	AASHTO	

Green	Book	now	includes	this	better	option).	This	enables	

the	motorist	to	move	forward	once	the	pedestrian	conflict	

has been resolved so the right-turning motorist can focus 

on	traffic.	The	pedestrian	then	can	cross	to	a	shorter	street	

crossing.

Intersection	Left-Turn	Crashes:

1. Median islands—A	median	island	helps	channelize	leftturning	vehicles,	slowing	their	speeds	in	the	process.	An	

island also gives pedestrians a refuge for long crossings or 

if 	a	conflict	cannot	be	avoided.	However,	signal	phasing	

should ideally be designed to allow the pedestrian to cross 

the entire street during a single cycle.

2. Curb ramp placement and design—Poor	ramp	placement	

and	design	can	make	a	street	crossing	more	difficult	and	

may	lead	to	crashes.	For	example,	poorly	placed	or	oriented ramps force wheelchair users to make long detours 

and they may not cross in the allotted time at a signalized 

intersection; or they may force wheelchair users to cross 

outside the crosswalk lines at a location where motorists 

do not expect them. Proper ramp placement and design 

ensures that all users cross in crosswalks, close to the intersection, where motorists can see them, and without undue 

delay. Ramps must be wholly contained within the marked 

crosswalk area. Usually, this can only be accomplished if 

the	curb	radius	is	7.6	m	(25	ft)	or	less.	Single	ramps	that	

direct the pedestrian into the middle of the intersection 

should	be	avoided	(especially	on	arterial	streets)	but	may	

be necessary where a large radius precludes the use of two 

ramps.		Ramps	must	be	designed	to	meet	ADA	Guidelines,	

Well-designed pork-chop islands can help 

pedestrians navigate an intersection more 

safely.

Median islands provide a safe waiting 

place for pedestrians crossing multilane 

roads.

Well-designed curb ramps provide pedestrians with disabilities better access to the 

sidewalk system.
62 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

and two ramps at a corner are generally preferred over 

single-ramp	corners.	ADA	Guidelines	can	be	found	online	

at	http://www.access-board.gov/adaag/html/adaag.htm.

Signalized	Intersection	Crashes:

All	signalized	intersections	should	have	the	following	(unless	no	

pedestrians	are	expected):

•	 Pedestrian	signals	are	needed	(pedestrian	WALK/DON’T	

WALK	signals)	to	ensure	that	a	pedestrian	knows	when	

the signal phasing allows them to cross and when they 

should	not	be	crossing.	On	one-way	streets	(or	streets	with	

unusual	configuration)	a	pedestrian	approaching	from	the	

opposite direction may not realize an intersection is signalized and cannot see the vehicle signal heads nor know 

when it is safe to cross if there is no pedestrian signal. The 

same	is	true	for	intersections	with	left	turn	arrows.	Wide	

streets require more information on when to cross and 

when not to start crossing due to the long pedestrian clearance intervals that may exist.

•	 Marked	crosswalks	clearly	indicate	to	the	motorist	where	

to expect pedestrians and help keep the crossing area clear 

of 	vehicles.	It	should	be	standard	practice	to	mark	all	four	

legs of a signalized intersection unless unusual circumstances exist.

•	 A	WALK	signal	(walking	person	symbol)	should	be	long	

enough to get pedestrians started and a clearance interval 

(flashing	upraised	hand	or	DON’T	WALK	signal)	long	

enough to ensure that a pedestrian can fully cross the 

entire	street.		While	many	agencies	have	traditionally	used	

a	1.2	m/s	(4	ft/s)	assumed	walking	speed,	slower	walking	speeds	of 	1.1	m/s	(3.5	ft/s)	or	even	0.9	m/s	(3	ft/s)	

may be appropriate at locations which have a substantial 

number of older pedestrians. The Highway Capacity Manual 

specifically	recommends	a	slower	walking	speed	when	

the percentage of walkers over the age of 65 represent 

20	percent	or	more	of 	the	pedestrian	population	using	

that	crossing	(National	Research	Council,	2000).	Another	

option is to consider the use of automatic pedestrian 

detectors, which can detect slower-moving pedestrians in a 

crosswalk and automatically extend the pedestrian clearance interval until the pedestrian is safely on the other 

side	of 	the	street	(see	link	to	recent	research	on	automatic	

pedestrian	detectors	at	the	Pedestrian	and	Bicycle	Information	Center	Web	site:	http://www.walkinginfo.org/rd/

Crosswalks and pedestrian signals encourage pedestrians to cross at signalized 

intersections.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 63

technology.htm#peddetect).	New	detection	methods	such	

as video are being tested but some may still be expensive 

to implement.

•	 Push	buttons,	placed	where	a	pedestrian	who	is	in	a	wheelchair or is visually impaired can easily reach them, are often needed. They should be located so as to clearly indicate 

which crosswalk each button regulates for crossings in two 

different directions. The best practice is to provide push 

buttons mounted on two separate pedestals separated by 

at	least	3	m	(10	ft).	Illuminated	push	buttons	(that	light	up	

when	activated)	are	used	to	notify	the	pedestrian	that	the	

actuated	signal	is	working	and/or	connected.	They	increase	

the likelihood that pedestrians will actuate the push button and comply with the pedestrian signal. Push buttons 

are	not	used	in	downtown/central	business	districts	and	

other area of high pedestrian use where pedestrians can 

be expected at every signal cycle. The pedestrian phase 

should be on recall at these locations. Push buttons should 

not	be	needed	at	fixed-time	traffic	signals	where	pedestrian	

crossings are reasonably expected on more than an occasional	basis,	and	the	crossing	(WALK)	interval	should	

occur	every	signal	cycle.	The	MUTCD	Part	4	should	be	

used to design signals to the latest accessibility standards 

(ADA);	it	is	available	online	at	http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.

gov/pdfs/2003/Ch4.pdf.	

Many crashes occur while the pedestrian is crossing with the 

WALK	signal,	and	some	signal-timing	techniques	can	help	

reduce	the	incidence	of 	these	crashes.	Additional	countermeasures at signalized locations may include:

1. Protected left-turn phases—This	allows	left-turning	vehicles to have their own separate interval, which can also 

separate vehicle left-turning movement from pedestrian 

crossing intervals. Thus, pedestrians can cross without 

interference from left-turning motorists. Red and green 

left turn arrows are used to make it clear to motorists they 

must wait before turning left.

2. All-red	phase—A	short	(i.e.,	2	second)	all-red	interval	may	

help prevent a crash resulting from a high-speed red-light 

runner hitting a pedestrian who has begun crossing with 

the	WALK	signal	or	who	may	have	a	slower	walking	speed	

and did not clear the crosswalk.

3. Lead	Pedestrian	interval	(LPI)—The	LPI	can	help	reduce	conflicts	between	turning	vehicles	and	pedestrians	

Push buttons such as this one should be 

placed where they can be easily accessed 

when waiting to cross an intersection.
64 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

when turning vehicles encroach onto the crosswalk before 

pedestrians	leave	the	curb.	The	LPI	releases	pedestrians	

(WALK	phase)	3	to	5	seconds	prior	to	the	green	light	for	

vehicles. This enables pedestrians to enter and occupy the 

crosswalk before turning motorists enter it. This treatment 

is particularly effective where there is a double right or left 

turn movement.

4. Pedestrian countdown signal—This	tells	the	pedestrian	

how much time is left in the pedestrian clearance interval 

(flashing	DON’T	WALK	or	upraised	hand).	This	information encourages pedestrians to leave the crossing before 

the crossing time runs out and reduces the number of 

pedestrians who initiate a crossing too late in the cycle or 

who are still in the street at the end of the crossing interval. The countdown signal should begin during the pedesLead Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs)

St. Petersburg, FL

A lead pedestrian interval was created for study at three signalized intersections in downtown St. Petersburg, Florida where pedestrian crossings occurred at the average rate of 60 per hour. An LPI is intended 

to decrease crashes that involve motor vehicles and pedestrians by separating them in time. The LPI permits pedestrians to gain a head start before turning vehicles are released. Following the introduction of 

the	LPI,	conflicts	were	virtually	eliminated	for	pedestrians	departing	during	the	start	of	the	WALK	interval.	

There were 44 total pretreatment observation periods at all three 

sites. During each of these sessions, the sites averaged between 2 

and 3 conflicts per 100 pedestrians, with some periods having up to

5 conflicts per 100 pedestrians. After the LPI was installed, 34 of the

41 sessions had no conflicts, and no session had more than 2 conflicts per 100 pedestrians. This effect was noted for senior citizens

and non-seniors alike. There was also a smaller reduction in conflicts

during the remainder of the WALK interval. Thisreduction was likely

the result of pedestrians claiming the right-of-way during the earlier 

portion oftheWALK interval.The percentage of pedestrians yielding

to vehicles also declined following the introduction of the LPI, and 

data showed that pedestrians tended to cross more lanes during the 

3 second LPI the longer the intervention was in effect. This was likely 

the result of regular users discerning the presence of the LPI and 

modifying their behavior to utilize it to the fullest extent possible. 

Over a period of four months at these three sites, no reduction in intersection effectiveness for motor vehicles was detected. Moreover, local authorities opted to retain the LPI in places where the range of permitted 

turning movements governed by the signal cycles allows safe use of the LPI. This intervention was shown to 

increase pedestrian safety and improve pedestrian comfort and perceived safety levels as well.

For more information, visit http://www.walkinginfo.org/pedsafe and read Case Study No. 65 and 66 (follow 

links to case studies in Florida and click on the two links to LPI studies).

Countdown signals help pedestrians 

know how much time they have left to 

cross an intersection.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 65

trian	clearance	interval	(flashing	DON’T	WALK)	phase.	

The standards for pedestrian countdown signals can be 

found	in	Section	4E.07	of 	the	MUTCD.

5. All-pedestrian	phase	(also	known	as	Barnes	dance	or	

scramble	phase)—By	stopping	all	vehicle	movements	and	

allowing	pedestrians	to	cross	in	all	directions	(including	

diagonally),	virtually	all	conflicts	are	eliminated.	But	pedestrians are not allowed to cross during the regular motor 

vehicle phase, so motorists can turn without needing to 

yield to pedestrians. This introduces a third signal phase 

that generally increases delay for motorists and pedestrians. This signal phasing technique has been removed from 

many intersections as both pedestrians and motorists do 

not typically tolerate the extra delay, and such phasing may 

only be appropriate for a few central city crossing locations	with	very	high	pedestrian	traffic,	relatively	low	vehicle

volumes,	and	a	high	number	of 	turning	conflicts.		Also,	

where intersecting streets are narrow and cycle lengths are 

short, such timing schemes may be more practical, since 

increased delay will be less of a problem. The all-pedestrian phase may also be better when applied at intersections 

where all street approaches have a similar cross-section and

traffic	flow.

6. Prohibited right-turn-on-red at selected locations—Consideration should be made to prohibit right-turn-on-red 

(RTOR)	at	intersections	where	there	are	high	volumes	of 	

pedestrians,	particularly	near	schools,	and/or	where	older	

pedestrians	cross	regularly.		Placing	NO	TURN	ON	RED	

signs may also be appropriate at complex intersections 

(e.g.,	skewed	intersections,	intersections	with	more	than	

four	legs),	and	also	where	pedestrians	are	having	trouble	

crossing	on	a	WALK	signal	due	to	a	high	volume	of 	rightturning	motorists.	It	should	be	noted	that	at	locations	

where	RTOR	is	prohibited,	right-turn-on-green	collisions	

or	conflicts	with	pedestrians	may	still	occur.

Pedestrian Crashes on Road Sections:

1. Road diets—Reducing	travel	speeds	and	reducing	the	number	of 	travel	lanes	a	pedestrian	has	to	cross	are	beneficial	

in	all	cases.	One	well-documented	technique	that	accomplishes	both	goals	is	a	“road	diet”	that	takes	a	four-lane	

undivided	street	(two	lanes	in	each	direction)	and	reconfigures	the	lanes	to	two	travel	lanes,	a	center	turn	lane,	

and	two	bike	lanes.	The	benefits	for	pedestrians	include	a	

shorter effective crossing, fewer lanes to cross, and slightly 

An all-pedestrian phase may be appropriate at certain intersections where there 

is a large volume of pedestrians crossing 

the street regularly.

Prohibiting certain turning movements 

may protect pedestrians in the crossing.

A road diet, such as the one above, may 

decrease motor vehicle travel speeds and 

reduce the number of lanes a pedestrian 

must cross.
66 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

slower	motor	vehicle	traffic	speeds.	The	addition	of 	a	

center-turn lane also creates space for pedestrian crossing 

islands.	All	this	is	accomplished	without	having	to	change	

the curb lines. The bike lanes add a buffer for pedestrians 

as well as a place for bicyclists to ride. The key to a successful road diet is to ensure that all signals are set up to 

handle expected volumes of left-turn movements and to 

monitor adjacent streets to ensure that they are not overly 

impacted by higher speed or higher volume motor vehicle 

traffic.

 There are many variations on this road diet, for example 

reducing	a	multilane	one-way	street	by	one	lane.	A	more	

expensive road diet can involve moving the curbs to actually	narrow	the	roadway	surface.	A	simpler	road	diet	can	

involve	narrowing	the	travel	lanes	to	10	or	11	ft	to	slow	

motor	vehicle	traffic	speeds	and	create	space	for	bike	lanes	

that acts as a buffer for pedestrians. 

2. Traffic	calming—Within	neighborhoods,	traffic	calming	

measures	can	be	used	to	slow	motor	vehicle	traffic,	such	

as	speed	tables,	speed	humps,	traffic	circles,	chokers,	and	

chicanes, or to break up long stretches of straight streets. 

For	more	information	on	traffic	calming	devices	and	

techniques,	visit	http://www.trafficcalming.com,	http://

www.walkable.org, or refer to PEDSAFE	(Harkey,	2004)	

or other relative documents listed in the References section 

or	in	Appendix	F.

Transit-Related Crashes

A	high	number	of 	pedestrian	crashes	are	related	to	transit.	

Most involve a pedestrian crossing the street to get to a bus or 

after	getting	off 	the	bus.	All	of 	the	street-crossing	techniques	

described	so	far	are	applicable	to	transit	stops.	All	transit	stops	

must be accessible to all pedestrians, and policies should include 

the following provisions:

•	 All	stops	should	consider	the	safety	of 	the	pedestrian	

crossing. This does not necessarily mean a marked crosswalk at each stop location; rather, each stop should be 

placed where it is possible for a pedestrian to cross safely 

at or very near the stop. 

•	 Transit	(and	school	bus)	stops	must	provide	a	safe	place	

to stand and wait, even if there are no sidewalks. The lack 

of 	a	defined	waiting	area	is	undesirable,	especially	for	

 children. 

•	 Sidewalks	(or	paved	shoulders	in	rural	areas)	should	be	

Traffic calming devices such as this 

raised crosswalk help illuminate pedestrian crossings and slow motor vehicle 

traffic.

The decision for where to place bus 

stops, especially midblock bus stops, can 

impact pedestrian safety and can influence pedestrian travel and accessibility. 

They should always be located near a safe 

crossing location.

Transit stops need sidewalks with adequate width to accommodate waiting 

pedestrians.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 67

built to provide pedestrian access to all transit stops.

•	 Lighting	should	be	provided	at	or	near	all	bus	stop	locations for security and safety reasons and to minimize 

vandalism.

•	 The	transit	agency	should	review	all	its	stop	locations	to	

facilitate access and crossing. 

Techniques include:

a.	 Improve	the	pedestrian	crossing	(this	may	involve	

installing	a	new	signal).

b. Consolidate closely-spaced stops by eliminating some 

stops	(this	not	only	limits	the	number	of 	crossings,	

but	helps	with	transit	efficiency	as	the	buses	stop	less	

often).

c.	 Place	crosswalks	(where	warranted)	behind	the	bus	

stop at midblock locations. This allows pedestrians 

to cross behind the bus, where they can see oncoming	traffic;	it	also	enables	the	bus	driver	to	pull	away	

without endangering pedestrians.

d. Move stops to a location where it is easier to cross. 

This often involves decisions regarding nearside 

and	farside	locations	at	intersections.		In	general,	

farside locations are preferred for pedestrian safety, 

as pedestrians are encouraged to cross behind the 

bus, and the bus can leave without having to wait for 

pedestrians	to	cross.	It	also	allows	for	right-turn-onred movements on the nearside of the intersection. 

However, there are locations where a nearside stop 

may be more practical for operational and accessibility reasons. 

Education Solutions

Overview

Education plays an important role in the process to improve 

pedestrian safety. Education efforts can improve the ability of 

drivers and pedestrians to use and respond to the roadway environment safely and correctly. Education can complement enforcement programs to teach motorists and pedestrians about safe driving and crossing practices, as well as the laws that govern them. 

Numerous research studies have supported the notion that 

education efforts can succeed in changing pedestrian and driver 

behaviors and reducing pedestrian crash risks and rates. Some 

of the successful earlier programs aimed at the conditions of 

those times include:

Transit stops should be well-designed 

with pedestrian needs in mind, including 

shelter, signs, lighting, sidewalks connecting to the pedestrian travel network, 

and bus loading areas that are wheelchair 

accessible.
68 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Education Efforts Across the Nation

Countywide Example

WalkSafe Miami is a program aimed at reducing the incidence of children struck by vehicles by 

educating elementary school-aged children, teachers, parents, and their communities about 

traffic safety. The program uses educational training, engineering modifications, and enforcement to help achieve its goal. The Miami-Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization (M

produced six different pedestrian education posters aimed at increasing pedestrian safety 

practices. The posters’ safety messages were in English, Spanish, and Creole. They covered 

pedestrian-related topics ranging from interpreting pedestrian signals and being visible, to 

watching for turning cars and making eye contact with an oncoming motorist before crossing 

the street. The first of the posters were mounted in the county’s 600 buses and most of t

135 MetroRail train cars free as a county public service beginning in July 2003.

Statewide Example

One method for implementing educational programs to counter pedestrian crashes is to institutionalize pedestrian safety curricula in schools. US studies have shown that elementary school 

children (age 5-9) are more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash than any other age group. 

This is particularly true in urban areas where there is heavy traffic and few pedestrian amenities. Maryland has a comprehensive, hands-on safety curriculum based on a building block approach; it contains a series of lessons teaching pedestrian safety skills to younger grades (e.g. 

K-2) and bicycling skills to older students (e.g., grades 3-5). There is an Administrator’s Guide,

Teacher’s Guide, and Lesson Handbook for the program, developed by the City of Rockville.

From initial roll-out in the fall of 2002 to the end of the 2003-04 school year, the program has 

reached over 7,000 Rockville students at 10 different elementary schools. The Maryland Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Education Program has been made available to public and private 

schools, law enforcement agencies, and community organizations throughout Maryland. For 

more information, visit the Maryland Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Education Program Web 

site at http://www.rockvillemd.gov/recreation/bicycling/education-program.htm. 

Nationwide Example

The FHWA Pedestrian Safety Campaign is “designed to help communities conduct their 

own multi-media public education and information campaign.” The online document 

provides a step-by-step discussion of how to conduct a pedestrian safety marketing 

campaign. Starting with goals and strategies for a campaign, the guide elaborates on 

forming coalitions with other agencies and advocacy groups, provides hints on interacting with the media, and presents methods of campaign evaluation. The document 

further contains large amounts of actual campaign material and sample letters to aid 

agencies in the process of planning a public marketing campaign. For more information, visit: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/local_program/pedcampaign/index.htm.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 69

•	 The “Willy Whistle” pedestrian safety public information

and education messages were used to teach child pedestrians 

ages 5 to 9 how to look before crossing the street and safely 

conduct a midblock crossing. An evaluation found that

the education campaign resulted in significantly reducing

the number of dart-out pedestrian crashes involving 3- to 

7-year-old children by approximately 30 percent in the

three test cities of Los Angeles, CA; Columbus, OH; and

Milwaukee, WI (Blomberg et al., 1983). Part of this reduction

may be attributed to PSAs that alerted parents to increase

direct supervision of young children when outdoors, rather 

than changing the behavior of the young children. Subsequent research has found that educational videos alone can 

increase knowledge but usually result in little behavior change. 

•	 An evaluation of the efficacy of the film, “And Keep on

Looking,” targeting children in 4th through 7th grades,

showed an increase in safe street-crossing knowledge for 

children ages 9 to 12 in Seattle, WA. An assessment in

Milwaukee, WI indicated a pedestrian crash reduction of

greater than 20 percent for children aged 9 to 12 compared

with children in areas surrounding Milwaukee and in comparison cities (Preusser and Lund, 1988).

Recent studies have included education as part of a more comprehensive safety program and have shown similar successes:

•	 A 2007 study for NHTSA evaluated a pedestrian safety

program consisting mostly of education and enforcement measures in Miami-Dade County. Countywide

pedestrian crashes were reduced by 8 to 12 percent. The 

child pedestrian education program, “Walk Safe Miami,”

was implemented in elementary schools throughout the 

county. There was a 22 percent reduction in child pedestrian crashes countywide in the first year after full program

implementation. (See case study write-up on page 109).

•	 Walk Smart Baltimore, a comprehensive safety project was 

conducted in Baltimore, MD, aimed at reducing the pedestrian crash problem related to alcohol. Countermeasures 

were targeted to two “zones” in the city that accounted

for 73 percent of the pedestrian alcohol-related crashes 

but only 21 percent of the land area. The countermeasures included a police training video, press kits for the 

local media, radio and TV PSAs, brochures, posters, and

flyers. Using a surrogate measure of alcohol involveme

in crashes, the project team found an overall 16 percent 

decrease in pedestrian crashes. The surrogate measure 

crashes decreased 22.3 percent in the zones where the 

majority of countermeasures were focused. 

Other evaluations of pedestrian education 

programs can be found in the Online Library at 

www.walkinginfo.org.
70 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Education is an important and effective part of a pedestrian 

safety program, but having streets designed for pedestrians is a 

prerequisite. Most education campaigns will have limited 

long-term success if the streets are designed for highspeed traffic and do not safely accommodate all users.

While	many	education	programs	have	shown	positive	results	in	

improving pedestrian safety, others have failed to demonstrate 

significant	improvements.	This	is	likely	because	not	all	education efforts have all the necessary components for success or 

are not tailored to meet the needs of the community. To ensure the most effective and successful education programs, an 

agency should:

•	 Understand	the	local	context	and	apply	messages	to	the	

appropriate audience.

•	 Combine	and	coordinate	the	education	program	with	

other planning, engineering, and enforcement measures.

•	 Use	both	concentrated	short	and	long-term	efforts.

•	 When	appropriate,	supplement	informational	programs	

(i.e.,	programs	using	PSAs	or	other	passive	education	

techniques)	with	opportunities	to	put	learning	into	practice	

(i.e.,	skills	training	or	active	education).

Defining Education-Related Problems and Goals

Education programs and campaigns work best when there is 

a clear understanding of the audience, the objective, and the 

messages to be conveyed. Such programs produce the greatest 

safety	benefits	when	they	are	part	of 	a	long-term	program	and	

not just designed to achieve short-term changes. The education 

program	should	target	a	real	and	specific	community	problem.	

In	some	cases,	behavior-related	problems	are	a	symptom	of 	

other concerns, such as poor street design or lack of enforcement; in these cases, education should be coupled with additional measures to treat all of the underlying factors related to 

the concern. Examples of common pedestrian-related problems 

that	can	be	addressed	(in-part)	through	education	include:

•	 Pedestrians	at	an	intersection	don’t	appear	to	understand	

the	newly-installed	pedestrian	signals	and/or	don’t	choose	

to activate them. The novelty of the signal requires some 

additional information on its meaning and use.

•	 Pedestrians	do	not	think	they	have	enough	time	to	cross	at	

a	traffic	signal.

•	 Drivers	don’t	yield	to	pedestrians	in	crosswalks.

•	 Parents	don’t	understand	the	need	to	supervise	children	

under	the	age	of 	10	when	they	are	walking.

Left-turning vehicle failing to yield to 

pedestrians at an intersection.

Pedestrians failing to obey a traffic signal.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 71

•	 Children	ages	10	to	18	don’t	know	where	or	how	to	safely	

cross a street to get to school.

•	 Motorists	are	speeding	in	neighborhoods.

•	 Commuters	in	the	downtown	area	aren’t	taking	advantage	

of non-motorized modes of travel.

•	 Pedestrian	crashes	are	occurring	in	an	area	with	a	concentration of bars due to pedestrian drinking and walking.

•	 Designers	and	engineers	aren’t	using	pedestrian-friendly	

design practices.

Though there are many studies showing that education can have 

an impact, it is equally relevant to consider local conditions and 

factors to develop an education program tailored to the community.	The	goals	of 	an	education	program	should	be	specific,	

measurable,	and	related	to	the	problems	identified.	For	instance,	

if 	an	intersection	safety	study	reveals	that	only	20	percent	of 	

pedestrians	are	activating	the	push-button	(assuming	the	button	is	properly	designed	and	located	and	works	correctly)	for	

a crossing signal, an education campaign can be developed to 

focus	on	increasing	pedestrians’	understanding	of 	the	existence	

and	benefits	of 	the	crossing	features.	The	goal	should	be	to	increase activation of the push-button and safe crossing behavior. 

Establishing baseline conditions helps in setting realistic goals 

and evaluating program effectiveness.

Targeting Specific Audiences

There are major differences in the knowledge of safe pedestrian 

practices, walking abilities, behavioral patterns, and learning 

capacities of different groups of pedestrians and other road users. Because of this, education programs need to be tailored to 

the	specific	audiences	and	types	of 	safety	problems	they	intend	

to address, and to the behaviors they seek to modify. Common 

audiences for focused, pedestrian-related education programs 

include:

1. Road users, including: 

	 a.	Child	pedestrians	(several	different	age	groups)

 b. High school and college age pedestrians

	 c.	 Adults

	 d.	Older	pedestrians	(65+)	

	 e.	 Drivers

	 f.	 Alcohol	consumers	(especially	heavy	drinkers)	

2.	 Commuters/employees

3.	 Transportation	officials	and	decision	makers,	including	

engineers,	planners,	developers,	local	officials/leaders,	and	

law	enforcement	officers.

Educational messages and strategies 

used to convey them should be tailored to 

a particular audience and goal.

Especially for child audiences, it is important to consider when and how the 

audience should receive information.
72 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

These audiences can be reached in a variety of ways: through 

public awareness campaigns reaching a broad group of people 

at once; through interventions targeting narrow groups or situations; or through an intermediary—such as a pediatrician, a parent, or a grandparent—targeting people on a one-on-one basis.

For an education program to be successful, it is important to

consider:

1.	 When and how the audience should receive information—

for instance, children, depending on their developmental 

level, may not be able to understand certain messages or 

complicated images used to convey messages. 

2.	 Demographic factors—for example, the percentage of

non-English speakers in a community affects the development of the educational materials. Educational materials 

in several languages and/or a range of distribution methods (e.g., PSAs, posters, or presentations to neighborhood

groups) may be needed for certain populations.

The following section provides important safety messages and 

strategies for conveying those messages to each of the aforementioned groups. Based on identified safety concerns, goals,

and other considerations (e.g., available resources, etc.), each

community should determine the most important group or 

groups to target in an education program and the appropriate 

strategy to use.

Key Educational Messages and Strategies for Targeted Audiences

Educational messages for road users commonly focus on 

improving personal safety and obedience to traffic laws. Campaigns aimed at commuters or employees often focus on messages to encourage drivers to use carpools or transit, or to 

consider non-motorized transportation modes. Education and 

training programs aimed at transportation officials and decision

makers usually focus on encouraging stronger support for policies, programs, and facilities that promote safe walking. 

The following sections provide more detailed educational messages that could be incorporated into education campaigns and 

strategies that could be used to target the audiences described 

earlier.

Educating child (elementary and middle school) pedestrians

Being struck by a car is a leading cause of death and injury to 

children. Children, especially males age 5 to 9, are at high risk 

Education campaigns can teach children 

about safe pedestrian practices.

Safe Routes to School programs provide 

communities with strategies to make 

walking to school safer.

More details and examples of pedestrian safety programs are provided in NCHRP Report 500, Volume 10, “A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving 

Pedestrians,” (2004), which can be found at the site: 

http://www.national-academies.org.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 73

of being hit in a pedestrian crash. Young children are frequently

struck on the neighborhood streets near their homes. The task 

of teaching pedestrian safety to children is complicated by their 

level of development. To obtain significant results, education

programs must improve knowledge and awareness and teach 

skills appropriate for the level of development of the children 

they target. One excellent resource for educating children about

pedestrian and bicycle safety skills is the Education section of 

the National Center for Safe Routes to School Online Guide

(available at http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/guide/education/

index.cfm). It describes what groups to bring together to educate children (including parents, caregivers, and teachers) and

others who need to know about children’s needs and abilities as

bicyclists and pedestrians (including drivers and neighbors). It

also addresses when education programs need to take place.

The Education section of the SRTS Guide by the National 

Center for Safe Routes to School describes key messages for 

children (primarily elementary age) (http://www.saferoutesinfo.

org/guide/education/key_messages_for_children.cfm#health),

including: 

•	 Pedestrian safety skills.

•	 Personal safety.

•	 Health and environmental benefits of walking.

National Safe Routes to School Program

Nationwide

Through the 2005 passage of the Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy 

for Users (SAFETEA-LU), Congress designated a total of 

$612 million toward developing the National Safe Routes

to School Program. The Program provides funds to the 

states to substantially improve the ability of primary and 

middle school students to walk and bicycle to school 

safely.

Each state administers its own program and develops its 

own procedures to solicit and select projects for funding. 

The program establishes two distinct types of funding opportunities: infrastructure projects, such as engineering improvements; and noninfrastructure related activities, such as education, enforcement, and encouragement programs.

For more information on the National Safe Routes to School Program, go to the

FHWA Web site http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/saferoutes/ or the National Center for 

Safe Routes to School Web site http://www.saferoutesinfo.org

Mapping best 

routes to school 

(above) and participating in SRTS 

programs can help 

provide school 

children with safer 

trips to school and 

back.

The NCSRTS Resource Center contains tip sheets 

for parents and other adults for teaching pedestrian 

safety to children. See www.saferoutesinfo.org/resources/education_tip-sheets.cfm.
74 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

The National Center for Safe Routes to School Online Guide’s

section on Education (http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/guide/

education/strategies_for_educating_children.cfm) also addresses various strategies to educate children, including:

•	 One-time instruction (such as an assembly).

•	 Classroom or physical education lessons (e.g., stand-alone,

integrated, or comprehensive curriculum for every grade).

•	 Parent involvement strategies for at-home education.

•	 Structured skills practice (e.g., class-based lessons, afterschool programs, or one-time events such as bike and 

pedestrian rodeos).

•	 Traffic safety quizzes or games that can be used at safety

fairs for children; traffic safety information that can be

made into games, coloring books, or other activity books. 

One key message to emphasize in child and parent education

programs is that children through the age of 10 should be supervised by an adult whenever walking or crossing the street. 

Mapping Out A Safer Community: Safe Routes to School

Detroit, Michigan

The following content is taken directly from the site, http://maps.culma.wayne.edu/community.htm: 

“In Detroit, neighborhood crime, gang activity, unrestrained dogs, and declining or dangerous properties affect students’ safety to and from school. To help address a broad range of community safety 

concerns, The Urban Safety Program partners with schools and community groups to implement the 

“Mapping Out A Safer Community” program. In this program, Detroit middle school students receive 

instruction in state-of-the-art computerized mapping (a.k.a. GIS-geographic information systems) 

and portable computing to study neighborhoods 

near their school. Using PocketPCs, students map 

locations and characteristics of dangerous properties, take photographs, and research property ownership. They also set priorities and identify the most 

problematic locations near their school. Properties 

with the most egregious violations, known as “The 

Dirty Dozen”, offer a compelling picture of hazards 

Detroit children face daily. This information is presented to community leaders and city officials who 

attempt to correct dangerous situations.

To date, the Urban Safety Program has worked with 

students from: Foch Middle School, Butzel Middle 

School, Spain Middle School, Finney High School, and community-based after school and summer programs. For more information, visit the Web site http://maps.culma.wayne.edu/index.htm.”
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 75

Sustainable Transportation Education Project (STEP)

Various Cities in Canada

The Sustainable Transportation Education Program (STEP) was developed by Green Communities Canada to 

test various approaches to engaging high school students in sustainable transportation issues. It was piloted in urban and rural (Peterborough, Markham, and Toronto) schools 

in Ontario, Canada. The program helped schools tackle transportation 

problems while increasing awareness and education about air quality, 

climate change, and healthy lifestyle issues. The program involved student-led events and activities, such as climate change presentations, a 

campaign against car idling, and participation in Walk to School Week. 

It also included classroom resources regarding sustainable transportation that could be incorporated into the curriculum of communications 

technology, geography, science, and civics courses. Additionally, traffic 

surveys were conducted with high school populations; these can be 

adapted for use by environmental clubs, environmental science, geography, social studies, civics or other courses. 

For detailed case studies and reports, as well as downloadable resources 

related to the STEP program, visit the site http://www.saferoutestoschool

.ca/index.php?page=step.

There is less information available on messages and strategies targeting middle-school age children. What is known is

that middle school children still need skills practice as well as 

exposure to messages that convey the importance of walking 

and safety. To be effective, these messages should be conveyed 

within themes that matter to that age group, such as fitness and

independence. Pre-teen audiences can be difficult to reach, so

creativity is a must in any educational effort. Some potential 

strategies for targeting middle-school-age children include:

•	 Put them in control—Organize a student committee to

address the problem of safety, physical inactivity, or issues 

related to excess weight. Ask them to come up with contests or program ideas. 

•	 Integrate walking into the culture in a subtle way—Have

teachers and administrators walk on local field trips.

•	 Start a Kids Teaching Kids program—Middle school

students can develop a safety assembly for elementary 

students and then deliver it (or high school students can

deliver it to middle schools). Make sure that the student

teachers are well-trained to convey correct strategies and 

that the teaching is within the children’s developmental

level.

•	 Use multimedia to convey messages—Consider the use

of music, video games, and computer software in addition 

to traditional media. Ask students to consider how many
76 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

songs have the word “walk” in the title. Think about using

“walk” songs as “music of the week” or as links in a class

assembly about walking to school. California’s Rad Rider

Web site (www.radrider.com) has bicycle safety messages

incorporated into an online comic book and safety tests; 

the site also offers a bicycle stunt show. See the example 

on page 74 on how GIS and PocketPC technology has

been used to engage youth in pedestrian safety issues.

Educating high school and college-age pedestrians

High school and college-age students represent unique pedestrian education opportunities and challenges. High school students 

are probably the least likely of any student age group to walk to 

school, either because their high schools are sited in areas where 

they are unable to walk safely to school, or because they want to 

take advantage of newfound driving privileges. However, ignoring high school populations for education programs would be 

missing an important opportunity to engage young drivers (and

pedestrians) in safety issues. One excellent way to reach high

school students is to couple pedestrian and safety issues with 

broader concerns about transportation, health, and the environment. Almost every high school has an environmental club

or other group that will help champion these messages; at the 

high school level, messages that come from peer groups may be 

better received than messages coming from teachers, parents, or 

other authorities.

Many college-age students are more likely to walk and bike than 

drive on campus. This is due to restricted campus parking; the 

expense of car ownership; and the fact that students are young, 

able, and generally more physically fit than other age groups.

They are an ideal target for pedestrian safety and promotion 

campaigns. However, college-age students also tend to take 

more risks than many other age groups, such as older pedestrians. They have a stronger perception of “invincibility,” and may

be apathetic to safety outreach initiatives. Also, alcohol can be a

factor, even for campuses that are technically “dry.”

Several universities have developed education programs and 

campaigns in partnership with their Parking and Transportation 

Services Office or Department of Public Safety. The College of

New Jersey and the University of Kentucky distribute a studentoriented pamphlet of “tips, guidelines, and resources” for getting around the campus “quickly, conveniently, and safely.” Key

messages include:

Many college-age students are more likely to walk and bike than drive on campus.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 77

•	 Reasons to walk or bike:

o Save money.

o	 Stay healthy (avoid the “Freshman 15”).

o	 Avoid vehicle parking hassles.

•	 Tips for crossing campus safely on foot:

o Cross the street at marked crosswalks or at intersections, and observe traffic-control signals. At intersections, watch for turning vehicles that may not be 

yielding to pedestrians.

o	 Yield to motor vehicles and bicyclists when you are not

in a crosswalk or are not crossing at an intersection.

o Stay to the right on shared pathways and avoid walking in “bike only” lanes.

o	 While walking or jogging alongside a road without

sidewalks, always walk or jog facing traffic.

o Make eye contact with oncoming motorists and 

cyclists, indicate your intention to cross (e.g., extend

your arm, place a foot in the crosswalk, or lean toward 

the crossing), and wait for the driver to slow or stop.

o	 Avoid cell phone use when walking in congested

areas or crossing busy streets; wear bright colors and 

walk in well-lighted areas at night; don’t step into the

street from behind an obstruction.

Some important strategies for educating high school and college-age pedestrians include:

•	 Develop partnerships for education programs—with Parking and Transportation Services Office, Department of

Public Safety, campus health organizations, public health/

University of North Carolina “Yield to Heels” Campus Safety Campaign

Chapel Hill, North Carolina 

The University of North Carolina’s “Yield to Heels” campaign is an ongoing pedestrian safety awareness campaign implemented by the UNC Department of Public Safety and the 

UNC Highway Safety Research Center. The “Yield to Heels” campaign intends to

remove myths about traffic and pedestrians and make helpful information about 

pedestrian safety available to the University community. The campaign focuses 

on three main messages for pedestrians, drivers and bicyclists: Be Aware, Be 

Safe, and Be Considerate. It involves high-visibility posters and signs; handing 

out promotional materials, coupons, and giveaways (such as tee-shirts and retroreflective gear); as well as issuing warnings to pedestrians and drivers observed

breaking the laws during the campaign effort. See the campaign Web site (http://

www.hsrc.unc.edu/y2h/) for the event flier, a description of student-oriented pedestrian safety messages, and other helpful links.

For more links to educational strategies for various 

audiences, visit http://www.walkinginfo.org/education/messages.cfm.
78 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

injury prevention alliances or student associations, or other 

student	groups	such	as	walking/bicycling	clubs	or	environmental groups.

•	 Take	advantage	of 	campus	life	and	university	events—	

distribute pamphlets or other materials at new student 

orientations,	large	student	assemblies	(such	as	sporting	

events),	or	through	campus	housing.

•	 Give	incentives—While	distributing	safety	messages,	

garner student interest by giving away food, wristbands, 

retro-reflective	gear,	posters,	coupons	for	local	restaurants,	

or other freebies.

•	 Tailor	a	program	to	relate	to	specific	student	population	

needs	and	interests—This	helps	engage	students	in	understanding why pedestrian safety is important and how 

it affects them directly. They learn what they can do, both 

personally	and	as	part	of 	the	school	or	college/university,	

to improve pedestrian safety and increase walking on campus and beyond.

Educating adult pedestrians

The challenge of walking along and crossing streets can make 

a	casualty	of 	even	a	fit,	healthy,	and	alert	adult.	Bad	weather,	

fast-moving	traffic,	and	inattention	by	drivers	or	pedestrians	can	

make situations worse. Some general pedestrian safety messages include:

•	 Make	yourself 	visible	to	drivers

o	 Wear	retro-reflective	materials	and	bright/light	

 colored clothing. 

o	 Carry	a	flashlight	when	walking	at	night.	

o Use caution when wearing headphones and talking on 

cell phones while walking, especially when crossing 

the street.

o Stand clear of buses, hedges, parked cars or other 

 obstacles before stepping into the street so drivers 

can see you. 

•	 Avoid	dangerous	behaviors

o	 Always	walk	on	the	sidewalk;	if 	there	is	no	sidewalk,	

walk	facing	traffic.	

o Stay sober; walking while impaired increases your 

chance of being struck. 

o	 Don’t	assume	vehicles	will	stop;	make	eye	contact	

with drivers and wait until they show signs of slowing 

or stopping for you. Brochures and educational handouts can 

be used to spread adult pedestrian safety 

messages.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 79

o	 Cross	with	traffic	signals	and	not	against	the	DON’T	

WALK	signal.

o	 Don’t	rely	solely	on	pedestrian	signals;	look	before	

you cross the road.

o	 Watch	for	cars	backing	up	in	parking	lots	and	near	

on-street parking spaces.

•	 Look	before	you	take	a	step

o Cross streets at marked crosswalks or at intersections, 

if possible.

o Look left, right, behind, and left again before crossing 

a	street	or	stepping	into	traffic.	

o	 Watch	for	turning	vehicles;	make	sure	the	driver	sees	

you and will stop. 

o	 When	crossing	multiple	lanes,	look	across	all	lanes	

you must cross and visually clear each lane before 

proceeding.

Strategies for educating adult pedestrians include:

•	 Incorporate	pedestrian	safety	messages	into	public	relations	efforts	(news	releases,	fact	sheets	for	local	officials,	

press	events,	etc.).

For more information on pedestrian education 

and enforcement measures, read Chapter 8 of 

NHTSA’s “Countermeasures That Work” 

document, availbale online at http://www.nhtsa.

gov/staticfiles/DOT/NHTSA/Traffic%20

Injury%20Control/Articles/Associated%20

Files/HS810891.pdf.

“Cross the Street As If Your Life Depends On It” 

Education Campaign

Greater Toronto Area, Ontario, Canada

In 2002, Toronto experienced one of the worst years in terms of pedestrian fatalities. The Injury Prevention Coalition began a campaign to increase citizen awareness and reduce pedestrian deaths and injuries in 

the Greater Toronto Area. Ads were developed with the slogan, “Cross 

The Street As If Your Life Depends On It, Because It Does.” Posters and 

safety brochures were sent to 900 different community agencies, all 

with the dramatic photo of a staged pedestrian fatality scene. These 

community	agencies	included	health	services,	police	and	fire	stations,	

parks and recreations centers, senior centers, licensing centers, and 

more. Additionally, ads were placed in 30 bus shelters at key intersections, and a short slide show was developed to be shown in local movie 

theatres, which directed viewers to a Web site with further information. 

The media launch for the event was covered by several city newspapers. Over 867,000 people viewed the pedestrian safety ad showed in 

movie theatres. The media images and brochures were evaluated for 

the effectiveness of the message, and both were found to educate readers and viewers, and bring up 

previous information regarding pedestrian safety. For more information, visit http://www.sunnybrook.ca/ 

programs/trauma/injuryprevent/injurypreventtipc.
80 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

•	 Highlight pedestrian facilities when introducing new infrastructure.

•	 Create a Web-based pedestrian safety quiz on a local agency

Web site for the purpose of educating pedestrians.

Educating older pedestrians (65+)

For older pedestrians, whether they are in good health or not,

walking can provide strong health and quality of life benefits.

However, research has shown that older pedestrians are often 

overrepresented in fatal pedestrian crashes. If they survive the

crash, they may be disabled or confined to a nursing home. Older adults are often struck while crossing streets in crosswalks or 

by drivers making turning movements through crosswalks. 

Older adults can be receptive to well-crafted safety messages. In

addition to the general messages described in the “Adult Pedestrian” section, key messages for older pedestrians could include:

•	 The threats presented by cars making turns.

•	 Tips for crossing intersections slowly but safely, including

waiting for a ‘fresh’ green light before crossing at a signal.

•	 Good choices of footwear (for better traction) and visible

clothing (bright and retro-reflective) for walking at night.

•	 Tips for avoiding backing vehicles, including watching for

back-up lights on vehicles or listening for engine noise 

before walking behind vehicles.

Strategies for educating older pedestrians include:

•	 Initiate campaigns to targeted settings/situations where

older pedestrians may be concentrated (e.g., retirement

communities, healthcare clinics/hospitals, libraries,

churches, etc.).

•	 Contact established organizations, such as AARP, or community centers that may already have a strong network 

with the older pedestrian community.

Educating drivers

An important educational feature is how motorists come to

think of pedestrians. Most motorists do not adequately look 

for pedestrians, and this is, in part, a result of how public or 

law enforcement officials educate them and enforce (or fail to

enforce) certain behaviors. In pedestrian-vehicle crashes, the

pedestrians are often blamed, even when the motorist was at 

fault because of the underlying assumption is that streets are 

Making presentations at group meetings 

with older pedestrians is one strategy for 

educating senior pedestrians.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 81

primarily for motorists. Educators and law enforcement officers

need to work to change these views to ensure that pedestrians 

are accepted as legitimate users of the street network. 

Roadway safety is a shared responsibility, and motorists have 

their fair share of things to do to comply with the rules of the 

road and help keep pedestrians safe. Some general driver safety 

messages include:

•	 Watch for pedestrians at all times o Scan the road and the sides of the road ahead for 

potential pedestrians.

o Before making a turn, look in all directions for pedes-

trians crossing.

o	 Don’t drive distracted or after consuming alcohol or

other drugs.

o	 Do not talk ona cell phone while driving.

o	 For maximum visibility, keep your windshield clean

and headlights on. 

•	 Yield to pedestrians at crossings

o	 Yield to pedestrians at crosswalks, whether marked or

unmarked. 

o	 Yield to pedestrians when making right or left turns

at intersections. 

o	 Do not park in or block crosswalks. Providea safety

zone for pedestrians.

•	 Drive within the posted speed limit and avoid aggressive

maneuvers

o	 If you are traveling ona road with more than one

lane of traffic, be especially aware of motor vehicles

stopped for crossing pedestrians. Do not pass the

stopped vehicles.

o	 Obey speed limits and come toa complete stop at

stop signs and signals.

o	 Always be prepared to stop for pedestrians.

Strategies for educating drivers include: 

•	 Plug into local media—have driver safety awareness cam-

paigns on TV, in radio traffic-watch PSAs, and in newspa-

pers; host a commute-time radio talk series on pedestrian 

safety issues, or develop an ad campaign to be displayed on 

billboards, in parking garages, or in other places most vis-

ible to drivers.

•	 Place and distribute driver safety material alongside pedes-

trian safety material. Most walkers are drivers, too.
82 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

•	 Couple	education	with	enforcement	to	reinforce	driver	

knowledge of and compliance with pedestrian-related laws.

•	 Add	pedestrian	safety	information	to	state	driver’s	license	

manuals	and	maps	where	traffic	safety	tips	provided	by	a	

state or community are displayed.

•	 Create	Web-based	traffic	safety	quizzes	(that	include	

pedestrian	safety	questions)	on	a	local	agency	Web	site	

for the purpose of educating drivers.

•	 Use	engineering	treatments	(such	as	roadway	signs	and	

in-street	signs)	to	alert	drivers	to	pedestrians	and	spread	

educational messages about yielding to pedestrians. See the 

Engineering treatments section for more engineering tools 

related to educating drivers.

Educating alcohol consumers

Most people know the risks of drinking and driving, but what 

many people may not know is that excessive drinking can have 

the	same	deadly	consequences	for	pedestrians.	Alcohol	plays	

an	important	factor	in	one-third	of 	all	pedestrian	deaths—this	

number is based on pedestrians who have been drinking and 

doesn’t	include	drinking	on	the	part	of 	the	driver.	Alcohol-

 related pedestrian deaths often involve males and occur at night, 

especially on weekends. Unfortunately there are typically no 

‘drunk	pedestrian’	laws	that	allow	police	officers	to	arrest	and	

easily	remove	a	pedestrian	from	harm’s	way.	The	problem	of 	

alcohol-impaired drivers and pedestrians is complex and requires a multifaceted approach including both education-based 

programs as well as other intervention methods, including engineering and enforcement. 

Alcohol	impairs	physical	agility	and	balance.	It	also	adversely	

affects vision, judgment, and other thought processes, which 

become extremely important when pedestrians try to cross the 

road.	It	is	widely	accepted	that	the	alcohol-impaired	driver	is	a	

major threat to pedestrians and all other road users. Researchers have also found that for a pedestrian, high levels of blood 

alcohol are associated with an increased risk of being hit by a 

motor vehicle. The following messages for alcohol consumers 

are	described	in	the	NHTSA	resource	guide,	The Facts: Impaired 

Pedestrians:

For	motorists:

•	 Do	not	drive	impaired.	It	slows	your	reaction	time,	

 impairs your judgment, and affects your alertness and 

 coordination.

Excessive drinking can pose a serious 

concern for pedestrians and drivers alike.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 83

•	 When you drive, particularly at night around populated

areas, watch for sudden, unexpected movements by pedestrians. Scan the road widely and often, and prepare for the 

unexpected. Slow down!

•	 If you know someone who has been drinking and is planning to walk, call them a cab or offer to drive or escort 

them, even if it is only a short distance. 

For pedestrians:

•	 Remember that alcohol affects your balance, impairs your

judgment, and reduces your alertness and coordination. 

It can also affect your vision.

•	 Limit how much alcohol you consume, especially if you

plan to walk. Do not fool yourself about your ability to

walk in traffic safely.

•	 Be more visible to traffic by carrying a flashlight or wearing retro-reflective clothing at night. During the day,

wearing fluorescent colors is best. Wearing white, especially

at night, is not enough for you to be seen adequately by 

motorists.

•	 If you know someone who has been drinking and is planning to walk, offer to call them a cab or escort them, even 

if it is only for a short distance.

One strategy for educating alcohol consumers is to initiate

public awareness and education campaigns to inform pedestrians and alert drivers about the hazards associated with walking 

while impaired. It is also important to train law enforcement

officers and point-of-sale personnel about impaired pedestrian

issues and the dangers of over-serving in general. 

The following are some additional strategies that could be 

combined with public awareness campaigns to provide a more 

comprehensive approach to the alcohol issue: 

•	 Develop or amend local or state laws that control the availability of alcohol (e.g., laws that dictate when bars must

close, etc.).

•	 Develop or amend laws to allow police to arrest or detain a

pedestrian if they are out walking impaired and may harm 

themselves or others. 

•	 Work with health officials, employment centers, and other

related groups for the early identification and treatment of

persons with alcohol problems.

•	 Address environmental issues (e.g., through improved

lighting, speed control measures on commercial strips, 

etc.) and devise different interventions for use on highMost alcohol-related crashes occur at 

night. Safety messages aimed at alcohol 

consumers and intermediaries should 

describe ways for pedestrians to be more 

visible at night.
84 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

speed roads in rural areas and medium-speed roads in 

urban areas where there is a pattern of drunk pedestrians 

being struck by motorists. See the Engineering solutions 

described	in	the	first	part	of 	Chapter	5	for	more	strategies	

related to environmental issues.

Educating	commuters/employees

There are many who drive to work daily who could walk, bicycle,	or	take	transit.	Often,	this	creates	unnecessary	roadway	

congestion, which may lead to increases in motorist-pedestrian 

crashes, as well as increases in pollution. Many communities 

and local agencies have transportation demand management 

(TDM)	programs,	which	aim	to	educate	road	users	about	their	

commute choices, provide incentives and alternatives to reduce 

driving	to	work,	and	can	result	in	more	efficient	use	of 	transportation resources. Educating commuters about travel options, 

benefits,	and	safe	practices	is	an	important	component	of 	any	

comprehensive pedestrian education program. The key to encouraging more commuters to travel by foot is to educate them 

on	the	benefits	of 	walking	and	the	feasibility	of 	doing	it.	

Educating	employees	about	the	benefits	of 	walking	and	safe	

walking/driving	habits	can	be	part	of 	a	company	or	agency	

traffic	safety	program.		It	is	not	uncommon	for	large	companies	

to institute a driver safety program to reduce the chance that 

their employees will get into a crash, keep insurance premiums 

low,	and	help	reduce	the	company’s	exposure	to	tort	liability	

by	reducing	crashes.		Some	companies,	such	as	Dow	Chemical,	require	employees	to	take	a	traffic	safety	and	map	reading	

course	before	being	allowed	to	travel	for	the	company.		Others	

require employees to take a mandatory defensive driving course 

every couple of years. Companies can include information on 

safe walking practices and driving practices around pedestrians 

in their curricula.

The following are some ideas for marketing non-motorized 

travel modes, and providing choices and incentives for walking 

as part of a commute, drawn from the Victoria Transport Policy 

Institute	(http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/index.php#incentives):

•	 Hold	bicycling	and	walking	events	and	activities,	particularly on trails and cycling routes.

•	 Develop	bicycling	and	walking	commute	campaigns;	these	

can involve contests as to which workers and worksites 

commute most by nonmotorized modes.

•	 Provide	and	promote	bicycle	parking,	showering,	and	

Educating employees about the benefits 

of walking, and encouraging commuters 

to consider walking can be an important 

part of a company or agency’s traffic 

safety program.

For more information on promoting walking, visit: 

http://www.walkinginfo.org/promote/strategies.cfm.

For more information on business-based walking 

programs, visit http://www.americanheart.org/

presenter.jhtml?identifier=3040830.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 85

clothes changing facilities at worksites, transportation terminals, and other destinations.

•	 Develop	and	distribute	education	materials	and	programs	

that teach cycling skills.

•	 Create	walking	and	bicycling	maps	showing	recommended	

routes	and	facilities,	roadway	conditions	(shoulders,	traffic	

volumes,	special	barriers	to	cycling,	etc.),	hills,	recreational	

facilities, and other information helpful to pedestrians and 

bicyclists.

•	 Develop	tourist	promotion	materials	highlighting	bicycling	

and walking.

•	 Create	a	Multi-Modal	Access	Guide,	which	includes	maps	

and other information on how to walk and cycle to a particular destination.

•	 Employers	(including	public	agencies)	can	create	a	mandatory defensive driving program to improve the safety of 

their employees and reduce their tort liability. This campaign should include pedestrian safety information.

Educating	elected	officials,	transportation	officials	and	decisionmakers

Educating	the	pedestrian	alone	is	not	enough.	An	effective	program to improve pedestrian safety and mobility should also address those responsible for approving, planning, designing, and 

developing	a	safe	pedestrian	network.	Elected	officials,	transportation	officials,	and	other	decision-makers	must	have	buy-in	

on the importance of walking and the need for safe walking 

conditions.	Otherwise,	they	may	not	provide	the	resources	to	

address the problems. Their support for pedestrian education 

programs, stepped-up enforcement activities, and infrastructure 

improvements	is	crucial.	It	is	important	for	elected	officials	and	

transportation decision-makers to understand and believe that:

•	 Walking	is	an	integral	and	critical	part	of 	the	transportation system. 

•	 The	presence	of 	pedestrians	is	a	good	indication	of 	the	

health and vitality of a community. 

•	 Walking	is	the	most	basic	form	of 	transportation,	and	yet	

also the easiest to overlook or take for granted. 

•	 Designing	a	safe,	convenient,	and	comfortable	walking	

environment requires careful planning, engineering, attention to detail, and ongoing maintenance and care. 

•	 Physical	improvements	must	go	hand	in	hand	with	land	

use control, legal changes, enforcement, education, and a 

complete package of measures that require coordination 

and support from politicians as well as professionals.

Get Active Orlando

Orlando, Florida

Orlando’s expansive program, Get 

Active Orlando, (funded by Active 

Living By Design) aims to encourage 

and facilitate walking and biking 

in the downtown area. Get Active Orlando’s vision is to establish 

downtown Orlando and its adjacent 

neighborhoods as an “Active Living 

District,” with residents, employees, 

and others in the downtown area 

routinely making the active choices 

in an environment that encourages 

safe physical activity. The Get Active Orlando partnership plans to 

develop and implement a campaign 

that focuses on the importance of 

daily active living and is developing 

a “Point of Choice” campaign that 

educates people on their options for 

active traveling. For more information, visit http://www.activeliving.

org/node/291?tab=summary.
86 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Some	strategies	for	educating	elected	officials	and	transportation	officials	and	other	decision-makers	include:

•	 Show	the	facts—improve	data	to	better	describe	the	nature	

of the pedestrian problem in the community and to justify 

attention to pedestrian concerns.

•	 Conduct	internal	campaigns	within	the	organization	to	

build	staff 	support	for	the	pedestrian	safety	program	(inhouse	meetings,	newsletters,	forums,	etc.).

•	 Develop	relationships	and	partner	with	other	agencies	

(such	as	transit	agencies,	public	health	agencies,	police	

departments,	etc.)	that	have	an	interest	in	pedestrian	issues	

and a responsibility for the public welfare.

•	 Plan	events	and	activities	that	encourage	officials	to	walk	

with an escort that can point out challenges and potential 

solutions.

•	 Partner	with	safety	groups,	community	groups,	homeowners associations, and others to lobby to politicians and 

decision-makers at the local and state level.

Enforcement Solutions

Overview

Programs to improve pedestrian safety should consider enforcement activities, in addition to engineering and education strategies. Enforcement, as well as education, teaches motorists and 

pedestrians	about	traffic	safety	and	the	laws	that	govern	their	

rights and responsibilities. 

The main goal for enforcement strategies is to deter unsafe 

driver and pedestrian behavior and to encourage all road users	to	obey	traffic	laws	and	share	the	road	safely.	Enforcement	

is one strategy to improve pedestrian safety, but enforcement 

alone will not likely have a long-term effect. Communities must 

combine enforcement, engineering and education strategies to 

address	specific	needs	and	achieve	long-term	results.

An	important	issue	is	motorists’	awareness	of 	the	presence	of 	

pedestrians. Many motorists do not routinely look for and yield 

to pedestrians. The pedestrians are often blamed in pedestrianvehicle crashes because of the underlying assumption that roadways	are	primarily	for	motorists.	Law	makers,	local	officials,	and	

law	enforcement	officers	need	to	work	to	change	these	views	to	

ensure that pedestrians are accepted as legitimate users of the 

street network. Motorists need to be taught and reminded that 

pedestrians	are	more	difficult	to	see	than	motor	vehicles	and	

An effective program to improve pedestrian safety and mobility should include 

elected officials and transportation 

decision-makers responsible for approving, planning, designing, and developing 

a safe pedestrian network.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 87

therefore conscious efforts are needed to reach for pedestrians 

in order to avoid collisions.

Furthermore, the Uniform Vehicle Code (UVC), that contains

the vehicle and traffic laws of the United States, and most state

laws require drivers to exercise due care any time they see a 

pedestrian in the roadway. The UVC was established by the national committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances—a

private, non-profit membership organization—as a set of guidelines related to motor vehicle safety. These guidelines or model 

legislation are then adopted by states as is or with changes to 

wording as each state chooses. UVC Section 11-504 states that

“Notwithstanding other provisions of this chapter or the provisions of any local ordinance, every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian. ... and shall 

give an audible signal when necessary, and shall exercise proper 

care and precaution upon observing any child or any obviously 

confused, incapacitated or intoxicated person.”

Complementary enforcement, education and engineering measures increase the effectiveness of safety programs. For example, to encourage more motorist yielding to pedestrians in crosswalks, the roadway should be designed to promote lower moto

vehicle speeds and provide clear sight lines between drivers and 

walkers. Police enforcement should give warnings and tickets 

Enforcement Programs Work

Enforcement programs increase the percentage of 

motorists yielding to pedestrians and also motorist 

awareness of pedestrians. They can also target motorists that are speeding or those that pass vehicles that 

are yielding to pedestrians. Malenfant and Van Houten 

(1989) measured large increases in yielding behavior in three Canadian cities employing enforcement 

complemented with educational outreach and several 

engineering interventions. Although safety may have 

been	greatly	influenced	by	the	engineering	interventions, the enforcement component increased yielding behavior (Malenfant, 1989).

More recently, this program has been applied to increase yielding behavior in Miami Beach, Florida. Data 

collected to date show that yielding has increased in both corridors following the introduction of the program and that maintenance strategies are working to maintain the increase in yielding behavior. Data also 

indicated that enforcement tactics for increasing yielding behavior to pedestrians in marked crosswalks at 

uncontrolled locations can be applied at other crosswalk locations. 

For more information, visit: http://www.hsrc.unc.edu/pdf/pedbike/99090.PDF.
88 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

to violating motorists. Simultaneous public education programs 

should be used to educate the public about the importance of 

motorist compliance to such laws and the possible consequences of not doing so. A pedestrian safety program in Miami-Da

County, Florida, that incorporated engineering, education and

enforcement components reduced pedestrian crash rates. (For

more information, see Comprehensive Approaches on page 108

and 109.)

The public typically thinks of enforcement as officers writing

tickets. In reality, enforcement should be a network of community members working together to promote safe walking 

and driving. This can be accomplished through safety awareness, education, and, where necessary, the use of warnings and/

or ticketing for dangerous and illegal behaviors. Enforcement 

entails members of the community working in conjunction with 

law enforcement. Working together to enforce rules for reasonable and careful walking and driving makes it safer and easier 

for everyone to walk.

A critical factor in conducting pedestrian enforcement is having

support from important stakeholders including local politicians 

and traffic court judges as well as law enforcement personnel. Politicians can ensure financial support for programs, and

judges, once they understand the magnitude of the problem and 

how a particular enforcement program is conducted, may be 

more likely to convict violators. This is critical as law enforcement officers may not continue to write citations if they are

consistently thrown out in court. 

An adequate level of enforcement is needed to control motorist and pedestrian behavior, especially in school zones. Studies 

by Van Houten (2004) and others have found that enforcement

aimed at motorists is more effective than enforcement aimed 

at pedestrians. “Anti-jaywalking” campaigns have proven ineffective and very unpopular. Police interaction with pedestrians 

should focus on education and warnings rather than giving 

citations. It has generally been more effective to cite motorists

for violations related to pedestrian safety. While the laws clearly

explain the dual responsibility of motorists and pedestrians, the 

reality is that the greatest threat to safety is a motorist who is 

operating a heavy motor vehicle, often at relatively high speeds. 

Also, enforcement programs that involve frequent and reasonable motorist penalties are more effective than enforcement 

that is less frequent but imposes high penalties for a motorist 

violation.

Enforcement should include a network of 

community members working together to 

promote safe walking and driving.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 89

Police resources should be used to enforce pedestrian crossing rights and to control motorist speeds. This requires speed 

limits to be established at reasonable and desirable levels. Police 

departments should undertake training programs so that the 

police officers who are responsible for enforcement programs

understand the laws and issues surrounding pedestrian safety.

Existing Pedestrian and Traffic Laws and their Enforcement

Many laws and ordinances addressing the safety of pedestrians 

currently exist. The Resource Guide on Laws Related to Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety includes provisions of vehicle and 

traffic laws for every state in the U.S. that may affect pedestrian

or bicycle safety. The Guide also contains existing state laws and 

local ordinances that are not included in the Uniform Vehicle 

Code, but have been implemented in one or more states or 

municipalities and are considered to have a positive effect on 

pedestrian or bicycle safety. Model legislation designed to enhance pedestrian safety is also included. The Guide is available 

as a download or can be ordered from the NHTSA Web site.

(See http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/pedbimot/bike/

resourceguide/index.html.)

A comprehensive enforcement program includes reviewing

existing relevant laws in a given locality. If necessary, modifications to the laws to improve the safety of pedestrians can be 

explored. A team of law enforcement officials, city attorneys,

traffic court personnel and other interested stakeholders should

review laws and ordinances that impact pedestrian safety, compare them with existing model ordinances, and consider changing them to increase the safety benefit to pedestrians. For example, statutes that require drivers to yield to a pedestrian standing 

on the curb at a crosswalk are stronger than those that say you 

must only yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk. Statutes that 

require drivers traveling in both directions to yield can reduce 

the number of pedestrians trapped in the center of the roadway. 

Changes to laws or ordinances should be made first at the state

level, and then at the local level. Any changes or additions need

to be publicized to the public to have any positive effect.

Identifying Unsafe Behaviors

Effective enforcement programs, like any safety efforts, first

must identify unsafe behaviors of drivers and pedestrians, and 

then select appropriate strategies for improving these behaviors. There are many ways to identify unsafe behaviors; an 

observation of driver and pedestrian activity is a good way to 

Enforcement programs that involve frequent and reasonable motorist penalties 

are more effective than enforcement that 

is less frequent but imposes high penalties for a motorist violation.
90 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

start. Speed measurements and examination of recent crash 

reports provide additional information. Collecting data to 

identify pedestrian safety problems is discussed in Chapter 3 

and approaches used to analyze this information are discussed 

in Chapter 4. To start, look for the common unsafe behaviors 

listed below when observing traffic.

Driver Behaviors

Unsafe motorist behaviors may include the following:

•	 Speeding, especially through residential streets and school

zones. (Speed is directly related to crash severity and is also

a likely factor in crash causation.)

•	 Failing to yield to pedestrians, especially in crosswalks.

(The law requires drivers to yield or stop for pedestrians in

crosswalks — it’s a law that is often ignored.)

•	 Running red lights or STOP signs.

•	 Passing cars stopped for pedestrians crossing the street.

•	 Passing stopped school buses.

•	 Parking or stopping in crosswalks.

•	 Failing to yield to pedestrians when making right or left

turns.

•	 Failing to yield to pedestrians on sidewalks when entering

or leaving driveways or alleys.

•	 Driving while distracted.

Some drivers don’t think about the risks they create. A driver

may not think going 10 mph over the speed limit will be noticeably less safe, especially on a wide, inviting street. Nevertheless, just a 10 mph difference in speed can greatly affect vehicle

stopping distance and greatly affects whether a pedestrian lives 

or dies when struck by a car. In a 20 mph impact, a pedestrian

Motorist fails to yield to pedestrian in 

crosswalk.

If a pedestrian is hit by 

a motor vehicle traveling 

40 mph, the risk of dying 

increases to 85 percent.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 91

has	about	a	5	percent	chance	of 	dying	when	hit	by	a	car.	At	30	

mph,	the	chance	of 	dying	increases	to	roughly	45	percent.	If 	a	

pedestrian	is	hit	by	a	motor	vehicle	traveling	40	mph,	the	risk	of 	

dying	increases	to	85	percent	(see	graph	below).	

Pedestrian Behaviors

A	critical	component	of 	enforcement	activities	is	ensuring	that	

pedestrians know and follow the safety rules whether or not 

they are laws. Some unsafe pedestrian behaviors that enforcement	can	influence	include:

•	 Crossing	a	street	at	an	undesirable	location.

•	 Not	looking	left,	right	and	left	again	before	crossing	the	

street.

•	 Not	continuing	to	look	for	traffic	while	crossing.

•	 Darting	out	between	parked	cars	and	trucks.

•	 Not	stopping	and	looking	any	time	before	stepping	in	

front of a vehicle or obstacle that is blocking the view of 

traffic.

•	 Wearing	dark	clothes	when	there	is	poor	lighting.

•	 Not	following	the	directions	of 	traffic	signals	or	crossing	

guards.

•	 Walking	along	a	street	with	their	back	to	traffic.

Using information obtained from crash and other data, the 

review of relevant laws, and direct observation of behavior, 

a	team	of 	law	enforcement	officers,	traffic	officials	and	other	

stakeholders can develop a plan and determine strategies to use 

to enforce laws and improve the safety of pedestrians.

Role of Law Enforcement Officers

Law	enforcement	officers	see	the	consequences	of	motor	vehicle crashes and the behaviors that cause these consequences. 

It	is	vital	that	they	connect	the	two.	From	conducting	education	

and enforcement campaigns to identifying unsafe conditions, 

law	enforcement	officers	can	play	multiple	roles.	Demands	on	a	

law enforcement department and the level of participation they 

can	offer	vary	among	communities.	It	is	important	to	understand the level of resources available for local law enforcement. 

Some communities reserve law enforcement resources for 

situations where pedestrians face direct or demonstrated harm, 

or when unsafe behaviors persist despite engineering improvements.

Pedestrian signal violations can lead to 

crashes.
92 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Types of Law Enforcement Officers

State police or highway patrols, sheriff departments and local 

law enforcement agencies all may be partners in a pedestrian 

safety program. There are at least three general types of law enforcement officers that typically assist pedestrian safety efforts:

•	 Traffic Enforcement Specialists/Motor Officers—These

officers are assigned to specialize in traffic enforcement.

They respond quickly to traffic safety hot-spots. Often

these officers utilize motorcycles, and are often referred to

as ‘motor officers’.

•	 Community Action Officers (CAOs)/Precinct Officers—

These officers are generally assigned to a specific portion

of the city and work on problem areas. While they do not

specialize in traffic enforcement, they can be called in for

enforcement activities and help coordinate with motor officers.

•	 School Resource Officers (SROs)—Some law enforcement

officers are assigned to schools and concentrate on special

problems such as gangs, drugs, and other problems. They 

can also be used to help solve special traffic problems on

or near a school campus and can coordinate with the motor officers and CAOs.

Officers can serve in the following ways:

•	 Teach members of the community to recognize and understand traffic, pedestrian and bike safety problems. In

addition to participating in community meetings, school 

safety assemblies, and safety fairs, educational efforts can 

include pedestrian and bicycle rodeos and providing media 

interviews on traffic safety issues.

•	 Evaluate local traffic concerns, observe problem areas and

behaviors, and provide input about safety improvements. 

Law enforcement officials can be a valuable part of a

safety audit team.

•	 Provide an enforcement presence that discourages dangerous behaviors. For example, this may involve issuing

warnings to drivers breaking traffic laws. Drivers who have

made a minor error will often respond to a warning from 

an officer by being more careful. Drivers who continue to

violate traffic laws need to be ticketed.

•	 Collaborate with traffic engineers and other stakeholders

regarding problem areas.

Enforcement measures can be taken to 

help encourage safer motorist habits.

Law enforcement officers can help improve pedestrian safety in a number of 

ways, including evaluating traffic concerns, providing enforcement presence, 

and educating members of the community.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 93

Community Enforcement Approach

Members of a community can work together to improve safety 

behaviors in many ways. Neighborhood speed watch programs 

and yard sign campaigns can provide opportunities for residents to educate drivers about the consequences of excessive 

driving speeds, while simultaneously making drivers aware that 

the neighborhood is concerned about safety. The community 

can work together to improve the safety of children walking to 

school by developing school crossing guard programs and safe 

routes to school walking plans. All adults in a community need

to be good role models for their children and others by driving safely, by actively looking left-right-left before entering the 

street, by crossing streets at prescribed locations such as marked 

crosswalks when they are available, and by following other traffic rules.

Neighborhood Speed Watch

Neighborhood Speed Watch programs are a traffic-related variation of neighborhood watch or crime watch programs. Such 

programs encourage residents to take an active role in changing the behavior of motorists on their neighborhood streets by 

helping raise public awareness and educate drivers about the 

negative impact of speeding. Residents record the speed, and 

the license plate and vehicle information of speeding motor 

vehicles using radar units borrowed from a local law enforcement agency. This information along with a letter is sent to the 

owners of the vehicles informing them of the observed violation and encouraging them or other drivers of their vehicles 

to drive in compliance with the posted speed limit. This type 

of awareness encourages some speeding drivers to slow down, 

but it often has limited long-term effectiveness in changing 

the problem, and many people are reluctant to ‘tattle’ on their

fellow residents. Neighborhood Speed Watch programs can

educate neighbors about the issue and help boost support for 

long-term solutions, such as traffic calming. Drivers also learn

that residents will not tolerate speeding in their neighborhoods. 

This program is more effective when implemented along with a 

neighborhood education program involving distributing traffic

safety information through door hangers or other means.

The organization of neighborhood speed watch programs can 

vary. Some jurisdictions have “Citizen’s Patrol” elements in the

police department and others have neighborhood volunteers to 

oversee the program. 

Neighborhood speed watch programs 

can increase motorists’ awareness of their 

speeds and the posted speed limits.

For more information on local neighborhood 

speed watch programs, visit http://www.slcgov.

com/transportation/TrafficManagement/speedwatch.htm and http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/

transportation/speedwatch.htm.
94 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Slow Down Yard Sign Campaigns and Pace Car Campaigns

Slow down yard sign campaigns allow residents to participate in 

reminding drivers to slow down. Neighborhood leaders, safety 

advocates and law enforcement officials work in partnership

to identify problem areas, recruit residents to post yard signs, 

organize distribution of yard signs, garner media attention, and 

evaluate the effectiveness of the campaign. Slow down yard sign 

campaigns may be conducted along with other speed enforcement efforts, such as progressive ticketing campaigns, and other 

safety efforts, such as neighborhood pace car campaigns and the 

use of speed radar trailers.

An evaluation of a yard sign campaign by the Safe Community

Coalition of Madison and Dane County, Wisconsin, concluded

that the signs are noticed and people do slow down when the 

signs are up, especially when speed boards are used to show 

drivers their approaching speed. 

Yard sign campaigns remind drivers to 

slow down.

Yard sign campaigns remind drivers to 

slow down. “KEEP KIDS ALIVE, DRIVE 25” Campaign

Omaha, Nebraska

Speeding in residential areas is all too common and renders neighborhoods 

unsafe for children and other pedestrians. Beginning in 1998, a local resident of 

Omaha, Nebraska started a grassroots education campaign to reduce residential speeding, a campaign that has since spread to over 240 communities all over 

the US. Collaborations between local residents, schools, neighborhood associations, local businesses, law enforcement, and traffic engineering and transportation departments improved mutual trust and strengthened opportunities to 

get the message out.

The education program was founded on the recognition that the majority of 

speeders in neighborhoods are residents themselves and that most speeders 

simply aren’t paying attention. Elements of the public awareness campaign have 

included street and yard signs, brochures, bumper stickers, trash can decals and even public service announcements, all containing the dramatic and effective slogan,“Keep Kids Alive, Drive 25.”Other slogans

expanded the message outside the neighborhood: “No Need to Speed,” “STOP. Take 3 To See,” “Check Your 

Speed,” and a Spanish language version, “Mantenga A Los Niños Vivos, Maneje A 25.” Funding has come 

through both the sale of related educational products as well as partnerships with local businesses. For 

example, Radio Disney sponsored public service announcements in Omaha, and Blue-Cross-Blue Shield

of Nebraska underwrote the cost of bumper stickers. In some cases, local departments of transportation 

have sponsored joint enforcement or engineering efforts, such as the installation of radar trailers and 

street signs.

The campaign has been a widely recognized success. The firststudy of effectiveness, conducted inOceanside, CA, found a 16 percent decrease in average speed of vehicles in targeted neighborhoods. A similar 

success was found in Omaha, where 75 percent of drivers braked when passing a yard sign. For more 

information, contact Tom Everson at Tom@kkad25.org or visit www.keepkidsavlivedrive25.org. 
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 95

Neighborhood pace car programs aim to make neighborhoods 

safer for pedestrians, bicyclists and drivers. Resident pace car 

drivers agree to drive courteously, at or below the speed limit, 

and follow other traffic laws. Programs usually require interested residents to register as a pace car driver, sign a pledge to 

abide by the rules, and display a Pace Car bumper sticker on 

their vehicle. 

Neighborhood Fight Back Programs

Neighborhood Fight Back programs are collaborative efforts

between local governments and concerned residents to address 

crime, blight and other issues negatively impacting their neighborhoods. Though typically used to address illegal drug and 

other criminal activity, traffic and pedestrian safety is another

area of concern targeted by Fight Back programs. The local government provides multi-agency support over a limited 

period of time to concentrate enforcement activities in specific

neighborhoods.

Adult School Crossing Guards

Well-trained adult school crossing guards can play a key role in

promoting safe driver and pedestrian behaviors at crosswalks 

near schools. They help children cross the street safely and remind drivers of the presence of pedestrians. A guard helps children develop the skills to cross streets safely at all times. Adult

school crossing guards can be parent volunteers, school staff 

or paid personnel. Annual classroom and field training for adult

school crossing guards as well as special uniforms or equipment 

to increase visibility are recommended, and in some locations 

required. For more information, visit http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/guide/crossing_guard/index.cfm.

Safe Routes to School Programs

Safe Routes to School (SRTS) is a national program teaching

education, enforcement, engineering, and encouragement strategies for communities to make walking to school safe and more 

widespread. The main goal for SRTS enforcement strategies is 

to deter unsafe behaviors of drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists, 

and to encourage all road users to obey traffic laws and share

the road safely. Enforcement used alone will not likely have a 

long-term effect. Communities must utilize a combination of 

strategies to address the specific needs of their schools and

achieve long-term results. 

Trained adult school crossing guards play 

a key role in promoting safe driver and 

pedestrian behaviors near schools.

To learn more about Safe Routes to School, go to 

http://www.saferoutesinfo.org. FHWA program 

guidance for Safe Routes to School is available at 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/saferoutes/srtsguidance.htm.

For information on neighborhood fight back 

programs, visit http://phoenix.gov/NSD/

fightbck.html and http://www.asu.edu/copp/

morrison/public/FightBackEvaluation.pdf.

For more information on pace car programs, visit 

http://www.ci.madison.wi.us/health/pubnews/

pdf_files/yardsign.pdf.
96 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Although SRTS programs vary among communities, they often

include exercises to map out the best ways to walk to school and 

implement strategies to encourage more walking. These plans 

can relate to enforcement and help identify where crossing 

guards or police enforcement can significantly reduce crash risk.

Safe walking routes can also be developed to help other groups, 

such as senior citizens, identify routes to walk to nearby stores 

and medical centers. Developing the route maps can help target

problem areas for improvements. 

Recommended Law Enforcement Approach

Effective law enforcement has four basic steps: 

1.	 Notify the community. An effective program will seek to

notify all community members that a strong traffic law

enforcement program is beginning.

Developing Safe Route to School Walking Route Maps

Phoenix, AZ

Phoenix, like many other communities, is working with school officials and parents to develop walking 

route maps to provide young students guidance on routes to walk to and from school. The intent of the 

program is not only to make the school trip safer by identifying the safest routes, but it also involves a 

comprehensive review of the walking routes by school officials and parents to identify problem areas. The 

walking route plan helps to identify where improvements are 

needed and where to place crosswalks, STOP signs and adult 

school crossing guards. The ultimate purpose of the walking 

routes is to encourage more children to walk to school and discourage parents from driving their children to school.

The school provides the walking attendance boundary map 

and parent volunteers to work on reviewing and developing 

the walking routes. The city provides aerial photographs, quarter-section maps and guidelines for parents and school officials 

on how to conduct their reviews. The process requires parent 

volunteers or school officials to review the entire walking route 

and to identify the most desirable walking route to serve each 

household within the walking attendance boundary. This exercise may also involve a revision of the walking attendance boundary if safe routes can be identified or created to serve more students.

Once the walking route maps are completed, traffic officials review the areas of concern and work with 

school officials to assure that the right number and placement of adult school crossing guards exists. The 

city provides final versions of the maps and maintains the computer files for the walking routes. It is the

responsibility of the school officials to distribute the walking route plans to the parents at the start of the 

school year and when new students are enrolled at the school. School walking route maps are reviewed 

annually to identify if there are any changes to or within the school walking attendance boundary.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 97

2.	 Use public awareness and education first. Public awareness and education is effective when applied prior to 

law enforcement activities. The awareness and education 

messages should inform people of the problem and why 

enforcement action is needed. This will generate public 

support and help offset complaints from those who are 

caught breaking the law. The public then needs to know 

what the enforcement activities will be and when they 

will start, as tickets are more likely to hold up in court 

when this groundwork has been done. Mass mailing and 

media campaigns using local television stations, radio and 

newspapers may help spread the message. Radio ‘traffic

watch’ programs are an excellent way to spread the traffic

safety message. Portable speed limit signs and speed reader 

boards are effective tools for providing real time speed information to drivers. For some drivers, raising that awareness may be enough to cause them to alter their behavior. 

3.	 Provide officer training. Officer training is critical to an

effective law enforcement program. The training should 

occur prior to the start of an enforcement program and include information on why, what, when, where and how law 

enforcement should occur to maximize behavior change, 

and to reduce the number of crashes involving pedestrians. Existing laws that impact pedestrian safety should be 

reviewed and discussed. For example, the officers need

to know the definition of crosswalks includes unmarked

crosswalks and they need to know pedestrian and motorist 

rights and responsibilities in crosswalks.

4.	 Follow up. Enforcement activities, regardless of the

specific method used, require follow-up to maintain their

effectiveness. To measure the impact of an enforcement 

activity in a specific situation, make a quick study before

and after the enforcement effort. Before-and-after studies 

do not have to be elaborate. They can be as simple as measuring speeds, or observing behaviors at crosswalks and 

parent drop-off and pick-up zones. Examine the results 

and decide on the next steps. If the results are positive, the

method used was likely effective in improving behavior. 

If the results indicate little change in unsafe behaviors,

perhaps another method should be used. Even with initial 

success, communities will need to repeat enforcement 

efforts periodically in order to sustain improvements in 

drivers’ behaviors.

Officer training is critical to an effective 

law enforcement program.
98 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Law Enforcement Methods

Law enforcement can use a variety of methods that utilize 

technology and personnel to raise awareness and educate motorists about driving behaviors and their relationship to safety. 

A variety of law enforcement methods can help change unsafe

behaviors, making walking safer and more attractive. 

Traffic Complaint Hot Line

Agencies can establish a central hot line phone number or Web

site address for citizen traffic complaints. This allows police to

coordinate their responses and concentrate on areas where there 

are numerous complaints. Traffic complaints are often associated with pedestrian crossings and other violations relating to 

pedestrian safety such as speeding. Where traffic complaint hot

lines have been established, most of the calls are about traffic

problems at or near schools. It is important for police to follow up with the complainant on the enforcement action and 

citations written. The complainants need to be told to provide 

information on the time of day and day of week when the 

violations are most prevalent to allow the police to better focus 

their resources. The police must then analyze the complaint to 

determine if it is truly the problem or merely a symptom of an 

underlying cause.

Radar Speed Trailers and Active Speed Monitors

Fixed motorist feedback signs or movable radar speed trailers

can be used as part of a community education and enforcement 

program. The more effective units have bright strobe lights 

that will flash like a photo-enforcement camera or display red

and blue flashing lights when motorists exceed a preset speed.

Radar trailers are moved to different locations and are occasionally supplemented with motor officer enforcement. Some

radar speed trailers can record speed data and traffic counts by

15-minute or hourly intervals throughout the day. This is useful 

information to compare to speeds prior to and following trailer 

placement. Radar speed trailers have limited long-term effectiveness if left in place. If moved around on a somewhat random

schedule and augmented by ticketing, they can have long-term 

benefits. They can also be useful in educating people and helping to boost support for other long-term solutions. 

Active speed monitors are permanent devices to keep drivers

aware of their speeds and the need to slow down. They are 

typically mounted in conjunction with a speed limit sign and 

visually display drivers’ real-time speeds as they pass. Drivers see

Speed trailers may be temporary or permanent devices to help monitor the speed 

of vehicles, especially inside neighborhoods.

Active speed monitors are permanent 

devices to keep drivers aware of their 

speeds and the need to slow down.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 99

how fast they are actually driving compared to the posted speed 

limit. Some active speed monitors are solar-powered.

Progressive Ticketing

Progressive ticketing is a method for introducing ticketing 

through a three-staged process. Issuing tickets is the most severe strategy of an enforcement program. It is usually reserved

for changing unsafe behaviors that other strategies failed to 

change or that pose a real threat to the safety of pedestrians and 

drivers. However, some communities actively advertise that the 

police will cite drivers for the more egregious violations, such 

as motorists speeding more than 20 mph over the posted speed

limit.

There are three main steps of an effective progressive ticketing 

program: 

1. 	 Educate—Establish community awareness of the problem.

The public needs to understand that drivers are speeding 

and the consequences of this speeding for people’s safety.

Raising awareness about the problem will change some 

behaviors and create public support for, or at least understanding of, the enforcement efforts to follow. The start of 

a safety campaign can be done as a part of a press conference.

2. 	 Warn—When violations are observed, give motorists

written warnings instead of citations. This allows police 

to stop motorists for lesser violations. This educational 

stop allows the officers to hand out safety literature that

indicates what harm is caused by excessive speed and the 

stopping distances required by higher speeds. Motorists are 

often relieved that the officer did not give them a citation

and may heed the warning. There are times during the 

warning period when some discretionary citations will be 

given for the more flagrant violations.

Beginning a ticketing program with education and warnings provides time to build support for the program as 

well as time for offenders to change behaviors. Issuing

warnings allows police to contact up to 20 times more

non-compliant drivers than does ticketing. In addition, the

high frequency of stops ensures not only that many people 

directly make contact with law enforcement, but also that 

many others witness these stops and are prompted to start 

to obey the rules.

Begin a ticketing program with education 

and warnings.
100 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

3. 	 Ticket—Finally, after the warning time expires and offenders continue their unsafe behaviors, officers should

issue tickets. Ticketing also gives the program credibility 

by showing that law enforcement is doing exactly what 

they said they would do if unsafe behavior did not change. 

Unfortunately, for some people receiving a ticket and experiencing the consequences is necessary, with the hopes of 

encouraging them to become safer drivers.

Pedestrian Decoy Operations

Pedestrian decoy operations are carefully designed and thoroughly coordinated activities to warn motorists that the yieldto-pedestrian laws will be enforced at target locations. Officers

prepare a site ahead of time by establishing the safe stopping 

distance to a crosswalk, with a 16 km/h (10 mi/h) over the

speed limit leeway. Cones are set out in that location. An officer

in plain clothes steps into the crosswalk just before a vehicle 

Law enforcers participate in pedestrian 

decoy operations.

Heed the Speed

Nationwide

The Heed the Speed neighborhood safety program 

is a combined education and enforcement neighborhood safety program that has been evaluated 

by NHTSA. The traffic safety campaign is conducted with active neighborhood participation using 

a public information campaign and a short (i.e., 

three month), intensive police enforcement campaign. Warnings are given out at first, followed by

citations by the end of the three-month period. 

The education component involves community 

meetings to get the word out about the consequences to pedestrians and motorists of speeding 

and how it affects insurance rates. Residents are

asked to voluntarily comply with the speed limits. 

Safety articles are written in community newsletters and local newspapers about the dangers and 

consequences of speeding. Nearby high schools 

and car dealerships are contacted with the same 

information. Residents are provided with yard

signs with the HEED THE SPEED safety message. 

Radar speed trailers and radar speed training of new officers

in these neighborhoods help to provide a high level of police 

visibility. The program is repeated at intervals when speeds 

increase. Machine speed studies can be used to record and 

monitor speed results.

Heed the Speed safety campaigns have 

proven to be effective in reducing motorists’ speeds in neighborhoods. The campaign in the above two photos included 

adding visual illusion speed humps to the 

pavement to encourage slower driving 

speeds.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 101

passes the cone. This gives the motorist plenty of time to yield 

to the pedestrian. If the motorist doesn’t yield, either a warning

or a citation is given to the driver, based on the severity of the 

incident. The most effective campaigns have been accompanied 

by an extensive media blitz ahead of time. All the interactions

can be recorded on video so if motorists dispute a ticket, their 

behavior can be viewed by the courts. This usually leads to a 

guilty plea. These campaigns have proven to be very popular, as 

pedestrians are happy to see enforcement oriented at motorists, 

who often act aggressively towards pedestrians. The use of law 

enforcement officers as decoy pedestrians provides the officer

with first-hand experience as a pedestrian at a difficult and busy

crossing.

Photo Enforcement

Automated photo speed enforcement (photo radar) and red

light enforcement take a real-time photo of traffic to record vehicle speeds and behaviors. It can be used to document speeders

and those who drive dangerously through crosswalks. In several

evaluations, the presence of photo enforcement at intersections 

has resulted in fewer drivers running red lights and a decline in 

speeds and collisions. The mere presence or threat of photo 

speed enforcement may result in better driver compliance and 

behavior.

Automated photo speed enforcement is just one of many tools

law enforcement has to influence driver behavior and reduce

vehicle speed. Laws on the use of photo enforcement vary 

from state to state, and some states currently do not allow this 

type of enforcement. Photo radar systems typically operate 

on set speed thresholds, (e.g., 11 mph or more over the posted

speed limit) only capturing images of motor vehicles moving

at or above the established threshold. When a violation occurs,

the system captures speed data, as well as images of the motor vehicle (and in some systems the driver) at the time of the

violation. Citations are typically issued through the mail to the 

registered owner of the vehicle after a review of the vehicle and 

registration information is completed.

Photo enforcement technology does not replace traditional 

methods of traffic enforcement. Rather, it serves as a supplement to traditional traffic enforcement techniques, in addition

to education and engineering efforts designed to enhance traffic

safety.

Communities wishing to apply this technology to their traffic

safety efforts should consult with local courts, prosecuting auA van equipped with photo enforcement 

technology can be used at several locations where speeding threatens pedestrian safety.

For more research and information on photo enforcement, see:

Case Study 67, Red Light Camera Enforcement, Boulder Colorado. In PEDSAFE: Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection 

System, September, 2004. FHWA-SA-04-003 

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal 

Highway Administration. Available online at 

www.walkinginfo.org/pedsafe/case_studies2.

cfm?op=L&subop=I&state_name=Colorado. 

Case Study 68, Red Light Photo Enforcement, 

West Hollywood, California. In PEDSAFE: 

Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure 

Selection System, September, 2004. FHWASA-04-003 U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Highway Administration. Available online 

at www.walkinginfo.org/pedsafe/case_studies2.

cfm?op=L&subop=I&state_name=California.
102 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Pedestrian Decoy Operation

City of Miami Beach

Van Houten and Malenfant (2004) conducted a study of driver yielding behavior 

at four crosswalks in each of two—an east and west—high crash corridors in the 

City of Miami Beach. Police teams were situated at eight selected crosswalks. Each 

team included a decoy pedestrian who crossed the street when other pedestrians 

were not present, and a spotter who radioed failure to yield violations to other 

officers who flagged the violators and gave them a verbal warning (or citation)

and an enforcement flyer.

The police stopped 1,562 motorists 

for failing to yield to pedestrians 

over the period of a year, with 1,218 

of these stopped during the first two

weeks of the program (Van Houten 

and Malenfant, 2004). Three hundred 

seven citations were issued, of which 

188 were given during the first eight

weeks of the program. At baseline, 

3.3 percent and 18.2 percent of the 

drivers yielded to pedestrians in the 

west and east corridors respectfully. 

The introduction of the enforcement program at the four sites in 

the west corridor led to an increase 

in yielding to 27.6 percent during 

the first week of the program while

no increase in yielding occurred 

at the untreated east corridor. The 

introduction of the enforcement 

operations in the east corridor led to 

an increase in yielding to 28.8 percent in this corridor, while increased 

yielding was maintained in the west 

corridor. Monthly follow-up data 

indicated that the gains produced 

by the program were maintained in 

the absence of high levels of police 

enforcement with overall yielding rates of 27.8 percent in the west corridor and 

34.1 percent in the east corridor during the follow-up data collection (Van Houten 

and Malenfant, 2004).

 Additionally, police officers in Miami Beach and Miami Springs received training 

on pedestrian safety and enforcement activities that have been used to address 

a variety of violations and behaviors that often lead to collisions between pedestrians and motor vehicles (Zegeer et al, 2007).

“Decoy” 

Pedestrian Crossing the Street 

in Enforcement 

Operation.

Enforcement 

Operations in 

Miami-Dade.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 103

thorities, law enforcement and community groups in the plan-

ning and development of their photo enforcement programs. 

Some states may not allow photo enforcement in general, but 

may permit it in school zones. Also, in some locations where

photo enforcement is not permitted, citizen advocates can 

petition their legislators to permit its use. Photo enforcement 

provides communities witha highly flexible tool that can be de-

ployed when and where it is needed for maximum effect. Most 

systems also capture data on traffic flow and average speeds, en-

abling communities to measure the effectiveness of the deploy-

ments in relation to crash data for the area. A permanent, fixed photo speed enforcement camera in

a

neighborhood will almost never be financially viable, buta

mobile photo speed unit that can be carried in vans provides 

a feasible alternative. Such mobile units can provide excellent 

citywide coverage for problem areas. In these cases,a vendor

can operate the equipment, buta police officer must review the

photos and approve the citations before they are issued. The 

implementation of any photo enforcement program should be 

carefully planned, have reasonable and attainable expectations, 

and include public input and political support. It should also

emphasize the safety benefits rather than the monetary benefits,

as the public may be against these devices if raising revenue is 

emphasized. Alerting the public to the photo speed enforce-

ment effort before it begins is critical to avoid negative publicity. 

Visible warning signs should be placed in advance of the cam-

era location before the effort begins so drivers will understand 

what will happen. An effective photo enforcement program will

allow for the continuous two-way exchange of information with 

the community and have the flexibility to meet changing traffic

safety issues and concerns.

Double Fines in School Zones and Other Special Interest Areas

Strict enforcement of speed laws in school zones and other 

locations where pedestrian traffic is high, or crash data suggests

that speeding may be a factor in pedestrian crashes, can improve 

the safety for pedestrians and drivers. Along with school zones,

senior centers, park and recreation facilities, college campuses, 

hospitals and shopping areas are some of the locations that may 

warrant special attention by law enforcement officials to dis-

courage speeding and encourage proper behavior for yielding to 

pedestrians who are crossing roadways.A zero tolerance policy

for speeders in these special areas, and even an increase in fines

for drivers who violate the posted speed limit, are potential 

approaches.
104 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Building Partnerships and Coordination with Other E’s

Developing and implementing a successful education or enforcement program cannot be achieved by any one organization 

or agency—it takes a team effort. The benefits of effect

partnerships and collaboration include:

•	 Strength in numbers.

•	 Additional resources, expertise, and funding.

•	 Well-coordinated and more efficient use of resources.

•	 Better anticipation of program obstacles and potential

solutions.

Identifying all interested or potentially affected parties will help

ensure success. A successful partnership will include:

•	 Policy and decision makers.

•	 Engineers and transportation planners.

•	 Educators (including teachers, principles, school board

Double Fines in School Zones

State of Washington

In 1997, Washington State enacted legislation that doubled the basic fine for driversspeeding in a school

zone. This fine cannot be waived, suspended or reduced. One-half of the revenue generated is directed

into an account managed by the State’s Governor’s Highway Safety Office (the Washington Traffic Safety 

Commission), which is designed to enhance safety in school zones and student transportation. The legislation allows $1.5 million to be spent per biennium, with $1 million for law enforcement and $500,000 for 

public education. Funds for law enforcement are available to agencies through an application process. 

These funds can be used to purchase equipment—such as radars, computers, patrol cars or motorcycles—that improves safety in school zones or student transportation. The public education funds make 

it possible to produce and disseminate products, such as public service announcements, radio and bus 

ads, and crossing guard equipment. The funds 

have also been used to provide mini-grants 

to support International Walk to School Day 

celebrations around the state and have paid 

for the creation and distribution of the School 

Administrator’s Guide to Pedestrian Safety and 

the School Safety Resource Kit.

Through proactive enforcement, where law 

enforcement officers are focusing on school 

zone safety, communities have seen reductions 

in collisions in school zones. For example, collision rates in school zones have declined by 23 

percent in Bremerton, Washington, and by 13 

percent in Tumwater, Washington.

Defining the 3 E’s: Engineering, Education, and 

Enforcement. Sometimes other groups like to add 

other E’s as well: Encouragement, Emergency 

Services, Evaluation. 
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 105

members	etc.).

•	 Law	enforcement	officers	and	judges.

•	 Advocates	and	community	representatives.

•	 Health	and	safety	professionals.

•	 Transit	officials.

•	 Media.

Some strategies for building effective partnerships include:

•	 Understand	the	issues	and	the	purpose	of 	the	partnership.

•	 Seek	to	interest	agencies	and	encourage	cooperation.

•	 Establish	agreed-upon,	long-term	goals,	strategies,	and	

responsibilities.

•	 Create	achievable	short-term	goals	to	show	progress	and	

early successes.

More information on building partnerships and working with 

stakeholders is provided in Chapter 2. 

Media’s Role in Education and Enforcement

All	the	components	of 	a	good	education	and	enforcement	

program—creating	awareness,	alerting	the	public,	and	enforcing	

safe	practices—benefit	from	media	coverage.	For	enforcement	

events, the goal is to garner substantial media attention and eduBuilding Partnerships 

Portland, Oregon

At the Oregon Department of Transportation in Portland, OR, a forward-thinking manager brought together a diverse coalition of community groups to form a Community and School Traffic Safety Partnership. 

Included in the partnership are school boards, neighborhood associations, businesses, nonprofits, elder

advocacy groups, insurance providers, enforcement agencies, and bike and pedestrian advocacy groups. 

The coalition implements a wide variety of programs with success, such as an interactive half hour sidewalk pedestrian presentation. Another innovative program is the crosswalk enforcement action, where 

the ODOT partners with police enforcement to pull over anyone violating a monitored intersection for half 

an hour, during which a representative acts as a pedestrian repeatedly crossing the road. Both drivers and 

pedestrians are stopped and given an informational pamphlet and, in certain cases, a citation. This active 

enforcement action is performed wherever requested by a community.

The partnered organizations play an active role in the program as well. For example, various senior centers work closely with representatives from the ODOT to address problem areas and to develop localized 

pedestrian maps for use by members and residents. The maps show all points of interest including transit 

stops, benches, water fountains, curb cuts, and more, and designate a prioritized route to frequent destinations. Suggestions for revision are solicited from residents themselves, a bilingual explanation of signals is 

included, and the maps are distributed at the senior center and by local Meals on Wheels partners. For more 

information, contact Sharon White at (503) 823-7100.
106 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

cate the public to change behavior, not issue numerous tickets. 

If 10 motorists receive tickets and 100,000 people hear about

it, the enforcement effort will have a more significant impact

than if officers issue 100 tickets and only the recipients know

what happened. The key to a successful campaign is to provide 

information before the education or enforcement event occurs 

to encourage community support and facilitate positive coverage. Without such prior notification, motorists may claim to be

caught by surprise, which can lead to negative publicity. 

There are many ways to involve the media. For example:

•	 Neighborhood groups or community leaders can hold a

press conference to talk about pedestrian safety and tell the 

public that they are requesting more enforcement or are 

implementing an education campaign. 

•	 Organizers can provide the press with packets of information about walking and safety statistics. Press packets can 

include frequently asked questions to help a reporter ask 

the right questions in an interview.

•	 Informed members of the community can be available to

talk to the media. A child who is well-versed in the pedestrian problems in the neighborhood can provide an important perspective. Hearing a child explain how difficult it is

to cross a street will have a bigger impact than reading a 

statistic. Properly educated police and elected officials c

also deliver a powerful message.

The entire community can be made aware of the pedestrian 

safety program in a variety of ways to ensure they know what 

will happen before the program begins in force. Event organizers can:

•	 Publish an article in the local newspaper or in a neighborhood newsletter.

•	 Send an e-mail to residents.

•	 Put up speed reader boards so drivers see for themselves

what their speeds are compared to posted speeds.

•	 Post information signs near where the enforcement or

education effort will occur.

•	 Post yard signs in their front yards to get the message out.

•	 Participate in media events and community safety fairs.

In ethnically diverse communities, providing safety messages to

the public in various languages and with culturally-relevant messages will be critical for the success of the effort. Some safety 

out-reach efforts may require bilingual staff to provide the 

safety message to all targeted groups.

Informed members of communities can 

talk to media to raise awareness of pedestrian safety issues.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 107

Finding Funding and Support

Successful education and enforcement programs need longterm funding and support. This can be through local or regional 

agency budgets, support and contributions provided by local 

businesses or other stakeholders and partners (such as area

hospitals or advocacy groups like Safe Kids), or state and federal grants. Chapter 6 and Appendix D provide information on

funding strategies and sources for pedestrian projects.

Comprehensive Pedestrian Safety Program

Burlington, Vermont

The Burlington Department of Public Works launched an annual pedestrian safety campaign in the summer of 2006, based 

on materials in FHWA’s Pedestrian Safety Toolkit. The campaign included engineering, education, and enforcement 

components. 

For the engineering component, the 

town worked to develop a multi-modal 

transportation improvement plan; improve pedestrian access to transit and 

to the waterfront; and facilitate the 

development of pedestrian improvements to Cliff Street and other locations. On the enforcement side, the department worked with the Mayor and 

the Police Department to distribute 

educational materials to violators, with 

specific information targeted at motorists, cyclists, pedestrians. Extra enforcement in the downtown area focused on 

bicycle- and pedestrian-related violations. For the education component, public service announcements were broadcast over radio and television and displayed 

on safety slides at the downtown cinema. The Department of 

Public Works collaborated with the Mayor, Police Department, 

and local advocacy organizations to develop press releases and 

hold press conferences highlighting safety initiatives, using 

the media to spread the message. Additionally, safety coupons 

were designed and distributed for discounts on retro-reflective

clothing and other safety products. For more information visit: 

http://www.dpw.ci.burlington.vt.us/transportation/bikewalk/

safety/.

Example FHWA safety campaign 

materials are available online at http://

safety.fhwa.dot.gov/local_program/

pedcampaign/index.htm.
108 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Comprehensive Pedestrian Safety Programs

Hamilton Township, New Jersey

From 1998 to 2004, Hamilton Township experienced 23 pedestrian crashes and 6 deaths along the same 

corridor. At the end of 2004, the Township began a concerted safety campaign involving education, 

engineering, and enforcement solutions. 

Several low cost measures were taken immediately, including fencing along the highway medians, temporary message signs to pedestrians and drivers, improved intersection markings, countdown signals, 

and revised intersection timing. Longer-term solutions were also planned, including median barriers, 

sidewalks, and pedestrian overpasses. To educate the public, flyers were distributed at intersectio

and to pedestrians crossing at unsafe and unauthorized locations. Presentations were given at schools 

and community centers in addition to radio and television messages. Additionally, the city undertook 

an aggressive enforcement effort, issuing summonses to jaywalkers rather than warnings. The Police 

Department increased traffic enforcement along the route by 600 percent and established a traffic safety coordinator. The New Jersey Division of Highway Safety helped establish funds for the creation of a 

Traffic Safety Unit dedicated to pedestrian and other traffic safety concerns. 

From 2005 to 2006, there were two pedestrian crashes, as compared with 10 in 2004 alone. For more 

information, contact Chief of Police, Jay McKeen at: jmckeen@townshipofhamilton.com.

Measuring Program Effectiveness

Measuring program effectiveness is important to: 

•	 Show an outcome that demonstrates that the program met

or exceeded the objectives. 

•	 Help determine if the program needs to be adjusted or

changed. 

•	 Document and justify the need for continued funding or

program expansion.

•	 Provide guidance for other communities looking to implement a similar program. 

Program measures must relate to the objectives established for 

the program, and should include observable phenomena—

things that can be seen and quantified. Outcomes to be measured could include:

•	 Number of crashes, injuries, and fatalities.

•	 Behaviors of pedestrians (such as looking, crossing, and

yielding), and drivers (such as speeding and yielding).

•	 Citations issued/enforcement hours.

•	 Number of people walking.

•	 Knowledge, opinions, and attitudes.

•	 Changes in organizational activity/procedures.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 109

Pedestrian Safety Demonstration

Miami-Dade County, Florida

A multidisciplinary team took part in a long-term effort to educate 

drivers and pedestrians, and enforce laws in high-crash locations and 

zones in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Using pedestrian crash data 

from 1996-2001, four zones were identified as having abnormally

high pedestrian crash experiences. Based on locational crash characteristics, as well as pedestrian (age, ethnicity) factors, a total of 16 different types of education, enforcement, and engineering treatments 

were selected and targeted to reduce pedestrian crashes. 

Education strategies included interactive programs, workshops, and 

events; brochures, videos, and posters in several languages (including Spanish and Creole), and giveaways. The education programs 

were targeted at specific audiences (e.g., children walking to school,

older pedestrians, etc.), and materials and communication strategies 

were tailored to those groups. For more information on the education program targeting children, visit www.walksafe.us. The enforcement effort involved conducting officer training in pedestrian safety 

enforcement at the City of Miami Beach Police Department. This enforcement program complemented other countermeasures in South 

Beach that were implemented during the Miami-Dade Demonstration project. It also included a Driver Yielding Program that targeted 

drivers at crosswalks to try to increase awareness and yielding behaviors. The engineering component involved several studies to identify 

high pedestrian crash corridors, prioritize locations, and help select 

countermeasures. Over $6.5M in pedestrian safety projects were programmed or implemented on these corridors as a result.

A before-after study was used with three separate control groups to 

evaluate the effects of the combined pedestrian safety program on 

pedestrian crashes. A three-year “after” period was used (2002-2004). 

Multivariate intervention auto-regressive integrated moving average 

(ARIMA)time series analysis was used, along with non-parametric (i.e.,

Mann-Whitney) U-tests to test for statistically significant differences

in pedestrian crash experiences. Results showed that the pedestrian

safety program reduced Countywide pedestrian crash rates by between 8.5 percent and 13.3 percent, depending on which control 

group was used. This effect translated to approximately 180 fewer 

crashes each year in Miami-Dade County for the first two years (2003

and 2004) after the study period ended. The greatest reductions were 

found in pedestrian crashes among children, where there was a 32 

percent reduction in child pedestrian crashes in the four zones, and 

a 22 percent reduction Countywide. Educational and other measures to reduce crashes involving older 

pedestrians showed no effect. A number of lessons learned were identified for future implementation 

such a program by other jurisdictions.

For more information, contact Charlie Zegeer at zegeer@claire.hsrc.unc.edu or 919-962-7801.
110 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

How	and	when	a	program/project	is	evaluated	is	determined	by	

the	objectives	and	activities	of 	the	project.	It	is	easier	to	measure the success of a program if decisions are made about what 

to	measure	and	how/when	to	evaluate	it	before	implementing	

the	program.	Appendix	E	provides	guidance	on	evaluating	pedestrian safety plans; much of this information can be applied 

to evaluating pedestrian education or enforcement programs. 

Comprehensive Approaches

Successful approaches to improve pedestrian safety usually 

involve a comprehensive program that includes elements of engineering, planning, education, and enforcement measures. The 

sidebars	on	pages	107	through	109	show	some	examples.

Policy and Planning Solutions

Over	and	beyond	incorporating	features	designed	specifically	

to improve pedestrian safety, there are many aspects of general 

street design that result in safer conditions for pedestrians:

General Street Design

1. Speed control—For	many	pedestrian	crashes,	speed	is	an	

important factor; high speeds reduce the possibility of 

crash avoidance, and increase the likelihood of a severe 

injury or fatality. Cities that have made concerted efforts to 

reduce pedestrian crashes use speed reduction as a primary 

tool.	Speed	reduction	must	be	a	matter	of 	both	policy	(by	

setting	lower	speed	limits)	and	design.	However,	simply	

lowering speed limits on streets where motorists can go 

fast is usually ineffective. Streets must be redesigned to 

encourage lower speeds. 

2. Traffic	Calming—Local	agencies	often	develop	plans	and	

polices	for	using	a	variety	of 	traffic	calming	measures	for	

reducing	pedestrian	and/or	other	crash	types	on	local	and	

neighborhood streets. Such measures include, speed tables, 

traffic	circles,	speed	humps,	chokers,	and	chicanes,	to	break	

up long straight stretches of straight streets and to reduce 

vehicle	speeds	and/or	reduce	cut-through	motor	vehicle	

traffic.

3. Residential	Street	Design—Many	residential	streets	built	in	

the last few decades have been built too wide and without 

interruptions for long distances, encouraging higher speeds 

than appropriate for streets where children are frequently 

expected. Most small children who are involved in a crash 

Having good plans and policies in place 

to support walking enables safer streets 

for pedestrians.

Designing streets with pedestrians in 

mind can result in streets that are pedestrian-friendly with lower vehicle speeds 

(bottom photo) rather than higher-speed 

auto-oriented (top photo) designs.

For more information about pedestrian-friendly 

site design, see Georgia’s “Site Design for Pedestrians” Toolkit at http://www.dot.state.ga.us/

DOT/plan-prog/planning/projects/bicycle/

ped_facilities_guide/10_site_design_for_pedestrians.pdf. Other site design resources can be 

found in Appendix G.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 111

are	hit	within	a	block	of 	their	homes.	Features	of 	residential streets that are safe for pedestrians include narrow width, on-street parking, tight curb radii, short block 

length, buffered sidewalks with street trees, short building 

setbacks, and streetlights.

Land Use and Site Design

Land use patterns can have an impact on pedestrian crashes. 

Many pedestrian crashes occur in suburban, auto-oriented locations.	One	reason	is	motorists	simply	do	not	expect	pedestrians on some streets, but are much more highly aware of their 

presence	on	streets	where	pedestrian	use	is	high.	Other	reasons

include higher driving speeds in suburban areas and possibly 

diminished motorist reaction times or their willingness to slow 

and yield to crossing pedestrians. The following land use and 

site design techniques can help manage speed and therefore 

lower crash rates:

1. Buildings	that	define	streets—Buildings	located	at	the	

back of the sidewalk give the motorist sense of enclosure; 

buildings set far back, with large parking lots in front, create the illusion of a wide road which encourages higher 

speeds and discourages walking. 

2. Mixed-use development—Buildings	with	retail	on	the	

bottom, housing on the top encourage pedestrian activity.	This	includes	parking	garages,	office	buildings	and	fast	

food restaurants.

3. Street connectivity—Lack	of 	street-connectivity	and	

pedestrian connections discourages walking because of 

the added travel distance to reach destinations. Long super 

blocks also reduce pedestrian crossing opportunities; 

midblock crossings should be provided about every 91 m 

(300	ft)—the	length	of 	a	typical	urban	block.

4. Curb/Parking	Management—Curb	management	practices	

(such	as	painted	curbs)	can	be	used	to	regulate	parking.	

Parking should not be placed between the sidewalk and 

a building, as stated previously. The principles of access 

management should be extended to parking: single lots 

serving multiple stores are preferred over single stores each 

with its own parking and driveway.

These site design practices need to be incorporated in city codes 

for	future	development.	Also,	many	retail	outlets	such	as	fast	

food restaurants are remodeled or rebuilt about every ten years, 

Land Use Policies

State of Pennsylvania

New land use policies will help remedy future developments but will 

not solve the immediate problems 

in urban and suburban areas, where 

existing land uses do not accommodate—much less encourage—

walking or bicycling. Therefore, the 

Pennsylvania Statewide Bicycle and 

Pedestrian Master Plan includes a 

section on retrofitting existing land

uses to serve pedestrians. It provides 

guidance on downtown redevelopment, “pedestrianizing” existing 

retail/office developments, and retrofitting suburban residential neighborhoods, including recommendations such as:

•	 Maximize pedestrian transit access to the site from adjacent 

land uses.

•	 Improve the layout of buildings

and parking lots.

•	 Bring destinations closer to

home.

•	 Encourage denser development or redevelopment.

•	 Provide sidewalks and street

trees.

•	 Reduce the speed of automobile traffic.

•	 Provide off-road internal pathway systems.

•	 Provide “pocket” parks and

community green space.

For more information, visit: http://

www.dot.state.pa.us.
112 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

which may present opportunities to implement new site design 

requirements	to	retrofit	existing	facilities,	such	as	installing	sidewalks with a planting strip.

Countermeasures to be Used with Caution

Concerned	citizens	and	elected	officials	often	respond	to	a	

tragic pedestrian crash with a call for an immediate solution. 

Among	the	most	commonly	requested	solutions	are	a	traffic	

signal,	a	flasher,	a	pedestrian	bridge	or	underpass,	or	a	marked	

crosswalk.	While	these	all	can	be	an	effective	solution	in	certain	

places, in some instances they are not appropriate or effective.

Traffic Signals

The	primary	purpose	of 	a	traffic	signal	is	to	create	gaps	in	

motor	vehicle	traffic	that	otherwise	would	be	hard	to	find.	The	

MUTCD	warns	against	the	overuse	of 	signals	for	a	variety	

of 	reasons.	Used	inappropriately,	traffic	signals	may	increase	

crashes.	See	MUTCD	Chapter	4	for	information	on	signal	warrants	(http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2003/Ch4.pdf).

Traffic	signals	can	range	from	$35,000	to	$300,000	for	one	

intersection,	if 	no	associated	road	widening	is	necessary.		Furthermore, resources are needed for annual maintenance of the 

signal. 

In	many	cases,	the	only	solution	to	crossing	a	busy,	multilane	

arterial street is to install a pedestrian crossing signal. This is 

especially true in locations where there is not another signal 

for	0.4	km	(0.25	mi)	or	more	in	an	area	with	lots	of 	pedestrian	

activity.

Traffic	signals	(with	pedestrian	displays)	are	one	possible	option to be considered in helping to get pedestrians safely across 

busy	streets.	Adding	a	traffic	signal,	however,	does	not	guarantee safety for a pedestrian, since some motorists run red lights 

and some turning motorists fail to yield to a pedestrian in a 

crosswalk	during	the	WALK	interval;	also,	some	pedestrians	will	

cross	against	the	traffic	signals.

Pedestrian Bridge or Underpass

A	popular	but	often	ineffective	countermeasure	is	to	install	a	

pedestrian bridge or underpass. These solutions are appealing 

because they give the impression of complete separation of 

pedestrians	from	motor	vehicle	traffic.	In	theory	this	is	true,	but	

in practice this rarely occurs for several reasons:

Traffic signal installations may be the 

only solution to enable pedestrians to 

cross some busy, multilane streets. However, signals do not solve all pedestrian 

crossing problems and should be used 

with caution.

Curb management (such as painted 

curbs to keep cars away from the marked 

crosswalk) would help this pedestrian to 

better see cars approaching the intersection. In this case, a curb extension would 

also help the pedestrian to better see cars 

approaching the crossing.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 113

•	 Bridges and underpasses are so expensive, they cannot be

provided at most locations where pedestrians may want to 

cross.

•	 Underpasses are often prone to security concerns due to

low visibility.

•	 The inconvenience of out-of-distance travel is high, up to

305 m (1,000 ft) or more, because of the need to provide

accessible ramps; many pedestrians will not walk this extra 

distance and cross at-grade.

•	 To be effective, there has to be a self-enforcing feature

that requires the pedestrian to use the bridge, such as 

topography, or fencing along one side of the street or in 

the median for several hundred feet on either side of the 

grade-separated crossing.

These reasons explain why pedestrian bridges or underpasses 

are under-used, and motorists are frustrated when they see pedestrians crossing in the vicinity of an bridge or underpass; this 

in turn increases the risk to pedestrians crossing at grade.

The high cost of a pedestrian bridge or underpass (from several hundred thousand to several million dollars) makes them

impractical for all but a few locations. Many pedestrian crossing 

islands with illumination can be provided for the cost of one 

bridge; along a corridor with multiple crossing points, the crossing islands are a more effective use of resources.

Marked Crosswalks without Additional Treatments

Marked crosswalks tell the pedestrian where to cross. For example, where sight distance is compromised, it may be desirable 

to direct the pedestrian to the location where the site distance is 

best. Marked crosswalks also tell the motorist to expect pedestrians at a particular location, but motorists on higher-speed 

streets frequently cannot see them until it is too late to stop. 

Without other safety features mentioned thus far (islands, curb

extensions, illumination etc.), marked crosswalks on their own

do not necessarily increase the security of a pedestrian crossing the street. Zegeer et al. (2005) have completed an exhaustive study on the effectiveness of marked crosswalks, which 

can be downloaded at http://www.walkinginfo.org/rd/devices.

htm#cros1. In general, the following principles apply to the

installation of marked crosswalks alone (i.e., without other substantial pedestrian treatments):

•	 On two-lane streets, a crosswalk can be marked without

compromising pedestrian safety.

•	 On multilane streets with an average daily traffic (ADT)

Pedestrian bridges should be 

convenient for pedestrians (see top 

photo); otherwise they will not be 

used (as in bottom photo).

The underpass in the top photo is 

not well-lit or secure. Underpasses 

should be designed so that they are 

safe for pedestrians to use (see better example in bottom photo).
114 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

of 	up	to	15,000	vehicles	per	day	(VPD)	and	a	median	or	

island, crosswalk can be marked without compromising 

pedestrian safety.

•	 On	streets	with	an	ADT	over	12,000	(or	15,000	with	a	

median)	marked	crosswalks	on	their	own	are	not	recommended; other, more substantial, measures are needed to 

provide a safe pedestrian crossing.

At	locations	where	crosswalks	alone	are	not	appropriate	(e.g.,	

on	multilane	roads	with	ADTs	above	about	12,000),	the	study	

recommends consideration of more substantial pedestrian 

crossing	treatments,	such	as	enhanced	nighttime	lighting,	traffic	

and	pedestrian	signals	(if 	warranted),	among	others.		Marked	

crosswalks should be given priority where there is an expectation of regular pedestrian activity such as near a school, park, or 

other generator.

As	stated	in	the	report,	“the	results	of 	this	study	should	not	

be	misused	as	justification	to	do	nothing	to	help	pedestrians	to

safely	cross	streets.	Instead,	pedestrian	crossing	problems	and	

needs	should	be	routinely	identified,	and	appropriate	solutions	

should be selected to improve pedestrian safety and access. 

Deciding	where	to	mark	or	not	mark	a	crosswalk	is	only	one	

consideration	in	meeting	that	objective”	(Zegeer	et	al.,	2005).

Textured and/or Colored Crosswalks

Textured or colored crosswalks are often requested based on 

the assumption that they stand out and are more visible by 

motorists.	In	many	cases,	the	opposite	is	true:	red	or	gray	pavers	

are barely visible from afar, and they disappear from sight completely	at	dusk	or	at	night.	Textured	crosswalks	are	difficult	for	

pedestrians in wheelchairs or with walkers or canes; their efforts 

Summary of Marked Crosswalk Study (Zegeer et al., 2005)

C = Candidate site for marked crosswalks.

P = Possible increase in pedestrian 

crash risk may occur if crosswalk 

markings are added without other 

pedestrian facility enhancements.

N = Marked crosswalks alone are insufficient and pedestrian crash risk

may increase when providing 

marked crosswalks alone. Consider using other treatments such 

as traffic signals with pedestrian 

signals where warranted or other 

substantial crossing improvements 

to increase crossing safety.
Chapter 5: Selecting Safety Solutions 115

when crossing the street should not be impeded. If a community decides to implement colored crosswalks, it is best to color 

the pavement around a conventional, high-visibility white crosswalk; this way it really does stand out and is smooth.

Assessing the Effects of Treatments on Other Road Users

Many pedestrian problems result from auto-oriented designs 

that didn’t take pedestrian safety into account; for example, adding turn lanes at an intersection without considering the effect 

on pedestrian crossing distance. The same principle applies to 

pedestrian countermeasures: a solution that benefits pedestrians

at one location may have negative effects on other users of the 

street, intersection, corridor or neighborhood. For example,

street diverters to reduce cut-through traffic on a local street

may increase turn movements at an intersection at the edge of 

the neighborhood.

Each solution should be evaluated for unintended negative consequences, or consequences that may need further mitigation. 

A solution should not be rejected just because it has a negative

impact on other users, nor is a benefit/cost analysis needed in

every case. A common example is the dilemma associated with

placing median pedestrian crossing islands on commercially-developed arterials. The crossing island is typically a safety benefit

to the pedestrian, but may restrict left turns into a driveway or 

side-street. Usually, an island can be designed to aid motorists 

and pedestrians. At times driveways can be moved or combin

to adequately serve the adjacent land uses. In cases where this

cannot be done, decision makers have to choose between a 

higher level of pedestrian safety and accommodating land use 

access for motorists or look into other alternatives.

Many of the recommended pedestrian safety improvements 

may also have safety benefits for motor vehicle traffic. Common

examples include medians, which have been shown to reduce 

motor vehicle crashes, traffic calming that slows traffic (slower

speeds equate to fewer and less severe crashes), and simplified

intersections that are easier for motorists to negotiate, and right 

turn “pork-chop” islands which make it easier to time traffic

signals.

Safety Effects on Other Roadway Users

Bicyclists

Bicyclists should not be negatively impacted by pedestrian treatments. In general, most designs that make roads safer and more

A safe roadway environment will take into 

account all modes of travel.
116 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Improvements made for the safety of 

vulnerable populations (such as clearly 

defining the pedestrian path) also benefit 

other roadway users.

comfortable for pedestrians also benefit cyclists, especially measures that slow traffic, or that narrow or reduce motor vehicle

traffic lanes to create more space for other users. But certain

countermeasures may impact bicyclists; others are perceived 

by bicyclists to be dangerous, but in reality they do not have 

negative impacts based on crashes— sometimes it is a matter of

perception.

Pedestrian crash countermeasures that may impact bicyclists 

negatively include speed bumps (which are typically only allowed in shopping centers), curb extensions that protrude into

the bike lane (those more than 1.8 m [6 ft] wide), and street

closures with no bicycle access. Countermeasures that should 

be considered in the context of protecting bicycle safety include 

on-street parking, narrow lanes, curb extensions, and chicanes.

Meeting the Safety Needs of All Pedestrians

Safety improvements should meet the needs of all pedestrians 

to the maximum extent possible. Improvements that benef

young children, older persons, and people with vision, mobility, 

or hearing impairments also increase the safety of all pedestrians.

Federal (and some state) laws and regulations spell out what

must be done to accommodate pedestrians with disabilities. 

When facilities are provided for pedestrians, they must be accessible for persons with disabilities unless that is not physically 

feasible.

The most current accessible design requirements can be found 

at http://www.access-board.gov/. Designing Sidewalks a

Trails for Access, Parts 1 and 2, provide the state of the practice for applying the American with Disabilities Act and similar

requirements to pedestrian facilities. Find Part one at: http:

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/access-1.htm and

Part 2 at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/sidewalk2/.
Chapter 6: Providing Funding 117

Chapter 6:

Providing 

Funding

Funding is critical to implementation. It can be the enabler for making improvements that reduce crashes, or it can be the barrier that prevents needed improvements from being made. With most state and local governments facing severe budget

constraints, allocating funds to address pedestrian safety issues can be a challenge. 

Nevertheless, some states and urban areas are achieving very low pedestrian crash 

numbers in spite of limited funding. The challenge is to figure out how these outcomes are being achieved and then apply them to states and communities with high 

numbers of pedestrian crashes. 

Commitment to Safety

Achieving better outcomes always begins with a commitment to safety for all modes.

It should be the number one priority of state and local transportation agencies. Once

this commitment is made, it allows transportation agencies to allocate funds to reducing all crash types, including pedestrian crashes. Projects that only focus on reducing 

congestion or motor vehicle crashes may jeopardize the safety of pedestrians and 

bicyclists. 

A simple benefit/cost analysis is an excellent way to justify and increase expenditures on pedestrian improvements. Most of the improvements that reduce pedestrian 

crashes are relatively inexpensive when compared to efforts to reduce motor vehicle 

crashes. It costs an agency less, per crash, to reduce pedestrian crashes than motor vehicle crashes. It may not cost the agency anything if it is a policy change or a change in

a design standard that leads to fewer pedestrian crashes. For example, almost all Seattle

arterial streets are designed to a 48 km/h (30 mi/h) design speed, which is the legal

speed limit unless otherwise posted. This is one of the reasons Seattle has one of the 

lowest pedestrian fatality rates in the nation; Seattle has made a commitment to safety 

as the number one priority. 

“ Most of the 

improvements 

that reduce pedestrian crashes 

are relatively 

inexpensive when 

compared to 

efforts to reduce 

motor vehicle 

crashes. ”
118 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Funding Strategies

The following funding strategies can be applied to finance pedestrian safety improvements: 

•	 Routine accommodation in new projects.

•	 Partnerships.

•	 Dedicated funds and set asides.

•	 Annual maintenance budget.

Routine Accommodation in New Projects

Routinely including pedestrian facilities with other roadway improvement projects is 

a cost-effective strategy for reducing pedestrian crashes and encouraging more walking. The construction of good pedestrian infrastructure as part of normal public 

and private development and the adoption of good traffic management practices are

known as “routine accommodation.” The majority of pedestrian infrastructure is

built in conjunction with other projects: pedestrian crossings are built in conjunction 

with the construction of intersections; pedestrian signals are installed in conjunctions 

with traffic signals; and most sidewalks in residential neighborhoods are built as part

of private, residential housing construction. The same applies to traffic management

practices: high visibility crosswalks can be marked after pavement overlays as a matter 

of standard practice. 

Routine accommodation allows for significant improvements over time, even if there

is no special funding available for pedestrian safety improvements. Chapter 5 provides 

a list of standardized traffic management and design practices that will reduce crashes

over time. Routine accommodation for new projects does not diminish the importance of immediately addressing high crash locations, corridors, and other targeted 

areas immediately. 

Partnerships

Both public works and many private development projects provide partnership opportunities for making improvements to increase pedestrian safety in addition to what 

might be accomplished through routine accommodation. For example, opportunities

to construct sidewalks can be provided with resurfacing projects; opportunities for 

placing utilities underground (and thus eliminating obstructions on sidewalks) can be

found with other projects. There are opportunities to develop partnerships around the 

following project types:

Voluntary/No Cost Improvements

Many projects will generate some neighborhood concern or opposition. More often 

than not, public and private projects include some pedestrian amenities, supported by 

the neighborhood, to build good will. In other cases, there may be a common benefit.

Private developers and other agencies are often willing to make needed pedestrian 
Chapter 6: Providing Funding 119

safety improvements, as a safer, more 

accessible development is more attractive 

to potential tenants or customers.

Required Restoration and Mitigation

Large projects present an opportunity 

for	significant	pedestrian	improvements.	

For	example,	a	new	development	may	

generate	enough	traffic	to	warrant	a	

signal near a school or other pedestrian 

destination. Utility work next to a roadway or in an abandoned railroad line can 

provide an opportunity for constructing 

a sidewalk or pathway.

Combined	Improvements

Combined improvements involve grouping smaller projects with an existing 

funded	project.		Funding	improvements	

as part of larger projects creates economies	of 	scale.	For	example,	if 	there	is	

a public works project to construct a 

concrete roadway, it may be cheaper to 

add construction of sidewalks on nearby 

as	a	separate	project.	It	may	also	

be advantageous to provide funding for a spot improvement such 

as a midblock crossing where 

pedestrians are expected to cross. 

Not only are costs reduced when 

two types of work are combined 

into one project, but other advantages include reduced impact to 

traffic,	residents,	and	businesses.		

Dedicated Funds and Set Asides

Some	states,	MPOs	(Metropolitan	Planning	Organizations)	and	local	governments	

have	set	aside	dedicated	funds	for	pedestrian	and/or	bicycle	improvements.	Set	asides	

are	either	a	percentage	of 	a	larger	fund;	for	example,	a	percentage	of 	Federal	funds	

(beyond	the	mandated	Federal	Enhancement	fund)	for	pedestrian	and/or	bicycle	projects; or set asides with an independent funding source; typical examples include developer	funds	(funds	deposited	by	developers	into	a	centralized	fund	or	escrow	account	

for	future	use),	resource	funds	(taxes	on	extracted	natural	resources	such	as	gravel	or	

oil),	and	real	estate	excise	funds.	

streets instead of building them 

Partnership Opportunities: Universities

Chapel Hill, North Carolina

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is centered in 

the heart of downtown. The University currently maintains 

an extensive network of sidewalks that are internal to UNC 

property. In addition, the UNC Department of Transportation 

and Parking makes periodic recommendations to the Town 

about UNC off-campus sidewalk needs. These projects do not 

fall under University jurisdiction but impact pedestrian traffic 

(mostly UNC students and employees) going to and from the 

University. Some of these off-campus projects have evolved 

into	“joint	projects”	financed	by	both	entities.

One such project included an investigation of pedestrian 

safety risk locations on and around campus performed by 

the University of North Carolina Chancellor’s Pedestrian 

Safety Committee (UNC Pedestrian Safety Committee), working with the University community, the Town of Chapel Hill, 

and the North Carolina Department of Transportation. Based 

on the results of the study, this group was able to improve 

signage, modify roadways and crosswalks, increase enforcement, and create a long-term plan for pedestrian safety on 

the 740 acre campus.

For more information, visit: http://townhall.townofchapelhill.

org/planning/bikeped/bikepedplan.htm.
120 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

While	dedicated	funds	and	set	asides	are	possible	funding	sources,	they	should	not	

be	a	substitute	for	routine	accommodation.	For	example,	funding	for	shoulder	and	

sidewalk improvements should be routine practice and not paid for through set aside 

funds.	In	general,	changing	policy	to	include	pedestrian	improvements	in	all	programs	

and projects will produce more funding than set asides. 

Annual Maintenance Budget

Existing annual maintenance budgets can be used to make small but important pedestrian	improvements.	For	example,	limited	budgets	for	painting	marked	crosswalks	can	

be focused around schools and high crash locations. Crosswalks can be widened or 

changed to high-visibility markings when they are scheduled to be repainted. Crosswalk	signs	scheduled	for	replacement	can	be	upgraded	to	the	brighter	fluorescent	

yellow-green	signs	that	have	been	adopted	by	the	MUTCD	as	an	option	for	pedestrian	

and bicycle warning signs. 

Dedicated Funds

State of Wisconsin

The Wisconsin Department of Transportation currently funds sidewalks and other 

pedestrian facilities through many different state and Federal programs. Since 1990, 

WisDOT has included sidewalks in construction projects along a State Trunk Highway (STH) if the local municipality agrees to pay 25 percent of the cost and agrees 

to accept responsibility for future sidewalk repair, maintenance, and spot replacement. WisDOT will pay the full cost to replace existing sidewalks when they must 

be replaced due to WisDOT action (i.e. roadway-widening projects that require the 

removal of sidewalks). WisDOT administers Federal funds for local road projects 

that are eligible to include sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities. These projects 

generally require a 20 percent local match while Federal funds cover the remaining 80 percent of expenses. Through General Transportation Aids (GTAs), WisDOT 

helps fund local sidewalk construction and replacement work as well as all other 

pedestrian-related work, such as crosswalk painting and crossing signal installation, 

on a partial reimbursement basis. 

Another major source of funding for pedestrian projects is the Statewide Multimodal 

Improvement Program (SMIP). This includes the following components:

•	 An	enhancement	program	for	local	and	state	highway	enhancements.

•	 A	surface	transportation	program.

•	 A	surface	transportation	program	discretionary	(STP-D).

•	 An	urban	surface	transportation	program	(STP-U).

•	 A	congestion	mitigation	and	air	quality	program	(CMAQ).

•	 A	hazard	elimination	program.

•	 Interstate	maintenance.

•	 National	highway	system	funds.

•	 A	highway	bridge	replacement	and	rehabilitation	program.

•	 A	transportation	and	community	and	system	preservation	pilot	program.

For more information, visit: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/state/ped2020.

htm.
Chapter 6: Providing Funding 121

Funding Criteria

State and local governments typically use multiple funding sources for transportation projects, from Federal grants to gas taxes to general tax revenues. These sources

often have funding criteria that determine what projects are eligible. Funding criteria

are reviewed and updated periodically; they can be rewritten to increase funding for 

pedestrian safety projects. There are two ways these sources can be levied to make 

pedestrian safety improvements: 1) The funding criteria should give higher scores to

projects that include pedestrian safety elements; and 2) The funding criteria should

allow for good pedestrian projects (those likely to reduce crashes) to compete for the

funding. Some states have constitutional provisions banning the use of gas taxes for 

anything but highway projects; but the definition of “highway” should include pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks. 

Major Funding Sources

Federal funding for pedestrian improvements has increased dramatically in the last 12

or so years. Prior to the 1990s only a few million dollars a year of Federal funds were

being invested in bicycle or pedestrian facilities. While the energy crisis of the early

1970s had spawned new interest and some modest government initiatives to make

improvements, very little money from the government at any level was invested in 

bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Likewise, the outdoor recreation industry and business 

community in general provided very little funding for facilities, planning, programs, 

or organizational development. Throughout the late 1970s and 1980s, the largest

Revising Funding Selection Criteria

State of New Jersey

In New Jersey’s Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, the section on “Implementing the Plan” 

includes a list of funding strategies. One such strategy involves working through Metropolitan Planning 

Organizations to revise Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) project selection criteria to promote 

bicycle and pedestrian projects and ensure that an adequate percentage of transportation funding is 

used for pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities. 

Another strategy involves partnering with various agencies: the Office of Travel and Tourism within the NJ 

Commerce and Economic Growth Commission to provide grants in support of walking tours and events; 

the NJ Department of Law and Public Safety to make use of NHTSA (Section 402) funds for pedestrian 

program activities that deal with safety and enforcement; and the NJ Department of Environmental Protection to pursue funding sources for trails to augment existing National Recreational Trails and Green

Acres funding.

The plan also states that counties are responsible for routinely funding pedestrian improvements and 

incorporating incidental improvements into roadway projects. Municipalities are to dedicate funds for 

independent pedestrian projects and establish funding sources for pedestrian improvements related to 

roadway projects (land use/recreation fees, general funds, etc.).

For more information, visit: http://www.bikemap.com/RBA/.
122 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

amounts of funds for bicycling and walking were invested by state and local parks 

agencies building multi-use trails; however, even these levels of investment were very 

small compared to what is happening today.

Federal Funds

Transportation	Funds

The	Safe,	Accountable,	Flexible,	Efficient	Transportation	Equity	Act—A	Legacy	for	

Users	(SAFETEA-LU),	passed	in	August	2005,	authorized	$286.4	billion	in	Federal	gas	tax	revenue	and	other	Federal	funds	over	five	years	for	all	modes	of 	surface	

transportation,	including	highways,	bus	and	rail	transit,	bicycling,	and	walking.		Walking and bicycling improvements are not only eligible to receive funding from most of 

the	transportation	funds	made	available	by	SAFETEA-LU,	but	“shall	be	considered,	

where appropriate, in conjunction with all new construction and reconstruction of 

transportation	facilities,	except	where	bicycle	and	pedestrian	use	are	not	permitted”	

(23	U.S.C.,	§217	(g)	(1)).	

In	a	February	1999	Guidance	memo	(still	in	effect),	FHWA	stated,	

“We expect every transportation agency to make accommodation for bicycling and walking 

a routine part of their planning, design, construction, operations and maintenance activities... Bicycling and walking ought to be accommodated, as an element of good planning, 

design, and operation, in all new transportation projects unless there are substantial safety 

or cost reasons for not doing so....Even where circumstances are exceptional and bicycle use 

and walking are either prohibited or made incompatible, States, MPOs, and local governments must still ensure that bicycle and pedestrian access along the corridor served by the 

new or improved facility is not made more difficult or impossible. Maintaining access to the 

transportation system for nonmotorized users is not an optional activity” (FHWA,	1999).

This	memo	(FHWA,	1999)	also	spelled	out	planning	requirements	for	nonmotorized	

facilities.		“States	and	metropolitan	areas	(with	populations	of 	more	than	50,000)	are	

required to plan for the “development and integrated management and operations 

of 	transportation	systems	and	facilities	(including	pedestrian	walkways	and	bicycle	

transportation	facilities)	that	will	function	as	an	intermodal	transportation	system...”	

(based	on	23	U.S.C.,	§134	(a)(3)	and	23	U.S.C.,	§135	(a)(3)).

Non-Transportation	Funds

Outside	of 	the	Federal	transportation	programs	there	are	a	wide	range	of 	other	

Federal	funds	that	can	be	used	for	walking	facilities.	Community	Development	Block	

Grants	through	the	Department	of 	Housing	and	Urban	Development	(HUD)	are	

a likely source of funds for community-based projects such as commercial district 

streetscape improvements, sidewalk improvements, Safe Routes to School, or other 

neighborhood-based walking facilities that improve local transportation or help revitalize neighborhoods. The National Transportation Enhancements Clearinghouse 

has	prepared	a	useful	Technical	Brief:	Financing	and	Funding	for	Trails	that	cites	over	

For the most current 

FHWA Program 

Guidance, visit the Web 

site: http://www.fhwa.

dot.gov/environment/

bikeped/guidance.htm.

The full memo can be 

viewed at http://

www.fhwa.dot.gov/

environment/bikeped/

memo.htm.
Chapter 6: Providing Funding 123

Funding Examples from around the Nation

Creative Local Partnerships

•	 Selling bricks for local sidewalk projects, especially those in historic areas or on downtown 

Main Streets, is increasingly common. Donor names are engraved in each brick, and a tremendous amount of publicity and community support is purchased along with basic construction materials. Portland, Oregon’s downtown Pioneer Square is a good example of such 

a project.

•	 A pivotal 40-acre section of the Ice Age Trail between the cities of Madison and Verona,

Wisconsin, was acquired with the help of the Madison Area Youth Soccer Association. The 

soccer association agreed to a fifty year lease of 30 acres of the parcel for a soccer complex,

providing a substantial part of the $600,000 acquisition price.

•	 The City of Phoenix partners with school boards to provide funding for the Safe Routes to

School program. A part of the funding is a result of a grant from the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety; $27,000 for additional police enforcement at schools and brighter safety vests 

for crossing guards. The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) has partnered with 

Phoenix to expand the school crossing guard training across the entire metropolitan area. 

Any community can adopt the Phoenix School Safety program if there is the political will to 

fund the program elements and devote the resources to school crossing safety. For more on 

this example, see: http://www.iwalktoschool.org/award_app_template.cfm?ID=196.

•	 In Chapel Hill, North Carolina, localized requests can be granted through a public improvement petition and assessment fee alternative when neighborhoods support the construction 

of a sidewalk in their area and are willing to be assessed for all or part of the project cost. 

Dedicated Funding From State Transportation Revenues

•	 Since the mid-90s, California Highway Patrol (CHP) has been awarded pedestrian safety corridor grants through the State Office of Traffic Safety (OTS). The CHP uses a formula to assess 

and rate the most severe corridors in the state in terms of crashes, fatalities, and injuries. The 

OTS typically awards two grants per year spanning over a 12-month period in an amount 

of $100,000. Typical goals are a 10 to 15 percent reduction in crashes and a 5 to 10 percent 

reduction in fatalities and injuries. Since inception, favorable results have been recorded 

with the program expanding each year. Ginny Mecham (GMecham@chp.ca.gov) and Ophelia Torpey (OTorpey@chp,ca.gov) can both be reached at 916-657-7222 for more information about this program.

•	 In Indiana, motorists are paying extra forspecial license platesthat benefit greenways, open

space, parks, and trails. In 1995 about $1.9 million was netted from sale of 75,740 plates. The 

plates cost an additional $35, of which $25 goes to the Indiana Heritage Trust. Maine and 

Florida use similar license plate fee add-ons for conservation, parks, and bicycle and pedestrian program funding. 

•	 By constitutional amendment, Oregon dedicates one percent of state gas-tax revenue to

providing improvements for bicycling and walking on state-managed highways. Michigan 

also has a one percent law. 
124 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

thirty	Federal	and	national	funding	sources	that	could	be	used	to	help	fund	bicycling	

and	walking	facilities	and/or	programs,	especially	trails:	http://www.enhancements.

org.

State and Local Funds

States typically raise revenue for highway and transportation infrastructure through a 

state	motor-vehicle	fuel	tax	and/or	vehicle	licensing	fees.	Similar	to	the	Federal	legislation,	laws	in	many	states	make	most	pedestrian	programs	eligible	for	funding.	In	some	

states, use of funds may be limited to improvements on state owned and operated 

facilities. 

Some examples of revenue streams used by local communities to improve conditions 

for pedestrians include: special bond issues, dedications of a portion of local sales 

taxes or a voter-approved sales tax increase, and the use of the annual capital improvement	budgets	of 	Public	Works	and/or	Parks	agencies.	

Private Sector Funds

Foundations

A	wide	range	of 	foundations	have	provided	funding	for	walking	projects	and	programs.	A	few	national	and	large	regional	foundations	have	supported	the	national	

organizations involved in bicycle and pedestrian policy advocacy. However, it is usually 

the regional and local foundations that get involved in funding particular pedestrian 

projects. These same foundations may also fund statewide and local advocacy efforts.	The	best	way	to	find	such	foundations	is	through	the	research	and	information	

services	provided	by	the	National	Foundation	Center.	They	maintain	a	huge	store	of 	

information including the guidelines and application procedures for most foundations	as	well	as	their	past	funding	records.	They	can	be	reached	online	at:	http://www.

fdncenter.org.

Developer	Funded	Projects

In	some	cases,	developers	are	required	to	provide	funding	for	roadway	improvement	

projects	that	will	build	sidewalks,	walkways	and	trails.	In	other	cases,	developers	are	

required to build off-site improvements, largely in response to master plans or stipulations	on	their	development.	While	in	the	latter	case,	they	may	not	be	providing	funding to the agency to build the project, the result may be the same.

See	Appendix	D	for	a	list	of 	these	and	other	funding	sources.
Chapter 7: Creating the Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 125

Chapter 7: 

Creating the 

Pedestrian Safety 

Action Plan

I

mplementing changes to reduce pedestrian crashes requires an action plan that takes 

identified countermeasures and puts them into a practical and achievable strategy

that allows progress to be measured over time. Creating a pedestrian safety action 

plan is the culmination of effective stakeholder involvement, problem identification,

and prioritization of solutions. It can be thought of as going from the “where” to the

“what” to the “how.”

The quality and effectiveness of an action plan does not depend on its length or 

depth. The key is to come up with a plan that effectively focuses resources on making 

the changes that reduce the greatest number of crashes. Short, straightforward, and 

well thought out plans are the most easily implemented. Appendix I contains a checklist of things to consider when developing a safety action plan.

A pedestrian safety action plan should incorporate the following steps:

Step 1: Define Objectives.

Step 2: Identify Locations.

Step 3: Select Countermeasures.

Step 4: Develop an Implementation Strategy.

Step 5: Institutionalize Changes to Planning and Design Standards.

Step 6: Consider Land Use, Zoning and Site Design Issues.

Step 7: Reinforce Commitment.

Step 8: Evaluate Results.

Step 1: Define Objectives

The key to a successful pedestrian safety action plan is to clearly state its purpose at 

the very beginning. In addition to the general goal of improving pedestrian safety,

an agency should define specific and measurable objectives that can later be used to

evaluate the level of success of the program. 

“ Implementation requires the 

ongoing commitment of an 

entire transportation agency. 

Momentum 

will only be 

achieved over 

time through constant attention 

and action. ”
126 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Explicit goals of a pedestrian safety action plan include a target percentage reduction	of 	pedestrian	crashes	in	defined	locations	or	areas.	More	specifically,	it	ought	to	

be	stated	what	types	of 	pedestrian	crashes	shall	be	reduced	(walk	to	school,	multiple	

threat	crashes,	etc.).	

While	the	action	plan	typically	emphasizes	safety	goals	of 	reducing	crash	frequency	or	

severity	(of 	certain	types	of 	crashes	in	specific	areas),	the	plan	may	also	include	more	

general objectives such as increased pedestrian activity or enhanced walkability of a 

community. 

Step 2: Identify Locations

Chapters 3 and 4 discuss how to use crash and other data to identify where improvements need to be made and provide guidance on how to 

organize and prioritize locations. Using this information, the 

first	step	in	writing	an	action	plan	is	to	compile	lists	of 	actual	

locations. High crash or high-risk locations should be organized into four categories:

1. Spot locations.

2. Corridors.

3.	 Targeted	areas	(including	neighborhoods).

4. Entire jurisdictions.

Step 3: Select Countermeasures

Chapter 4 provides guidance on how to identify and prioritize countermeasures to address different types of crashes. 

Using this information, the third step in completing an action 

plan is to identify engineering, educational, and enforcement 

countermeasures	that	can	be	implemented	over	time.	Specifically:

1.	 For	each	high	crash	location,	create	a	list	of 	appropriate	

countermeasures based on the collision history and local 

conditions; include everything from simple measures 

such as spot speed enforcement, to more complex measures	such	as	installing	a	new	traffic	signal.

2.	 For	each	high	crash	corridor	and	neighborhood/targeted	

area, identify needed countermeasures; for example, by 

reorganizing all the bus stops along a corridor, it may be 

possible to direct pedestrians to signalized crossing locations and away from crossings at uncontrolled intersections.

3.	 For	all	locations,	identify	countermeasures	that	will	be	installed	everywhere	as	a	

matter	of 	“routine	accommodation”	(discussed	in	Chapter	6).	Chapter	5	provides	

Implementation Plan 

Example

Oakland, CA

The Oakland Pedestrian Master Plan 

includes a chapter which identifies implementation policies, priority projects, 

staffing needs, and funding sources 

to ensure that pedestrian projects are 

managed, funded, and implemented. 

The plan specifies five goals to promote

Oakland as a walkable city, including: 

pedestrian safety, access, streetscaping 

and land use, education, and implementation. General plan policies are listed 

to support each of these goals. The section also includes 20 years of priority 

projects to improve safety, access, and 

streetscaping for pedestrians in the City 

of Oakland. Projects are prioritized in 

two phases: projects to be completed 

within 1 to 5 years and projects to be 

completed within 6 to 20 years.

For more information, visit: http://

www.oaklandnet.com/government/

pedestrian/index.html.
Chapter 7: Creating the Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 127

lists of highly effective countermeasures that should be incorporated into agency 

design manuals and routinely applied to all public and private projects. 

Step 4: Develop an Implementation Strategy

The	fourth	step	in	creating	an	implementation	plan	is	to	identify	“how”	improvements	

will be made. This requires commitment of the entire agency, not just one or two 

people	focusing	on	pedestrian	safety.	It	requires	public	involvement	and	political	will	

(Chapter	2)	and	agency	resources	(Chapter	6).	It	can	also	involve	phasing	and	making	

use	of 	temporary	measures	(Chapter	4).

Timing as an Implementation Strategy

Critical to implementing an action plan is maintaining ongoing, continuous progress. 

Small, immediate changes that are highly visible create the momentum and support 

needed to make the more costly and substantive changes that require more time.

Proposed	improvements	identified	in	Step	3	of 	the	plan	should	be	divided	into	three	

categories: simple measures, moderately complex measures, and complex measures. 

More complex measures may require more time, money, and coordination among different departments and agencies.

Simple, moderately complex, and complex countermeasures will require different time 

lines.	All	treatments	can	begin	immediately	and	continue	into	the	future	in	parallel.	

The improvements requiring the least amount of time and resources will likely be 

completed	first,	and	those	that	require	the	most	will	be	completed	later	as	resources	

allow.

This	approach	also	helps	to	address	liability	concerns.	While	no	agency	can	be	expected to address all issues at once, an agency must be able to demonstrate that it has 

a well-conceived and systematic implementation plan for making improvements over 

time. 

The timing approach that divides improvements into simple, moderately complex, 

and complex measures should be done within the context of addressing high crash 

locations,	corridors,	and	neighborhoods	(or	places	with	high	crash	potential).	Some	

examples include:

1.	 A	simple	strategy	may	propose	that	over	a	three-year	period,	all	school	zone	

signs will be upgraded, starting with high crash locations, corridors and neighborhoods; new crosswalks and spot police enforcement may also be simple 

strategies.

2.	 A	moderately	complex	strategy	may	be	to	upgrade	lighting	at	unmarked	crosswalks over a six-year period, starting with high crash locations, corridors, and 

neighborhoods/targeted	areas;	other	moderately	complex	solutions	may	be	

signal changes, retiming, roadway restriping, or institutionalizing safety education 

programs in schools.
128 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Timing as an Implementation Strategy

The following examples are case studies from PEDSAFE that each deal with countermeasure implementations ranging from simple to complex:

Simple Solutions: 

Radar Trailers in Neighborhoods

For the past ten years, residents of Bellevue, WA have been able to request cityowned portable radar trailers to target 

excessive speeds along corridors and in 

neighborhoods. The trailers have resulted 

in average speed reductions of 4.8 to 8.0 

km/h (3 to 5 mi/h), are very popular, and 

cost relatively little.

Moderately Complex Solutions: 

Traffic Calming

In an effort to improve the safety of neighborhood children going to and from 

school and reduce vehicle speeds, Cambridge, MA implemented several traffic 

calming measures along Granite Street, 

including curb extensions, a raised crosswalk, and a raised intersection. The 85th 

percentile motor vehicle speed was reduced from 28 mi/h to 45 to 38 km/h (24 

mi/h) after the improvements.

Complex Solutions: 

Area Revitalization

Wall Street in Asheville, NC is an aesthetically re-designed downtown center of economic activity. What once originated as a 

delivery alley has now been transformed 

into a walkable and livable streetscape 

conducive to pedestrian activity on wide 

sidewalks. Average vehicle speeds are 

below 32 km/h (20 mi/h) on the adjacent 

one-way street.
Chapter 7: Creating the Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 129

3.	 A complex strategy may be to reconstruct major intersections over a ten-year

period, again starting with high crash locations, corridors, and neighborhoods/

targeted areas; others may include acquiring right-of-way, realigning roadways, or 

revitalizing areas.

Built into this approach is the concept of phasing. For example, a high crash intersection may initially only get new ladder style crosswalk markings and a temporary median island or warning signs, with more complex measures (such as the installation of

a traffic signal with pedestrian signals or a roadway narrowing treatment) to be added

later when funding becomes available. This approach also allows for temporary improvements such as painted curb extensions that can be installed as a low cost strategy 

until funding can be found for permanent curb revisions.

Using the list of effective measures from Chapter 5, agencies can develop a matrix 

or other system of organization to provide an easy and effective way to set program 

objectives and track simple, moderately complex, and complex measures over time. 

Measures listed in an action plan will vary somewhat based on local conditions, crash 

patterns, and priorities; state and local agencies are also likely to focus on different 

measures.

Step 5: Institutionalize Changes to Planning and Design Standards

Design and traffic management practices that can lead to a reduction in pedestrian

crashes should be incorporated into all appropriate planning, design, and maintenance 

manuals as well as standard specifications. This is referred to as institutionalization. It

ensures that good design will automatically occur with all future agency projects and 

programs as a matter of routine accommodation. It provides the basis for installing

countermeasures such as marked crosswalks and pedestrian signals at all signalized 

intersections. However, it is not always enough to have the best standards in the correct manuals; continued training may be necessary to ensure that all responsible parties 

understand the standards and interpret and apply them consistently and accurately.

Appendix F provides a list of recommended publications that address pedestrian policies and designs. It also provides a list of key policy and design issues that should be

addressed first if pedestrian crashes are to be reduced. Institutionalizing good design

and traffic management practices for pedestrians may take some time, some issues

may be controversial, and it may require several iterations to complete all the changes. 

However, it is one of the most important and effective ways to reduce pedestrian 

crashes over time and should be vigorously pursued.

It is important to be aware of problems that may occur during project implementation, construction, or maintenance that may lead to a pedestrian crash if certain 

precautions are not taken. For example, closing sidewalks during a sidewalk repair or

maintenance can cause pedestrians to be forced to walk in the travel lane or to cross 

the street to use the sidewalk on the other side. Pedestrians should never be forced to 

walk in the travel lane unless the lane is barricaded off and the route is made to be accessible. Construction zone provisions that accommodate pedestrian safety should be 

an important part of the new policies and practices adopted (institutionalized) by the
130 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Examples of Comprehensive Plans

Plan Components of the Florida State Highway Safety Plan

The Florida State Highway Safety Plan includes the following elements:

1. Identify high pedestrian crash corridors or areas.

2. Analyze corridors and areas of pedestrian crash patterns and causal factors.

3. Apply multimodal level of service analysis to supplement crash data.

4. Implement pedestrian education programs.

5. Set priorities based on crashes, percentage of walkers, etc.

6. Include sidewalks in all applicable new construction, widening, and resurfacing projects (on and off-system).

7. Implement traffic calming strategies.

8. Increase enforcement of pedestrian laws.

The Washington D.C. Pedestrian Safety and Accessibility Program

The Washington D.C. Pedestrian Safety and Accessibility Program is an example of 

a comprehensive pedestrian safety program. The primary goal of the program is to 

reduce pedestrian fatalities and injuries. The secondary goals of the program are to 

increase walking trips and transit use while achieving reductions in motorized trips. 

The program features four main categories of strategies, including: Networking and 

Coalition Building; Education; Engineering, Planning, and Design; and Enforcement 

and Regulation.

The Networking and Coalition Building component involves coordination among 

numerous agencies, including the District Department of Transportation, the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Department of Health, the Department of Public 

Schools, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, and the Metropolitan Police Department.

The Education component includes increasing outreach and awareness of pedestrian safety and accessibility issues, the provision of educational materials in English 

and Spanish, the preparation of a toolkit of resources and lessons for schools, and 

participation in the “International Walk to School Day.” 

The Engineering, Planning, and Design component includes targeting high-risk locations; improving data collection, analysis, and problem identification; deploying t

necessary engineering countermeasures; adopting Pedestrian-Oriented Developmental Regulations; integrating pedestrian accommodation issuesinto the planning,

design, and approval processes; and advocating for the construction of light rail.

The Enforcement and Regulation component of the program involves targeting

enforcement zones; enforcing existing motorist, bicyclist, and pedestrian laws; reviewing existing motorist, bicyclist, and pedestrian laws and advocating for stiffer 

penalties; pursuing professional training and education; advocating for innovative 

policing (officers on bikes, horses, and skates); reviewing right-turn-on-red and 

left-turn regulations; and enforcing harsher penalties for speeding, especially in 

school areas.

For more information 

on these two plans, visit 

the site http://www.

dot.state.fl.us/safety/

TransSafEng/strategicplandocs/Strategic%20

Hwy%20Safety%20

Plan%205-8-03.pdf.
Chapter 7: Creating the Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 131

agency. To prevent causing problems in work zones, adequate signing and/or provisions must be made to direct pedestrians to safe paths and/or to provide safe street

crossings to sidewalks on the other side of the street. A good resource on this topic is

Chapter 13 in the Traffic Control Devices Handbook (Pline, 2001).

For purposes of an implementation plan, an agency must commit to reviewing and

revising its planning and design guidelines and specifications. Using the information in

Chapter 5, the agency should list the design and policy changes that need to be incorporated into its documents and create a time line for completing the changes.

Step 6: Consider Land Use, Zoning, and Site Design Issues

As noted in Chapter 1, there is a direct relationship between land use and pedestrian

safety. Land use affects motorist speed, trip frequency, and behavior. It also affects

pedestrian trip frequency and behavior. Communities that have been successful in 

implementing various land use, zoning, and site design regulations have often been 

successful in reducing their number of pedestrian crashes. Land use and development 

patterns should encourage pedestrian trips. Provisions should be created for pedestrian facilities, and developers should be required to provide pedestrian infrastructure 

(e.g., sidewalks) along roads in new developments.

While it is recognized that transportation agencies, especially those at the state level,

may have a limited ability to directly affect land use, zoning, and site design, there is 

a very direct relationship between land use and transportation planning. New roads 

open up new areas for development and new development creates demands for new 

roads. Furthermore, planning and zoning departments and those agency functions

involved with reviewing and approving private and public developments should be 

thoroughly involved in the process to promote pedestrian-friendly and safe infrastructure and roadway designs. Effective stakeholder participation is one way that broad 

support for changes to land use policies might be built during the pedestrian safety 

planning process.

Chapter 5 lists some of the most highly effective land use, zoning, and site design 

measures for reducing pedestrian crashes and creating a more pedestrian-friendly 

walking environment. For purposes of an implementation plan, an agency shou

recognize the importance of land use and commit to working with the appropriate 

parties in implementing some or all of the measures listed in Chapter 5.

Step 7: Reinforce Commitment

Implementation requires the ongoing commitment of an entire transportation agency.

Momentum will only be achieved over time through constant attention and action.

There are many things an agency can do to achieve ongoing commitment to pedestrian safety. An agency should choose the strategies that work and incorporate them

into its implementation plan. The following is a short list of strategies used by various 

transportation agencies in communities that have been successful in reducing pedestrian crashes over time:
132 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

•	 Provide ongoing internal training to ensure that designs do not inadvertently

impact pedestrian mobility and safety.

•	 Provide ongoing external training to help the public focus on changes that will

improve pedestrian safety.

•	 Have transportation agencies write Requests for Proposals (RFPs) that require

appropriate pedestrian expertise.

•	 Institute an award system to acknowledge good projects that provide safer conditions for pedestrians.

•	 Work cooperatively with the Health Department on pedestrian safety research

or education programs.

Step 8: Evaluate Results 

A successful pedestrian safety plan must contain a mechanism to evaluate results. This

ensures that implemented countermeasures are effective in reducing crashes and improving safety and helps ensure future funding opportunities if the plan is perceived 

as a success. In order to perform a thorough evaluation, the specific objectives of the

Pedestrian Safety Action Plan need to be defined early-on in the process. Given limited resources, it is critical that the most effective countermeasures are identified and

pursued when prioritizing improvements. Most communities that fail to reduce pedestrian crashes do so not because of a lack of funds, but because they do not implement 

the right countermeasures and make the right changes to agency design and management policies. This may be because they fail to continually evaluate the results to see 

if their efforts are actually reducing crashes. Evaluation means that implementation 

plans are not static documents—they should change over time as various crash countermeasures are tried and evaluated.

A key prerequisite to any evaluation process is to quantify the before conditions and

track changes in the after condition. The data collection efforts discussed previously 

in Chapter 3 ought to be maintained throughout the implementation of the pedestrian 

safety plan. Appendix E elaborates on specific evaluation techniques.

Combining a record of successful projects is very helpful in showing progress over 

time. Good safety plans will include a comprehensive documentation of successful 

projects or institutional changes. It is also important to note that in some cases, the

number of pedestrian crashes may not go down due to the fact that pedestrian activity 

and access has been increased. In these instances, the rate of pedestrian crashes may

have decreased, and a well-documented evaluation of results is needed to provide the 

most accurate measure of success.
References 133

References

National Guides and Major Research Documents

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, A Policy on 

Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, Washington, D.C., 2001.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Guide for the 

Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, Washington, D.C., July 2004.

Axelson, P.W., D.A. Chesney, D.V. Galvan, J.B. Kirschbaum, P.E. Longmuir, C. Lyons,

and K.M. Wong, Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access, Part I of II: Review of Existing Guidelines and Practices, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 1999.

Available online at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/access-1.htm,

accessed June 10, 2004.

Blomberg, R.D., D.F. Preusser, A. Hale, and W.A. Leaf, Experimental Field Test of Proposed Pedestrian Safety Messages: Vol. II: Child Messages, National Highway Safety Administration, Report No. DOT HS 806 522, Washington, DC, November, 1983.

Campbell, B., C.V. Zegeer, H. Huang, and M. Cynecki, A Review of Pedestrian Safety 

Research in the U.S. and Abroad, Federal Highway Administration, McLean, VA, January

2004.

Federal Highway Administration, “FHWA Guidance—Bicycle and Pedestrian Provisions of Federal Transportation Legislation”, February 24, 1999. Available online at

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/bp-guid.htm, accessed January 2,

2006.

Federal Highway Administration, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and 

Highways, Washington, D.C., 2003. Available online at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov.

Harkey, David L., and C.V. Zegeer, PEDSAFE: Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System, Federal Highway Administration, Washington D.C., September

2004. Available online at http://www.walkinginfo.org.

Institute of Transportation Engineers, Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities: A Recommended Practice of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, D.C., March 1998.

Available online http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/designsafety.pdf.
134 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Institute	of 	Transportation	Engineers,	Traditional Neighborhood Development Street Design 

Guidelines: Recommended Practice,	Washington,	D.C.,	1999.	

Institute	of 	Transportation	Engineers,	Traffic Engineering Handbook, Prentice Hall, 

Englewood	Cliffs,	NJ,	1999	(draft).	Available	for	puchase	online	at	http://www.ite.org.

Institute	of 	Transportation	Engineers,	Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook, 

Washington,	D.C.,	1990.	

Kirschbaum,	J.B.,	P.W.	Axelson,	P.E.	Longmuir,	K.M.	Mispagel,	J.A.	Stein,	and	D.A.	

Yamada,	Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access, Part II of II: Review of Existing Guidelines 

and Practices,	Federal	Highway	Administration,	Washington,	D.C.,	2001.	Available	online	at	http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/sidewalk2/,	accessed	June	10,	2004.	

McMahon,	Patrick	J.,	C.V.	Zegeer,	Chandler	Duncan,	Richard	L.	Knoblauch,	J.	Richard	

Stewart,	and	Asad	K.	Khattak,	An Analysis of Factors Contributing to ‘Walking Along Roadway’ Crashes: Research Study and Guidelines for Sidewalks and Walkways,	Federal	Highway	

Administration,	McLean,	VA,	March	2002.	

National Research Council, Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, 

Washington,	D.C.,	2000.	

Pline,	J.,	ed.,	“Chapter	13:	Pedestrians,”	Traffic Control Devices Handbook,	Institute	of 	

Transportation	Engineers,	Washington,	D.C.,	2001.	

Preusser,	D.F.	and	A.K.	Lund,	And Keep on Looking: A Film to Reduce Pedestrian Crashes 

Among 9 to 12 year Olds,	Journal	of 	Safety	Research,	Vol.	19:177-185,	1988.

U.S.	Access	Board	and	the	Federal	Highway	Administration,	Accessible Rights-of-Way: 

A Design Guide,	Washington,	D.C.	Available	online	at	http://www.access-board.gov/

prowac/guide/PROWGuide.htm,	accessed	January	19,	2006.	

Zegeer, C.V., C. Seiderman, P. Lagerwey, M. Cynecki, M. Ronkin, and R. Schneider, 

Pedestrian Facilities User Guide: Providing Safety and Mobility,	Federal	Highway	Administration,	McLean,	VA,	2002.	Available	online	at	http://www.walkinginfo.org.

Zegeer,	C.,	D.	Henderson,	R.	Blomberg,	L.	Marchetti,	S.	Masten,	Y.	Fan,	A.	Brown,	

L.	Thomas,	J.	Stutts,	Evaluation	of 	the	Miami-Dade	Pedestrian	Safety	Demonstration	

Project,	National	Highway	Traffic	Safety	Administration,	Washington,	D.C.,	2007.	

Zegeer,	C.V.,	Jane	Stutts,	Herman	Huang,	Michael	J.	Cynecki,	Ron	Van	Houten,	Barbara	Alberson,	Ronald	Pfefer,	Timothy	R.	Neuman,	Kevin	L.	Slack,	Kelly	K	Hardy,	

NCHRP Report 500, Vol. 10: A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Pedestrians, Transportation	Research	Board,	Washington,	D.C.,	2004.

Zegeer,	Charles	V.,	Richard	Stewart,	Herman	H.	Huang,	Peter	A.	Lagerway,	John	

Feganes,	and	B.J.	Campbell,	Safety Effects of Marked versus Unmarked Crosswalks at 

 Uncontrolled Locations,	Federal	Highway	Administration,	McLean,	VA,	September	2005.	

Available	online	at	http://www.walkinginfo.org.
References 135

Zegeer, C.V., The National Bicycling and Walking Study: Transportation Choices for a Changing 

America, Final Report, USDOT, FHWA, Washington, D.C., 1994. Available online at

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/study.htm.

Local Plans

City and County of Denver, Pedestrian Master Plan (Draft), Denver, CO,

April 2004. Available online at http://www.denvergov.org/Transportation_

Planning/141113406template3jump.asp.

City of Bellevue, Transportation Department, Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation Plan 

Update, Bellevue, WA, October 1999. Available online at http://www.ci.bellevue.

wa.us/departments/Transportation/pdf/PedBikePlan99.pdf.

City of Cambridge, Community Development Department, Pedestrian Plan, Cambridge, MA, 2000. Available online at http://www.cambridgema.gov/~CDD/et/ped/

plan/ped_plan.html.

City of Madison, Pedestrian Transportation Plan, Madison, WI, September 1997. Available

online at http://www.cityofmadison.com/transp/PedTransPlanTableOfContents.html.

City of Marina, Marina Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan (Draft), Marina, CA, August

2003. Available online at http://www.lgc.org/marina/.

City of Oakland, Pedestrian Master Plan, Oakland, CA, August 2002. Available online at

http://www.oaklandnet.com/government/pedestrian/index.html.

City of Portland, Offices of Transportation, Transportation Engineering and Development, Pedestrian Transportation Program, Portland Pedestrian Master Plan, Portland, 

OR, June 1998. Available online at https://www.portlandonline.com.

City of Sacramento, Department of Public Works, Traffic Engineering Division, Pedestrian Safety Guidelines, Sacramento, CA, January 2003. Available online at http://www.

cityofsacramento.org/dsd/dev_eng_finance/entitlements/pdfs/ped_safety.pdf.

Maricopa Association of Governments, Pedestrian Plan 2000, Phoenix, AZ, Decemb

1999. Available online at http://www.mag.maricopa.gov/pdf/cms.resource/

ped‐plan2000sum-web_427.pdf

Puget Sound Regional Council, Association of Washington Cities, and County Road

Administration Board, Pedestrian Facilities Guidebook: Incorporating Pedestrians Into Washington’s Transportation System, Washington State Department of Transportation, September

1997. Available online at http://www.psrc.org/projects/nonmotorized/strategy.pdf.

SANDAG (San Diego’s Regional Planning Agency), Planning and Designing for Pedestrians: Model Guidelines for the San Diego Region, San Diego, CA, June 2002. Available online

at http://www.sandag.org/uploads/publicationid/publicationid_713_3269.pdf.

Town of Chapel Hill, Pedestrian Plan Policies and Guidelines, Chapel Hill, NC, May 1994. 
136 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

State Plans

Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Alaska Bicycle and Pedestrian 

Plan—An Integral Part of Vision 2020: Alaska’s Long-Range Statewide Transportation Plan, 

March 1995. Available online at http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/IGLOO.html, accessed

June 17, 2005.

Arizona Department of Transportation, Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, August

2003. Available online at http://www.azbikeped.org/statewide-bicycle-pedestrianintro.html.

Caltrans, Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in California: Technical Reference Report, March 2004.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Statewide Bicycle and 

Pedestrian Master Plan: Pedestrian Facility Planning and Design Guidelines, April 1996. Available online at http://www.dot.state.pa.us.

Florida Department of Transportation, Florida Pedestrian Planning and Design Handbook, 

Tallahassee, FL, March 1997. Available online at http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/

ped_bike/ped_bike_standards.htm#Florida%20Ped%20Handbook.

Georgia Department of Transportation, Pedestrian and Streetscape Guide, September 

2003. Available online at http://www.dot.state.ga.us/dot/plan-prog/planning/

projects/bicycle/images/ped_streetscape_guide_june05.pdf.

Government of the District of Columbia, District of Columbia Traffic Calming Policies and 

Guidelines, District Department of Transportation, 2002. Available online at http://

www.ddot.dc.gov/ddot/lib/ddot/services/pdf/traffic_calming.pdf.

Idaho Transportation Board, Idaho Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan, January

1995. Available online at http://itd.idaho.gov/planning/reports/bikepedplan/idt.pdf.

National Center for Bicycling and Walking, Vermont Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility Planning and Design Manual, Vermont Agency of Transportation, December 2002. Available

online at http://www.aot.state.vt.us/progdev/Documents/LTF/FinalPedestrianAndB

icycleFacility/PedBikeTOC.html.

New Jersey Department of Transportation, Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan: 

Phase 2, no date. Available online at http://www.bikemap.com/RBA/NJBikePed.pdf.

North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian

Transportation, Bicycling and Walking in North Carolina: A Long-Range Transportation Plan, 

November 1996. Available online at http://www.ncdot.org/transit/bicycle/about/

longrangeplan2.pdf.

Oregon Department of Transportation, Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, 1995. Available online at http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/docs/or_bicycle_

ped_plan.pdf.
References 137

Transportation and Growth Management, Main Street...when a highway runs through it: 

A Handbook for Oregon Communities,	Oregon	Department	of 	Transportation	and	the	

	Oregon	Department	of 	Land	Conservation	and	Development,	November	1999.	

Available	online	at	http://egov.oregon.gov/LCD/TGM/docs/mainstreet.pdf.

Virginia	Department	of 	Transportation,	VTrans 2025 Statewide Pedestrian Plan,	2004.	

Available	online	at	http://www.sotrans.state.va.us/VTrans/home.htm.

Washington	DOT,	Bicycle	and	Pedestrian	Program,	Pedestrian Facilities Guidebook, 

Olympia,	WA,	September	1997.	Available	online	at	http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/EESC/

Design/DesignManual/desEnglish/1025-E.pdf.

Wisconsin	DOT,	Division	of 	Transportation	Investment	Management,	Bureau	of 	

Planning, Wisconsin Pedestrian Policy Plan 2020,	March	2002.	Available	online	at	http://

www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/state/ped2020.htm.

Zegeer,	C.V.,	Herman	Huang,	David	Harkey,	and	Michael	J.	Cynecki,	Planning and 

Designing Local Pedestrian Facilities,	State	of 	North	Carolina,	Department	of 	Transportation,	1997.	Available	online	at	http://www.ncdot.org/transit/bicycle/projects/	

resources/projects_peddesign.html.

Web Sites

Association	of 	Pedestrian	and	Bicycle	Professionals.	Avaliable	online	at	http://www.

apbp.org/website/.

Burden,	Dan.	“How	Can	I	Find	and	Help	Build	a	Walkable	Community”	Available	

online	at	http://www.walkable.org/article1.htm.

Congress	for	the	New	Urbanism	Web	site.	Available	online	at	http://www.cnu.org.

Federal	Highway	Administration,	Congestion	Mitigation	and	Air	Quality		Improvement	

Program	Fact	Sheet.	Available	online	at:	http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/safetea/	

congairfactsheet.htm.

Federal	Highway	Administration,	Federal	Lands	Highway	Division,	SAFETEA-LU:	

Review	of 	the	Federal	Lands	Highway	Program	and	Other	Related	Provisions.	Available	online	at:	http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/flh/flhfs051028.htm.

Federal	Highway	Administration,	Good	Practices	Guide	for	Bicycle	Safety	Education—Evaluation.	Available	online	at	http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/ee/bestguidedoc.

html#evaluation.

Federal	Highway	Administration,	Pedestrian	Safety	Campaign.	Available	online	at	

Safety.fhwa.dot.gov/local_program/pedcampaign/index.htm.

Federal	Highway	Administration,	Pedestrian	Safety	Web	site.	Available	online	at	

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/ped/index.htm.
138 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Federal Highway Administration, “Public Involvement Techniques for Transportation

Decision-Making.” Available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/pittd/cover.htm.

Federal Highway Administration, Fact Sheets on Highway Provisions. Available online

at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/factsheets.htm.

Federal Highway Administration, National Scenic Byways Program: Grant Guidance.

Available online at: http://www.bywaysonline.org/grants/guidance/.

Federal Highway Administration, Recreational Trails Program. Available online at:

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/rectrails/.

Federal Highway Administration, Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation

Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). Available online at: http://www.

fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/.

Federal Highway Administration, Section 402 Highway Safety Funds. Available online

at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/state_program/section402/.

Federal Transit Administration, Grant Programs. Available online at: http://www.fta.

dot.gov/25_ENG_HTML.htm.

Feet First Pedestrian Advocacy. Available online at http://www.feetfirst.info/.

Maryland Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Education Program. Available online at

http://www.rockvillemd.gov/recreation/bicycling/education-program.htm.

National Transportation Enhancements Clearinghouse. Available online at: http://

www.enhancements.org/.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash Analysis Tool. Available online at http://www.

walkinginfo.org/pc/pbcat.htm.

Street Design Guidelines. Available online at http://www.walkable.org.

The Facts: Impaired Pedestrians. Available online at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/

people/outreach/safesobr/17qp/impaired.html.

Traffic Calming Information. Available online at http://www.trafficcalming.com.

University of Kansas Community Toolbox. Available online at http://ctb.ku.edu.

U.S. Access board Web site. Available online at http://www.access-board.gov/.

U.S. Census Bureau Web site. Available online at http://www.census.gov/.

Victoria Transport Policy Institute. Available online at http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/

index.php#incentives.

Victoria Transport Policy Institute Online TDM Encyclopedia. Available online at

http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/.
References 139

Virginia	Tech	On-line	Toolbox,	“Partnerships	and	Participation	in	Planning.”	Available	

online	at	http://www.uap.vt.edu/cdrom/.

Walk	to	School	Day	International	Award	Applications.	Available	online	at	http://

www.iwalktoschool.org/award_app_template.cfm?ID=196.

Other Research Documents

Federal	Highway	Administration,	Canadian Research on Pedestrian Safety,	McLean,	VA,	

December	1999b.	Available	online	at	http://www.hsrc.unc.edu/pdf/pedbike/99090.

PDF.

Federal	Highway	Administration,	FHWA Study Tour for Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety in 

England, Germany, and the Netherlands,	Report	No.	FHWA/PL-95/006,	Washington,	DC,	

1994. 

Federal	Highway	Administration,	Pedestrian/Bicyclist Safety Resource Set (CD-ROM),	

Report	No.	FHWA-SA-00-005,	2000.	Available	online	at	http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/

fourthlevel/newprod.htm#set,	accessed	April	24,	2004.	

Florida	Department	of 	Transportation,	2002 Quality/Level of Service Handbook,	FDOT:	

Tallahassee,	2002.

Harkey,	D.,	J.	Mekemson,	M.	Chen,	and	K.	Krull,	Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash Analysis 

Tool (PBCAT) User’s Manual,	Report	No.	FHWA-RD-99-192,	Federal	Highway	Administration,	Washington,	DC,	June	2000.	

Hefferan,	Jennifer	R.	and	Peter	Lagerwey,	“The	City	of 	Seattle,	WA,	USA	Crosswalk	

Inventory	and	Improvement	Plan,”	ITE Journal,	January	2004.

Huang,	Herman,	C.V.	Zegeer,	Richard	Nassi,	and	Barry	Fairfax,	The Effects of Innovative Pedestrian Signs at Unsignalized Locations: A Tale of Three Treatments, Report No. 

	FHWA-RD-00-098,	Federal	Highway	Administration,	McLean,	VA,	August	2000.	

Available	online	at	http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/pubs/00-098.pdf.

Hunter,	W.,	J.	Stutts,	W.	Pein,	and	C.	Cox,	Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash Types of the Early 

1990’s,	Report	No.	FHWA-RD-95-163,	Federal	Highway	Administration,	Washington,	

DC,	1995.	

Malenfant,	L.	and	R.	Van	Houten,	“Increasing	the	Percentage	of 	Drivers	Yielding	

to	Pedestrians	in	Three	Canadian	Cities	with	a	Multifaceted	Safety	Program,”	Health 

Education Research, Vol. 5, 1989, pp. 274-279.

National	Highway	Traffic	Safety	Administration.	Traffic Safety Facts: 2004 Data.	DOT	

HS	809	913.	Available	online	at	http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/ncsa/

TSF2004/809913.pdf.

Noyce,	David	A.	and	R.	Dharmaraju,	An Evaluation of Technologies for Automated 

 Detection and Classification of Pedestrians and Bicyclists,	Federal	Highway	Administration,	

	Massachusetts	Highway	Administration,	and	University	of 	Massachusetts	Trans-
140 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

portation	Center,	May	2002.	Available	online	at	http://www.walkinginfo.org/pdf/

UMTCBike	Report02-01.pdf,	accessed	August	2005.

Petritsch,	Theodore	A.	Bruce	W.	Landis,	Peyton	S.	McLeod,	Herman	F.	Huang,	Srikalyan	Challa,	“Level	of 	Service	Model	for	Signalized	Intersections	for	Pedestrians,”	

TRB	2005	Annual	Meeting	CD-ROM,	2005.

Reschovsky,	C.,	“Journey	to	Work:	2000,”	Census 2000 Brief,	US	Department	of 	Commerce,	Census	Bureau,	Washington,	DC,	March	2004.	Available	online	at	http://www.

census.gov/prod/2004pubs/c2kbr-33.pdf,	accessed	April	23,	2003.	

Robertson,	Douglas,	“Chapter	13:	Pedestrian	Studies,”	Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies,	Institute	of 	Transportation	Engineers,	Washington,	D.C.,	2000.	

Schneider,	Robert,	Robert	Patton,	Jennifer	Toole,	Craig	Raborn,	Pedestrian and Bicycle 

Data Collection in United States Communities: Quantifying Use, Surveying Users, and Documenting Facility Extent,	Federal	Highway	Administration,	January	2005.	Available	online	at	

http:www.pedbikeinfo.org.

U.S.	Department	of 	Justice,	The Americans With Disabilities Act Title II Technical Assistance 

Manual, Covering State and Local Governments, November 1993. 

U.S.	Department	of 	Transportation,	National Bicycling and Walking Study Five Year Status 

Report,	Federal	Highway	Administration,	Washington,	DC,	1999.	Available	online	at	

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/study.htm.

Van Houten, R. and L. Malenfant, Canadian Research on Pedestrian Safety,	Federal	Highway	Administration,	Washington,	DC,	January	1999.	Available	online	at	http://www.

fhwa.dot.gov/tfhrc/safety/pubs/99090/99090.pdf.

Van	Houten,	R.	and	L.	Malenfant,	“The	Influence	of 	Signs	Prompting	Motorists	to	

Yield	50	ft	(15.5	m)	before	Marked	Crosswalks	on	Motor	Vehicle-Pedestrian	Conflicts	

at	Crosswalks	with	Pedestrian	Activated	Flashing	Lights,”	Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 24, 1992, pp. 217-225. 

Van	Houten,	R.,	D.	McCusker,	and	L.	Malenfant,	“Advance	Yield	Markings:	Reducing	Motor	Vehicle-Pedestrian	Conflicts	at	Multilane	Crosswalks	with	Uncontrolled	

Approach,”	Transportation Research Record 1773, TRB, National Research Council, 

	Washington,	DC,	2001,	pp.	69-74.	Available	online	at	http://www.cers-safety.com/	

advanceyieldmarkings.pdf.

Van	Houten,	R.,	“The	Effects	of 	Advance	Stop	Lines	and	Sign	Prompts	on	Pedestrian	

Safety	in	Crosswalks	on	Multilane	Highways,”	Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 21, 

1988,	pp.	245-251.	Available	online	at	http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.f

cgi?artid=1286120&blobtype=pdf.
Appendix	A:	How	to	Create	and	Run	an	Effective	Pedestrian	Advisory	Board 141

Appendix A: 

How to Create and Run an

Effective Pedestrian 

Advisory Board

Step 1: Create an Official PAB

Pedestrian Advisory Boards (PABs) should be created through an official action.

At the local level, local officials can pass a resolution; at the state level, it may be an

agency directive or a law passed by state legislators. Creating an official PAB is important for two reasons: 

1.	 The creation of the PAB will immediately make decision-makers aware of the

Board and its importance while also educating them on important pedestrian issues; and 

2.	 An official PAB cannot be easily disbanded or ignored when the decision-makers

change (e.g. new department director, mayor, or governor).

Step 2: Recruit and Interview PAB Members

PABs should be made up of about eight to fifteen people—any fewer, and participants will be overwhelmed; any more, and the size can become unmanageable. Often

state PABS are larger than local PABs. It is useful to have up to 15 people for a few

reasons: it can be difficult to get anything done if some do not show up for a meeting; there is always attrition for unrelated reasons (e.g., people moving); when the

group is established, it can more effectively work in subcommittees if more people 

are involved. Appointments should be staggered to avoid large turnover and promo

continuity. In order to prevent discontinuity, the Chair position should not be a rotating position. 

To create an effective, balanced, and diversified PAB, all prospective candidates should

be recruited and interviewed. Simply contacting various organizations and asking 

them to send a representative is not enough; openings should be advertised through 

local media sources or political offices. A letter of interest and a resume should be

required. People who invest their time are more likely to be committed PAB members.

The interview should be like any other job interview. For example, interviews could be

conducted by a representative from the executive office (mayor or city manager), the

person who will be staffing the PAB, and a current PAB member.
142 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

There are three qualities to look for in prospective PAB members:

1. Candidates need to have the interests of the broader community in mind rather 

than be focused on an issue close to home (e.g. a stop sign on their street), or

they are likely to leave once their issue has been addressed..

2. Candidates should have a history of volunteerism; experienced volunteers will 

be more likely to attend meetings and commit the time needed to make the PAB

successful.

3. Candidates need to be good listeners and have a collaborative approach to problem solving. 

Since PABs are advisory, they will only be effective and legitimate if their members

reflect the community they represent. Gender, race, age, type of walker (casual to fitness walkers), and the geographic location of residence for each applicant should be

considered to ensure a balanced, representative board. 

Step 3: Determine Logistic Support

The local or state agency should make it very clear from the beginning what services 

can and cannot be provided to a PAB. Staffing a PAB should require about four to

eight hours a month. Direct services should be limited to providing a meeting place

and attending meetings. Minutes and meeting notices are typically done by the Board 

members—email makes this easy—but can also be done by a secretary on loan to the

Board from a state or local agency. A PAB may benefit from secretarial support to take

notes or transcribe audio tapes, write minutes, send out announcements, make copies, 

schedule rooms, etc. However, the more the board members take responsibility for 

their logistics, the more invested and effective they will be.

Step 4: Provide PAB Members with Timely and Useful Information

The most important role for local and state agency staff is to provide the PAB with

timely and useful information so their input is effective. PAB members are volunteers

who are giving of their limited time to the community and their time should be well 

spent. For example, board members need to know when they can provide comments

on an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or a major public works project.

An informed PAB will be a better board. For example, in Seattle, PAB members get

together once a year for an all day, facilitated retreat. As part of the retreat, Seattle

Department of Transportation staff conducts a short training session on pedestrian

design issues. One of the purposes of the training is to help participants better understand things that can’t be changed (e.g. shape and color of a regulatory sign) versus

things that involve more choices and engineering judgment (e.g. determining the number of lanes needed on an arterial that is being reconstructed).

Step 5: Set the PAB Agenda

The Board Chair should coordinate with agency staff and departmental representatives (listed in Step 3) to develop a list of topics for Board review and input. The rela-
Appendix A: How to Create and Run an Effective Pedestrian Advisory Board 143

tionship of the agency with the Chair is critical to the success of the Board. Typically, 

PABs will want to provide input on agency policies, programs, and projects. Board

meetings should feature a presentation on one of these topics. This makes every meeting important and ensures good attendance and participation. The Chair (not agency

staff) should invite the program/project manager to participate and present at a PAB

meeting. The person who staffs the PAB should help with the presentation. This

builds teamwork and can make presenting to a citizen’s group a positive experience.
144 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Appendix B: 

How to Conduct 

Pedestrian Counts and 

Behavior Studies 

Step 1: Determine Study Location and Scope

When conducting a pedestrian study it is important to identify the exact location of

where the data is to be collected. Counts at intersections or along short segments of 

streets may include an observation of the location where the pedestrians are crossing 

(intersection versus midblock, in or outside of the crosswalk, and which crosswalk at

an intersection is to be studied).

Step 2: Decide on Types of Studies to Perform

Pedestrian studies may include collecting data on pedestrian volumes, walking speeds, 

gaps in motor vehicle traffic, conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians, or pedestrian

behavior. The type of study should be determined based on what problems exist at a 

location and should aim to assist in selecting appropriate countermeasures.

Step 3: General Observation of the Study Site and Pedestrians

Before starting the actual data collection, the analysts should familiarize themselves 

with the study location and note the types of signal control, the location of crosswalks 

and markings and other features such as sight distance restrictions. It is also appropriate to note general observations of pedestrian behavior such as walking patterns and 

compliance with signal control devices.

Step 4: Develop a Data Collection Plan

It is important to create a plan for what type of data will be collected and during what

time period. Depending on the specific geometry of the site, locations need to be

identified where the analyst can readily observe all necessary data. Pedestrian count

and behavior data should focus on the time of day or day of week when a concern 

exists. This could include times with high or low pedestrian volumes, depending on 

when pedestrian crashes occurred. Pedestrian counts at schools should be conducted 

during school arrival or departure times and the duration may be limited to the start 
Appendix B: How to Conduct Pedestrian Counts and Behavior Studies 145

Pedestrian Count Examples

Manual Pedestrian Counts

A number of localities around the country collect manual counts on a regular basis. The Washington, D.C. 

District Department of Transportation conducts pedestrian counts at each leg of approximately 100 intersections annually. The District of Columbia has been taking pedestrian counts at intersections and other 

pedestrian crossing locations for over 20 years. Counts are currently on file for approximately five to t

percent of the 13,000 intersections in the District.

In Albuquerque, New Mexico, the Mid-Region Council of Governments (MRCOG) collects bicycle and pedestrian counts at all signalized intersections in Albuquerque (more than 500 sites) on a three-year cycle. 

Automated Pedestrian Counts 

A number of agencies have installed infrared devices to collected automated counts of pedestrians, as well 

as bicyclists. The City Government of Cheyenne, Wyoming has installed an infrared counter to take the 

path counts on the Dry Creek Greenway. In Licking County, Ohio, the Licking County Area Transportation 

Study has installed infrared counters in 11 locations along a shared-use path system. 

The Massachusetts Highway Department and the University of Massachusetts Transportation Center have 

installed an infrared sensor placed above the Norwottuck Rail Trail at the end of Route 116 underpass in

Amherst, MA. The Autosense II sensor was placed on an underpass structure, 5.4 m (18 ft) above the trail, 

in order that pedestrians and bicyclists passing underneath the device could be detected. The active infrared sensor detected pedestrians and bicyclists with two separate infrared beams (Noyce, 2002). For more 

information, visit: http://www.walkinginfo.org/pdf/UMTCBikeReport02-01.pdf.

A variety of types of technologies are available for automated counting of pedestrians. These technologies 

are evaluated in detail in the research paper, “An Evaluation of Technologies for Automated Detection and 

Classification of Pedestrians and Bicyclists,” which is available online at http://www.walkinginfo.org/pdf/

UMTCBikeReport02-01.pdf.

and end of the school day. Concerns along bus routes should focus on the peak commute times or whenever pedestrian crashes are occurring. Pedestrian concerns in a 

business area may include both the peak commute times and the midday lunch period. 

If 	there	is	a	nighttime	pedestrian	safety	concern,	nighttime	counts	and	observations	

should be made. The study duration should be matched to signal warrants in the 

MUTCD	and	other	local	or	state	requirements.	In	general,	the	duration	of 	a	study	may	

vary from an hour to multiple days, possibly affecting the personnel requirements.

Step 5: Collect the Data

The actual data collection process varies depending on the type of study. Examples of 

study types include:

•	 Volume	Study:	Pedestrian	counts	can	be	performed	manually	using	tally	sheets,	

mechanical count boards, or electronic count boards. There are also technologies available to perform automated pedestrian counts, including video detection, 
146 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

infrared,	or	microwave	technology.	When	pedestrian	counts	are	made,	they	are	

generally	short-term	counts	of 	two	to	four	hours.	In	rare	instances,	counts	may	

be made for up to eight hours. Counts should ideally be summarized by 15-minute	intervals,	but	hourly	summaries	are	also	acceptable.	If 	15-minute	intervals	are	

used, a single individual may be able to count each movement of a busy intersection in an hour. Pedestrian activity along a sidewalk or in a crossing may be 

recorded on a video camera and then reviewed at a later date at high speed to save 

time.	If 	pedestrian	counts	are	very	high,	a	single	observer	can	be	used	to	conduct	

the count from a videotape by reviewing the videotape slowly.

•	 Walking	Speed	Study:	Determining	average	pedestrian	walking	speeds	is	necessary for pedestrian signal warrants, pedestrian signal timing and other applications. 

Walking	speed	studies	are	especially	important	when	the	average	walking	speed	

is	significantly	different	from	the	typically	assumed	1.0	to	1.2	m/s	(3.5	to	4	ft/s).	

The difference may be due to pedestrian characteristics such as high volumes, age 

distribution,	pedestrian	cell	phone	use,	level	of 	physical	fitness,	and	disabilities;	or	

it can be related to geometric characteristics of the study site such as steep grades, 

narrow	sidewalks,	and	shared-use	paths.	Adverse	weather	conditions	including	

rain, snow and wind may also affect walking speeds in coastal or mountain regions. 

•	 Gap	Study:	In	some	cases	it	may	be	necessary	to	analyze	gaps	in	the	motor	vehicle	

traffic	stream	at	pedestrian	crossing	locations	to	determine	appropriate	crossing	

treatments.	For	example,	the	MUTCD	warrants	a	pedestrian	signal	if 	the	frequency of crossable gaps falls below a certain threshold. 

•	 Behavior	Study:	While	general	observations	on	pedestrian	behavior	should	be	

made before any detailed data is collected, there may be situations where a more 

in-depth analysis of pedestrian behavior is appropriate. Elements of pedestrian 

behavior	of 	interest	may	include	the	occurrence	of 	pedestrian-vehicle	conflicts,	

an	assessment	of 	pedestrian	understanding	and	compliance	with	traffic	control	

devices, or other exhibited behavior, such as running, or hesitating. Measures of 

effectiveness	of 	behavioral	studies	can	be	quantitative	(number	of 	conflicts	or	

violations),	but	may	also	be	more	qualitative	in	nature	(pedestrians	seem	to	be	

unclear	about	meaning	of 	signs).	

Step 6: Analyze the Data

It	is	good	practice	to	decide	on	the	method	of 	data	analysis	prior	to	collecting	the	

data. This will assure that all necessary information is in fact collected and will be 

available	during	data	extraction	and	analysis.	Depending	on	the	type	and	extent	of 	the	

study, it may be appropriate to consult a statistician to assure that large amounts of 

data	(especially	before-and-after	or	time	series	data)	are	properly	interpreted.	
Appendix C: How to Conduct Pedestrian and Motorist Behavior Assessments 147

Appendix C: How to 

Conduct Pedestrian and 

Motorist Behavior 

Assessments

Step 1: Understand the Human Element of a Crash

First and foremost on the observer’s mind should be the realization that, in most

cases, the pedestrian did not walk into the street with the intention of being struck. 

Similarly, the motorist involved in a pedestrian crash did not collide with the pedestrian intentionally. If the motorist could have avoided the crash, he or she would have

done so. Crashes can result from:

•	 Motorist or pedestrian inattention.

•	 Poor judgment on the part of the motorist or pedestrian (possibly a factor of

age [young and elderly pedestrians and motorists], mental or physical disabilities,

fatigue, or drug/alcohol use).

•	 Miscalculation of risks.

•	 Pedestrians not understanding the speed of an approaching vehicle.

•	 Motorists miscalculating their own speed.

•	 Pedestrians assuming that approaching motorists see them and will react to them.

•	 Motorists not understanding the speed and direction of a pedestrian, or unexpected pedestrian movement.

•	 Visual screens (parked or stopped vehicles, landscaping) or insufficient lighting.

Step 2: Observe Pedestrian and Motorist Movements

The best way to conduct the process of “thinking like a pedestrian” is to first observe

pedestrian movements. In many cases, pedestrians will follow a variety of patterns

in areas with a high number of crashes. For example, some pedestrians will wait at a

signalized intersection and cross on the WALK signal, while others will cross against

the signal when they see a gap in motor vehicle traffic.

Next, observe motorist movements to “think like a motorist.” In many cases, motorists appear to travel oblivious to the presence of pedestrians. Observers should note

their movements. For example, some motorists at a signalized intersection will yield to
148 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

pedestrians while turning right or left when the pedestrians are in the crosswalk, while 

others will try to drive around the pedestrian and through the crosswalk as soon as 

there is a sufficient gap to do so.

Step 3: “Walk a Mile” in Their Shoes

The observer should begin where the pedestrians initiate their movements, preferably 

under typical conditions (including at night), and look up and down the street to see

what the pedestrian sees. With all due caution, the observer should then attempt to

emulate the observed movement without placing himself or herself at risk. At times,

an illegal maneuver may be safer than the legal or intended movement.

To focus on the motorist’s experience, the observer should also drive through the area

and make the observed movements, preferably under typical conditions (including at

night), and look up and down the street to see if there are any pedestrians in the problem areas identified earlier. With all due caution, the observer should then attempt to

emulate the observed vehicle movement (again, without placing anyone at risk).

Step 4: Record Objective and Subjective Observations

The observer should then note what he or she saw, heard, felt, including a subjective 

evaluation such as the relative safety of both the pedestrian and motorist maneuvers 

observed and experienced. Objective observations can point out design flaws such

as poor sight distance, or other roadway features. The subjective evaluation may lead 

to an observation such as “no wonder pedestrians do not cross there—it is so far

away from the bus stop” or “I can see why the motorist could have missed seeing the

pedestrian crossing—that billboard is so distracting.” The observer should note the

behaviors uncritically and record these movements.

Step 5: Visualize a Solution

The observer then should take a step further and imagine a pedestrian safety solution that better accommodates the pedestrian’s needs as well as the motorist’s. With

that solution in mind, the observer should again cross the road making the movement 

as if the solution were in place (if possible), as well as drive along the roadway. This

process may require the use of spotters to watch for approaching motor vehicle traffic

and pedestrians and ensure that no one is placed at undue risk. 
Appendix D: List of Funding Sources 149

Appendix D: 

List of Funding Sources

Federal

A brief description of various federal funding sources available is listed below. F

more detailed information, please see Appendix 2 of the “FHWA Guidance—Bicycle

and Pedestrian Provisions of Federal Transportation Legislation” (FHWA, 1999),

available online at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/bp-guid.htm.

Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act—A Legacy for Users 

(SAFETEA-LU)

SAFETEA-LU was signed into law on August 10, 2005. It represents the large

surface transportation investment in U.S. history and contains a number of provisions 

to address pedestrian safety, many of which are highlighted below. More information 

can be found at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/.

Surface Transportation Program (STP)

The Surface Transportation Program provides flexible funding to states which can be

used on a wide variety of projects including pedestrian improvements. States should 

consider the STP as a primary source of funds for pedestrian projects because of its 

broad eligibility requirements. More information can be found at: http://www.fhw

dot.gov/safetealu/factsheets/stp.htm.

Transportation Enhancement Program (TE)

Transportation Enhancements funds are available for communities to help expand 

transportation choices such as safe pedestrian facilities. These provisions include 

funding for non-construction safety-related activities, including pedestrian safety training. More information can be found at: http://www.enhancements.org
150 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ)

The CMAQ Program provides funding for air quality non-attainment areas. Progra

and projects that contribute to air quality improvements and reduce congestion can be 

provided funding through the CMAQ Program. These funds can be used for a varie

of pedestrian projects including constructing pedestrian walkways and non-construction projects such as maps and brochures. More information can be found at: http:

ops.fhwa.dot.gov/safetea/congairfactsheet.htm.

Highway Bridge Program

The Highway Bridge Program provides funds to replace or rehabilitate highway 

bridges. Sidewalks and pathways under crossings or bridges can be built as part of 

bridge rehabilitation. More information can be found at http://www.fhwa.dot.go

safetealu/factsheets/bridge.htm.

National Highway System Program (NHS)

This program provides funding for improvements to roads that are part of the National Highway System, which includes the Interstate System and other arterial routes.

Funding can be used for pedestrian facilities along NHS routes. More informati

can be found at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/factsheets/nhs.htm.

Federal Lands Highway Program (FLHP)

These funds are available for transportation planning, research, engineering, and construction on Federal lands. This funding can be used for pedestrian facilities with

these lands. More information can be found at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/flh/flhfs051028.ht

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)

The Highway Safety Improvement Program provides funding to reduce the number

and severity of traffic fatalities and injuries on all public roads including publiclyowned pedestrian pathways and trails. More information can be found at: http:

www.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/factsheets/hsip.htm.

Railway-Highway Crossings

There is also specific funding to reduce the number and severity of traffic fatalities

and injuries at public highway-rail grade crossings by reducing the hazards to vehicles 

and pedestrians and installation of protective devices at crossings. More information 

can be found at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/factsheets/railcrossings.htm.
Appendix D: List of Funding Sources 151

Recreational Trails Program (RTP)

The Recreational Trails Program provides funding to develop recreational trails and 

related facilities for both motorized and non-motorized uses. More information can 

be found at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/rectrails/.

National Scenic Byways Program

Funding is available for the construction of pedestrian facilities along state and national scenic byways. More information can be found at: http://www.bywaysonlin

org/grants/guidance/.

Safe Routes to School Program (SR2S)

The Safe Routes to School Program provides funding to enable and encourage children to walk to school safely. Included in this program are infrastructure funds, whi

are used to assess and make improvements to the walking and bicycling physical 

environment around schools, and non-infrastructure funds, which are used to educate 

or encourage children to walk or bike to school. More information can be found at: 

http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/legislation_funding/.

Metropolitan and Statewide Planning Funds

These funds are available for states and metropolitan areas for transportation planning 

and research. Statewide and metropolitan planning funds can be used for pedestrian 

plans. More information can be found at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/factsheets/mp.htm and http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/factsheets/statewide.ht

State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program (Section 402)

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration helps administer this program

which can be used for pedestrian safety initiatives. More information can be found at: 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/state_program/section402/.

Federal Transit Administration Grants (FTA)

The Federal Transit Administration offers many grants to improve transit systems,

which includes pedestrian access and walkways. More information can be found at: 

http://www.fta.dot.gov/25_ENG_HTML.htm.

Community Development Block Grants (HUD)

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development administers the Community Development Block Grants. These grants assist low- and moderate-inco

neighborhoods and can be used for pedestrian enhancement projects such as sidewalk 

installation or repair. More information can be found at: http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/index.cf
152 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

State

In addition to federal funding, there are also many sources of state funding that can

be used for pedestrian safety projects. Review the statewide pedestrian master plan, if 

one is available, for information on sources specific to the state. State DOTs may al

provide information on their Web sites as to available funding mechanisms. Many of

the examples below are from the Arizona Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (Arizona

DOT, 2003) and the Alaska Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (Alaska DOT and Public Facilities, 1995). Although each state will differ, some funding examples include:

•	 Capital Budgets.

•	 Legislative Discretionary Funding.

•	 Local Service Roads and Trails (LSR&T).

•	 Trails, Footpaths, and Campsites.

•	 Operating Budgets.

•	 State Funds as Federal Match.

•	 State Sales Tax.

•	 Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF).

•	 Local Transportation Assistance Fund (LTAF).

•	 State Park Heritage Fund.

•	 Game and Fish Department Heritage Fund.

•	 Growing Smarter Planning Grant Program.

•	 State Highway Fund.

•	 State bicyclist and pedestrian grants.

•	 Special transportation funds (financed by state sales tax).

•	 Transportation/Growth Management Programs.

•	 Specialty license tag fees.

Regional

The following are two common examples of regional funding that may be available:

•	 Association of Governments (or Regional Planning Council) Funds.

•	 Municipal Planning Organization Budgets.

Local

Local funding resources can also be used for pedestrian safety projects. These will 

vary greatly from place to place. Details for many of the examples below can 

found in the Arizona Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (Arizona DOT, 2003) or in

Main Street...when a highway runs through it: A Handbook for Oregon Communities (Transportation and Growth Management, 1999). These plans provide excellent examples of

the type of local funding sources that may be available. A general list of local funds

includes:

•	 General Funds (from property taxes and gas tax revenues).

•	 Development Impact Fees.

•	 Parks and Recreation Funds.
Appendix D: List of Funding Sources 153

•	 Flood	Control	District	Funds.

•	 Revenue	and	General	Obligation	Bonds.

•	 Tribal	Casino	Revenues	(depending	on	the	state).

•	 Local	Funds	as	Federal	Match.

•	 Special	Bond	levies.

•	 Transportation	Impact	fees.

•	 System	development	charges.

•	 Local	Improvement	Districts.

•	 Charges	to	adjacent	property	owners.

•	 Cooperative	projects	with	utility	districts,	etc.

•	 Urban	renewal	district.

•	 Economic	improvement	district.

•	 Business	improvement	district.

Private

Funding	can	also	be	found	in	the	private	sector.		Some	sources	include:

•	 Developer	off-site	improvements	(not	money,	but	they	are	improvements).

•	 Dedications.

•	 Contributions.

•	 Corporate	underwriting.

•	 Donations	of 	right	of 	way/easements.

•	 Clubs,	groups,	and	volunteers.

•	 Grants	and	loans.
154 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Appendix E:

Evaluation of a 

Pedestrian Safety Plan

Evaluation serves as a tool to guide the efforts of the project staff, to demonstrate project success to the public, and to assure continued support from sponsors. The 

extent and methods of evaluation may differ for pedestrian safety plans on the local, 

MPO or state level, but the general principles stay the same. A thorough evaluation of

a pedestrian safety plan investigates effectiveness of countermeasures, monitors public 

opinion, and constantly reassesses the actual program plan. 

Countermeasure Evaluation

Implemented treatments should generally be evaluated in terms of their overall effectiveness, which typically has already been done by national research institutes and 

other agencies (at least for the treatments discussed in Chapter 7). But the usefulness

of any treatment in reducing pedestrian crashes is likely to vary across locations. The 

following questions should be asked:

•	 Is the treatment effective (in general)?

•	 Does the treatment work as intended?

•	 How did the treatment affect drivers and vehicle LOS?

Public Opinion Evaluation

Stakeholder involvement early in the plan development process is important for 

improving the quality of the plan. Chapter 2 discusses the importance of stakeholder 

involvement to both tailor the action plan to the (perceived) needs of the community

and continuously update the public of the progress of implementation. The main 

questions to ask are:

•	 Does the program address the needs of the community?

•	 Is the general public aware of the program?

•	 Is the program well received?

•	 Is there opposition by certain groups?
Appendix E: Evaluation of a Pedestrian Safety Plan 155

Before-and-After Evaluation Study Examples

University Place, WA; Portland, OR; and Boulder, CO

A number of agencies have performed evaluations of pedestrian safety before-andafter improvements were made to a facility. While many of the assessments focus 

upon travelspeeds, others examine vehicle volumes, number of conflicts, and number of incidents before and after facility improvements. 

The City of University Place, Washington built and transformed a major corridor, Bridgeport Way, into an inviting main street that would 

allow pedestrians and bicyclists to move about comfortably and 

safely while still accommodating vehicular movement through the 

corridor. The improvements included the placement of sidewalks 

and bicycle lanes along both sides of the corridor, as well as planter 

strips buffering the road from the sidewalk. A median and street 

lighting were also added, among other improvements. The City 

analyzed speed and accident data before and after the construction 

of the Bridgeport Way improvements. The project’s traffic calming 

features reduced speeds by 13 percent and reduced crashes by 60 

percent compared to pre-improvement conditions. 

In Portland, Oregon, a variety of traffic calming techniques were 

implemented along SE Harold Street, including the construction of 

one median island, eleven speed humps placed 91 to 274 m (300 

to 900 ft) apart, and curb extensions at five intersections. A beforeand-after evaluation revealed that traffic volumes had decrease

from a range of 3,400 to 4,800 vehicles per day (vpd) to a range of 

2,000 to 3,500 vpd. The 1,600 vpd average drop in daily traffic is 

a reduction of 37 percent. This drop presumably represents cutthrough motorists who found the speed humps to be inconvenient. The 85th percentile speed on SE Harold prior to project construction ranged from 59 to 64 km/h 

(37 to 40 mi/h). Measurement since speed hump construction shows an average 

decrease in the 85th percentile speed of 9.6 km/h (6 mi/h). 

In Boulder, Colorado, high traffic volumes and speeds were creating an unsafe and 

unpleasant walking and bicycling environment along 55th Street. A Capital Improvement Project was implemented to provide improved bicycle and pedestrian 

facilities in the corridor, and to provide some traffic calming for vehicles. Continuous sidewalks and bicycle lanes were provided along the street, as well as a bicycle/

pedestrian underpass, two raised crossings and one raised intersection, with pedestrian refuge islands at both of the raised crossing locations. Data collected by 

the city staff indicate that both travel speeds and traffic volumes decreased following completion of the project. The 85th percentile speeds decreased from 67 km/h 

(42 mi/h) before the project to 61 km/h (38 mi/h) after the project. Average vpd 

decreased from 12,400 before the project to 9,400 after the project. 

For more information, visit http://www.walkinginfo.org/pedsafe and find the case

studies relating the details of these improvements.

Bridgeport Way in 

University Place, 

WA before (above) 

and after (below) 

improvements were 

made.
156 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Program Plan Evaluation

It is furthermore important to assess if the overall objectives of the program plan

have been achieved. Depending on the specific objectives, questions could include:

•	 Did the overall number of pedestrian crashes decrease?

•	 Do stakeholders perceive that roads are safer?

•	 Are agencies collaborating on efforts?

•	 Did the design manuals get updated with new policies and countermeasures?

•	 Have proposed procedures been adopted by agencies?

An important precondition to program evaluation is that goals are formulated earlyon in the process. If assessment results can be matched to explicitly stated goals, the

success in achieving those objectives can be demonstrated and decisions can be made 

on how to improve or modify the program if necessary. To assure proper evaluation, 

it should be included in the project budget from the beginning. Types of evaluation 

include:

•	 Before and After Studies—Typical measures of effectiveness for pedestrian

safety projects include crash frequency, number of crossing events, or number of 

observed conflicts (a short-term proxy measure for actual crashes), yielding rates.

•	 Public Surveys—Surveys could include opinion polls about the program, knowledge tests following an education campaign, or questionnaires investigating 

perceived safety of improved intersections.

•	 Expert Rating—The project team could hire experts on pedestrian safety to

evaluate (or re-evaluate) an intersection, a corridor, or the general safety of a

community. 
Appendix	F:	Reference	Guide	and	Plan	Summaries 157

Appendix F:

Reference Guide and Plan

Summaries

National Guides

Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities (2004)

The American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO)

Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities presents effective measures for accommodating pedestrians on public rights-of-way. The guide recognizes 

the profound effect that land use planning and site design have on pedestrian mobility 

and addresses these topics as well. The guide can be purchased through the AASHTO

Web site at http://www.aashto.org.

Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access, Parts 1 (1999) and 2 (2001)

The guides Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access Parts 1 and 2

provide the state of the practice for applying the American with

Disabilities Act (ADA) and similar requirements to pedestrian

facilities. Find Part one at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/access-1.htm and Part 2 at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environmen

sidewalk2/.

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (2003)

The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) defines the standards used by

road managers nationwide to install and maintain traffic control devices on all streets

and highways. The MUTCD is published by the Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA). The MUTCD audience includes the insurance industry, law enforcemen

agencies, academic institutions, private industry, and construction and engineering professionals. Find the document at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2003r1/pdf-index.

htm.
158 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Traffic Control Devices Handbook (2004)

The Traffic Control Devices Handbook (TCDH) was prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) to augment the MUTCD as adopted nationally by th

Federal Highway Administration. While the MUTCD outlines the design and application of traffic control devices on public roadways in the United States, criteria a

data to make decisions on the use of a device and its application are not always fully 

covered in the MUTCD. This Handbook bridges the gap between the MUTCD provisions and those decisions to be made in the field on device usage and application. The

Handbook can be ordered through the Institute of Transportation Engineers online

bookstore at http://www.ite.org.

Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities, A Recommended Practice of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (1998)

Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities, A Recommended Practice of the Institute of Transportation Engineers is intended to provide guidance on how to implement a comprehensive 

program of engineering, education and enforcement to improve safety for pedestrians. 

Find the document at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/designsafety.pdf.

Pedsafe: The Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System (2004)

Pedsafe: The Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System is intended to provide practitioners with the latest information available for improving the safety and 

mobility of those who walk. The online tools provide the user with a list of possible 

engineering, education, or enforcement treatments to improve pedestrian safety and/

or mobility based on user input about a specific location. It can be found at http://

www.walkinginfo.org/pedsafe/.

A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Pedestrians (2004)

The National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 500, Volume

10: A Guide for Reducing Collisions Involving Pedestrians provides strategies that can be employed to reduce the number of collisions involving pedestrians. The NCHRP Report 

500, Volume 10 can be purchased through the Transportation Research Board Web

site at http://www.trb.org.	

A Review of Pedestrian Safety Research in the United States and Abroad (2004)

The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of research studies on pedestrian safety in the United States and abroad. Readers will find details of pedestri

crash characteristics, measures of pedestrian exposure and hazard, and specific roadway features and their effects on pedestrian safety. Such features include crosswalks 

and alternative crossing treatments, signalization, signing, pedestrian refuge islands, 

provisions for pedestrians with disabilities, bus stop locations, school crossing measures, reflectorization and conspicuity, grade-separated crossings, traffic-calming

measures, and sidewalks and paths. Pedestrian educational and enforcement programs 
Appendix F: Reference Guide and Plan Summaries 159

are	also	discussed.	Review	this	document	online	at	http://www.walkinginfo.org/pdf/

PedSynth/Ped_Synthesis_Report.pdf.

National Bicycling and Walking Study (1994)

The National Bicycling and Walking Study includes a series of 24 case studies highlighting model activities conducted with respect to bicycle and pedestrian planning. The 

National Bicycle and Walking Study	presents	a	plan	of 	action	for	activities	at	the	Federal,	

state, and local levels for increasing the amount of walking and bicycling in the United 

States.		A	five-year	status	report	on	the	National Bicycling and Walking Study was published	in	1999.		A	ten-year	status	report	on	the	study	was	published	in	2004.	Selected	

case studies included in the 1994 National Bicycling and Walking Study can be obtained 

through	the	National	Transportation	Library	at	http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/nbws.html.	

The	1999	five-year	status	report	is	available	through	the	FHWA	Web	site	at	http://

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/study.htm.	The	2004	ten-year	status	report	

is	available	at		http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/study/.

Highway Design Handbook for Older Drivers and Pedestrians (2001)

The Highway Design Handbook for Older Drivers and Pedestrians provides recommendations	that	upon	implementation	may	remedy	deficient	designs	that	disproportionately	

penalize older road users due to changes in functional ability experienced with normal 

aging. These may be most urgently needed where a crash problem with older drivers 

or	pedestrians	has	already	been	demonstrated;	however,	the	greater	benefit	arguably	

lies in designing safer new roads and identifying and modifying problems with existing roads before statistics reveal a crash problem. The engineering enhancements 

described	in	this	document	should	benefit	all	road	users,	not	just	older	persons.	The	

document	is	available	online	at	http://www.tfhrc.gov/humanfac/01103/coverfront.

htm#toc.

Safety Effects of Marked versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations (2005)

Safety Effects of Marked versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations: Final Report 

and Recommended Guidelines presents the results of a study that examined the safety of 

pedestrians at uncontrolled crosswalks and provides recommended guidelines for 

pedestrian	crossings.		Review	this	document	online	at	http://www.walkinginfo.org/

pdf/r&d/safetyeffects.pdf.

An Analysis of Factors Contributing to “Walking Along Roadway” Crashes: Research Study and 

Guidelines for Sidewalks and Walkways (2002)

An Analysis of Factors Contributing to “Walking Along Roadway” Crashes: Research Study and 

Guidelines for Sidewalks and Walkways summarizes the results of a study that examined 

the safety impacts of having sidewalks and walkways along roadways. The document 

also provides guidelines and recommendations for providing such facilities. Review 

this	document	online	at	http://www.walkinginfo.org/pdf/r&d/SidewalkReport.pdf.
160 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Resource Guide on Laws Related to Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety 

This Guide presents a selection of vehicle and traffic law provisions from the Uniform Vehicle Code prepared by the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws

and Ordinances (NCUTLO), other state laws and local ordinances that have a positive

effect on pedestrian or bicycle safety, and model laws prepared or adapted to meet 

specific safety needs. The safety relevance of each provision is assessed in terms of

its likely effects on the causes of bicycle or pedestrian crashes with motor vehicles, 

the prevention or reduction of bicyclist or pedestrian injuries and possible effects on 

pedestrian and bicycle injury-producing situations that do not involve motor vehicles. 

Each provision is cross-referenced to a description of how the concept is implemented in each state. The Guide is available as a download or can be ordered from 

the NHTSA Web site. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/pedbimot/bike/resourceguide/index.html.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Resource Guide (2005)

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Resource Guide is a compilation of existing and 

proposed countermeasures to help solve a range of bicycle and pedestrian safety 

problems. The Guide was prepared for the bicycle and pedestrian safety professionals 

and others who are developing programs at the state or community level. The Guide is 

available for download from NHTSA’s Web site at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/

injury/pedbimot/bike/BikePedestrian/index.htm.

Safe Routes to School Guide (2006)

The Safe Routes to School Guide is a comprehensive online reference manual designed to support communities in developing Safe Routes to School programs. The 

guide was developed by the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC) in collaboration with SRTS experts from around the country and support from the National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Find the Guide at http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/guide/.

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines

The Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines outline the role of the adult school

crossing guard and the elements of a crossing guard program. The guide was prepared 

by the National Center for Safe Routes to School and the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center with funding from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and can be found at http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/guide/crossing_guard/index.

cfm.
Appendix F: Reference Guide and Plan Summaries 161

State Guides

Arizona: Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (2003)

This is a guide for making pedestrian-related transportation decisions at the state 

and local level. The plan provides a long-term agenda for implementing a system of 

pedestrian facilities on the ADOT State Highway System and seeks to coordinate the

relationship between ADOT and smaller jurisdictions. The plan described state policies and codes that affect pedestrian planning and provides a matrix o  creative ordinances from around the nation, encouraging localities to implement and follow them

It contains an informative table on potential funding opportunities and resources that

consist of project type, required matching funds, deadlines, etc. The plan is well-organized and presents a great example of citizen participation and stakeholder involvement. Development of the plan involved a comprehensive steering committee 

representatives from pedestrian activist organizations, municipalities, state engineering 

agencies, a review committee, and engineering input. Find the document at http://

www.azbikeped.org/statewide-bicycle-pedestrian-intro.html.

New Jersey: Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, Phase 2 (2004)

This plan provides clear guidance for the most effective use of Federal, state, and local

resources to implement pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The stated goals and objectives are supported with proposed performance measures to determine the effectiveness and critical success factors. The plan presents a good example of how to use GIS

analysis to prioritize the improvement of pedestrian facilities around the state. It us

demand forecasting (showing pedestrian trips by census tract and roadway crossability)

and suitability forecasting (calculating the suitability of making capital investments) to

identify and prioritize project locations. Summarized in a matrix form, the implementation section includes several strategies and assigns responsibility to various agencies 

and organizations. This document is available online at http://www.bikemap.com/

RBA/NJBikePed.pdf.

Virginia: VTrans 2025 Statewide Pedestrian Plan (2004)

This plan is a tool for establishing a consistent approach to integrate a consideration 

for walking into transportation planning in Virginia. The preliminary draft remains 

general, providing a basic framework of the vision, strategies, and action items. It discusses several influences on the need to offer and operate pedestrian facilities, including Federal legislation such as the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act

(ISTEA), ADA accessibility requirements, and Virginia Department of Transportation policies. The plan reveals a regional program for obtaining public input, holding 

twelve public stakeholder meetings across the state. It acknowledges that disagreements exist on how to accommodate pedestrians and that there is a need to arrive at 

cooperative solution. For more information, see the Web site http://www.transportation.virginia.gov/VTrans/home.htm.
162 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

Florida: Pedestrian Planning and Design Handbook (1996)

The plan presents guidelines, standards, and criteria for pedestrian planning and 

facilities. It is intended as a reference for any locality, agency, organization, group, 

citizen interested in improving the walking environment. It offers an overview of t

pedestrian planning process and discusses the various steps of public involvement, 

data collection, development of goals and strategies, and implementation resources. 

The plan provides a comprehensive analysis of pedestrian-motor vehicle crashes 

in the state. It discusses the design details of roadway crossings, intersection treatments, and traffic calming strategies as well as presents other pedestrian consideratio

such as signage and signalization, school/work zone practices, and street lighting. 

chapter is devoted to each element and includes recommendations, maintenance, and 

further references. This document can be downloaded from the site http://www.dot.

state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/ped_bike_standards.htm#Florida%20Ped%20Handbook.

Georgia: Pedestrian and Streetscape Guide (2003)

The guide focuses on the design of pedestrian environments and streetscape facilities. 

It offers technical information on “best practices” that apply to situations encountered

in project development. It provides a thorough examination of pedestrian characteristics and factors that influence pedestrian travel. The guide supplies an interesting spatial analysis, diagramming the space needs for different types of pedestrians—adu

children, elders, and those with disabilities. It discusses ways to prioritize projec

using Geographic Information Systems (GIS), referencing the Latent Demand Model

and Portland, OR’s Pedestrian Potential Index. The bulk of the guide exists in several

toolkits, each devoted to different subjects. The toolkits begin with general design 

guidelines and move into more specific topics such as accessibility, school zones, trails

and paths, sidewalks, crossings, etc. Detailed facility diagrams provide useful technical information for other agencies and localities. This report can be found at htt

www.dot.state.ga.us/dot/plan-prog/planning/projects/bicycle/ped_facilities_guide/

index.shtml.

Vermont: Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility Planning and Design Manual (2002)

The manual assists agencies, organizations, and citizens with the planning, design, 

construction, and maintenance of pedestrian facilities in a variety of settings. It incorporates a separate analysis of characteristics of traffic-related pedestrian fatalities a

common characteristics of pedestrian crashes. It primarily focuses on the sidewa

environment adjacent to the roadway, considering width, slope, surface, and access 

points. The supporting street cross-sections give a clear representation of desired 

space and scale. The manual also recognizes special treatment of pedestrian planning 

for rural areas. Visit the Web site http://www.aot.state.vt.us/progdev/Documents/

LTF/FinalPedestrianAndBicycleFacility/PedBikeTOC.html for more information.
Appendix F: Reference Guide and Plan Summaries 163

Oregon: Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (1995)

This is one of the first plans developed to promote walking. It is in-depth and informative, addressing various aspects of pedestrian planning. The plan is divided into two 

sections—policy/action planning and network planning—with the purpose of presenting ODOT with general principles and policies for providing walkways along state

highways. It provides a framework for cooperation between ODOT and local jurisdictions and offers guidance to cities and counties wanting to develop local pedestria

plans. The plan presents an overview of existing legislation relating to pedestrians, 

describes the current conditions statewide, and suggests implementation actions to 

ensure achievement of stated goals and policies. It contains clear, measured diagrams

and street cross-sections of most desirable design facilities. The Oregon plan c

be read and ordered online at http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/

docs/or_bicycle_ped_plan.pdf.

Oregon: Main Street...when a highway runs through it: A Handbook for Oregon Communities 

(1999)

This handbook was designed for communities that are working together to enhance 

the vitality of a main street which also serves as a state highway. It describes the ma

tools available to identify the problems and figure out good solutions to strike a balance between the needs of pedestrians, shoppers, employees, business owners, and 

residents with the needs of through traffic—both auto and freight—to move safely

and efficiently over longer distances. It can be found at http://egov.oregon.go

LCD/TGM/docs/mainstreet.pdf.

California: Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities in California, Technical Reference Report (2005)

Caltrans’ Technical Reference Report is intended to help accommodate pedestrian transportation throughout the State of California. It is intended as a resource for professionals, agency staff, and citizens. Through the collection o  demographic and pedestrian collision data, the report makes a strong case for the need to improve pedestria

facilities. It contains a grant source matrix that shows available funding by agenc

amount, deadline, and requirements. The bulk of the report is related to pedestrian 

travel, organized from broad topics to design detail. Each page contains a description 

and discussion of a different element, drawing, diagram or photo that enables standard and innovative practices to be easily understood. This document can be found at 

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/survey/pedestrian/pedbike.htm.

North Carolina: Bicycling and Walking in North Carolina, A Long Range Transportation Plan 

(1996)

Developed by the Office of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation of the NCDOT,

this pedestrian plan builds upon the NC long-range transportation plan, elaborating 

on the goals, focus areas, and programming specific to walking. It also demonstrates

technique for performing a statewide inventory: in the plan- making process, city managers or mayors of NC communities with populations of at least 1,000 were surveyed

for information on the community’s walking environment. The plan summed t
164 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

individual data to obtain the total miles of a particular pedestrian facility in the state. 

The plan also discusses crash data and reviews relevant pedestrian content of different 

Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) plans. The plan formulates actions, supplies funding sources/levels, and calls for an evaluation of projects. This document is

available at http://www.ncdot.org/transit/bicycle/about/longrangeplan2.pdf.

North Carolina: Planning and Designing Local Pedestrian Facilities (1997)

The Local Pedestrian Facilities manual provides suggestions and guidelines for local planners and traffic engineers to increase pedestrian safety and friendliness. The manual

demonstrates design details for pedestrian treatments and traffic calming. It contai

a table of sidewalk placement and width recommendations according to street type 

and gives individual consideration to pedestrians with disabilities as well as pedestrians 

in school and work zones. The manual focuses on signage and signalization, treatments often overlooked in pedestrian design manuals. The manual finishes with a

comprehensive matrix summarizing pedestrian problems and possible solutions. It can

be ordered online at http://www.ncdot.org/transit/bicycle/projects/resources/projects_peddesign.html.

Washington: Pedestrian Facilities Guidebook (1997)

The purpose of the Pedestrian Facilities Guidebook is to assist various agencies and organizations in pedestrian planning and encourage good design practices when developing these spaces. It discusses the importance of construction, maintenance, and

operations. The guidebook presents the needs and characteristics of pedestrians and 

then provides several toolkits, highlighting important information in boxes, tables, 

diagrams, and graphs. The guidebook gives attention to the spatial needs of all types 

of pedestrians. The toolkits address the design of important walking facilities like 

trails, sidewalks, intersections, and crossings, and they also discuss important accessibility issues and school zone safety. The guidebook provides an opportunity for citizen 

comments through a request form and a detailed resource guide. For further information, visit the Web site http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/EESC/Design/DesignManual/

desEnglish/1025-E.pdf.

Pennsylvania: Pedestrian Planning and Design Guidelines (1996)

The Pedestrian Planning and Design Guidelines is one part of the Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan for Pennsylvania. The plan-making process involved a comprehensive 

public outreach program that held workshops across the state, established a toll-free 

number and questionnaire, and included representatives from several stakeholder 

groups. The Pedestrian Planning and Design Guidelines act as a guide for PENNDOT and

localities to make the current transportation system more accessible to pedestrians. 

The guide recognizes the importance of incorporating pedestrians into land use and 

planning policies and discusses ways to retro-fit existing developments to better serve

pedestrians. The design guidelines focus on best practices for sidewalks, intersections, 

and other crossings. This document can be found by visiting http://www.dot.stat

pa.us.
Appendix F: Reference Guide and Plan Summaries 165

District of Columbia: Traffic Calming Policies and Guidelines (2002)

To reduce the negative impact of motor vehicle use and ensure overall safety, the 

District of Columbia Traffic Calming Policies and Guidelines provide a process for involving 

the public in implementing traffic calming measures. It supplies a formal request fo

for citizens and describes the process from request to implementation. The document 

presents criteria for rating and selecting traffic calming projects when competing for

specific funding. Also, it describes and diagrams traffic calming measures approv

for the District of Columbia. The document is available at http://www.ddot.dc.gov/

ddot/lib/ddot/services/pdf/traffic_calming.pdf.

Idaho: Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (1995)

This document serves as a first step in establishing a statewide vision and comprehensive approach to pedestrian transportation planning. It provides a clear, simple statement of goals and objectives as well as action strategies, policies, statutes, and design 

standards that can be used to meet those goals. It provides guidelines pertaining to

pedestrian facilities combined with helpful planning and design information for local 

agencies. It can be found at http://itd.idaho.gov/planning/reports/bikepedplan/idt.

pdf.

Wisconsin: Pedestrian Policy Plan 2020 (2001)

This statewide pedestrian plan focuses on the policies and programs that will help 

improve conditions for walking. The plan was conceived with assistance from the 

Pedestrian Plan Citizen’s Advisory Committee and citizens around the state provided

additional insights, suggestions, and reactions through public sessions and hearings as 

well as focus group meetings; this enables the plan to better reflect citizen concerns.

The plan is meant to be used by local traffic officials seeking guidance to meet pedestrian needs on local road systems. It can be found at http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/

projects/state/ped2020.htm.

Local Guides

Denver, CO: Pedestrian Master Plan (2004)

The plan establishes a city-wide pedestrian network. It uses a detailed development

process that incorporates existing conditions assessment, existing plans, GIS studies,

public involvement, and policy review. Development of the plan included two rounds

of public workshops and input from an inter-agency advisory team. The plan uses 

GIS analysis to measure potential pedestrian activity by locating concentrations of pedestrian destinations; GIS allows for a systematic strategy for building, improving, and

maintaining the pedestrian infrastructure. The plan prioritizes projects with a scoring 

system and provides several funding sources. It can be found at http://www.denvergov.org/Transportation_Planning/141113406template3jump.asp.
166 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Marina, CA: Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan (2003)

This plan contains a clear outline and discussion of goals and action strategies. It

offers a comprehensive street inventory and assessment of deficiencies. The pl

suggests changes to the pedestrian environment and sets guidelines for different size 

roadways. It uses several graphic examples, describes design details, and mentions

proper placement to enhance the walking environment. The plan can be downloaded 

from the Web site http://www.lgc.org/marina/.

Bellevue, WA: Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation Plan Update (1999)

This is a policy-oriented document that aims to revise the 30-year plan. It presen

key issues that have appeared during the implementation of pedestrian facilities, proving to be a helpful resource for localities considering such improvements. The document emphasizes the importance of maintenance policies. It supplies an organized,

informative table that contains description, justification, cost, priority, and jurisdiction

of projects. Find this document online at http://www.ci.bellevue.wa.us/departments/

Transportation/pdf/PedBikePlan99.pdf.

San Diego, CA: Planning and Designing for Pedestrians, Model Guidelines for the San Diego 

Region (2002)

These guidelines provide an extremely thorough look at how to plan and design for 

the pedestrian. The plan discusses the land use and community structure elements 

that affect the pedestrian environment. It contains a comprehensive list of site a

design details that includes information on considerations, guidelines, example images, 

and technical diagrams. The pedestrian measures index is a good tool for identifying appropriate countermeasure to use depending on roadway volume and speed. To 

download this plan, go to the site http://www.sandag.org/uploads/publicationid/

publicationid_713_3269.pdf.

Sacramento, CA: Pedestrian Safety Guidelines (2003) 

These guidelines focus on street crossing treatments at controlled and uncontrolled 

intersections, discussing tools such as pavement marking and signal options and giving 

attention to roadway design. The guidelines create a four level system to address crosswalk placement for uncontrolled locations as well as a matrix of appropriate treatments for streets with different numbers of lanes, average daily traffic volume (ADT),

and posted speed. The Sacramento plan is available online at http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/dev_eng_finance/entitlements/pdfs/ped_safety.pdf.

Portland, OR: Pedestrian Master Plan (1998) 

The Master Plan outlines an action plan to achieve the city’s pedestrian-oriented goals.

To identify needed improvements, the plan used a rigorous identification process,

including several opportunities for public input. Data collection included citizen

requests, street inventories, and an examination of crash data. Using GIS mappi

capabilities, it developed a Pedestrian Potential Index, which measures the strength of
Appendix F: Reference Guide and Plan Summaries 167

environmental factors (policy, proximity, and quantitative) that favor walking, and a

Deficiency Index, which measures how critically pedestrian improvements are needed

based on traffic volumes, crash data, and a lack of sidewalks. The plan contains

section on sources and strategies for obtaining funding. It also presents a graph 

the past pedestrian funding and gives five different scenarios for the implementation

of future pedestrian improvements. For more on this plan, visit the Web site https://

www.portlandonline.com/shared/cfm/image.cfm?id=90244.

Madison, WI: Pedestrian Transportation Plan (1997)

This plan dedicates a significant section to the history and importance of pedestrian

planning, as well as “thinking like a pedestrian.” It includes a hypothetical walki

tour of photographs that reveal possible locations for pedestrian improvements. It

incorporates planning, design, and maintenance into long-term goals and objectives. 

The plan emphasizes the importance of education and encouragement of pedestrian 

travel as integral to the success of pedestrian transportation. For more on this plan,

visit the site http://www.cityofmadison.com/transp/PedTransPlanTableOfContents.

html.

Chapel Hill, NC: Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan (2004)

This is a concise, general plan that provides a foundation for future pedestrian planning. The plan contains information on policies and guidelines that should be used 

in planning for future pedestrian needs. It discusses how to encourage pedestri

movement, highlighting characteristics and influences on pedestrian travel. The pl

reinforces design guidelines from previous studies and establishes local standards for 

streets. Finally, it addresses the role of the state, MPO, university and private developers in the identification of projects and funding process. This plan is available 

http://townhall.townofchapelhill.org/planning/bikeped/bikepedplan.htm.

Oakland, CA: Pedestrian Master Plan (2002) 

The plan is a fine example of how to examine census information and pedestrian

collision data, showing graphs on speed, location, time of day, age, etc. The development of the plan involved an extensive community outreach process with technical 

and citizen advisory board, as well as neighborhood meetings. The plan identifies

pedestrian route system through the city from the specified criteria and then focuses

improvements in those areas first. It contains comprehensive descriptions and graphics o  design details and provides a detailed implementation plan with prioritizatio

and cost of individual projects. To find this plan online, go to http://www.oaklandnet.

com/government/pedestrian/index.html.

Cambridge, MA: Pedestrian Plan (2000)

This is a beautiful and creative plan that addresses safety and walkability. It begins

with general pedestrian issues and then moves on to specific action in Cambridge. The

analysis tools include census data and an examination of the pedestrian environment. 

The plan separates pedestrian design guidelines from roadway issues and vehicular 
168 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

movements, allowing for the safety issues to be addressed from different, independent 

viewpoints.		For	the	pedestrian	improvements	specific	to	Cambridge,	the	plan	classifies	the	city	into	nodes,	spines,	and	other	areas	pedestrians	are	most	likely	use.	It	then	

presents needed actions to improve the space. This plan is available at 

http://www.cambridgema.gov/~CDD/et/ped/plan/ped_plan.html.

Phoenix, AZ: Pedestrian Plan 2000 (1999)

The	Maricopa	Association	of 	Governments	plan	promotes	the	accommodation	of 	

pedestrian travel throughout the low-density, automobile-oriented Phoenix metropolitan	area.	It	uses	a	two-step	process	in	creating	roadway	design	guidelines:	(1)	the	Latent	Demand	Model	estimates	potential	pedestrian	activity	based	upon	the	frequency	

and	proximity	of 	adjacent	trip	generators,	and	(2)	the	Roadside	Pedestrian	Condition	

Model	analysis	statistically	separates	results	based	on	roadway	and	traffic	variables.		

The	focus	of 	the	plan	is	on	providing	sidewalks	and	lateral	separation	(buffer).	The	

online	version	of 	this	document	is	available	at	http://www.mag.maricopa.gov/pdf/

cms.resource/ped-plan2000sum-web_427.pdf.

Seattle, WA: Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Implementation Strategy for the Central Puget Sound 

Region (2002)

This	regional	plan	identifies	more	than	2,000	miles	of 	needed	bike	lanes	and	paths	and	

pedestrian	improvements	around	activity	centers.		It	can	be	found	online	at	http://

www.psrc.org/projects/nonmotorized/strategy.pdf.

Boulder, CO: Transportation Master Plan (2003)

Pedestrian	planning	is	fully	integrated	into	the	Boulder,	CO	Transportation Master Plan. 

The plan outlines modal split targets of 15 percent by bike and 24 percent by foot by 

2020	and	offers	a	variety	of 	resources	to	transportation	officials	seeking	to	increase	

pedestrian	travel.	More	about	the	plan	and	its	elements	can	be	found	at	http://www.

ci.boulder.co.us/publicworks/depts/transportation/tmp.html.
Appendix	G:	Pedestrian-Related	Land	Use	Planning	Resources 169

Appendix G:

Pedestrian-Related Land Use

Planning Resources

Access Management

Access Management Awareness Project, Iowa State University. Available online at http://

www.ctre.iastate.edu/Research/access/ (includes report, case studies, and toolkit).

Giguere, Ronald K., Access Management in the New Millennium, TRB Committee on Access Management (A1D07). Available online at http://gulliver.trb.org/publications/

millennium/00000.pdf.

TRB Access Management Committee. Available online at http://www.accessmanagement.gov/.

Access Management, Victoria Transport Policy Institute. Available online at http://www.

vtpi.org/tdm/tdm1.htm.

Site Planning and Design

Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities: A Proposed Recommended Practice of the Institute of 

Transportation Engineers, ITE Technical Council Committee 5A-5.

Jarvis, Frederick D., Site Planning and Community Design for Great Neighborhoods, Home 

Builder Press, 1993.

Lynch, Kevin, Site Planning, MIT Press, 1984.

Rubenstein, Harvey M., Pedestrian Malls, Streetscapes, and Urban Spaces, Wiley, 1992.
170 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Untermann,	Richard	K.,	Accommodating the Pedestrian, Adapting Towns and Neighborhoods 

for Walking and Bicycling, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1984.

Russ, Thomas H., Site Planning and Design Handbook, McGraw Hill: Boston, Massachusetts,	2002.

Vernez-Moudon,	Anne,	et	al.,	Effects of Site Design on Pedestrian Travel in Mixed-Use 

Medium Density Environments,	Transportation	Research	Record	1587.	Available	online	at	

http://www.enhancements.org/trb%5C1578-07.pdf.	

Street Connectivity

Dill,	Jennifer,	Measuring Network Connectivity for Bicycling and Walking, School of Urban 

Studies	and	Planning,	Portland	State	University.	Available	online	at		http://web.pdx.

edu/~jdill/Dill_ACSP_paper_2003.pdf),	2003.	

Handy,	Susan,	R.	Paterson,	and	K.	Butler,	Planning for Street Connectivity: Getting from Here 

to There,	Planning	Advisory	Service	Report	515,	American	Planning	Association,	2004.

Roadway Connectivity: Creating More Connected Roadway and Pathway Networks.	Available	

online	at	http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm116.htm.	

Transit Accessibility

Jeng,	One-Jang	and	George	Fallat,	Pedestrian Safety and Mobility Aids for Crossings at Bus 

Stops,	Report	No.	FHWA-NJ-2003-013,	Federal	Highway	Administration,	Washington,	

D.C.,	September	2003.	Available	online	at	http://www.transportation.njit.edu/nctip/

final_report/PedestrianSafety.pdf.

Khan,	Arif.,	Pedestrian-Transit Connection Analysis,	Alta	Planning	and	Design,	Portland,	

OR.	Available	online	at	http://www.americawalks.org/PDF_PAPE/Khan.pdf.	

Moundon,	Anne	Vernez	and	Paul	M.	Hess,	Pedestrian Safety and Transit Corridors, Washington State Transportation Center,	Report	No.	WA-RD-556.1,	Washington	Department	

of 	Transportation,	January	2003.	Available	online	at	http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/ppsc/

research/CompleteReports/WARD556_1Ped_Safe_Transit_Corridor.pdf.	

Texas	Transportation	Institute	(TTI),	Guidelines for the Location and Design of Bus Stops,

Transit	Cooperative	Research	Program,	No.	19,	National	Academy	Press,	Washington,	

D.C.,	1996.	Available	online	at	http://trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?ID=2597.

Transportation	Resource	Associates,	Transit Bus Safety Program,	Federal	Transit	Association,	Washington,	D.C.,	March	2001.

Tucker, Lisa E., Safer Stops for Vulnerable Customers, Report No. NCTR-473-13, National	Center	for	Transit	Research	(NCTR),	US-DOT,	Washington	D.C.,	March	2003.	

Available	online	at	http://www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed_Proj/Summary_PTO/FDOT_BC137_38_SS.pdf.
Appendix H: Checklist for Engineering and Planning Solutions 171

Appendix H:

Checklist for 

Engineering and 

Planning Solutions

This section lists effective and commonly used pedestrian crash countermeasures, each with a brief description. It follows the outline provided in Chapter 5, although the order may be slightly different in some places. Please fill in the blanks with

information on whether or not your agency has adopted these practices; if not, what 

changes in your policies would be required for these countermeasures to become 

“routine accommodation”?

I. Walking Along the Road Crashes

Rural environments

Paved shoulders provide room for pedestrians to walk away from traffic; they also

provide room for bicyclists and increase safety for motor vehicle operators. To be effective, paved shoulders should be 1.8 m (6 ft) wide or more; 1.2 m (4 ft) is considered

the minimum acceptable width.

	Do you routinely provide paved shoulders on rural highways and trunk roads? 	 	

	 Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure shoulders are routinely

	 provided? ________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

Urban and suburban environments

Sidewalks reduce walk-along-the-road crashes by providing positive separation from 

traffic. Continuous and connected sidewalks are needed along both sides of streets to

prevent unnecessary street crossings. Sidewalks should be buffered with a planter strip 

to increase pedestrian safety and comfort; separation makes it easier to meet ADA

requirements for a continuous level passage and for a clear passage around obstacles.
172 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

	Do you routinely provide sidewalks on urban and suburban arterials? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If so, what is the standard width? _________________

	Are your sidewalks curbtight or separated? ______________

	What change(s) need to be instituted to ensure separated sidewalks are routinely

	 provided? ______________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Driveways clearly mark the area where motorists will be crossing the pedestrian’s path.

Continuous access to parking creates long conflict areas between pedestrians and motorists; this ambiguity complicates the motorist’s task of watching for pedestrians.

	Do you routinely ensure that access points are limited and well defined? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure access points are well

	 defined?__________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Driveways should be designed to look like driveways, not street intersections: sidewalks should continue through the driveway, the level of the sidewalk should be 

maintained, and the driveway should be sloped so that the motorist goes up and over 

the sidewalk. Driveways should be away from intersections. The number and width of

driveways should be minimized.

	Do you routinely require that driveways be located away from intersections and

	 designed to look like driveways, not intersections? Yes/

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure driveways are properly

	 designed and located? _______________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Illumination greatly increases the motorist’s ability to see pedestrians walking along the

road at night. Double-sided lighting illuminates both sidewalks for increased pedestrian safety.

	Do you routinely provide illumination on both sides of the street? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure streets are well lit?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

II. Crossing the Road Crashes

Pedestrian crossing islands reduce crashes substantially at uncontrolled locations, 

especially on busy multilane streets where gaps are difficult to find. An island breaks

an otherwise complex crossing maneuver into two easier steps: a pedestrian looks left, 

finds an acceptable gap in one direction, crosses to the island, then looks right and

finds a second gap.
Appendix H: Checklist for Engineering and Planning Solutions 173

	Do you routinely provide pedestrian crossing islands at identified crossing points?

	 Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure islands are provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Curb extensions reduce the total crossing distance on streets with on-street parking 

and increase visibility: the waiting pedestrian can better see approaching traffic and

motorists can better see pedestrians waiting to cross the road, as their view is no longer blocked by parked cars.

	Do you routinely provide curb extensions at identified crossing points? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure curb extensions are provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Illumination greatly increases the motorist’s ability to see pedestrians crossing the

road. Increased lighting should be provided at the primary crossing points. Doublesided lighting should be provided along wide arterial streets; this enables motorists to 

see pedestrians along the road, who may decide to cross anywhere, anytime.

	Do you routinely provide illumination at identified crossing points? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure illumination is provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

III. Popular Crossing Solutions and How to Improve Them

The public often responds to a tragic pedestrian crash with a call for an immediate solution. Commonly requested solutions include traffic signals, flashers, overcrossings or

undercrossings, or marked crosswalks. While these can be effective solutions in certain

places, in some instances they are not appropriate or effective.

Traffic Signals

The primary purpose of a traffic signal is to create gaps in traffic that otherwise would

be hard to find. The MUTCD warns against the overuse of signals for a variety of

reasons. Inappropriate traffic signals may increase crashes. Traffic signals are expensive, from $35,000 to $300,000 for one intersection, not including any associated road

widening.

But in some cases, the only solution to crossing a busy, multilane arterial street is to 

install a pedestrian crossing signal. This is especially true in locations where there is no 

other signal for 0.4 km (0.25 mi) or more in an area with lots of pedestrian activity.
174 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Improving Traffic Signals

Traffic signals may be the only way to create a gap for pedestrians to cross busy multilane highways with significant volumes. Since it is difficult to meet MUTCD warrants

for a pedestrian signal based solely on existing pedestrian counts, it may be necessary 

to anticipate how many pedestrians might cross once a signal is installed. A median

island and a two-stage pedestrian crossing help reduce impacts on traffic flow: the

pedestrian stops one direction of traffic at a time, and the two crossings are separated

at a fenced-in median island.

	Do you install traffic signals based on anticipated pedestrian volumes? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted so warranted signals are provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Overcrossing or Undercrossing

These solutions are appealing because they give the impression of complete separation of pedestrians from motor vehicle traffic. In practice, this rarely occurs because:

1.	 Overcrossings and undercrossings are expensive and cannot be provided at most

locations where pedestrians want to cross.

2. Undercrossing are often prone to security problems due to low visibility.

3. The out-of-distance travel is so inconvenient many pedestrians will refuse to walk 

this extra distance and cross at-grade.

4.	 Overcrossings or undercrossings are seldom used, and motorists are frustrated

when they see pedestrians crossing in the vicinity of an overcrossing or undercrossing; this in turn increases the risk to pedestrians crossing at grade.

The high cost of an overcrossing or undercrossing makes them impractical for all but 

a few locations. 

Improving Overcrossings and Undercrossings

	Do you install separated crossings based on well-defined criteria? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted so separated crossings are provided

	 only	where warranted? ____________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Marked Crosswalks Without Additional Crossing Treatments

Marked crosswalks (without additional crossing treatments) should only be installed

where there is an expectation of a significant number of pedestrians such as near a

school, park or other generator. Without the associated features mentioned so far

(islands, curb extensions, illumination etc.), marked crosswalks on their own do not
Appendix H: Checklist for Engineering and Planning Solutions 175

necessarily increase the security of a pedestrian crossing the street. The most recent 

study on marked crosswalks can be downloaded at http://www.walkinginfo.org/rd/

devices.htm. In general, the results can be summarized as follows:

•	 Two-lane roads: no significant difference in crashes.

•	 Multilane roads (three or more lanes):

	 •	 Under 12,000 ADT: no significant difference in crashes.

	 •	 Over 12,000 ADT without median: crashes at marked crosswalks > crashes at

 unmarked crosswalks.

	 •	 Over 15,000 ADT and with median: crashes at marked crosswalks > crashes at

 unmarked crosswalks.

The study also made the following observations:

•	 Medians reduce crashes by 40 percent.

•	 Pedestrians over 65 are over-represented in crashes relative to crossing volumes.

•	 No evidence was found to indicate that pedestrians are less vigilant in marked

crosswalks.

•	 Looking behavior increased significantly after crosswalks were installed.

	Do you have a program for evaluating, upgrading and installing marked crosswalks

	 at unsignalized locations? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) are needed to ensure that this occurs?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Textured and/or colored crosswalks are another popular request. In reality, they are

often less visible to motorists than white marked crosswalks, may create maintenance 

problems, and are difficult for pedestrians with disabilities to negotiate.

Improving Marked Crosswalks

Using high visibility markings ensures that motorists see the crosswalk as well as the 

pedestrian.

	Do you routinely install high-visibility crosswalks? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that high-visibility crosswalks

	 are provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

Crosswalks with advance stop bars (or yield lines) help prevent “multiple-threat”

crashes on multilane streets. These occur when a motorist in the outside lane stops to 

let a pedestrian cross and—by stopping so close to the crosswalk—masks a vehicle in

the adjacent lane who is not slowing down. The second motorist does not have time 

to react, and the pedestrian is struck at high speed. The advance stop bar (or yield line)
176 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

encourages	the	first	motorist	to	stop	back	9.1	m	(30	ft)—plus	or	minus	a	distance—so	

the pedestrian can see if a motorist in the second lane is not stopping. This enables 

the pedestrian to wait or even pull back if he has started to proceed into the second 

lane.

	Do	you	routinely	install	advance	stop	bars	at	crosswalks	on	multilane	streets?	

	 Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	advance	stop	bars	are	

	 provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Proper	signing	increases	the	motorist’s	awareness	of 	a	pedestrian	crossing.	

	Do	you	routinely	provide	signing	at	pedestrian	crossings?	Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	signing	is	provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Illumination	increases	the	motorist’s	ability	to	see	pedestrians	crossing	the	road.	

	Do	you	routinely	provide	illumination	at	pedestrian	crossings?	Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	illumination	is	provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

IV. Intersection Geometry

Intersection	geometry	has	a	profound	effect	on	pedestrian	safety	as	it	determines	to	

a large extent whether or not motorists will perceive pedestrians, the length of crosswalks, and the speed of approaching and turning vehicles.

	Do	you	have	an	intersection	design	policy	that	takes	pedestrian	safety	into	account?	

	 Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	pedestrian	safety	is	

	 considered?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Tighter	radii	benefit	pedestrians	by	shortening	the	crossing	distance,	bringing	crosswalks closer to the intersection, increasing visibility of pedestrians, and slowing 

right-turning vehicles. The appropriate radius must be calculated for each corner of an 

intersection;	difficult	turns	for	the	occasional	event	are	acceptable	(for	example	a	large	

moving	truck	turning	onto	a	local	street).
Appendix H: Checklist for Engineering and Planning Solutions 177

	Do you routinely encourage tight radii at urban/suburban intersections? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that tight radii are provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Pork-chop islands between an exclusive right-turn lane and through lanes shorten the 

crossing distance, reduce pedestrian exposure and improve signal timing. The island 

enables pedestrians and motorists to negotiate one conflict separately from the others.

The island should have the longer tail pointing upstream to the approaching right-turn 

motorist; so motorists approach at close to 90o and are looking at the crosswalk. The

crosswalk is placed one car length back from the intersecting street so the motorist 

can move forward once the pedestrian conflict has been resolved. The right-turning

motorist can focus on traffic and the pedestrian can focus on cross or through traffic.

	Do you routinely provide pedestrian-friendly pork-chop islands (long tail design) at

	 right-turn lanes? Yes / No

	If so, are they designed to enhance pedestrian safety?

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that well designed islands are

	 provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Median islands channelize and slow down left-turning vehicles. An island provides

pedestrians a refuge for long, unsignalized crossings or if a conflict cannot be avoided,

though signalized intersections should be designed to allow pedestrians to cross the 

entire street during a single signal cycle.

	Do you routinely provide median islands at intersections? Yes / No

	If so, are signals times so pedestrians can cross in one cycle?

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that islands are provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Proper crosswalk and curb ramp placement and design ensures that all users cross 

in crosswalks, close to the intersection, where motorists can see them, and without 

undue delay. Ramps (wings not included) must be wholly contained within the marked

crosswalk. Poorly placed or oriented ramps force wheelchair users to make long detours and they may not cross in the allotted time at a signalized intersection; they may 

be crossing outside the crosswalk lines where motorists do not expect them.

	Do you routinely provide crosswalks and ramps at all corners of all intersections?

	 Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If so, are they designed to enhance pedestrian safety?
178 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	crosswalks	and	ramps	are	

	 provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

V. Signalized Intersections

All	signalized	intersections	where	pedestrians	are	reasonably	expected	to	cross	should	

have the elements described in the following sections.

Pedestrian signals ensure that pedestrians know when the signal phasing allows them 

to	cross,	and	when	they	should	not	be	crossing.	On	one-way	streets	a	pedestrian	approaching from the opposite direction cannot see the vehicle signal heads and may not 

realize an intersection is signalized, nor know when it is safe to cross. Left turn arrows 

are not visible to the pedestrian.

	Do	you	routinely	provide	pedestrian	signals	at	signalized	intersections?	Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	pedestrian	signals	are	

	 provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Marked crosswalks indicate to the motorist where to expect pedestrians and help 

keep	the	crossing	area	clear	of 	vehicles.	All	legs	of 	a	signalized	intersection	should	be	

marked.

	Do	you	routinely	provide	marked	crosswalks	at	signalized	intersections?	Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	crosswalks	are	provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

It	is	important	to	provide	a	WALK	signal	long	enough	to	get	pedestrians	started,	and	

a clearance interval long enough to ensure that a pedestrian can fully cross the street. 

Traditionally,	1.2	m/s	(4	ft/s)	is	assumed	adequate,	though	1.1	m/s	(3.5	ft/s)	or	even	

0.9	m/s	(3.0	ft/s)	may	be	appropriate	at	locations	that	have	a	substantial	number	of 	

older pedestrians or pedestrians with mobility impairments.

	Are	your	signals	timed	to	give	pedestrians	adequate	time	to	cross?	Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	enough	time	is	provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Push buttons should be located where a pedestrian who is in a wheelchair or is visually-impaired can easily reach them, and positioned so that they clearly indicate which 
Appendix H: Checklist for Engineering and Planning Solutions 179

crosswalk the button regulates. Push buttons mounted on two separate pedestals work 

best, as it is nearly impossible to place two push buttons correctly on one signal pole. 

Push buttons are not needed in downtown/central business districts and other area of

high pedestrian use where pedestrians can be expected at every signal cycle.

	Do you routinely place pedestrian push buttons where they can be reached?

	 Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	Do you routinely avoid using pedestrian push buttons in downtown/central

	 business districts and other areas of high pedestrian use? Yes/No

	If not (either question), what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that push

	 buttons are accessible?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Signal timing techniques to reduce the incidence of crashes that occur while the pedestrian is crossing with the WALK signal include:

1. Protected left-turn phases that allow pedestrians to cross without interference from 

left-turning motorists. Red (then green) left turn arrows make it clear to motorists

they must wait before turning (especially important where there are double right or

double left turns).

	Do you routinely provide protected left turns at signalized intersections? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that protection is provided?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

2. Lead Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs) reduce conflicts between turning vehicles and

pedestrians when turning vehicles encroach onto the crosswalk before pedestrians 

leave the curb. The LPI releases pedestrians 3 to 5 seconds prior to the green light

for vehicles so pedestrians can enter and occupy the crosswalk before turning motorists enter it.

	Do you provide an LPI at signalized intersections with known turning conflicts?

	 Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to provide a LPI where helpful?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _____________________________________________________________

3. Pedestrian countdown signals indicate to the pedestrian how much time is left in the 

pedestrian clearance interval, encourage pedestrians to finish crossing before the

crossing time runs out, and reduce the number of pedestrians who initiate a crossing too late in the cycle.
180 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

	Do	you	provide	countdowns	at	signalized	intersections	where	it	would	help?

	 Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	provide	countdowns	where	helpful?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

VI. Other Techniques to Create a Better Pedestrian Environment

Road Diets

Reducing	the	number	of 	travel	lanes	a	pedestrian	has	to	cross	can	be	beneficial	to	all	

users.	A	well-documented	technique	takes	a	four-lane	undivided	street	(two	lanes	in	

each	direction)	and	reconfigures	it	to	two	travel	lanes,	a	center-turn	lane,	and	two	bike	

lanes	(without	changing	the	curb	lines).	The	benefits	for	pedestrians	include	fewer	

lanes	to	cross	and	slower	traffic	speeds.	The	center-turn	lane	also	creates	space	for	

pedestrian crossing islands. The bike lanes add a buffer for pedestrians as well as a 

place for bicyclists to ride. Variations include reducing a multilane one-way street by 

one	lane;	narrowing	the	travel	lanes	to	slow	traffic	and	create	space	for	bike	lanes;	or	

moving the curbs in to narrow the roadway.

	Do	you	routinely	consider	reducing	the	number	of 	travel	lanes	where	practical?	

	 Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	road	diets	are	

	 considered?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Arterial Street Design

High speeds make it harder to avoid a crash and increase the severity of a crash or 

the likelihood of a fatality. Speed reduction should be a primary tool in reducing 

pedestrian crashes. Simply lowering speed limits is usually ineffective. Streets must be 

redesigned to encourage lower speeds.

	Are	your	design	standards	predicated	on	slow	speeds	in	urban	environments?	

	 Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	speeds	are	reasonable	in	

	 urban	areas?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Residential Street Design and Traffic Calming 

Residential streets built in the last few decades are often wide and barren, encouraging speeds higher than appropriate for streets where children can be expected. Good 
Appendix H: Checklist for Engineering and Planning Solutions 181

residential street designs are narrow and have on-street parking, tight curb radii, short 

block length, buffered sidewalks with street trees, short building setbacks, and streetlights.

	Have	you	adopted	pedestrian-oriented	residential	street	design	standards?	Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	change	your	standards?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Traffic	calming	slows	traffic	inside	neighborhoods.	Common	techniques	include	speed	

tables	or	humps,	traffic	circles,	diverters,	chokers,	and	chicanes	to	break	up	long,	

straight streets.

	Do	you	routinely	consider	traffic	calming	on	neighborhood	streets?	Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	are	needed	to	institutionalize	traffic	claming?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

VII. Transit-related Crashes

Many	crashes	involve	a	pedestrian	crossing	the	street	to	access	transit.	All	streetcrossing techniques are applicable to transit stops. Transit providers and road authorities should ensure that all transit stops are accessible to all pedestrians. The following 

policies are recommended:

All	stops	should	consider	the	safety	of 	the	pedestrian	crossing—not	necessarily	a	

marked crosswalk at each stop location; rather, locating stops where it is possible for a 

pedestrian to cross safely at or very near the stop.

	Do	you	collaborate	with	transit	providers	to	ensure	pedestrians	can	cross	the	street	

	 wherever	there	is	a	transit	stop?	Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	transit	stops	are	safer?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Provide a safe place to stand and wait at transit and school bus stops, even if there are 

no sidewalks. Transit stops with a lack of space push people out into the roadway.

	Do	you	collaborate	with	transit	providers	to	ensure	stops	have	a	hard	surface?	

	 Yes	/	No

	If 	yes,	please	state	your	policy:	________________________________________

	If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	transit	stops	are	paved?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________
182 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Sidewalks or paved shoulders provide pedestrian access to all transit stops.

	Do you collaborate with transit providers to ensure stops are accessible? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure transit stops are accessible?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

Lighting should be provided at or near all bus stop locations.

	Do you collaborate with transit providers to ensure stops are lit? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure transit stops are lit?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________

The transit agency should also review all its stop locations to facilitate access and 

crossing. Techniques include:

1. Eliminating or moving transit stops in areas that are hard to cross.

2. Consolidating closely-spaced stops to limit the number of crossings and improve 

transit efficiency (as the buses stop less often).

3.	 Moving stops to a location where it is easier to cross. In general, farside locations

are preferred for pedestrian safety, as pedestrians can cross behind the bus and the 

bus can leave without having to wait for pedestrians to cross. However, there are 

locations where a nearside stop may be safer and better for operational reasons.

4.	 Placing crosswalks (where warranted) behind the bus stop at midblock locations so

pedestrians can cross behind the bus, where they can see oncoming traffic; it also

enables the bus driver to pull away without endangering pedestrians.

Transit providers also have their concerns:

1. Bus stops should be easily accessible: a stop should not be moved to a far side location if this location requires a lot of out-of-direction travel for users.

2. Bus stops should be located where the motorist can easily stop and move back into 

traffic again.

3. Bus stops need to be located where passengers with disabilities can board the bus.

	Do you collaborate with transit providers to ensure stops are practical? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure transit stops meet the transit

	 provider’s needs?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________
Appendix H: Checklist for Engineering and Planning Solutions 183

VIII. Planning Solutions

Land Use and Site Design

Land use patterns impact pedestrian crashes and the general feasibility of walking. 

Pedestrian crash severity is higher in suburban, auto-oriented locations where speeds 

are faster and motorists do not expect pedestrians. Pedestrian crashes are less severe 

in established, traditional urban areas where motorists are more aware of pedestrians. 

Sample land use and site design techniques that can encourage more walking and help 

manage speed and therefore affect crash rates include:

Buildings should define streets. Buildings located at the back of the sidewalk give the

motorist sense of enclosure; buildings set back with large parking lots in front create wide high-speed roads. Mixed-use development can encourage walking trips and 

enhance the pedestrian environment. Buildings with retail on the bottom and housing 

on the top encourage pedestrian activity.

Street connectivity encourages walking because of the reduced travel distance to reach 

destinations (cul-de-sacs without connector paths reduce pedestrian connectivity).

Parking should not be placed between the sidewalk and buildings; on-street parking 

can be a very effective way to slow traffic and encourage pedestrian-oriented development. The principles of access management should be extended to parking: single lots 

serving multiple stores are preferred over single stores each with its own parking lot 

and driveway.

Have you adopted city codes for future development that create a pedestrian-

	 friendly environment? Yes / No

	If yes, please state your policy: ________________________________________

	If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to change codes?

	 _________________________________________________________________

	 _________________________________________________________________
184 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

Appendix I: Checklist 

for Pedestrian Safety 

Action Plan

Elements

This checklist provides effective and commonly used elements of a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (PSAP). The template generally follows the outline of the Ho

to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan guide. 

To the extent possible, please fill in the blanks prior to the training workshop. On day

two of the training workshop, this checklist will be used to conduct a guided exercise 

to create an outline that can later be used as a basis for a PSAP.

I. Goals and Objectives

Commitment to safety for all modes should be the number one goal and priority of 

state and local transportation agencies. Once this commitment is made, it allo

transportation agencies to allocate funds to reducing all crash types, including pedestrian crashes.

	 Do you have a clearly stated commitment to safety as your number one priority?

	 Yes / No

	 If yes, please state: _________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that safety becomes the

	 number one priority of your agency? ________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

Clear objectives are needed for a pedestrian plan to be successful in reducing pedestrian crashes. They allow for the development of practical and achievable strategies; 

they also provide a way to measure progress over time. To be effective, objectives 

must be specific and measurable.

	 Do you have a clearly stated objective for reducing pedestrian crashes? Yes / No

	 If yes, please state: _________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________
Appendix I: Checklist for Pedestrian Safety Action Plan Elements 185

	 If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	objectives	are	adopted?

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

II. Stakeholders

Individual	stakeholder	involvement	is	an	excellent	way	to	get	a	better	product.		Public stakeholders should be viewed as partners who are the on-the-ground scouts who 

can identify problems, needs and opportunities. To be effective, stakeholders must be 

involved in a regular, ongoing and systematic way.

	 Do	you	routinely	provide	for	individual	stakeholder	involvement?	Yes	/	No

	 If 	yes,	please	describe:	______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	stakeholders	are	

	 routinely	involved?

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

A	Pedestrian	Advisory	Board	(PAB)	is	another	excellent	way	to	get	a	better	product.		

They also build public support for policies, programs, and projects to reduce pedestrian crashes. To be effective, stakeholders must be involved in the review of policies, 

programs and projects.

	 Do	you	have	a	PAB	that	regularly	reviews	policies,	programs,	and	projects?	

	 Yes	/	No

	 If 	yes,	please	describe:	______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	the	creation	of	an	effective	

	 PAB?

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

Public agency staff in other agencies are also stakeholders. Building positive, working 

relationships is essential for coordination on regional planning issues; it also provides 

a	way	to	coordinate	on	solving	specific	problems	such	as	identifying	high	crash	locations where additional enforcement may be needed, and coordinating transit stops 

with crossing locations.

	 Do	you	routinely	coordinate	with	other	agencies	on	crash,	transit,	etc.,	issues?	

	 Yes	/	No

	 If 	yes,	please	describe:	______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	you	coordinate	with	other	

	 agencies?

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________
186 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

III. Data Collection

Computerized, timely, geo-coded pedestrian crash data are essential to identify highcrash locations, corridors, and/or larger areas and to select appropriate improvements

to make conditions safer for pedestrians and other roadway users.

	 Do you routinely collect pedestrian crash data? Yes / No

	 If yes, please describe: ______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that crash data are routinely

	 collected?

Pedestrian counts along with crossing observations can be very useful in understanding pedestrian behavior and in considering the need for facilities. Counts and behavior 

studies, when combined with crash data, can also provide insights into specific crash

causes and potential countermeasures.

	 Do you routinely collect pedestrian counts and complete crossing observations?

	 Yes / No

	 If yes, please describe: ______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that pedestrian counts and

	 observations are routinely completed?

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

Sidewalk and marked crosswalk (at uncontrolled locations) inventories help identify

system gaps and unsafe conditions. When combined with crash data, pedestri

counts, and traffic characteristics, they can be very useful in prioritizing locations for

countermeasures and other improvements.

	 Do you routinely inventory sidewalks and marked crosswalks? Yes / No

	 If yes, please describe: ______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that inventories of sidewalks

	 and	marked crosswalks are routinely completed?

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

Inventories of traffic characteristics (such as ADT, road widths, and speeds) help

identify likely crash locations. When combined with actual crash data and pedestri

counts, they can be very useful in prioritizing locations for countermeasures and other 

improvements.

	 Do you routinely inventory roadway ADT, widths and speeds? Yes / No

	 If yes, please describe: ______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________
Appendix I: Checklist for Pedestrian Safety Action Plan Elements 187

	 If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that ADT, width and speed

	 information is routinely collected and coded?

	 ________________________________________________________________	

	 ________________________________________________________________

IV. Analyzing Information and Prioritizing Concerns

Categorizing pedestrian crash data should be done to determine whether they are 

occurring at a) spot locations, b) along corridors, c) in a neighborhood area, or d)

throughout an entire jurisdiction (poor standard practice such as failing to install

pedestrian indicators at signals). Once categorized, this information can be used 

focus resources and prioritize projects.

	 Do you routinely categorize pedestrian crash data? Yes / No

	 If yes, please describe: ______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that crash data is routinely

	 categorized?

	 ________________________________________________________________

Conducting field reviews and safety audits can be used to identify how each pedestrian

crash occurred, and what may be done to prevent future similar crashes. The outcome is a list of improvements that can be implemented to address those crashes and 

enhance safety.

	 Do you routinely conduct field reviews and safety audits? Yes / No

	 If yes, please describe: ______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that field reviews and safety

	 audits are routinely completed?________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

Crash typing describes the pre-crash actions of the parties involved. When crash

are “crash typed,” a pattern often emerges that helps identify what the problem is and

what countermeasures are generally related to each crash type. Crash typing is particularly useful in developing education and enforcement strategies.

	 Do you routinely “crash type” your pedestrian crash data? Yes / No

	 If yes, please describe: ______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that crash typing is routinely

	 completed?_______________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

Prioritizing pedestrian safety improvements is the final step once all appropriate data

has been collected. Priorities should be established based on a variety of factors 

including safety consequences, cost, travel demand, availability of right-of-way, federal 
188 How to Develop a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan 

and/or	state	mandates	and	public	support.		Solutions	can	be	phased	and	divided	into	

temporary or permanent improvements.

	 Do	you	routinely	prioritize	(rank)	pedestrian	safety	improvements?	Yes	/	No

	 If 	yes,	please	describe:	______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	safety	improvements	are	

	 routinely	prioritized?________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

V. Providing Funding

Routine accommodation for pedestrians in all projects, programs and maintenance 

activities is the most cost-effective funding strategy for reducing pedestrian crashes 

and encouraging more walking. The majority of pedestrian infrastructure is built in 

conjunction	with	other	projects.		It	allows	for	significant	improvements	over	time,	

even if there is no special funding available for pedestrian safety improvements.

	 Do	you	routinely	include	pedestrian	safety	improvements	in	all	projects,	programs,	

	 and	maintenance	activities?	Yes	/	No

	 If 	yes,	please	describe:	______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	pedestrian	safety	

	 improvements	are	included?

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

Dedicated	funds	and	set-asides	for	pedestrian	projects	allow	for	immediate	action	in	

addressing high crash locations, corridors, and other targeted areas. They can be federal, state or local funds and are often a percentage of another fund.

	 Do	you	routinely	set	aside	funds	that	are	dedicated	to	pedestrian	safety?	Yes	/	No

	 If 	yes,	please	describe:	______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If 	not,	what	change(s)	need	to	be	instituted	to	ensure	that	funds	are	routinely	set	

	 aside?___________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

VI. Creating the Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

A	Pedestrian	Safety	Action	Plan	focuses	resources	on	making	the	changes	that	reduce	

the greatest number of pedestrian crashes. To be effective, it must provide a framework for involving stakeholders, collecting and analyzing data, selecting countermeasures, developing implementation strategies and providing funding.

	 Do	you	have	a	Pedestrian	Safety	Action	Plan	that	includes	all	these	elements?	

	 Yes	/	No
Appendix I: Checklist for Pedestrian Safety Action Plan Elements 189

	 If yes, please describe: ______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that a comprehensive plan is

	 created? _________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

Evaluation of results ensures that implemented solutions are effective in reducing 

crashes and improving the safety and accessibility of pedestrian facilities; it also helps 

ensure future funding opportunities if the plan is perceived as a success. Success 

should be measured against the objectives set forth in the Pedestrian Safety Action

Plan—typically to reduce pedestrian crashes by a certain percentage.

	 Do you routinely evaluate results of your efforts to reduce pedestrian crashes?

	 Yes / No

	 If yes, please describe: ______________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 If not, what change(s) need to be instituted to ensure that regular evaluation

	 occurs?

	 ________________________________________________________________

	 ________________________________________________________________
FHWA-SA-05-12

Revised March 2009