Field Guide for Selecting 

Countermeasures at 

Uncontrolled Pedestrian 

Crossing Locations

July 2018, Updated
NOTICE

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of 

Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no 

liability for the use of the information contained in this document. This report does not 

constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.

The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or 

manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the 

objective of the document.
Technical Report Documentation Page

1. REPORT NO.

FHWA-SA-18-018

2. GOVERNMENT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NO. 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing 

Locations

5. REPORT DATE 

January 2018 (June 2018, Updated)

6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

CODE

7. AUTHOR(S)

Lauren Blackburn (VHB), Charles Zegeer (HSRC), and Kristen Brookshire (HSRC)

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

REPORT NO.

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME & ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NO.

11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO.

DTFH61-16-D-00005

VHB

8300 Boone Boulevard, Suite 300

Vienna, VA 22182

The University of North Carolina at 

Chapel Hill

Highway Safety Research Center (HSRC)

104 Airport Drive, Suite 2200

Chapel Hill, NC 27599-1350

12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS 

Federal Highway Administration Office of Safety

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD 

14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE 

FHWA

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

The Task Order Contracting Officer's Representative (TOCOR) for this task was Rebecca Crowe.

16. ABSTRACT

This field guide helps agencies select pedestrian crash countermeasures based on criteria established in published 

literature, best practices, and national guidance. This guide includes a form that the agency may use to document 

roadway characteristics and pedestrian safety issues. It also includes tables that relate these documented conditions 

to a specific set of countermeasure options. A series of descriptions lead the agency through additional installation 

considerations for each countermeasure. 

The January 2018 version of this document was updated to include the Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon (RRFB). 

FHWA issued a new Interim Approval (IA-21) for the optional use of RRFBs in March 2018.

17. KEY WORDS

pedestrian crash countermeasures, uncontrolled crossings, midblock crossings, 

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon, Road Diet, crosswalk visibility enhancements, 

Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon

18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

No restrictions.

19. SECURITY CLASSIF. (OF THIS 

REPORT) Unclassified

20. SECURITY CLASSIF. (OF THIS 

PAGE) Unclassified

21. NO. OF PAGES 

21

22. PRICE

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized.
ii

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Table of Contents

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

Sample Inventory Form ........................................................................2

Table 1 Instructions ..............................................................................3

Table 1: Application of Pedestrian Crash Countermeasures by 

Roadway Feature .................................................................................4

Table 2 Instructions ..............................................................................5

Table 2: Safety Issues Addressed per Countermeasure ..................6

Countermeasure: Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements ....................7

Countermeasure: Raised Crosswalk ................................................10

Countermeasure: Pedestrian Refuge Island ...................................12

Countermeasure: Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) ......................14

Countermeasure: Road Diet ..............................................................16

Countermeasure: Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon (RRFB) ...18
Introduction

This field guide helps agencies select pedestrian crash countermeasures based on criteria established 

in published literature, best practices, and national guidance. This guide includes a form that the 

agency may use to document roadway characteristics and pedestrian safety issues. It also includes 

tables that relate these documented conditions to a specific set of countermeasure options. A series of 

descriptions lead the agency through additional installation considerations for each countermeasure. 

Practitioners should reference additional resources issued through the FHWA Safe Transportation for 

Every Pedestrian (STEP) program that further describe these countermeasures. Resources include 

a series of “tech sheets” including additional illustrations, crash reduction factors, and general 

construction costs. 

Countermeasure Selection Tables

The information in this field guide relates to 

the information in the Guide for Improving 

Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing 

Locations (FHWA-SA-17-072). That guide 

describes a comprehensive decision-making 

process for the installation of pedestrian crossing 

countermeasures and leads the agency through 

the following steps in the process: 

1. Collect Data and Engage the Public 

2. Inventory Conditions and Prioritize Locations

3. Analyze Crash Types and Safety Issues 

4. Select Countermeasure(s) 

5. Consult Design and Installation Resources 

6. Identify Opportunities and Monitor 

Outcomes

This field guide expands upon the fourth step, 

Select Countermeasures, for agencies who 

have an established process for identifying 

priority locations for countermeasure installation. 

This step presents two tables for the agency to 

review to identify potential countermeasures. 

Table 1, “Application of pedestrian crash 

countermeasures by roadway feature,” 

compares roadway and vehicle speed 

characteristics to appropriate options. Table 2, 

“Safety issues addressed per countermeasure,” 

compares crash types and other observed safety 

issues to the countermeasures. This field guide 

contains both tables and instructions for their use.

Countermeasure Descriptions

The field guide focuses on uncontrolled crossing 

types—where sidewalks or designated walkways 

intersect a roadway at a location where no traffic 

control (i.e., traffic signal or STOP sign) is present. 

The countermeasures described in the guide 

include the following: 

» Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements, including: 

• High-visibility crosswalk markings

• Parking restriction on crosswalk approach

• Overhead lighting

• Advance Yield Here To (Stop Here For) 

Pedestrians sign and stop or yield line 

• In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign

• Curb extension 

» Raised crosswalk 

» Pedestrian refuge island 

» Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) 

» Road Diet

» Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon (RRFB)

The field guide includes a description for each of 

the countermeasures. The descriptions present 

additional design and installation considerations, 

such as references to the Manual on Uniform 

Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). 

1

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations
2

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Sample Inventory Form

On this example inventory form, the agency records information about roadway conditions and safety 

issues important to selecting countermeasures for uncontrolled crossing locations. The information 

added to this form is applied in Tables 1 and 2. Some information, such as pedestrian volume data, is 

used when reviewing MUTCD guidance for countermeasures such as the PHB.

Roadway Conditions Inventory

Speed Limit 

 ≤ 30 mph  35 mph  ≥ 40 mph

Total Vehicles per Day

Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT): _____________

Approximate Vehicles per Hour (VPH): ____________

 AADT < 9,000

 AADT 9,000–15,000

 AADT > 15,000

Travel Lane Configuration

 2 lanes without raised median

 3 lanes without raised median

 3 lanes with raised median

 4+ lanes without raised median

 4+ lanes with raised median

Crosswalk Length (feet): _________________

Approximate Total Pedestrians per Hour (PPH) 

Crossing the Roadway: _________________

Pedestrian Safety Issues Inventory

Noted conflicts at crossing locations  Yes  No

» History of turning movement crashes

» Observed conflicts at permitted crossings

Excessive vehicle speed  Yes  No

» 85th percentile speeds, per speed study

» History of speed-related crashes

Inadequate conspicuity/visibility  Yes  No

» Dim or dark conditions for pedestrians in the crosswalk

» Limited visibility of crosswalk due to roadway curvature or topography

» Obstructions, such as on-street parking, vegetation, and signage

Drivers not yielding to pedestrians in crosswalks  Yes  No

» Crash history in marked crosswalks

Insufficient separation between pedestrians and traffic  Yes  No

» Long crossing distance

» No buffer (e.g., landscape buffer, on-street parking, bike lanes)
3

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Table 1 Instructions

Table 1 provides initial countermeasure options for various roadway conditions. Each matrix cell 

indicates possibilities that may be appropriate for designated pedestrian crossings. Not all of the 

countermeasures listed in the matrix cell should necessarily be installed at a crossing. 

For multi-lane roadway crossings with vehicle AADTs exceeding 10,000, a marked crosswalk alone is 

typically insufficient (Zegeer, 2005). Under such conditions, more substantial crossing improvements 

(such as the refuge island, PHB, and RRFB) are also needed to prevent an increase in pedestrian 

crash potential.

 
4

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Table 1: Application of Pedestrian Crash 

Countermeasures by Roadway Feature

Table 1 identifies suggested countermeasures for uncontrolled crossing locations according to 

roadway and traffic features. Review the corresponding worksheets for countermeasures considered 

for the site. The worksheets describe additional design and installation considerations for the 

countermeasures.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1. Application of pedestrian crash countermeasures by roadway feature.

*Refer to Chapter 4, 'Using Table 1 and Table 2 to Select Countermeasures,' for more information about using multiple countermeasures.

**It should be noted that the PHB and RRFB are not both installed at the same crossing location.

This table was developed using information from: Zegeer, C.V., J.R. Stewart, H.H. Huang, P.A. Lagerwey, J. Feaganes, and B.J. Campbell. (2005). Safety effects of marked versus unmarked 

crosswalks at uncontrolled locations: Final report and recommended guidelines. FHWA, No. FHWA-HRT-04-100, Washington, D.C.; FHWA. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2009 Edition. 

(revised 2012). Chapter 4F, Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons. FHWA, Washington, D.C.; FHWA. Crash Modification Factors (CMF) Clearinghouse. http://www.cmfclearinghouse.org/; FHWA. Pedestrian 

Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System (PEDSAFE). http://www.pedbikesafe.org/PEDSAFE/; Zegeer, C., R. Srinivasan, B. Lan, D. Carter, S. Smith, C. Sundstrom, N.J. Thirsk, J. Zegeer, 

C. Lyon, E. Ferguson, and R. Van Houten. (2017). NCHRP Report 841: Development of Crash Modification Factors for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Treatments. Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, D.C.; Thomas, Thirsk, and Zegeer. (2016). NCHRP Synthesis 498: Application of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments for Streets and Highways. Transportation Research Board, Washington, 

D.C.; and personal interviews with selected pedestrian safety practitioners.
5

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Table 2 Instructions
Table 2. Safety issues addressed per countermeasure.

*These countermeasures make up the STEP countermeasure “crosswalk visibility enhancements.” Multiple countermeasures may be 

implemented at a location as part of crosswalk visibility enhancements.

6

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Table 2: Safety Issues Addressed per 

Countermeasure

Table 2 identifies the safety issues that may be addressed by suggested countermeasures for 

uncontrolled crossing locations. Review the corresponding worksheets for countermeasures 

considered for the site. The worksheets describe additional design and installation considerations for 

the countermeasures.
7

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Countermeasure: Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements
8

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Definition

This group of countermeasures includes high-visibility crosswalk markings, improved nighttime lighting, 

advance or in-street warning signage, curb extensions, and parking restrictions. These features may 

be used in combination to indicate preferred locations for people to cross, to increase visibility of the 

crossing location, and to help reinforce the driver requirement to yield the right-of-way to pedestrians 

at crossing locations. Refer to the Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements Tech Sheet for more information 

about this set of countermeasures.

Roadway and Site Information

Strongly consider the following countermeasures at all established midblock or intersection 

uncontrolled crossing locations: 

» High-visibility crosswalk markings

» Overhead lighting

» On-street parking restrictions or curb extensions

Note: On roadways with 4 or more lanes and more than 9,000 vehicles per day, the risk for 

pedestrian crashes could increase if marked crosswalks are not combined with other treatments, 

such as refuge islands or Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons.

Strongly consider adding advance Yield Here To (Stop Here For) Pedestrians sign and yield (stop) line 

if the roadway(s) are described by one of the following sets of conditions:

 Any AADT + 4 or more lanes (with or without a raised median) + any speed limit

 Any AADT + any number of lanes + ≥ 35 mph speed limit

Safety Issues and Behaviors 

This countermeasure may help address most traffic behaviors or safety issues but are most needed 

when the following are observed at the site: 

 Drivers not yielding to pedestrians in crosswalks

 Inadequate conspicuity/visibility of the crosswalk and pedestrian 

 Noted conflicts at crossing locations

Additional Installation and Design Guidelines 

Crosswalk Markings 

» High-visibility crosswalks may include a variety of crosswalk striping designs, such as ladder, 

continental, or bar pairs. 

» High-visibility markings may be supplemented with the pedestrian crossing warning signs (sign 

W11-2 in the MUTCD) on each approach to the crosswalk. 

» See MUTCD Section 2C.50 for more information about Non-Vehicular Warning Signs and Section 

3B.18 for more information about crosswalk markings. 

» Adjacent bus stops should be placed downstream of the crosswalk and not on the crosswalk 

approach.
9

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Overhead Lighting

» Overhead lights placed in advance of uncontrolled crossings on both approaches illuminate the 

front of the pedestrian and avoid creating a silhouette. 

» Consider placing the light fixtures 10 to 15 feet in advance of the crosswalk on both sides of the 

street.

Parking Restrictions and Curb Extensions

» Parking restrictions can include the removal of parking space markings or the installation of “no 

parking” signs or pavement markings. 

» The minimum setback for parking restrictions is 20 feet in advance of the crosswalk where speeds 

are 25 mph or less, and 30 feet in advance of the crosswalk where speeds are between 26 and 

35 mph.

» Curb extensions must not extend into travel lanes and should not block bicycle lanes. 

Advance Yield Here To (Stop Here For) Pedestrians sign and yield (stop) line 

» The stop line or “shark’s teeth” yield line is placed 20 to 50 feet in advance of a marked crosswalk 

to indicate where vehicles are required to stop or yield in compliance with the accompanying 

Yield Here To (Stop Here For) Pedestrians sign.

» Stop Here for Pedestrians signs should only be used where the law specifically requires that a 

driver must stop for a pedestrian in a crosswalk. Otherwise, Yield Here for Pedestrians signs should 

be used with shark’s teeth pavement markings.

» See MUTCD Section 2B.11 for more information about Yield Here To (Stop Here For) Pedestrians 

signs and Section 3B.16 for more information about stop and yield lines.

In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Sign

» The In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign can be placed in between travel lanes or in conjunction 

with a refuge island or raised median. 

» Consider maintenance and prompt replacement of damaged in-street (and all other) signs. 

» See MUTCD Section 2B.12 for more information about In-Street Pedestrian Crossing signs.
10

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Countermeasure: Raised Crosswalk

Definition

Raised crosswalks are ramped speed tables spanning the entire width of the roadway, often placed 

at midblock crossing locations. Refer to the Raised Crosswalks Tech Sheet for more information about 

this countermeasure. 

Roadway and Site Information

Consider this countermeasure for 2 or 3 lane roadways also described by the following conditions:

 AADT < 9,000 + ≤ 30 mph speed limit

Safety Issues and Behaviors 

This countermeasure may help address the following traffic behaviors or safety issues observed at the site: 

 Inadequate conspicuity/visibility

 Excessive vehicle speed
11

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Installation and Design Guidelines 

» Raised crosswalks may be installed with curb extensions and on-street parking. 

» Raised crosswalks may also be used at intersections, particularly at the entrance of the minor street.

» Raised crosswalks should be flush with the height of the sidewalk.

» The crosswalk table is typically at least 10 feet wide and designed to allow the front and rear 

wheels of a passenger vehicle to be on top of the table at the same time. 

» Detectable warnings (truncated domes) and curb ramps should be installed at the street edge 

for pedestrians with impaired vision.

» Raised crossings are generally avoided on arterial streets and primary routes for heavy trucks, bus 

transit, and emergency response vehicles.

» Consider storm water drainage and snowplowing in the design of the raised crosswalk. 

» See MUTCD Section 3B.25 for information about Speed Hump Markings and other markings that 

can be used with raised crosswalks.
12

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Countermeasure: Pedestrian Refuge Island

Definition

A pedestrian refuge island is a median with a refuge area that is intended to help protect pedestrians 

who are crossing the road. This countermeasure is sometimes referred to as a crossing island or 

pedestrian island. Refer to the Pedestrian Refuge Island Tech Sheet for more information about this 

countermeasure.

Roadway and Site Information

Consider this countermeasure for established pedestrian crossings at all 2 or 3 lane roadways without 

a raised median. 

Strongly consider this countermeasure if the roadway(s) are described by one of the following sets of 

conditions: 

 AADT ≥ 9,000 + 4 or more lanes without a raised median + any speed limit

 Any AADT + 4 or more lanes without a raised median + ≥ 35 mph speed limit
13

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Safety Issues and Behaviors 

This countermeasure may help address all traffic behaviors or safety issues but is most effective where 

the following are observed at the site: 

 Inadequate conspicuity/visibility

 Excessive vehicle speed 

 Insufficient pedstrian separation from traffic

Installation and Design Guidelines 

» Consideration should be given to creating a two-stage crossing. The island can encourage 

pedestrians to cross one direction of traffic at a time and look towards oncoming traffic before 

completing the second part of the crossing. 

» Pedestrian refuge islands should be at least 4 feet wide (preferably 8 feet) and of adequate 

length to allow the anticipated number of pedestrians to stand and wait for gaps in traffic before 

crossing.

» The cut-through of the island must include detectable warnings if island width is at least 6 feet.

» Refuge islands should be illuminated or highlighted with street lights, signs, and/or reflectors to 

ensure that they are visible to motorists.

» See MUTCD Section 3B for more information about the following for refuge islands: 

• Section 3B.10 - Approach Markings for Obstructions

• Section 3B.18 - Crosswalk Markings

• Section 3B.23 - Curb Markings 

» If applicable, evaluate the impact of the island on bicycle facility design.
14

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Countermeasure: Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB)

Definition

A PHB is a hybrid beacon used to control traffic and rests in dark until a pedestrian activates it via 

pushbutton or other form of detection. When activated, the beacon displays a sequence of flashing 

and solid lights that indicate when pedestrians should cross and when it is safe for drivers to proceed. 

Refer to the PHB Tech Sheet for more information about this countermeasure.

Roadway and Site Information

Strongly consider this countermeasure if the roadway(s) are described by one of the following sets of 

conditions: 

 AADT ≥ 15,000 + 4 or more lanes + any speed limit

 AADT ≥ 9,000 + 3 or more lanes (with or without median) + ≥ 35 mph speed limit

 Any AADT + any number of lanes + ≥ 40 mph speed limit

Safety Issues and Behaviors 

This countermeasure may help address the following traffic behaviors or safety issues observed at the site: 

 Drivers not yielding to pedestrians in crosswalks 

 Noted conflicts at crossing locations
15

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Additional Installation and Design Guidelines 

» Use in conjunction with signs and pavement markings at locations where pedestrians enter or 

cross the roadway. 

» Only install a PHB at a marked crosswalk. 

» For roadways with speeds of 35 mph or less, see MUTCD Figure 4F-1. For roadways speeds greater 

than 35 mph, see MUTCD Figure 4F-2. These charts compare crosswalk length, approximate 

vehicles per hour (VPH, including both approaches), and pedestrians per hour (PPH). The MUTCD 

recommends installation of a PHB where these conditions meet minimum criteria. 

» The PHB should be installed at least 100 feet from side streets or driveways that are controlled by 

STOP or YIELD signs.

» Parking should be prohibited and other sight obstructions should be removed at least 100 feet in 

advance of and at least 20 feet beyond the marked crosswalk and PHB. 

» The PHB should be coordinated if within a signal system.

» Review the MUTCD Part 4F for more information about the design and operation of the beacon 

face and the installation of optional signage. 
16

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Countermeasure: Road Diet

 
17

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Definition

A Road Diet is a roadway reconfiguration resulting in a reduction in the number of travel lanes, which 

is usually achieved by converting a four-lane undivided road to three lanes. The space gained by 

eliminating lanes is typically used for other uses and travel modes. Refer to the Road Diet Tech Sheet 

for more information about this countermeasure.

Roadway and Site Information

Consider this countermeasure for all roadways with four or more lanes without a raised median. 

Typically, Road Diets are considered for roadways with current and future average daily traffic (ADT) 

equal to or less than about 20,000. 

Safety Issues and Behaviors 

This countermeasure may help address the following traffic behaviors or safety issues observed at the site: 

 Conflicts at crossing locations

 Excessive vehicle speeds 

 Insufficient pedestrian separation from traffic

Additional Installation and Design Guidelines 

Refer to the FHWA’s Road Diet Informational Guide for a range of additional design considerations, 

including:

» Vehicle speed

» Level of Service (LOS)

» Quality of Service

» Operation and volume of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, and freight 

» Peak hour and peak direction traffic flow

» Vehicle turning volumes and patterns

» Frequency of stopping and slow-moving vehicles

» Presence of parallel roadways
18

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Countermeasure: Rectangular Rapid-Flashing 

Beacon (RRFB)

Definition

An RRFB is a pedestrian-actuated conspicuity enhancement used in combination with a pedestrian, 

school, or trail crossing warning sign to improve safety at uncontrolled, marked crosswalks. The device 

includes two rectangular-shaped yellow indications, each with an LED-array-based light source, that 

flash with high frequency when activated.

Roadway and Site Information

Strongly consider this countermeasure if the roadway(s) are described by one of the following sets of 

conditions: 

 AADT ≤ 15,000 + 2 lanes or 3 lanes (with a raised median) + ≥ 40 mph speed limit

 AADT 9,000–15,000 + 3 or more lanes (with or without median) + ≥ 35 mph speed limit

In the following exceptions, strongly consider a PHB instead of the RRFB: 

 AADT 9,000–15,000 + 3 lanes (without raised median) or more lanes + ≥ 40 mph speed limit
19

Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Safety Issues and Behaviors 

This countermeasure may help address the following traffic behaviors or safety issues observed at the site: 

 Noted conflicts at crossing locations

 Inadequate conspicuity/visibility of the crosswalk and pedestrian 

 Insufficient pedestrian separation from traffic 

Additional Installation and Design Guidelines 

The RRFB is not currently included in the MUTCD. FHWA has issued interim approval for the optional 

use of the RRFB (Interim Approval 21 or IA-21). State and local agencies must request and receive 

permission to use this interim approval before they can use the RRFB. IA-21 provides additional 

information about the conditions of use, including dimensions, placement, accessibility features, and 

flashing requirements. IA-21 does not provide guidance or criteria based on number of lanes, speed, 

or traffic volumes.

RRFBs are placed on both ends of a crosswalk. If the crosswalk contains a pedestrian refuge island 

or other type of median, an RRFB should be placed to the right of the crosswalk and on the median 

(instead of the left side of the crosswalk). 

An RRFB shall only be used to supplement the following warning signs, located at or immediately 

adjacent to an uncontrolled marked crosswalk:

» Post-mounted W11-2, S1-1, or W11-15 crossing warning sign with a (W16-7P) plaque OR

» An overhead-mounted W11-2, S1-1, or W11-15 crossing warning sign.

See MUTCD Section 2C.50 Non-Vehicular Warning Signs and Section 7B.08 School Sign (S1-1) for 

more information about signs that may be used with an RRFB. 
FHWA-SA-18-018 June 2018, Updated