Photo by JD Weihere on Unsplash 

PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER 

FHWA-SA-21-087

APRIL 2022 
i 

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. 

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. 

Non-Binding Content

The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of law and are not 

meant to bind the public in any way. This document is intended only to provide 

clarity to the public regarding existing requirements under the law or agency 

policies. While this is non-binding guidance, you must comply with the applicable 

statutes or regulations. 

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information 

to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public 

understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the 

quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically 

reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure 

continuous quality improvement.
ii

Technical Documentation Page

1. REPORT NO. 

FHWA-SA-21-087 

2. GOVERNMENT ACCESSION 

NO.

3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NO. 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 

Pedestrian Lighting Primer 

5. REPORT DATE 

April 2022

6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 

HSA

7. AUTHOR(S) 

This primer is a compilation of joint efforts by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. (VHB), 

Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI), and the FHWA Office of Safety to be a 

resource for transportation practitioners interested in lighting design considerations 

for locations with pedestrian activity. 

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

REPORT NO. 

FHWA-SA-21-087 

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 

 

10. WORK UNIT NO. 

11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO. 

DTFH61-05-D-00024 (VHB) 

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 FHWA contract manager for this report was Joseph Cheung. 

16. ABSTRACT 

Lighting of pedestrian facilities plays a key role in increasing the safety performance of the road network for all users. Effective 

pedestrian lighting installations are a means of addressing the vulnerability of pedestrians during dark conditions and improving 

safety and security of all road users spanning different ages and abilities, including wheelchair and other mobility device users. 

Lighting not only makes it easier for drivers to see pedestrians, but also improves pedestrians’ abilities to see their surroundings 

and detect trip hazards. It increases pedestrians’ perceived levels of safety and security associated with the use of pedestrian 

facilities. Lighting may also increase pedestrians’ confidence in performing certain tasks, such as assessing and selecting 

appropriate gaps at uncontrolled crossings and monitoring vehicles approaching and making different movements through 

signalized intersections. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) published this primer to be a resource for transportation 

practitioners interested in the safety and security benefits of pedestrian lighting as well as lighting design considerations at 

locations with existing or future pedestrian activity. 

17. KEY WORDS: 

lighting, pedestrian, safety, security 

18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT 

No restrictions. 

19. SECURITY CLASSIF. (OF THIS REPORT) 

Unclassified 

20. SECURITY CLASSIF. (OF THIS 

PAGE) Unclassified 

21. NO. OF 

PAGES 

57

22. PRICE 

N/A 

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed pages authorized 
iii

Contents 

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

1.1. Purpose and Scope of Primer ................................................................................................................................................ 2

1.2. Pedestrian Safety and Security .............................................................................................................................................. 2

1.3. Benefits of Lighting for Pedestrian Safety and Security ............................................................................................... 6

1.4. Existing Guidance and Gaps ................................................................................................................................................... 7

2. Lighting Design Process .................................................................................................................................................................... 9

2.1. Assessment of Potential Lighting Needs ........................................................................................................................ 11

2.1.1. General Principles of Lighting Needs Assessment ............................................................................................. 11

2.1.2. Pedestrian Considerations for Lighting Needs Assessment ........................................................................... 11

2.2. Selection of Design Criteria ................................................................................................................................................. 14

2.2.1. Primary Design Criteria ................................................................................................................................................. 14

2.2.2. Secondary Design Criteria ........................................................................................................................................... 16

2.2.3. Pedestrian Considerations for Design Criteria..................................................................................................... 18

2.3. Equipment Selection ............................................................................................................................................................... 25

2.3.1. General Principles of Equipment Selection ........................................................................................................... 25

2.3.2. Pedestrian Considerations for Equipment Selection ......................................................................................... 27

2.4. Determination of Control Strategy ................................................................................................................................... 29

2.4.1. General Principles of Control Strategies ................................................................................................................ 29

2.4.2. Pedestrian Considerations for Control Strategies .............................................................................................. 29

2.5. Design and Verification ......................................................................................................................................................... 30

2.5.1. General Design Process ................................................................................................................................................ 30
iv

2.5.2. Pedestrian Considerations for the Design Process ............................................................................................ 31

3. Design Example ................................................................................................................................................................................. 32

3.1. Example Scenario ..................................................................................................................................................................... 32

3.2. Assess Lighting Needs ........................................................................................................................................................... 34

3.3. Select Design Criteria ............................................................................................................................................................. 34

3.4. Select Equipment ..................................................................................................................................................................... 35

3.5. Determine Control Strategy ................................................................................................................................................. 36

3.6. Design and Verification ......................................................................................................................................................... 37

4. Summary and Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................. 43

5. References ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 45
v 

List of Figures 

Figure 1. Graphic. Pedestrian fatalities per year and pedestrian fatalities per year as a percent of total traffic 

fatalities. Source: NHTSA. ........................................................................................................................................................................... 3

Figure 2. Graphic. Estimated pedestrian injuries per year and five-year average estimated pedestrian injuries per 

year. Source: NHTSA .................................................................................................................................................................................... 3

Figure 3. Graphic. Infographic for nighttime pedestrian fatalities. Source: FHWA. ............................................................. 4

Figure 4. Graphic. Percentage of pedestrian fatalities in dark conditions (i.e., “Dark – Not Lighted,” “Dark –

Lighted,” or “Dark – Unknown Lighting”) by race (2008–2018). Source: NHTSA. ................................................................. 4

Figure 5. Graphic. Dark condition (i.e., “Dark – Not Lighted,” “Dark – Lighted,” or “Dark – Unknown Lighting”) 

pedestrian fatalities per year and dark condition pedestrian fatalities per year as a percent of total pedestrian 

fatalities. Source: NHTSA. ........................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Figure 6. Graphic. The major steps in lighting design. Source: FHWA...................................................................................... 9

Figure 7. Graphic. Typical lighting design process flowchart (not required under FHWA regulations). Source: 

FHWA. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 10

Figure 8. Focus group results for places that are most important to improve for walking in Portland. Source: 

PBOT. .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 12

Figure 9. Graphic. Methods of calculating illuminance. Source: FHWA. ............................................................................... 15

Figure 10. Photograph. Example of glare from a light source. Source: FHWA. .................................................................. 16

Figure 11. Graphic. Light trespass, glare, and sky glow. Source: FHWA. ............................................................................... 17

Figure 12. Graphic. Detection distance for rural highway by light type and luminance. Source: FHWA. ................. 22

Figure 13. Graphic. Recommended pedestrian lighting criteria selection flowchart (not required under FHWA 

regulations). Source: FHWA. .................................................................................................................................................................. 24

Figure 14. Graphic. General representation of IES distribution types. Modified from IES RP-8-18. Source: FHWA.

........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 26

Figure 15. Graphic. Detection distance by light type and luminance. Source: FHWA. .................................................... 28

Figure 16. Graphic. Variable mounting heights within public right-of-way. Source: FHWA. ........................................ 29
vi

Figure 17. Photograph. Examples of negative and positive contrast. Source: FHWA. ..................................................... 31

Figure 18. Graphic. Sketch of example scenario. Source: FHWA. ............................................................................................. 33

Figure 19. Graphic. Rendering of urban five-lane arterial with midblock crosswalk and transit stop similar to the 

example scenario. Source: The Greenway Collaborative, Inc. ................................................................................................... 33

Figure 20. Graphic. Example LED cobrahead roadway luminaire. Source: FHWA. ............................................................. 36

Figure 21. Graphic. Critical luminaire locations within the study area. Source: FHWA. ................................................... 38

Figure 22. Graphic. Software rendering of final lighting design for example scenario. Source: FHWA. ................... 41

 
vii 

List of Tables

Table 1. Factors identified by a STEP Pedestrian Lighting Scan Tour for assessing pedestrian lighting needs. 

Source: FHWA. ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 13

Table 2. Recommended roadway luminance criteria by street classification and pedestrian activity (from IES RP8-18, not required under FHWA regulations). ................................................................................................................................ 20

Table 3. Recommended design criteria for pedestrian facilities (not required under FHWA regulations)1. ........... 23

Table 4. Selected design criteria for example scenario1. ............................................................................................................. 35

Table 5. Summary of initial lighting design criteria and calculation results. ....................................................................... 39

Table 6. Summary of revised lighting design criteria and calculation results. .................................................................... 40

Table 7. Summary of final lighting design criteria and calculation results. .......................................................................... 41
1 

1. Introduction 

Lighting of pedestrian facilities plays a key role in increasing the safety performance of the road 

network for all users. Effective pedestrian lighting installations are a means of addressing the 

vulnerability of pedestrians during dark conditions and improving the safety and security of all road 

users spanning different ages and abilities, including wheelchair and other mobility device users. 

Lighting not only makes it easier for drivers to see pedestrians, but also improves pedestrians’ abilities 

to see their surroundings and detect trip hazards. It increases pedestrians’ perceived levels of safety 

and security associated with the use of pedestrian facilities. Lighting may also increase pedestrians’ 

confidence in performing certain tasks, such as assessing and selecting appropriate gaps at 

uncontrolled crossings and monitoring vehicles approaching and making different movements 

through signalized intersections. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) research report Street 

Lighting for Pedestrian Safety documents these benefits of lighting (Terry et al., 2020). FHWA 

published this primer to be a resource for transportation practitioners interested in the safety and 

security benefits of pedestrian lighting as well as lighting design considerations at locations with 

existing or future pedestrian activity. 

5

The primer has five sections: 

Section 1 provides background information that illustrates the need and 

motivation of the primer, along with the primer purpose and scope. 

Section 2 details the lighting design process, including assessments of

potential lighting needs, design criteria, equipment selection, control strategy 

determination, and design and verification. 

Section 3 presents a design example for a given set of conditions, including 

pedestrian volume, area type, and context. 

Section 4 contains a discussion of the conclusions and findings of this document. 

Section 5 is a list of the reports, journal articles, and other resources 

referenced herein. 
2 

1.1. Purpose and Scope of Primer 

The purpose of this primer is to be a resource for 

transportation practitioners interested in lighting 

design considerations for locations with pedestrian 

activity. This primer is a user-friendly companion 

document to the FHWA research report Street 

Lighting for Pedestrian Safety (Terry et al., 2020). 

More specifically, the primer highlights how the 

results from the FHWA research report Street 

Lighting for Pedestrian Safety can complement 

commonly used lighting design guides such as those 

listed in Section 1.3. The primer also provides basic 

information that practitioners can consider when 

providing lighting to improve pedestrian safety. The 

primer is written in a manner that assumes the 

reader may have only basic knowledge of lighting 

terminology. However, it is important that a qualified 

lighting designer perform the actual steps of lighting 

design and finalize any design plans. 

The objective of the research documented in the 

FHWA research report Street Lighting for Pedestrian 

Safety (Terry et al., 2020) was to provide lighting 

recommendations for pedestrian safety, including 

any specific needs for and examples of lighting 

associated with Safe Routes to School (SRTS) for 

children. In developing the lighting 

recommendations, the companion FHWA research 

report considered the ability of pedestrians to see 

and detect hazards on walkways and crosswalks, the 

visibility of pedestrians to motorists, and impacts of 

lighting on pedestrian decisions related to whether 

to cross a roadway. 

1.2. Pedestrian Safety and Security 

Pedestrian traffic fatalities in the U.S. have been 

steadily increasing over the past 10 years, both in 

frequency and as a proportion of total traffic 

fatalities. Figure 1 presents annual pedestrian fatality 

numbers from 2009 to 2019 and clearly displays this 

trend. During this same period, the estimated 

number of pedestrians injured in crashes fluctuated 

from year-to-year as shown by the bars in figure 2, 

but with the five-year rolling average trendline (the 

solid line in figure 2) showing a steady increase from 

approximately 64,000 in 2009 to approximately 

75,000 in 2019.
3 

Figure 1. Graphic. Pedestrian fatalities per year and pedestrian fatalities per year as a percent of total traffic fatalities. Source: NHTSA. 

Figure 2. Graphic. Estimated pedestrian injuries per year and five-year average estimated pedestrian injuries per year. Source: NHTSA
4 

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

(NHTSA) reported that 76 percent of pedestrian 

fatalities in 2019 occurred in dark conditions

(including “Dark – Not Lighted,” “Dark – Lighted,” and 

“Dark – Unknown Lighting”) as shown in figure 3

(NHTSA, 2021). This percentage increased from 69 

percent of pedestrian fatalities occurring in dark 

conditions in 2009. Figure 4 shows that minority 

communities experience a disproportionate 

burden of pedestrian fatalities in dark conditions. 

These statistics are compelling but become even 

more so when considering that only about 25 

percent of all traffic volume occurs after dark

(Griffith, 1994; CIE, 2010). This means that the 

majority of pedestrian traffic fatalities occur 

during the time of day when fewer vehicles are on 

the road. Figure 5 shows that the frequency of 

pedestrian fatalities during dark conditions has 

experienced an increasing trend over the past 10 

years. 

Figure 4. Graphic. Percentage of pedestrian fatalities in dark conditions (i.e., “Dark – Not Lighted,” “Dark – Lighted,” or “Dark – Unknown 

Lighting”) by race (2008–2018). Source: NHTSA.

Figure 3. Graphic. Infographic for nighttime pedestrian fatalities. 

Source: FHWA. 
5 

Figure 5. Graphic. Dark condition (i.e., “Dark – Not Lighted,” “Dark – Lighted,” or “Dark – Unknown Lighting”) 

pedestrian fatalities per year and dark condition pedestrian fatalities per year as a percent of total pedestrian fatalities. Source: NHTSA.

Pedestrians are the most vulnerable road user 

population at night and are between three and 

almost seven times more vulnerable in the dark 

than during daylight hours (Sullivan & Flannigan, 

1999). Given these statistics, pedestrians have the 

potential to gain significant safety performance 

benefits from new or improved lighting.

In addition to increasing traffic crash risk, dark 

conditions can also have negative effects on 

pedestrian security. People may avoid walking at 

night as a precaution against potential crime 

(Painter, 1996). Darkness is one of the primary 

factors that influences potential personal risk and 

heightened fear, as darkness reduces visibility and 

recognition and creates additional blind spots. 

Women, in particular, report experiencing fear, real 

or perceived, at night that significantly constrains 

their travel behavior. Studies have documented that 

women suffer disproportionately high rates of 

victimization, especially from gender violence and 

theft, at night (Smith, 2008). Good lighting plays a 

role in reducing women’s fear of walking or 

accessing transit at night (Loukaitou-Sideris, 2010). 

Lighting for pedestrian security is particularly 

important at locations where the walking space is 

restricted, ambient light may be blocked, and 

pedestrian traffic is more separated from the 

surrounding context. New or improved lighting can 

increase security and encourage pedestrian activity 

at night, specifically at and near transit stops. This 

can improve the safety and security of transit riders 

while boarding, alighting from, or waiting for transit. 

The American Public Transportation Association 

(APTA) developed the document Security Lighting for 

Transit Passenger Facilities as a resource for these 

situations (APTA, 2009). 
6 

The Crash Modification Factors (CMF) 

Clearinghouse contains several CMFs 

that quantify reductions in the number 

of vehicle/pedestrian crashes due to 

the addition of lighting: CMF IDs 435, 

436, 440, 441, and 2379.

1.3. Benefits of Lighting for 

Pedestrian Safety and Security 

Several studies of the effects of lighting on road 

safety concluded that proper lighting has the 

potential to reduce the number of nighttime 

pedestrian fatalities and injuries (Elvik & Vaa, 2004; 

Ye et al., 2008). These studies have resulted in CMFs 

that quantify reductions in the number of 

vehicle/pedestrian crashes due to lighting ranging 

from 0.58 (42 percent reduction) to 0.19 (81 percent 

reduction), depending on the crash severity of 

interest. These include CMF IDs 435, 436, 440, 441, 

and 2379 in the CMF Clearinghouse. 

Zhou & Hsu (2012) collected illuminance data over 

3 years along a 32-mile U.S. 19 corridor in Florida. 

The corridor had the highest pedestrian crash 

frequency in the county. More than 82 percent of 

the pedestrian crashes along the corridor occurred 

on segments with some type of lighting already 

present. The researchers paired the illuminance 

data with nighttime pedestrian crash data and 

found that road segments with lower levels of 

lighting were associated with a higher frequency of 

nighttime pedestrian crashes than segments with 

higher light levels. Nearly half of all the crashes 

occurred on segments where the illuminance was 

less than 10 lumens per square meter (lux). This 

study’s findings highlighted that pedestrian safety 

depends not only on lighting presence, but also on 

the quality of lighting that is provided. 

One pedestrian population that may 

especially benefit from improved lighting is 

school-age children. These children may travel 

to or from school, often by walking or biking, 

during the early morning or evening hours. Even 

if school hours are limited to the daytime, there 

are often before or after school activities that may 

cause students to travel earlier or later. 

Depending on the time of year, these trips could 

occur during twilight or total darkness. 

Furthermore, children are particularly vulnerable 

to vehicular traffic. They are often smaller in 

stature, and thus more difficult for motorists to 

see. Children are also not as experienced at 

judging the direction of sounds, estimating the 

speed and distance of oncoming vehicles, or 

anticipating other road users’ behavior. Jonah & 

Engel (1983) found that the likelihood of child 

pedestrians being injured more than doubles 

during dark conditions. The Safe Routes to School 

(SRTS) Online Guide identifies pedestrian-scale 

street lighting as an important measure for 

improving safety and security for children walking 

to school (Safe Routes to School, 2015). This is 

especially true at intersections and other 

crossings.
7 

In addition to improving pedestrian safety, lighting 

can also improve the personal security of 

pedestrians. Several studies show that new or 

improved lighting increases pedestrians’ perception 

of security. Peña-García, Hurtado, & Aguilar-Luzón 

(2015) surveyed 275 pedestrians in Granada, Spain 

and found that higher illuminance levels tend to 

increase perceptions of security. Several other 

studies have shown lighting to have a substantial 

effect on perception of security (Loewen, Steel, & 

Suedfeld, 1993; Nasar, Fisher, & Grannis, 1993; Nasar 

& Jones, 1997). In addition to the presence of 

lighting, the type, quality, and distribution of lighting 

also affect perceived security (Boyce et al., 2000; 

Haans & de Kort, 2012; Markvica, Richter, & Lenz, 

2019; Portnov et al., 2020). Painter (1996) studied 

both the occurrence of crime and pedestrian fear of 

crime on three streets in the United Kingdom that 

were identified as being “poorly lit, fear inducing, 

and potentially hazardous.” After lighting 

improvements were implemented, incidents of crime 

and disorder decreased significantly at two of the 

three sites (the third had low occurrence of crime in 

both the before and after cases). The results also 

suggested that the improved lighting had a positive 

affect outside the immediate study area, reducing 

crime on several adjacent unlit streets. It also led to 

a marked increase in perception of personal security, 

with over 90 percent of respondents reporting their 

fear of crime had decreased, and significant 

increases in pedestrian activity. Chalfin et al. 

conducted a randomized experiment to study the 

effectiveness of street lighting in reducing crime. The 

study took place in New York City using temporary 

lighting installations and found that the addition of 

street lighting reduced outdoor nighttime crime by 

36 percent (Chalfin et al., 2019) Painter & Farrington 

(1997) performed a survey-based experiment in the 

United Kingdom that showed crime prevalence 

decreased by 23 percent after improved lighting was 

installed, compared to a decrease of 3 percent at the 

control location. Crime incidence (average number 

of victimizations per household) decreased by 41 

percent, compared to no change at the control 

location.

1.4. Existing Guidance 

and Gaps 

There are several documents that provide general 

information on lighting warrants and design criteria. 

These include: 

• American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Roadway 

Lighting Design Guide, 7th Edition (AASHTO, 

2018).

• Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) 

Guide for the Design of Roadway Lighting (TAC, 

2006).

• National Cooperative Highway Research 

Program (NCHRP) Report 152 Warrants for 

Highway Lighting (also known as the FHWA 

Method) (Walton & Rowan, 1974).

• Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) RP-8-18 

Recommended Practice for Design and 

Maintenance of Roadway and Parking Facility 

Lighting (IES, 2018).

• FHWA Informational Report on Lighting Design 

for Midblock Crosswalks (Gibbons et al., 2008).

Subsequent sections of this primer will cover 

selected content from these non-binding reference 

documents in more detail, focusing on the material 

within each of them that applies to lighting for 

pedestrian safety. In general, a majority of existing 

lighting references emphasize motorist needs. 
8 

A companion FHWA research report to this primer, 

Street Lighting for Pedestrian Safety, identified 

several gaps in existing lighting resources (Terry et 

al., 2020). These include: 

• Understanding the visibility of children by 

motorists in low-light conditions. 

• Understanding differences in light level 

requirements that may exist between adult and 

child pedestrians to maintain visual performance. 

• Identifying recommended light levels resulting in 

optimal visibility for both pedestrians and drivers 

based on: 

o Empirical research to support the 

specification of light levels for both 

pedestrians and drivers. 

o Research and information on 

recommended lighting for sidewalks, 

roadway segments without crosswalks, 

and separated pedestrian facilities (to 

supplement current recommendations 

for crosswalk lighting). 

• Establishing a universal metric for designing 

pedestrian lighting (e.g., vertical illuminance, 

semi-cylindrical illuminance, etc.). 

• Understanding the effects of different lighting 

sources and luminaire types on pedestrian 

visibility. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

9 

2. Lighting Design Process 

Lighting system design should consider a variety of factors, including safety and comfort for all road 

users, impacts to the environment, and energy consumption. Lighting design generally involves the 

steps in figure 6, each of which are discussed in this section of the primer. 

Figure 6. Graphic. The major steps in lighting design. Source: FHWA.

The flowchart in figure 7 illustrates how the general 

lighting design process flows through each of these 

steps and depicts how background information, 

policies, and design reference materials inform the 

process, beginning with lighting analysis and 

ultimately resulting in a completed design. The final, 

iterative steps of the process include selecting pole 

locations, with initial arrangements often being 

revised multiple times to meet primary and 

secondary design criteria. These steps as shown in 

figure 7 are recommended by IES and AASHTO but 

are not required under FHWA regulations. The 

flowchart is included to illustrate a typical lighting 

design process. 

For each step of the lighting design process, the 

following sections provide: 1) an overview of 

selected terminology and general lighting design 

considerations with references to other documents 

for additional information and 2) specific lighting 

design considerations for pedestrians. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

10

Figure 7. Graphic. Typical lighting design process flowchart (not required under FHWA regulations). Source: FHWA.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

11

2.1. Assessment of Potential 

Lighting Needs 

2.1.1. General Principles of Lighting Needs 

Assessment 

A lighting warrant is a condition or set of conditions 

that are evaluated for a study area to inform the 

installation of lighting. Lighting warrants commonly 

include assessments of the amount of traffic 

(motorized and nonmotorized), roadway geometry, 

the surrounding environment, and crash statistics. 

Lighting practitioners in the United States generally 

reference three sources of lighting warrant 

procedures, though FHWA regulations do not 

require the use of these sources or the procedures 

they contain:

• AASHTO Roadway Lighting Design Guide, 7th

Edition (AASHTO, 2018). 

• TAC Guide for the Design of Roadway Lighting

(TAC, 2006). 

• NCHRP Report 152 Warrants for Highway 

Lighting (Walton & Rowan, 1974). 

Each resource provides a framework for evaluating 

different warrant criteria and considering the 

benefits and cost effectiveness of installing lighting. 

The resources focus primarily on the installation of 

lighting to improve the general visibility and 

conditions for motorists. Resources for warranting 

lighting installations for pedestrians are more 

limited. 

2.1.2. Pedestrian Considerations for Lighting 

Needs Assessment 

The practice of evaluating the need for pedestrian 

lighting varies widely among different regions, State 

Departments of Transportation (DOTs), and local 

agencies, and decisions are often made on a caseby-case basis. The information provided in this 

primer represents a sample of factors that can be 

part of a needs assessment for pedestrian lighting. It 

is based on a recent literature review and targeted 

scan tour conducted by the FHWA Safe 

Transportation for Every Pedestrian (STEP) program. 

As part of its STEP program, FHWA collaborated with 

State and local stakeholders to increase 

implementation of countermeasures that reduce 

pedestrian fatalities, particularly at uncontrolled 

crossing locations. In February 2021, participants 

from the FHWA STEP team and six State DOTs 

gathered virtually for an FHWA STEP Pedestrian 

Lighting Scan Tour to discuss approaches to site 

selection and prioritization for potential lighting 

improvements. 

A key outcome of this scan tour involved FHWA 

documenting noteworthy State agency practices 

related to lighting for pedestrian safety. The factors 

most often used by the State DOTs in attendance to 

determine warranting conditions for pedestrian 

lighting include pedestrian crash history, especially 

during hours of darkness, pedestrian volumes, and 

the perceived level of risk and vulnerability of 

pedestrians (see table 1). 

FHWA grouped the factors based on their

prevalence in the reviewed literature and sampled 

agency policies and practices. While the factor 

groupings in table 1 are in part listed based on 

input from the participating States for the Scan 

Tour and are not always research based, lighting 

designers can consider how to incorporate these 

factors into their own local and regional noteworthy 

practices and to inform their decision-making 

process.

State and local agencies responsible for lighting 

decisions, or other governing bodies (e.g., city 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process

12

councils) may grant exemptions from providing 

pedestrian lighting when warranting criteria are met 

due to historical or environmental reasons. In 

locations without pedestrian lighting, other 

measures to enhance user visibility of roadway 

edges, pedestrian crossings, and the roadside can 

guide drivers and pedestrians navigating darker 

sections of roadway and increase driver awareness 

of pedestrian presence. Examples include high 

visibility markings, parking restrictions, and signing 

(FHWA, 2017; FHWA, 2018). 

Additionally, agencies can equitably engage with 

underserved communities to determine where 

and how new and improved lighting can most 

benefit the community by considering their 

priorities, including eliminating crash disparities, 

connecting to essential neighborhood services, 

improving active transportation routes, and 

promoting personal safety. In 2019, Portland 

Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) conducted a 

citywide “Walking Priorities Survey” to understand 

the barriers Portlanders face while walking. When 

evaluating the demographics of survey respondents, 

it became clear that Black Portlanders were 

underrepresented. So, PBOT created a “Walking 

While Black” focus group to better understand if 

Black Portlanders experience unique barriers or 

identify unique priorities to improve walking (PBOT, 

2019). As shown in figure 8, the focus group revealed 

that Black Portlanders identified poor street lighting 

as the biggest barrier to walking, compared to the 

citywide population which rated it much lower. As 

a result, Portland introduced new lighting-level 

guidelines to increase lighting on public streets. 

Figure 8. Focus group results for places that are most important to improve for walking in Portland. Source: PBOT. 

WHAT MAKES WALKING DIFFICULT IN PORTLAND?

BLACK 

PARTICIPANTS

CITYWIDE

PARTICIPANTS

SURVEY SCALE FROM 

1 (NOT IMPORTANT) TO 

6 (REALLY IMPORTANT)

Sidewalks/walking paths missing on BUSY streets

People driving too fast on BUSY streets

Not enough safe places to cross BUSY streets

People driving too fast on RESIDENTIAL streets

Sidewalks/paths missing on RESIDENTIAL streets

Drivers not stopping for pedestrians crossing the street

Buckled/cracked sidewalks, or other tripping hazards

Missing curb ramps at Intersections

Not enough time to cross the streets

5.00

4.94

4.82

4.78

4.74

4.71

4.47

4.47

4.00

3.91

3.62

4.66

4.29

4.46

4.44

4.29

4.29

3.46

3.22

3.08

Poor Lighting
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

13

Table 1. Factors identified by a STEP Pedestrian Lighting Scan Tour for assessing pedestrian lighting needs. Source: FHWA.

Note: * Night-to-day crash ratio = number of crashes at night / number of crashes during day. 

- = not applicable. 

Group 1 

Most common Factors

Group 2 

Less Common Factors

Group 3 

Other Factors 

Average daily traffic (ADT) 

volumes Available sight distance Ambient lighting levels 

Functional classification Benefit-cost analysis Frequency of inclement weather 

Nearby development, land use, 

or density 

Channelization devices (curb, 

guardrail, etc.) Presence of parking 

Night-to-day crash ratio* Intersection layout complexity 

Retroreflective pavement 

markings (reduced need for 

lighting) 

Night or pedestrian crash 

history Presence of multiple turn lanes 

Anticipated crossing locations 

for children (e.g., schools , 

parks, recreation centers) 

Ped/bike presence and crossing 

maneuvers (any – with or 

without marked crossings) 

Speed limit (often 35+ or 45+ 

mph)

Speeding history (10+ mph over 

posted) 

Ped/bike volume during hours 

of darkness (often 100+/hr) 

Vertical and horizontal 

curvature 

Turning movement volumes 

- - Wide or depressed medians 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

14

2.2. Selection of Design 

Criteria 

Once a need for lighting in the study area is 

established, design criteria are then identified. The 

selected criteria for general roadway lighting 

applications typically make up two categories: 

primary criteria and secondary criteria. 

• Primary criteria are the desired lighting levels in 

the project area that the lighting system is 

designed to provide. Lighting levels are often 

defined using measures of luminance or 

illuminance. 

• Secondary criteria guide the characteristics of a 

lighting system, including aesthetics, comfort of 

the light source, and the ability to limit excess 

light output. 

In addition to these factors, there are additional 

design criteria to consider for pedestrian lighting 

applications, discussed in section 2.2.3. 

2.2.1. Primary Design Criteria 

Design criteria and recommended practices are 

guided by basic measures of lighting levels such as 

average and average-to-minimum ratios. IES RP-8-

18, a recommended practice for the design and 

maintenance of roadway lighting, identifies criteria 

for average luminance and uniformity ratios for 

various road classifications (IES, 2018). The AASHTO 

Roadway Lighting Design Guide provides 

recommended lighting levels using illuminance 

criteria rather than luminance (AASHTO, 2018). 

FHWA regulations do not require the use of these 

sources or the procedures they contain. The next two 

sections provide additional background on 

illuminance and luminance. 

Illuminance 

Illuminance is a measure of how much light is falling 

on a surface per unit area. Illuminance is measured 

in International System (SI) units of lux (lx) or non-SI 

units of foot-candles (fc) common to the US, where 

one foot-candle is equal to 10.764 lux. There are 

three methods of measuring illuminance when 

considering lighting designs: horizontal, vertical, and 

semi-cylindrical. 

Horizontal illuminance is measured on a road surface 

in a horizontal orientation (see figure 9), defining the 

amount of light falling on a horizontal plane. 

Increasing horizontal illuminance at night with 

lighting improves the accuracy and speed at which 

information can be ascertained by the user from the 

roadway environment (Boyce, 1973; Eloholma et al., 

2006; Rea, 2000; Terry et al., 2016). Previous studies 

have indicated that nighttime crashes at 

intersections can be mitigated by an increase in the 

horizontal illuminance level (Bhagavathula et al., 

2015; Minoshima et al., 2006; Oya, Ando, & 

Kanoshima, 2002). 

Vertical illuminance defines the amount of lighting 

falling on a vertical plane (see figure 9). For lighting 

design, measurements of vertical illuminance are 

typically recorded at the eye level of observers 

oriented to their path of travel—whether drivers or 

pedestrians. Vertical illuminance helps road users 

see objects, but also influences the amount of glare 

experienced by those users. The vertical-tohorizontal illuminance ratio is a measure of potential 

glare, with higher ratios representing more glare. 

Generally, a vertical illuminance measurement height 

of 1.5 m from the ground represents the eye height 

of a standing pedestrian. 

Semi-cylindrical illuminance is a measure that 

considers the light falling on a semi-cylinder rather 

than on a flat surface by measuring the light falling 

on a surface from a wider angle than a vertical 

illuminance measurement (see figure 9). This metric 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

15

may more accurately represent the ability of a driver 

to see a pedestrian in some scenarios since it helps 

account for the three-dimensional nature of 

pedestrians. It may also be an effective metric for 

pedestrian lighting requirements when considering 

pedestrian-to-pedestrian interactions on a 

pedestrian facility given that facial recognition can 

be important for a pedestrian’s perception of safety.

Luminance 

Luminance is the amount of light emitted from a 

surface in a specific direction per unit area of the 

surface. Luminance is measured in either SI units of 

candela per square meter (cd/m2) or non-SI units of 

footlambert (fL), where one fL is equal to 3.426 

cd/m2. In terms of visual perception, an observer 

perceives luminance. It is an approximate description 

of how “bright” an object appears when viewed from 

a given direction. Research has shown that 

increasing the luminance of the roadway surface 

makes objects on the roadway easier to detect 

(Economopoulos, 1978). At night, drivers can detect 

objects sooner as the average luminance of the 

roadway increases (Cuvalci & Ertas, 2000; Gibbons et 

al., 2015; He et al., 1997; Lewis, 1999). A luminance 

measure describes perceived brightness of an object 

when viewed from a given direction. 

Figure 9. Graphic. Methods of calculating illuminance. Source: FHWA.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

16

2.2.2. Secondary Design Criteria 

Secondary design criteria are selected to guide 

characteristics, selection, and placement of the light 

sources. Local agencies or municipalities often 

provide policies or master plans that influence the 

selection of secondary design criteria using the 

following metrics. 

Correlated color temperature (CCT) of the light 

source - A measure of the apparent color output of 

a light source, measured in degrees Kelvin (K) (IES, 

2018). Luminaires manufactured for use in roadway 

and pedestrian applications are tested for color 

temperature. CCT represents the relative warmth of 

the emitted light. Lower values (e.g., 2700K) indicate 

a warm, yellow tone of light; higher values (e.g., 

5000K or more) indicate a cool, blue tone of light; a 

neutral white is around 4000K. 

Surround ratio – A ratio of the illuminance spilling 

over the edge of a path or roadway relative to the 

illuminance on the path or roadway (CIE, 2000). A 

surround ratio is calculated by comparing the 

average illuminance in the area adjacent to a 

roadway equal in width to one travel lane, to the 

average illuminance in the roadway. Recent research 

has shown that a surround ratio of at least 80 percent 

provides significant benefits for the detection of 

objects and pedestrians both in and beside the 

roadway. 

Glare – Difficulty or discomfort associated with a 

light source in direct view of the observer (IES, 2018). 

Veiling luminance is a common measure of glare 

used to guide the lighting design process. There are 

two types of glare that may occur due to the 

presence of a light source. 

• Disability glare is intensity from a light source 

that limits a road user’s ability to see.

• Discomfort glare occurs when light from a light 

source causes discomfort to a road user. 

It is important for both types of glare to be 

minimized. IES RP-8-18 provides recommended 

maximum allowable levels for glare (IES, 2018). Glare 

can become more of a potential issue for pedestrian 

scale lighting (6.5m in height or lower). Figure 10

shows an example of glare from a light source. 

Section 2.2.3 of this primer recommends an 

approach to mitigating glare from lower mounting 

heights by increasing the vertical illuminance and 

luminance. 

Figure 10. Photograph. Example of glare from a light source. 

Source: FHWA. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

17

Light trespass – Excess light that falls on areas or 

surfaces that are not intended to be illuminated, 

such as private properties, residential areas, or the 

night sky (IES, 2018). A common method of 

quantifying light trespass is by calculating the 

vertical illuminance on a vertical plane at the public 

ROW. Light trespass is minimized with careful 

selection, placement, and orientation of luminaires 

so that light is directed toward the area intended to 

be illuminated. Alternatively, shielding of a light 

source may be an effective means of blocking 

unwanted light output from a luminaire. Figure 11

presents an illustration of light trespass from a 

luminaire. 

Recommended limitations on light trespass often 

become more stringent in areas of environmental 

sensitivity. IES RP-8-18 provides recommended 

maximum allowable levels for light trespass based 

on environmental zone ratings (IES, 2018). 

Environmental zones are determined by surrounding 

land use and development. 

Figure 11. Graphic. Light trespass, glare, and sky glow. Source: FHWA.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

18

2.2.3. Pedestrian Considerations for Design 

Criteria 

This section of the primer outlines the general steps 

for determining lighting design criteria for 

pedestrian facilities. The steps bring together 

information from two FHWA research and 

informational reports on pedestrian lighting, Street 

Lighting for Pedestrian Safety and FHWA’s 

Informational Report on Lighting Design for Midblock 

Crosswalks, as well as other commonly referenced 

lighting resources, such as IES RP-8-18 (Terry et al., 

2020; Gibbons et al., 2008; IES, 2018). 

Determine the type of pedestrian facility and 

level of pedestrian activity 

This primer generally classifies pedestrian facilities 

into one of three categories based on the research 

from which the primer is based. The bullet list below 

describes these categories and the respective basis 

for lighting design criteria in this primer within those 

categories. 

• Pedestrian Facility Type – Marked Crosswalks 

(midblock and intersections). Marked 

crosswalks indicate locations for pedestrians to 

cross a roadway and signify to motorists to yield 

to them (FHWA, 2013a). Design criteria for 

lighting of a crosswalk is provided in FHWA’s 

Informational Report on Lighting Design for 

Midblock Crosswalks (Gibbons et al., 2008). While 

the underlying research was focused on 

midblock crosswalks, the conclusion of the 

informational report translates the findings to 

potential criteria for crosswalks at intersections. 

• Pedestrian facilities adjacent to the roadway.

A category of pedestrian facilities adjacent to 

(but not crossing) a roadway captures sidewalks 

and walkways (i.e., “pedestrian lanes”) that 

provide people with space to travel within the 

public ROW that is separated from roadway 

vehicles. These facilities also serve as places for 

children to walk, run, skate, ride bikes, and play 

(FHWA, 2013b). Design criteria for lighting of 

these facilities is provided in the FHWA research 

report Street Lighting for Pedestrian Safety and 

are a function of pedestrian activity levels as 

defined in IES RP-8-18 (Terry et al., 2020; IES, 

2018). The research documented in the FHWA 

report Street Lighting for Pedestrian Safety

focused on the abilities of drivers to detect 

children on pedestrian facilities positioned 

approximately 5 to 7 ft (1.5 to 2 m) to the right 

of the driving lane. This distance coincides with 

the positioning of a sidewalk. The behaviors and 

decision making of children are not always 

predictable and the safety of a child in proximity 

to a roadway increases when the driver is aware 

of the child. This highlights the need to provide 

adequate pedestrian lighting at this distance 

from the roadway. The research in the FHWA 

report Street Lighting for Pedestrian Safety also 

studied the ability of pedestrians to identify 

potential trip-and-fall hazards in their path on 

these adjacent facilities. 

• Separated pedestrian pathway. Lighting for 

pedestrian areas that do not cross and are not 

adjacent to or within a roadway is designed to 

meet a different set of objectives and criteria, as 

no vehicle-to-pedestrian interaction is 

anticipated. Recommended design criteria for 

these facilities are not the focus of this primer 

and are anticipated in other, upcoming 

informational resources. 

Pedestrian lighting design criteria in the previously 

cited resource documents sometimes vary as a 

function of a general categorization of pedestrian 

activity. The following definitions are adapted from 

IES RP-8-18 and are referenced throughout this 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

19

document, though they are not legally binding 

under FHWA regulations: 

• Low (10 or fewer pedestrians per hour) – Areas 

with very low volumes of pedestrians during 

hours of darkness. Examples may include 

suburban streets with single family dwellings, 

very low-density residential developments, and 

rural or semi-rural areas. 

• Medium (11-100 pedestrians per hour) –

Areas where lesser numbers of pedestrians are 

expected during hours of darkness. Examples 

may include downtown office areas, libraries, 

apartments, neighborhood shopping, industrial, 

parks, and streets with nearby transit lines. 

• High (over 100 pedestrians per hour) – Areas 

with significant numbers of pedestrians expected 

during hours of darkness. Examples may include 

downtown retail areas, theaters, concert halls, 

stadiums, and transit terminals. 

Determine illuminance criteria 

Illuminance criteria provided in different resource 

documents vary by the type of pedestrian facility and 

by the level of pedestrian activity. 

Marked Crosswalks: Midblock - For crosswalk 

locations, FHWA’s Informational Report on Lighting 

Design for Midblock Crosswalks found that an 

average vertical illuminance of 20 lux in the 

crosswalk, measured at a height of 1.5 m (5 ft) from 

the road surface, provided adequate detection 

distances in most circumstances (Gibbons et al., 

2008). 

Intersections - The FHWA’s Informational Report on 

Lighting Design for Midblock Crosswalks stated that 

while no specific research has been performed that 

addresses the higher background luminance 

typically found at intersections and the greater 

cognitive demands on drivers as they approach an 

intersection, the informational report considered a 

level of 30 vertical lux a conservative estimate of the 

lighting level required for adequate visibility 

(Gibbons, et al., 2008). 

Adjacent pedestrian facilities - For pedestrian 

facilities adjacent to (but not crossing) a roadway 

(e.g., sidewalks and walkways), the FHWA research 

report Street Lighting for Pedestrian Safety suggests 

the use of illuminance criteria measured in semicylindrical (SC) lux where pedestrian activity is high 

(more than 100 pph) (Terry et al., 2020). The report 

recommends 10 SC lux at these locations, and notes 

that additional light beyond this level does not 

increase visibility. The same report recommends 2 

vertical lux for these facilities where pedestrian 

activity is low (0 to 10 pph) to medium (11 to 100 

pph). 

Determine pavement luminance based on area 

type and pedestrian volume 

IES RP-8-18 provides criteria for roadway luminance 

based on both the classification of the roadway and 

the identified level of pedestrian activity (IES, 2018). 

Table 2 provides a summary of the IES RP-8-18

criteria. The criteria are not required under FHWA 

regulations.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

20

Table 2. Recommended roadway luminance criteria by street classification and pedestrian activity (from IES RP-8-18, not required under 

FHWA regulations).

Lavg: Maintained average pavement luminance 

Lmin: Minimum pavement luminance 

Lv,max: Maximum veiling luminance 

Street 

Classification 

Pedestrian 

Activity 

Classification 

Average 

Luminance 

Lavg (cd/m2) 

Average 

Uniformity 

Ratio 

Lavg/Lmin

Maximum 

Uniformity 

Ratio 

Lmax/Lmin

Maximum 

Veiling 

Luminance 

Ratio 

Lv,max/Lavg

Major 

High 1.2 3.0 5.0 0.3

Medium 0.9 3.0 5.0 0.3

Low 0.6 3.5 6.0 0.3

Collector 

High 0.8 3.0 5.0 0.4

Medium 0.6 3.5 6.0 0.4

Low 0.4 4.0 8.0 0.4

Local 

High 0.6 6.0 10.0 0.4

Medium 0.5 6.0 10.0 0.4

Low 0.3 6.0 10.0 0.4
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

21

The research documented in the FHWA research 

report Street Lighting for Pedestrian Safety suggests 

maintaining a minimum average luminance on 

adjacent pedestrian facilities for visibility of 

pedestrians to drivers and for pedestrians’ visibility 

of their walking path (Terry et al., 2020). The 

minimum average luminance level depends on the 

area type classification within the previously 

determined level of pedestrian activity. The following 

bullet list highlights these suggested luminance 

criteria: 

• For high pedestrian volume facilities and school 

zones: 

o Urban environments – 2 cd/m2 average 

o Rural environments – 1 cd/ m2 average 

• For low to medium pedestrian volume facilities: 

o Urban environments – 1 cd/m2 average 

o Rural environments – use typical road 

luminance recommended in RP-8-18, 

shown in table 2. 

Lighting designers can also use typical road 

luminance values recommended in IES RP-8-18

along crosswalks (IES, 2018). 

The average luminance provided by a design along 

an adjacent pedestrian facility is determined along a 

grid of calculation and measurement points aligned 

along the pedestrian path. This line of calculation 

points along the path should be spaced at no more 

than 2 m (6.6 ft). 

Select Light Source CCT: Special Considerations 

CCT is a measure of the apparent color output of a 

light source, measured in degrees Kelvin (K). CCT 

considerations can be applied to any type of light 

source, but typically becomes important with LED 

light sources, as the technology of LED lighting 

allows for a wide range of available CCT options, 

whereas other types of light sources do not allow the 

same flexibility. 

In the FHWA research report Street Lighting for 

Pedestrian Safety, researchers evaluated CCT 

selection on the visual performance of drivers in 

detecting pedestrians. The researchers compared 

pedestrian detection distances under three LED light 

sources ranging from 2200 to 5000 K. Results 

determined the detection distances under the 2200 

K LEDs were significantly shorter than the 4000 K and 

5000 K LEDs under the same luminance levels as 

shown in figure 12 (Terry et al., 2020).
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

22

Figure 12. Graphic. Detection distance for rural highway by light type and luminance. Source: FHWA.

Since the development and popularization of LED 

roadway lighting, research has suggested that the 

light spectrum used in LED roadway lighting, 

particularly of higher Kelvin ratings, can disrupt 

melatonin production, resulting in poorer sleep 

quality and the overall health of those near the 

roadway. When selecting the spectral content of a 

light source, a range of 3000 K to 4000 K obtains a 

balance between the potential negative impacts on 

health and the potential benefits to road user 

visibility. Achieving such a balance remains an active 

topic of discussion in public health and lighting 

professions. The American Medical Association 

Council on Science and Public Health, for example, 

encourages the use of 3000K or lower to minimize 

potential negative health and environmental effects 

(AMA, 2016). State and local agencies, or other 

governing bodies responsible for lighting decisions, 

may decide to consider lower CCT values in 

environmentally sensitive areas or areas where the 

lighting system is near a residential area. Clear 

communication and documentation of such 

considerations will provide a record of stakeholder 

discussions and trade-off analysis that led to an 

informed decision. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

23

Summary of Lighting Design Criteria for 

Pedestrian Facilities 

The information in table 3 presents design criteria for 

pedestrian facilities based on the steps in the 

previous sections of this document. Values 

presented are for areas where the pedestrian 

lighting is provided by a roadway scale luminaire 

(6.5m or 20 ft or higher). For pedestrian scale lighting 

(6.5m in height or lower) an additional 2 vertical lux 

and 0.5 cd/m2 are added to the criteria to overcome 

additional glare resulting from the use of a lower 

mounting height. Figure 13 presents a flowchart of 

this design criteria selection process, depicting the 

roadway factors and road user characteristics that 

influence the design. These steps as shown in figure 

13 are recommended by IES and AASHTO but are 

not required under FHWA regulations. The flowchart 

is included to illustrate a typical criteria selection 

process. 

Table 3. Recommended design criteria for pedestrian facilities (not required under FHWA regulations)1. 

Pedestrian facility characteristics 

Light Source Characteristics 

Average 

Illuminance 

Average Luminance 

CCT (LED only) 

Rural Urban 

Intersection crosswalk 30 lux vertical * * 3000 K to 4000 K 

Midblock crosswalk 20 lux vertical * * 3000 K to 4000 K 

Facility adjacent 

to roadway 

Low2 to Medium3

Pedestrian Activity 

2 lux 

vertical * 1 cd/m2

3000 K to 4000 K 

High4 Pedestrian Activity 

and/or School Zones 

10 lux 

SC 1 cd/m2

2 cd/m23000 K to 4000 K 

*Use minimum maintained average pavement luminance criteria from RP-8-18.

1 Values are for roadway scale luminaire heights (6.5m or 20 ft or higher). For pedestrian scale lighting (6.5m in 

height or lower), add 2 vertical lux and 0.5 cd/m2 to the criteria to overcome increased glare resulting from the use 

of a lower mounting height. 

2 Low Pedestrian Activity (10 or fewer pedestrians per hour) – Areas with very low volumes of pedestrians during 

hours of darkness. Examples may include suburban streets with single family dwellings, very low-density residential 

developments, and rural or semi-rural areas. 

3 Medium Pedestrian Activity (11-100 pedestrians per hour) – Areas where lesser numbers of pedestrians are 

expected during hours of darkness. Examples may include downtown office areas, libraries, apartments, 

neighborhood shopping, industrial, parks, and streets with nearby transit lines. 

4 High Pedestrian Activity (over 100 pedestrians per hour) – Areas with significant numbers of pedestrians expected 

during hours of darkness. Examples may include downtown retail areas, theaters, concert halls, stadiums, and transit 

terminals. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

24

Figure 13. Graphic. Recommended pedestrian lighting criteria selection flowchart (not required under FHWA regulations). Source: FHWA.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

25

2.3. Equipment Selection 

2.3.1. General Principles of Equipment 

Selection 

After the design criteria for a project location have 

been selected, lighting equipment is selected for the 

design. Luminaires are often selected based on an 

inventory of existing lighting installations or 

preferences and policies of the local agency. When 

feasible, equipment is selected to minimize the total 

light output while meeting the goals of the project 

and the design criteria. Some of the elements that 

are considered when selecting lighting equipment 

and luminaires include: 

Luminaire mounting height – The distance from 

ground level to the light source. 

Luminaire wattage – The power used by a luminaire 

to produce light. Luminaires with higher wattage 

levels typically produce more light. 

IES light distribution – A classification system that 

describes the lateral and longitudinal pattern of light 

that is produced by a luminaire. Distribution types 

range from Type I (very linear output) to Type V 

(circular output). Definitions and classification of 

light distribution types is included in IES RP-8-18

(IES, 2018), though the definitions and classification 

are not required under FHWA regulations. General 

representations of IES distribution types are 

presented in figure 14. 

BUG Rating – A rating system that indicates the 

amount of backlight (B), uplight (U), and glare (G) 

that is produced by a luminaire, with each value 

rated on a scale from 0 to 5. Higher BUG ratings may 

indicate that light is being directed away from the 

target facility or into the night sky. BUG ratings are 

described in ANSI/IES TM-15-20, Luminaire 

Classification System for Outdoor Luminaires 

(ANSI/IES, 2020). FHWA regulations do not include 

requirements based on BUG ratings. 

Correlated color temperature (CCT) (refer to 

Section 2.2.) 

Aesthetics – Luminaires are often selected for 

decorative design characteristics. 

Many properties of the selected equipment are 

interrelated. For example, a particular mounting 

height will influence the selection of luminaire 

wattage to appropriately meet design criteria.

Designers consider these properties and how they 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

26

affect one another when selecting or recommending 

lighting equipment for a given project. 

Figure 14. Graphic. General representation of IES distribution types. Modified from IES RP-8-18. Source: FHWA.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process

27

2.3.2. Pedestrian Considerations for Equipment 

Selection

One of the primary factors in selecting equipment is 

the mounting height of the luminaire, which is 

typically measured from the pavement surface to the 

light source. Luminaire mounting height plays a 

significant role in designing for pedestrian lighting 

facilities, and sometimes, the selected mounting 

height is lower than in lighting systems installed 

exclusively for roadway lighting. 

In the FHWA research report Street Lighting for 

Pedestrian Safety, an experiment compared the 

detection distances for drivers of motor vehicles 

when viewing pedestrians when under pedestrian 

scale lighting (mounting height less than 6.5 m or 20 

ft) and road scale lighting (mounting height greater 

than 6.5 m or 20 ft). Results of the experiment 

indicate an increase in detection distance when 

pedestrian scale lighting was present. Detection 

distances also increased with higher levels of 

pavement luminance (Terry et al., 2020). Figure 15

shows the two-way interaction between light type 

and luminance for pedestrian scale lighting. The 

figure is based on the FHWA research report Street 

Lighting for Pedestrian Safety (Terry et al., 2020).

Based on the findings of this research, mounting 

heights of less than 6.5 m or 20 ft provide improved 

visual performance in areas where pedestrians are 

present. There is an expected trend downward from 

higher luminance levels (2 cd/m2) to medium (1 

cd/m2) to low (0.5 cd/m2). For road scale, the higher 

luminance produced longer detection distances as 

expected, but low and medium averages were not 

significantly different.

A disadvantage of pedestrian scale lighting is an 

increase in the glare produced by the light source, as 

these lower luminaires are closer to the line of sight 

of the driver. When pedestrian scale lighting is used, 

an additional 2 semi-cylindrical lux or 0.5 cd/m2

allows for the lighting performance to overcome the 

increase in glare associated with lower mounting 

heights.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

28

Figure 15. Graphic. Detection distance by light type and luminance. Source: FHWA.

Lower mounting heights are typically associated with 

a decrease in pole spacing to achieve the desired 

design criteria, since the effective area illuminated by 

each light source becomes smaller. As the pole 

spacing decreases, the required total number of 

poles for a lighting system increases. Selection of 

appropriate wattage for the luminaires allows the 

designer to balance the benefits of pedestrian scale 

mounting heights with the increased energy 

consumption. Many luminaires are available in a 

range of wattage options while maintaining 

aesthetics. 

Selection of appropriate IES distribution type is 

especially relevant when considering pedestrian 

lighting systems. Distribution types are selected with 

the facility and pole layout in mind and can 

considerably affect the required pole spacing and 

efficiency of the lighting system. For pedestrian 

facilities that tend to be relatively narrow and linear 

in nature, selection of a Type I or Type II luminaire 

allows for more light to be directed toward the 

design facility while limiting light trespass. Figure 16

shows a conceptual example of variable mounting 

heights within the public right-of-way to achieve the 

visibility needs of different road users. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

29

Figure 16. Graphic. Variable mounting heights within public right-of-way. Source: FHWA.

2.4. Determination of Control 

Strategy 

2.4.1. General Principles of Control Strategies 

A lighting control system is a set of hardware and 

software that adjusts power and light output for a 

lighting installation. Control strategies vary from a 

simply on/off setting triggered at dusk and dawn, to 

fully adjustable dimming controls that respond to a 

programmable schedule or motion in the project 

area. The designer’s selection of the proper control 

strategy is based on input from the maintaining 

agency and local community, as well as on 

characteristics of the project location, including 

vehicle or pedestrian activity. 

2.4.2. Pedestrian Considerations for Control 

Strategies 

Adaptive lighting, an approach to lighting that 

adjusts the light output based on the presence or 

volume of road users, is a lighting control strategy 

that is particularly beneficial when applied to 

pedestrian lighting systems. An FHWA report, 

Design Criteria for Adaptive Roadway Lighting,

provides a proposed set of adaptive lighting criteria 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process

30

to assist in the decision of whether to provide 

adaptive lighting (Gibbons et al., 2014a). Its 

companion report, Guidelines for the Implementation 

of Reduced Lighting on Roadways, establishes the 

criteria for determining appropriate lighting levels 

based on roadway characteristics and usage

(Gibbons et al., 2014b).

Common application of an adaptive lighting system 

includes dimming of the lighting system based on 

pedestrian count data. In areas where pedestrian 

volumes are high (more than 100 pph) during the 

evening hours and low (0 to 10 pph) in late night 

hours, an adaptive lighting control system can be 

dims the light output when pedestrian volumes, and 

corresponding recommended design criteria,

decrease. Adaptive lighting systems may also be 

programmed for special events and time of day 

schedules, which is particularly beneficial in school 

zones and public parks.

Where adaptive lighting is used, varying levels of 

light output can be programmed, but turning off the 

lighting system completely can cause potential risks 

or concerns for the local community. Dimming may 

not be noticeable to the casual observer; however, 

once lighting has been installed, there is a general 

expectation that the facility will remain lit during 

hours of darkness. In cases where low pedestrian 

volumes occurring during certain hours of the night 

do not warrant lighting, the adaptive lighting system 

can be programmed to maintain a low level of 

lighting.

2.5. Design and Verification

2.5.1. General Design Process

Once the need for lighting has been established, and 

the designer has selected design criteria, lighting 

equipment, and control strategy, the lighting system 

is then designed in a photometric analysis software 

package. There are several market ready software 

tools capable of detailed illuminance, luminance, 

and glare calculations. Using site survey data and the 

selected lighting equipment, the designer can use 

this software to develop a three-dimensional model 

of a proposed light pole layout. The photometric 

analysis provides calculated results for illuminance, 

luminance, glare, and other metrics that are used to 

evaluate the proposed lighting layout. The 

calculated photometric results are then compared to 

both the primary and the secondary criteria. If the 

criteria are not appropriately met, the layout is 

refined through a change in pole spacing, offset 

from the roadway, mounting height, or luminaire 

selection. This iterative process continues until the 

design is optimized, when the selected design 

criteria are met while minimizing the number of 

poles and luminaires.

Pole placement is a critical step in the design process 

that, in addition to affecting the lighting results, 

includes consideration of local and State 

requirements, utility conflicts, and ease of 

maintenance, among other factors. Additional 

information about pole placement is included in the 

AASHTO Roadside Design Guide, 4th Edition

(AASHTO, 2011).
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 2. Lighting Design Process 

31

2.5.2. Pedestrian Considerations for the Design 

Process 

The process of developing a photometric model and 

selecting a lighting layout for pedestrian lighting 

systems is similar to other roadway lighting designs; 

however, there are some key elements of a 

pedestrian lighting system for the designer to 

consider, including light pole placement, contrast, 

and calculation grid location. 

Often, the overall layout of light poles on a 

pedestrian facility may be governed by one or 

several critical pole locations. For example, 

midblock crossings and intersections may require a 

particular pole location to provide the optimal 

vertical illuminance and positive contrast of 

pedestrians in a marked crosswalk. Contrast is the 

measurable visible difference between a target and 

the target’s background. Positive contrast results in 

the target being brighter than its background and 

negative contrast results in the target being darker 

than its background, as illustrated in figure 17. 

FHWA’s Informational Report on Lighting Design for 

Midblock Crosswalks provides additional 

information regarding proper light pole location 

(Gibbons et al., 2008). Placement of these critical 

pole locations first, before locating other poles 

based on a set spacing, results in improved contrast 

and visual performance in midblock crossings. 

Figure 17. Photograph. Examples of negative and positive 

contrast. Source: FHWA. 

For the calculation and the verification of the lighting 

in the pedestrian sidewalks areas, locate the 

calculation grid centered in the design area with a 

maximum spacing of 2 m (6.5 ft) between grid points 

in each direction. Calculation points for vertical or 

semi-cylindrical illuminance should be located at a 

height of 1.5 m (5 ft) above the pavement surface 

and centered in the sidewalk or pathway.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 3. Design Examples 

32

3. Design Example 

The design example included in this chapter details a typical scenario for lighting pedestrian 

facilities. It presents the key characteristics of the location and illustrates the application of the 

process described in Section 2. This example does not cover all potential scenarios related to lighting 

for pedestrian safety, but it is designed to demonstrate the information provided in the previous 

sections of this primer. The example begins by describing the scenario and progresses through 

sections devoted to each of the steps in the process laid out in Section 2, as follows: 

1. Assessment of potential lighting needs. 

2. Selection of design criteria. 

3. Equipment selection. 

4. Determination of control strategy. 

5. Design and verification. 

3.1. Example Scenario 

This scenario focuses on a segment of an urban 

five-lane arterial roadway running between two 

intersections, as shown in figure 18. On the north 

side of the subject roadway is a park and on the 

south side is an elementary school, served by a 

driveway. This segment of the roadway is marked as 

a school zone, and there is a transit stop in the 

study area that serves the park and school. The 

peak hourly pedestrian volumes occur just before 

and after school hours, as this street is used by 

many students and families living in the nearby 

neighborhoods to access the school and park. It is 

also used frequently outside of school hours. The 

peak pedestrian volumes sometimes occur in dark 

conditions, depending on time of year. 

Figure 19 shows a rendering of an urban five-lane 

arterial with a midblock crosswalk and a transit 

stop, similar to the scenario used in this example. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 3. Design Examples 

33

Figure 18. Graphic. Sketch of example scenario. Source: FHWA. 

Figure 19. Graphic. Rendering of urban five-lane arterial with midblock crosswalk and transit stop similar to the example scenario. Source: 

The Greenway Collaborative, Inc. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 3. Design Examples 

34

3.2. Assess Lighting Needs 

The first step is to identify the lighting needs in the 

given scenario. This example includes several 

different pedestrian facility types. There are 

intersection crossings at the two intersections, with 

marked crosswalks on all four approaches of each 

intersection. There is a midblock crosswalk near the 

school driveway to connect the school property to 

the park. Finally, there are sidewalks along both 

sides of the subject roadway. In addition to these 

pedestrian facilities, there is also the roadway itself 

to be considered in the lighting design process. The 

designer should also be aware of the role that 

lighting plays both in terms of safety and security 

for users of the transit stop located in the study 

area. 

Note that this example will focus on the area of the 

subject roadway between the two intersections, 

inclusive of the inner crosswalks across the major 

road at each intersection (as indicated by the 

shaded area in figure 18). However, the process and 

criteria for lighting the intersection crosswalks not 

included in the shaded area would be the same as 

the process illustrated in this example. 

3.3. Select Design Criteria 

The next step is to select the lighting design criteria 

for each of the facility types identified. This example 

focuses on primary criteria, or the desired lighting 

levels that the system is designed to provide in the 

project area. The designer can also consider 

secondary criteria, such as aesthetics or ability to 

limit light trespass. Section 2.2.2 contains more 

information and resources regarding secondary 

criteria. 

As previously noted, this example contains marked 

crosswalks (both midblock and at intersections) and 

pedestrian facilities adjacent to the roadway (i.e., 

sidewalks). Table 3 in Section 2.2.3 of this document 

summarizes the design criteria for these pedestrian 

facilities. The table of criteria is recreated below as

table 4 and the criteria selected based on the 

characteristics of the example are denoted with 

bolded text. Intersection crosswalks should have an 

average of 30 lux vertical illuminance. Midblock 

crosswalks should have an average of 20 lux vertical 

illuminance. There are two options for average 

illuminance of adjacent pedestrian facilities, or 

sidewalks, depending on pedestrian activity. In this 

case, since the subject roadway is in a school zone, 

the sidewalks should have 10 lux semi-cylindrical 

illuminance. The average luminance of the roadway 

should be 2 cd/m2 since the study area is urban and 

the subject roadway is in a school zone. Finally, the 

chosen luminaires should have a CCT of 3000 K to 

4000 K at all locations. 

Refer to section 2.2 for a detailed discussion of 

lighting design criteria. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 3. Design Examples 

35

Table 4. Selected design criteria for example scenario1. 

Pedestrian facility characteristics 

Light Source Characteristics 

Average 

Illuminance 

Average Luminance 

CCT (LED only) 

Rural Urban 

Intersection crosswalk 30 lux vertical * * 3000 K to 4000 K 

Midblock crosswalk 20 lux vertical * * 3000 K to 4000 K 

Facility adjacent 

to roadway 

Low2 to Medium3

Pedestrian Activity 

2 lux 

vertical 

* 1 cd/m23000 K to 4000 K 

High4 Pedestrian Activity 

and/or School Zones 

10 lux 

SC

1 cd/m2 2 cd/m2 3000 K to 4000 K 

*Use minimum maintained average pavement luminance criteria from RP-8-18.

1 Values are for roadway scale luminaire heights (6.5m or 20 ft or higher). For pedestrian scale lighting (6.5m in 

height or lower), add 2 vertical lux and 0.5 cd/m2 to the criteria to overcome increased glare resulting from the use 

of a lower mounting height. 

2 Low Pedestrian Activity (10 or fewer pedestrians per hour) – Areas with very low volumes of pedestrians during 

hours of darkness. Examples may include suburban streets with single family dwellings, very low-density residential 

developments, and rural or semi-rural areas. 

3 Medium Pedestrian Activity (11-100 pedestrians per hour) – Areas where lesser numbers of pedestrians are 

expected during hours of darkness. Examples may include downtown office areas, libraries, apartments, 

neighborhood shopping, industrial, parks, and streets with nearby transit lines. 

4 High Pedestrian Activity (over 100 pedestrians per hour) – Areas with significant numbers of pedestrians expected 

during hours of darkness. Examples may include downtown retail areas, theaters, concert halls, stadiums, and transit 

terminals. 

3.4. Select Equipment 

The next step is to select lighting equipment that 

will enable the design to meet the identified 

criteria. Lighting equipment selection typically 

depends on local inventory and the preferences of 

the local agency. In this case, the lighting design 

will use the roadway cobrahead style LED 

luminaires (see figure 20). Selection of luminaires is 

often based on local inventory and standards, and 

in this example, cobrahead luminaires have been 

selected for consistency within the local 

municipality, which in turn results in ease of 

maintenance and familiarity to road users. The 

design will use a color temperature of 3000 K 

(which is within the recommended range presented 

in table 3), 204 W of power, and an IES distribution 

of Type II (as illustrated previously in figure 14). 

Type II provides a shallower distribution angle that 

will result in greater longitudinal illumination of the 

sidewalks while also casting light onto the roadway. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 3. Design Examples 

36

Figure 20. Graphic. Example LED cobrahead roadway luminaire. Source: FHWA. 

Given the width of the roadway cross-section, the 

use of pedestrian scale mounting heights (20 feet 

or less) alone may not provide adequate 

illumination or uniformity across all roadway travel 

lanes. Therefore, a roadway scale mounting height, 

or a combination of pedestrian scale and roadway 

scale luminaires, is more appropriate to meet the 

design goals. Additionally, the cobrahead 

luminaires that are selected for use are intended for 

roadway scale mounting heights. For this example, 

the luminaires will be mounted at a height of 35 

feet. They will be positioned on both sides of the 

roadway in a staggered layout to adequately light 

the entire width of the pavement and adjacent 

pedestrian facilities. 

Refer to section 2.3 for a detailed discussion of 

lighting equipment selection, including the tradeoffs between roadway scale lighting and pedestrian 

scale lighting. 

3.5. Determine Control 

Strategy 

The lighting control strategy determines when and 

at what level the lighting operates. In this example, 

the lighting system will use traditional photocell 

“dusk-to-dawn” operation.

For locations with variable pedestrian volumes and 

where lighting impacts to the surrounding area are 

of concern, consideration may be given to the use 

of adaptive lighting systems. Methods for applying 

adaptive lighting technologies are included in IES 

RP-8-18 as well as NCHRP Research Report 940, 

Solid-State Roadway Lighting Design Guide, Volume 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 3. Design Examples

37

2: Research Overview (Lutkevich et al., 2020). These 

methods are not required under FHWA regulations. 

Refer to section 2.4 of this primer for more 

information on control strategies, including a 

discussion of adaptive lighting in the context of 

lighting for pedestrians.

3.6. Design and Verification

After identifying design criteria, selecting 

equipment, and determining the control strategy, 

the remaining step is to design the lighting system 

and verify that it meets the design criteria. This is 

done using a photometric analysis software 

package, of which there are several options that 

operate in a similar manner. The discussion 

presented in this example should apply generally to 

all of them.

The software works by calculating the lighting 

metrics (luminance, illuminance, etc.) at points laid 

out across the study area in grid pattern, based on 

a given selection and layout of light sources. The 

grid is established based on existing guidance, with 

roadway illuminance points (per IES RP-8-18) and 

semi-cylindrical illuminance points (per CIE, 2000). 

All vertical and semi-cylindrical illuminance points 

are located 4.9 ft (2 m) above the roadway surface 

to represent the typical height of a pedestrian, with 

a maximum spacing of 6.5 ft. Roadway luminance 

points are located with a maximum spacing of 16.4 

ft.

For each of the luminaire models selected for a 

given design, a data file (IES file format) typically 

provided by the lighting manufacturer is imported 

into the lighting software. The data file includes 

information about the luminaire’s spatial light 

distribution and intensity for use in the lighting 

model. When importing IES files, a light loss factor 

(LLF) is typically applied to account for depreciation 

of light output over time. During the lifecycle of a 

lighting installation, light output is expected to 

decrease due to dirt and dust accumulation, lamp 

lumen depreciation and ambient temperature 

changes, among other physical and environmental 

factors. Therefore, a light loss factor checks that a 

lighting design will meet the selected design 

criteria throughout the expected service life. For 

this design, a total light loss factor of 0.85 is applied 

to each luminaire IES file, which is typical for many 

LED light sources.

The first step is to identify critical locations where 

luminaire placement is either important to achieve 

design goals, or highly constrained due to roadway 

geometrics, utility conflicts, or other obstacles. 

These critical luminaires are often located near 

midblock crossings or intersections. They should be 

placed in advanced of crosswalks to create positive 

contrast (as illustrated previously in figure 17). In 

this example, the critical luminaires are the two at 

the midblock crosswalk and one each at the 

intersection crosswalks, as shown in figure 21. They 

are placed behind the sidewalk. Critical luminaire 

locations may also include areas where existing 

utility conflicts, driveways, or landscaping 

significantly influence the placement of a pole.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 3. Design Examples 

38

Figure 21. Graphic. Critical luminaire locations within the study area. Source: FHWA.

Once the locations of the critical luminaires have 

been selected, the designer continues by filling in 

the remaining space behind the sidewalk along 

both sides of the roadway with luminaires in a 

staggered layout, trying to keep roughly equal 

spacing between them. In this case, the placements 

result in approximately 200 ft between light poles. 

This spacing is a reasonable starting point, however 

the design process will determine whether this 

spacing is valid or should be revised to achieve the 

design criteria. 

At this point, the photometric analysis software 

package calculates the results for the design and 

shows that they are too low to meet the targeted 

design criteria. The criteria and results are shown in 

table 5, where the bolded rows indicate items that 

did not meet the target criteria. As discussed in 

section 2.5, lighting design relies on an iterative 

process, so this is not unexpected. Since the 

calculated average lighting levels are lower than the 

target design criteria, while the average-tominimum uniformity ratios are acceptable per RP8-18 criteria, the design must be revised to provide 

higher average illuminance in the project area (IES, 

2018). The designer may choose to decrease the 

pole spacing to achieve greater illumination; 

however, this will result in an increase in the 

required number of poles. In the interest of 

reducing construction and maintenance costs by 

requiring the fewest number of light poles, a logical 

next step is to increase the input power to each 

luminaire while keeping all other inputs the same, 

including the pole spacing. In this example, the next 

iteration will use a 268 W luminaire from the same 

manufacturer, an increase from the 204 W luminaire 

originally selected. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 3. Design Examples 

39

Table 5. Summary of initial lighting design criteria and calculation results. 

Calculation Zone Calculation Type Units 

Target 

Criteria 

Calculation 

Results 

Average Average 

Midblock Crosswalk Vertical Illuminance Lux 20 19.06 

Intersection Crossing (West) Vertical Illuminance Lux 30 19.26 

Intersection Crossing (East) Vertical Illuminance Lux 30 18.23 

Sidewalk (North) SC Illuminance Lux 10 7.63 

Sidewalk (South) SC Illuminance Lux 10 7.73 

Roadway (Westbound) Luminance Cd/m2 2.0 1.92 

Roadway (Eastbound) Luminance Cd/m2 2.0 1.92 

Note: Additional lighting design criteria recommended in IES RP-8-18 should be evaluated and considered 

for uniformity and glare. 

Upon calculating the results again with the 

photometric analysis software package, the results 

show that the midblock crosswalk, sidewalk, and 

roadway meet the design criteria. However, the 

intersection crossings do not meet the vertical 

illuminance requirement, particularly at the grid 

points towards the centerline of the roadway 

(furthest from the light poles). Table 6 summarizes 

the criteria and results, with the items that did not 

meet criteria shown in bold. 

Because in this case the lighting design is not 

meeting criteria in a targeted location, the design 

can incorporate some minor adjustments. Although 

the criteria could be achieved by further increasing 

the wattage of all luminaires, doing so would overilluminate much of the project area, and may 

increase glare. Individual adjustment of pole 

locations where necessary allows for the design to 

maintain consistent use of the same luminaires and 

will not change the calculated results for other 

areas of the project area which are satisfactory.

First, to fine-tune the pole placements at the 

intersections, the designer can move them closer to 

the sidewalk and closer to the intersection 

crosswalk. Additionally, the designer can adjust the 

mounting height from 35 ft to 30 ft for the pole 

closest to each intersection crossing. These 

adjustments will increase the amount of vertical 

illuminance at the targeted locations. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 3. Design Examples 

40

Table 6. Summary of revised lighting design criteria and calculation results. 

Calculation Zone Calculation Type Units 

Target 

Criteria 

Calculation 

Results 

Average Average 

Midblock Crosswalk Vertical Illuminance Lux 20 25.19

Intersection Crossing (West) Vertical Illuminance Lux 30 25.46 

Intersection Crossing (East) Vertical Illuminance Lux 30 24.10 

Sidewalk (North) SC Illuminance Lux 10 10.09

Sidewalk (South) SC Illuminance Lux 10 10.21

Roadway (Westbound) Luminance Cd/m22.0 2.53

Roadway (Eastbound) Luminance Cd/m22.0 2.54

Note: Additional lighting design criteria recommended in IES RP-8-18 should be evaluated and considered 

for uniformity and glare. 

The photometric analysis software package 

calculates the results one more time, which show 

that the resulting design now meets the design 

criteria for intersection crosswalk illuminance, 

midblock crosswalk illuminance, sidewalk semicylindrical illuminance, and roadway luminance. 

Table 7 shows the key criteria and results, and 

figure 22 shows a software rendering of the final 

lighting design.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 3. Design Examples 

41

Table 7. Summary of final lighting design criteria and calculation results. 

Calculation Zone Calculation Type Units 

Target 

Criteria 

Calculation 

Results 

Average Average 

Midblock Crosswalk Vertical Illuminance Lux 20 25.19

Intersection Crossing (West) Vertical Illuminance Lux 30 30.87

Intersection Crossing (East) Vertical Illuminance Lux 30 31.29

Sidewalk (North) SC Illuminance Lux 10 10.02

Sidewalk (South) SC Illuminance Lux 10 10.02

Roadway (Westbound) Luminance Cd/m22.0 2.54

Roadway (Eastbound) Luminance Cd/m22.0 2.56

Note: Additional lighting design criteria recommended in IES RP-8-18 should be evaluated and considered 

for uniformity and glare. 

Figure 22. Graphic. Software rendering of final lighting design for example scenario. Source: FHWA. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 3. Design Examples

42

This example presented the key characteristics of 

the location and illustrated the application of the 

pedestrian lighting design process described in 

Chapter 2, from assessment of lighting needs 

through design and verification. A comparison of 

the final calculation results to the selected design 

criteria reveals that the primary design goals of the 

lighting layout are achieved. The average luminance 

and illuminance metrics for each various type of 

facility (crosswalks, sidewalks, and roadway 

segments) are met or exceeded with the selected 

lighting design. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 4. Summary and Conclusion 

43

4. Summary and Conclusion 

This primer is intended to be a resource for transportation practitioners interested in lighting design 

considerations for locations with pedestrian activity. The primer highlights how the results from the 

companion FHWA research report, Street Lighting for Pedestrian Safety (Terry et al., 2020), can 

complement lighting design information in commonly used lighting design guides. 

The introduction to the primer establishes an 

understanding of recent trends in pedestrian safety 

and security in dark or nighttime conditions. It 

presents a summary of existing research indicating 

the benefits of lighting for improving pedestrian 

safety, citing studies that resulted in CMFs that 

quantify reductions in the number of 

vehicle/pedestrian crashes due to lighting ranging 

from 0.58 (42 percent reduction) to 0.19 (81 percent 

reduction), depending on crash severity (CMF IDs 

435, 436, 440, 441, and 2379). It presents an overview 

of the relevant existing guidance, as well as gaps 

identified in the companion research report. 

Section 2 walks through the lighting design process, 

with specific consideration of pedestrian lighting 

criteria and design considerations. The material in 

Chapter 2 is organized by the major steps of lighting 

design: 

• Assessment of lighting needs. 

• Selection of design criteria. 

• Equipment selection. 

• Determination of control strategy. 

• Design and verification. 

For each step of the lighting design process, the 

primer provides 1) an overview of selected 

terminology and general lighting design 

considerations with references to other resources for 

additional information and 2) specific lighting design 

considerations for pedestrians. The selection of 

lighting criteria for pedestrian facilities draws on 

information from two FHWA research and 

informational reports on pedestrian lighting: Street 

Lighting for Pedestrian Safety and Informational 

Report on Lighting Design for Midblock Crosswalks, as 

well as other commonly referenced lighting 

resources, such as RP-8-18 (Terry et al., 2020; 

Gibbons et al., 2008; IES, 2018). 

Section 3 presents a lighting design example that 

depicts a typical scenario for lighting pedestrian 

facilities. The example walks through the site 

characteristics, design criteria, application of the 

design approach and interpretation of analysis 

results, and other considerations. 

While not a focus of this primer, evaluating the 

success of lighting installations and maintaining 

their performance are key to sustaining lighting 

benefits over time. Systematic and data-driven 

maintenance and evaluation approaches can 

address racial and socio-economic disparities that 

exist in lighting maintenance processes driven only 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 4. Summary and Conclusion

44

by self-reporting. In addition, community 

engagement programs that communicate with 

residents across geographic, socio-economic, racial, 

and language boundaries can assess whether 

lighting investments are meeting community needs. 

As this primer has illustrated, lighting of pedestrian 

facilities is key to increasing the safety performance 

of the roadway network for all users. Effective 

pedestrian lighting is a means of addressing the 

vulnerability of pedestrians during dark conditions 

and improving the safety and security of all road 

users spanning different ages and abilities. This 

primer, along with the companion FHWA research 

report, Street Lighting for Pedestrian Safety (Terry et 

al., 2020), can help transportation practitioners to 

realize the benefits of lighting designs and provide 

safer facilities for pedestrians at night.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 5. References 

45

5. References 

AASHTO (2011). Roadside Design Guide, 4th Edition. American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C. 

AASHTO (2018). Roadway Lighting Design Guide, 7th Edition. American Association of State 

Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C. 

American Medical Association (AMA). (2016). Human and Environmental Effects of Lighting 

Emitting Diode (LED) Community Lighting. Report of the Council on Science and Public Health. 

CSAPH Report 2-1-16. Retrieved from https://www.ama-assn.org/sites/amaassn.org/files/corp/media-browser/public/about-ama/councils/Council%20Reports/council-onscience-public-health/a16-csaph2.pdf 

ANSI/IES (2020). Luminaire Classification System for Outdoor Luminaires [ANSI/IES TM-15-20]. 

American National Standards Institute/Illuminating Engineering Society. 

APTA (2009). Security Lighting for Transit Passenger Facilities. American Public Transportation 

Association, Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://www.apta.com/wpcontent/uploads/Standards_Documents/APTA-SS-SIS-RP-001-10.pdf. 

Bhagavathula, R., Gibbons, R. B., & Edwards, C.J. (2015). Relationship between Roadway 

Illuminance Level and Nighttime Rural Intersection Safety. Transportation Research Record: 

Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2485, 8-15. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.3141/2485-02. 

Boyce, P.R. (1973). Age, illuminance, visual performance and preference. Lighting Research & 

Technology, 5(3), 125-144. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/096032717300500301. 

Boyce, P.R., Eklund, N.H., Hamilton, B.J., & Bruno, L.D. (2000). Perceptions of safety at night in 

different lighting conditions. Lighting Research and Technology, 32, 79-91. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1177/096032710003200205. 

Chalfin, A., Hansen, B., Lerner, J., & Parker, L. (2019). Reducing Crime Through Environmental 

Design: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment of Street Lighting in New York City. Crime Lab: 

New York. Retrieved from 

https://urbanlabs.uchicago.edu/attachments/e95d751f7d91d0bcfeb209ddf6adcb4296868c12/st

ore/cca92342e666b1ffb1c15be63b484e9b9687b57249dce44ad55ea92b1ec0/lights_04242016.pd

f. 

CIE (2000). Technical Report: Road Lighting Calculations [CIE 140:2000]. Commission 

Internationale de L'Eclairage, Vienna, Austria. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 5. References 

46

CIE (2010). Lighting of Roads for Motor and Pedestrian Traffic [CIE 115:2010]. Commission 

Internationale de L'Eclairage, Vienna, Austria. 

Cuvalci , O. & Ertas, B. (2000). Roadway Lighting Design Methodology and Evaluation. Journal of 

Integrated Design & Process Science, 4(1), 1-23. Retrieved from 

https://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-integrated-design-and-process-science/jid4-1-

01. 

Economopoulos, I.G.A. (1978). Photometric parameters and visual performance in road lighting. 

Technische Hogeschool Eindhoven. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.6100/IR117059. 

Eloholma, M., Ketomaki, J., Orrevetelainen, P., & Halonen, L. (2006). Visual performance in nighttime driving conditions. Opthalmic and Physiological Optics: Journal of the College of 

Optometrists, 26(3), 254-263. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2006.00313.x. 

Elvik, R. & Vaa, T. (2004). Handbook of Road Safety Measures. Elsevier, Oxford, UK. 

FHWA. (2013a). “The Walking Environment: 4. Marked Crosswalks and Enhancements”. Federal 

Highway Administration, Washington, DC. Retrieved from 

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/saferjourney1/library/countermeasures/04.htm. 

FHWA. (2013b). “Sidewalks, Walkways and Paved Shoulders”. PEDSAFE. Federal Highway 

Administration, Washington, DC. Retrieved from 

http://pedbikesafe.org/PEDSAFE/countermeasures_detail.cfm?CM_NUM=1. 

FHWA (2017). Nighttime Visibility. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC. Retrieved 

from https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/night_visib/. 

FHWA (2018). Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements: Countermeasure Tech Sheet. Federal Highway 

Administration, Washington, DC. Retrieved from 

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/step/docs/techSheet_VizEnhancemt2018.pdf. 

Gibbons, R.B., Edwards, C., Williams, B., & Anderson, C.K. (2008). Informational Report on Lighting 

Design for Midblock Crosswalks [FHWA-HRT-08-053]. Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington D.C. Retrieved from 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/08053/08053.pdf. 

Gibbons, R., Guo, F., Medina, A., Terry, T., Du, J., Lutkevich, P., & Li, Q. (2014a). Design Criteria for 

Adaptive Roadway Lighting [FHWA-HRT-14-051]. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, 

DC. Retrieved from https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/14051/14051.pdf. 

Gibbons, R., Guo, F., Medina, A., Terry, T., Du, J., Lutkevich, P., ..., & Vetere, P. (2014b). Guidelines 

for the Implementation of Reduced Lighting on Roadways [FHWA-HRT-14-050]. Federal Highway 

Administration, Washington, DC. Retrieved from 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/14050/14050.pdf. 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 5. References 

47

Gibbons, R.B., Meyer, J.E., Terry, T.N., Bhagavathula, R., & Lewis, A., Flanagan, M., & Connell, C. 

(2015). Evaluation of the Impact of Spectral Power Distribution on Driver Performance [FHWAHRT-15-047]. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC. Retrieved from 

https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/35871. 

Griffith, M.S. (1994). Comparison of the Safety of Lighting Options on Urban Freeways. Public 

Roads, 57(2). Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC. Retrieved from 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/publicroads/94fall/p94au8.cfm. 

Haans, A. & de Kort, Y.A.W. (2012). Light distribution in dynamic street lighting: Two 

experimental studies on its effects on perceived safety, project, concealment, and escape. 

Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(4), 342-352. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.05.006.

He, Y., Rea, M., Bierman, A., & Bullough, J. (1997). Evaluating Light Source Efficacy under Mesopic 

Conditions Using Reaction Times. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society, 26(1), 125-138. 

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/00994480.1997.10748173. 

IES (2018). American National Standard Practice for Design and Maintenance of Roadway and 

Parking Facility Lighting [RP-8-18]. Illuminating Engineering Society. 

Jonah, B.A. & Engel, G.R. (1983). Measuring the Relative Risk of Pedestrian Accidents. Accident 

Analysis & Prevention, 15(3), 193-206. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-

4575(83)90019-2. 

Lewis, A. (1999). Visual Performance as a Function of Spectral Power Distribution of Light 

Sources at Luminances Used for General Outdoor Lighting. Journal of the Illuminating 

Engineering Society, 28(1), 37-42. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00994480.1999.10748250. 

Loewen, L.J., Steel, G.D., & Suedfeld, P. (1993). Perceived safety from crime in the urban 

environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13, 323-331. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80254-3. 

Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2010). What is Blocking Her Path? Women, Mobility, and Security. IN 

Conference Proceedings 46: Women’s Issues in Transportation: Report of the 4th International 

Conference; Volume 1: Conference Summary and Plenary Papers, Transportation Research Board 

of the National Academies, 103-121, Washington, D.C. Retrieved from: 

https://www.nap.edu/download/22901 

http://nap.edu/22901 What Is Blocking Her Path? Women, Mobility, and Security by Anastasia, 

Department of Urban Planning, University of California, Los Angeles (p. 118) 

Lutkevich, P., Gibbons, R., Bhagavathula, R., & McLean, D. (2020). Solid-State Roadway Lighting 

Design Guide: Volume 2: Research Overview [NCHRP Research Report 940]. Transportation 
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 5. References 

48

Research Board, Washington, D.C. Retrieved from 

https://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/180129.aspx. 

Markvica, K., Richter, G., & Lenz, G. (2019). Impact of urban street lighting on road users’ 

perception of public space and mobility behavior. Building and Environment, 154, 32-43. 

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.03.009. 

Minoshima, O., Oka, K., Ikehara, K., & Inukai, N. (2006). Research on Accident Reduction by 

Intersection Lighting. Presented at the Road Engineering Association of Asia and Australasia 

(REAAA) Conference, Philippines. 

Nasar, J.L., Fisher, B., & Grannis, M. (1993). Proximate physical cues to fear of crime. Landscape 

and Urban Planning, 26, 161-178. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(93)90014-

5. 

Nasar, J.L. & Jones, K.M. (1997). Landscapes of fear and stress. Environment and Behavior, 29, 

291-323. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/001391659702900301. 

NHTSA (2021). Traffic Safety Facts: Pedestrians [DOT-HS-813-079]. Retrieved from 

https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813079. 

Oya, H., Ando, K., & Kanoshima, H. (2002). A Research on Interrelation between Illuminance at 

Intersections and Reduction in traffic Accidents. Journal of Light & Visual Environment, 26(1), 29-

34. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2150/jlve.26.1_29. 

Painter, K. (1996). The influence of street lighting improvements on crime, fear, and pedestrian 

street use, after dark. Landscape and Urban Planning, 35, 193-201. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(96)00311-8.

Painter, K. & Farrington, D.P. (1997). Crime reducing effect of improve street lighting: the Dudley 

project. In Clark, R.V. (1997), Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies. Retrieved from 

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/crime-reducing-effect-improved-streetlighting-dudley-project. 

Peña-García, A., Hurtado, A., & Aguilar-Luzón, M.C. (2015). Impact of public lighting on 

pedestrians’ perception of safety and well-being. Safety Science, 78, 142-148. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.04.009. 

Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT). (2019). News Blog: PedPDX: Walking While Black. 

Retrieved from https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/725213 

Portnov, B.A., Saad, R., Trop, T., Kliger, D., & Svechkina, A. (2020). Linking nighttime outdoor 

lighting attributes to pedestrians’ feeling of safety: an interactive survey approach. PLoS ONE, 

15(11). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242172. 

Rea, M.S. (2000). IESNA Lighting Handbook, 9th Edition. Illuminating Engineering.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING PRIMER | 5. References 

49

Safe Routes to School (2015). Safe Routes to School Online Guide. Retrieved from 

http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/index.cfm. 

Sullivan, J.M., and Flannigan, M.J. (1999). Assessing the Potential Benefit of Adaptive Headlighting 

Using Crash Databases [Report No. UMTRI-99-21]. University of Michigan Transportation 

Research Institute. Retrieved from https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/49401. 

TAC (2006). Guide for the Design of Roadway Lighting [PTM-LIGHTING06]. Transportation 

Association of Canada. 

Terry, T., Brimley, B., Gibbons, R., & Carlson, P. J. (2016). Roadway Visibility Research Needs 

Assessment [FHWA-SA-17-031]. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC. Retrieved 

from https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/42850. 

Terry, T., Gibbons, R., Kassing, A., Bhagavathula, R., & Lutkevich, P. (2020). Research Report: Street 

Lighting for Pedestrian Safety [FHWA-SA-20-062]. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, 

D.C. 

Walton, N.D. & Rowan, N.J. (1974). Warrants for Highway Lighting [NCHRP Report 152]. 

Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C. Retrieved from 

https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_152.pdf. 

Welsh, B.C. & Farrington, D.P. (2008). Effects of Improved Street Lighting on Crime. Campbell 

Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1-51. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2008.13. 

Ye, X., Pendyala, R.M., Washington, S.P., Konduri, K., & Oh, J. (2008). A Simultaneous Equations 

Model of Crash Frequency by Collision Type for Rural Intersections. Presented at the 87th Annual 

Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. 

Zhou, H. & Hsu, P. (2012). Effects of Roadway Lighting Level on the Pedestrian Safety. Presented 

at the 9th International Conference of Chinese Transportation Professionals, 2009. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1061/41064(358)4y.