-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
FINAL REPORT
HUMAN FACTORS REVIEW OF THE FALLOWFIELD AT-GRADE RAIL
CROSSING
Submitted to:
Ms. Krista Tanaka City of Ottawa
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 0B9
Email: [email protected]
Prepared by:
Alison Smiley, Ph.D., CCPE Thomas Smahel, M.Arch., CCPE
Human Factors North Inc.
174 Spadina Avenue, Suite 202 Toronto, Ontario M5T 2C2
Phone: (416) 596-1252 Fax: (416) 596-6946
E-mail: [email protected]
March 31, 2015
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION
..................................................................................................................................
1
2 REVIEW OF CIMA MEMORANDUM RE STOP LINE PLACEMENT
.......................................................... 1
3 REVIEW OF STOP LINE LITERATURE
....................................................................................................
1
4 OTTAWA FALLOWFIELD SITE
VISIT...................................................................................................
2
4.1 SITE VISIT OBSERVATIONS
.................................................................................................................
2 4.2 RESULTS
........................................................................................................................................
3
4.2.1
EB1..........................................................................................................................................
3 4.2.2 WB1
........................................................................................................................................
4 4.2.3
EB2..........................................................................................................................................
5 4.2.4 Compliance
.............................................................................................................................
5 4.2.5 Speed Observations
.................................................................................................................
5 4.2.6 Crossing Conspicuity
................................................................................................................
6 4.2.7 Miscellaneous Observations
....................................................................................................
7
5 MONTRAL SITE VISIT
........................................................................................................................
7
5.1 SITE VISIT OBSERVATIONS
.................................................................................................................
9 5.2 RESULTS
........................................................................................................................................
9
5.2.1 Boulevard Segneurial
...............................................................................................................
9 5.2.2 Boulevard du
Millenaire..........................................................................................................10
5.2.3 Crossing Conspicuity
...............................................................................................................10
5.2.4 Compliance
............................................................................................................................10
6 DISCUSSION
......................................................................................................................................11
6.1 COMPLIANCE
.................................................................................................................................11
6.2 SPEED
..........................................................................................................................................12
6.3 GATE CONSPICUITY
.........................................................................................................................13
7 RECOMMENDATIONS
........................................................................................................................13
8 REFERENCES
......................................................................................................................................13
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 1
1 INTRODUCTION The City of Ottawa requested the assistance of
Human Factors North Inc. (HFN) in undertaking a human factors
assessment of the Fallowfield at-grade rail crossing which is
coincident with a signalized intersection with a bus transitway.
There have been a number of incidents, mostly on the eastbound
approach (referred to as EB1), where vehicles are stopping beyond
the stop bar and either reversing to avoid the gate coming down on
the vehicle or getting caught under the gate. To complete this
assessment we have carried out the following work:
1. Reviewed and commented on a 2014 Technical Memorandum as it
relates to the location of the stop bars and to guidance in the
event that the stop bars should be relocated further back from the
crossing signal gates.
2. Reviewed the scientific literature on the impact of stop bars
on driver stop position. 3. Conducted a human factors review of the
Fallowfield crossing, including a site visit with
observations of signs, signals and markings, speed and stop
location relative to stop lines. 4. Conducted similar reviews of
two combination rail crossing/signalized intersections in
Montreal to determine how they operate with regard to vehicle
stopping locations as compared to the Fallowfield crossing, and how
this might be influenced by various design and signing features
including stop line placement.
5. Based on the CIMA technical memorandum, review of the
literature on stop lines, and
human factors assessments of the Fallowfield crossing and a
similar crossing in Montral, recommended countermeasures to improve
stopping behaviour.
2 REVIEW OF CIMA MEMORANDUM RE STOP LINE PLACEMENT
The CIMA Technical Memorandum of June 2014 concludes that:
1. The only clear and unambiguous standards that precisely
detail the location of the stop line are provided in the
MUTCDC.
2. There is no guideline provided for the distance between the
stop line to the railway warning device (in this case, the
gates).
3. The location of the current stop lines is in accordance with
the MUTCDC in that they exceed the minimum perpendicular distance
of 5.0 m from the closest rail.
3 REVIEW OF STOP LINE LITERATURE
We did not find any studies specifically dealing with driver
response to stop lines at a combined traffic signal and railway
crossing. However, there are studies that suggest stop lines, when
added to crosswalks (Mortimer & Nagamachi, 1969), stop lines
alone (Mortimer, Nagamachi, & Carlson, 1969) stop lines with
signs and pavement markings (Van Houten, 1988) and stop lines when
moved (Retting & Van Houten, 2000) change driver behaviour in
that they reduce encroachment into pedestrian crosswalks. Based on
their study, Mortimer and Nagamachi 1969 state that This indicates
that drivers use the stop line as a cue for determining the
stopping position, but because it is some distance from the
crosswalk they allow themselves a fair amount of latitude around
the stop line itself. For this reason, the variances in stopping
position were fairly large, but the stop line was evidently quite
effective in reducing crosswalk encroachment.
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 2
In the second study Mortimer et al. (1969) found that the
inclusion of a stop line, or a stop line and a painted crosswalk,
resulted in stopping distances that were further from the
intersection than when there was a crosswalk with no stop line, or
no stop line or crosswalk. In the third study, the simple use of
advance stop lines and sign prompts was found to reduce
pedestrian-vehicle conflicts by almost 80 percent at a crosswalk on
a six-lane urban street (Van Houten 1988). On a street with a 30
mph (50 km/h) speed limit conflicts were observed before and after
stop lines were painted on the pavement and signs with the message
STOP HERE FOR PEDESTRIANS, accompanied by an arrow pointing down at
45 degrees to the road, were installed 50 ft. (15 m) before the
crosswalk. The proportion of motorists who stopped at least 10 ft.
(3 m) from the crosswalk increased from 50% to over 95%. Driver
stop position was examined at four signalized intersections in St.
Petersburg, Florida. In the baseline period the stop line was
positioned 4 ft. (1.2 m) back from the crosswalks at all four
intersections. The stop lines were then removed and installed 20
ft. (6.0 m) back from the crosswalks. Over 2,000 drivers were
observed during the baseline period and over 3,000 drivers were
observed when the stop lines were moved further away from the
crosswalk. Driver compliance was defined as either the leading edge
of the vehicle at or behind the stop line with the leading edge of
the vehicle ahead of the stop line, but with the front tires behind
her in contact with the stop line. The percentage of drivers who
stopped at least 4 ft. (1.2 m) from the crosswalk increased from
74% to 92% while drivers who stopped inside the crosswalk decreased
from 25% to 7% (Retting and Van Houten 2000). Thus, the four
studies were unanimous in finding that the position of the stop
line has a strong influence on stopping position, and can be used
effectively to reduce encroachment into pedestrian crosswalks.
4 OTTAWA FALLOWFIELD SITE VISIT 4.1 Site Visit Observations Our
site visit was made on January 16, 2015 between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00
p.m. The day was sunny and very cold. There was residual snow on
the roads after plowing but stop lines could still be seen. The
intersection of concern is the crossing of the combined bus
transitway and rail crossing at Fallowfield Road. This is a skewed
crossing; however, the stop lines for the intersection are
perpendicular to the roadway as are the railway gates. It was our
understanding from the City of Ottawa that the eastbound approach
to the crossing is the most problematic, with instances of vehicles
stopping beyond the stop line and being caught under the gates.
Damage to gates is a concern, but drivers continuing through when a
train is approaching is an even greater concern. In order to
understand driver behaviour at the crossing and to understand what
features of the intersection might affect stopping behaviour, we
made observations of the stopping location of vehicles at the
crossing of concern and two comparison locations along Fallowfield
Road. The three sites were as follows:
1. EB1: the crossing of concern, that is, the eastbound approach
to the intersection with the bus transitway and rail crossing
2. WB1: the westbound approach to the intersection with the bus
transitway and rail crossing
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 3
3. EB2: the eastbound approach to the intersection (Barrhaven
Crossing plaza) 250 m. upstream of the intersection referred to as
EB1 above
Both through lane and curb lane passenger vehicles were
observed. Large vehicles were a small percentage of the overall
traffic and so were not included in the sample. We observed
stopping location in terms of the front bumper of the vehicle
relative to the stop line. Vehicle positions were classified as
bumper:
Behind the first (wide) stop line
On the first (wide)stop line
Between the first and second stop line
On the second line
Beyond the second line
In the case of the WB1 crossing east of the railway crossing,
there was no second line, and vehicles were indicated to be so many
quarter metres beyond the first line (e.g., 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0
m). 4.2 Results 4.2.1 EB1
At EB1 there was a wide stop line, the far side of which,
according to the CIMA Technical Memorandum dated June 2014, was 2.4
m from the gates. There was a second narrower stop line 1.2 m from
the gates. This line is significantly faded. It is our
understanding from the City of Ottawa that it will not be
repainted. There was no pedestrian crossing. On the approach there
were ground mounted STOP LINE signs on either side of the roadway.
We observed the stopping location for 77 vehicles to be as
follows:
79% stopped with their bumpers behind the line 8% stopped on the
first line 6% stopped between the first and second lines 8% stopped
beyond the second line, including the 5% (4 vehicles) with bumpers
beyond
the gates, one by a full car length (see Photo 1)
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 4
Photo 1. Fallowfield Crossing (EB1) Two of the four drivers who
stopped beyond the gates backed up to avoid being caught by the
gates, should they have come down. In one of these cases there was
a train visible in the station. With respect to relative compliance
of drivers in the curb lane versus the passing lane, the following
results were found:
85% in curb lane were at or behind stop line; 3% (1/39) were
past the gates 89% in passing lane were at or behind stop line; 8%
(3/38) were past the gates
4.2.2 WB1
At WB1 there was a single wide stop line at the transitway
intersection. Beyond the signalized intersection, 66 m from this
stop line, were the gates and additional stop lines adjacent to the
tracks. There was no pedestrian crossing. On the approach there
were no STOP LINE signs. We observed the stopping location for 41
vehicles to be as follows:
41% stopped with their bumpers behind the transitway
intersection stop line 17% stopped on the stop line 42% stopped
beyond the stop line The 42% included 20% (8) who stopped more than
1 metre beyond the stop line, and 10%
(4) who stopped a full car length or more beyond the stop line
With respect to relative compliance of drivers in the curb lane
versus the passing lane, the following results were found:
79% in the curb lane were at or behind the stop line; 16% (3/19)
were at least 1 m past the stop line
41% in the passing lane were at or behind the stop line; 41%
(9/22) were at least 1 m past the stop line
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 5
4.2.3 EB2
At EB2 there was a wide stop line followed by two crosswalk
lines. We observed the stopping location for 36 vehicles to be as
follows:
61% stopped with their bumpers behind the stop line 19% stopped
on the stop line 8% stopped between the stop line and the first
crosswalk line 3% stopped on the first crosswalk line 8% stopped
beyond the first crosswalk line within the pedestrian crosswalk
With respect to relative compliance of drivers in the curb lane
versus the passing lane, the following results were found:
87% in the curb lane were at or behind the stop line; 76% in the
passing lane were at or behind the stop line
4.2.4 Compliance
Based on a comparison of the results from EB 1, EB 2 and WB 1,
compliance at EB 1 was best (87% with bumpers before or at the stop
line), followed by EB2 (80%) and WB1 (58%). The best performance at
EB1 may be in part because of the use of STOP LINE signs. The worst
performance at WB1 may be because neither a close-by railway gate
nor a pedestrian crossing was present nor were there any STOP LINE
signs, and so there was little consequence of stopping beyond the
stop line. Even though there was better compliance at EB1 than at
WB1, there was more inference with the gates at EB1. This is
because the margin of error was considerably less at EB1, where the
gates are 2.4 m from the stop line, as compared to that at WB1,
where the gates are 66 m from the stop line. The result was 5% of
vehicles potentially interfering with descending gates at EB1 but
no interference observed at WB1. At EB2, 3 out of 36 vehicles or
8.3% stopped within the pedestrian crosswalk. The same percentage
of vehicles stopped beyond the second line at EB1 with the hazard
of gates, as stopped there at EB2 with the hazard of a pedestrian
crosswalk. Thus, non-compliance was similar at EB1 and EB2. At EB1
compliance of vehicles in the curb and passing lanes was similar
(85% and 89% respectively), whereas at WB1 and EB2 compliance of
vehicles in the curb lane was better than that of vehicles in the
passing lane (79% vs. 41%, and 87% vs. 76% respectively.) Lower
speeds in the curb lane may make compliance easier for vehicles
caught in the dilemma zone. 4.2.5 Speed Observations
The speed limit on Fallowfield Road is 80 km/h. We made
observations of 25 free flow speeds on the eastbound approach while
the two upstream signals were green. The roads had some residual
snow after plowing which may have contributed to slightly slower
speeds than we would have observed on dry pavement. Free flow
traffic speeds ranged from 59 to 83 km/h with a mean of 73.4 km/h
and an 85th percentile of 80.2 km/h.
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 6
4.2.6 Crossing Conspicuity
With respect to the conspicuity of the rail crossing, there are
advance crossing signs, advance crossing pavement markings, and
crossbucks in both directions (EB1, WB1) and at EB1, ground-mounted
STOP LINE signs. The approach in both directions is on a tangent
and all signs are visible at a considerable distance, as are the
flashers. On the westbound approach the stop line at the transitway
intersection can be seen 5.8 seconds away at 60 km/h and the tracks
cannot be seen until 3 seconds away, well after passing the
transitway stop line. On the eastbound approach, the stop lines at
EB2 and EB1 can be seen at 5.2 seconds and 6.3 seconds away at 60
km/h, respectively, and the tracks at EB1 at 3.5 seconds. Thus, at
the mean recorded speed of 73.4 km/h, these distances are
equivalent to travel times of 4.7 seconds for the stop line and 2.7
seconds for the tracks. However, there are signs on both sides of
the eastbound lanes pointing to the stop line. On the westbound
approach (WB1) there are no STOP LINE signs. Perhaps this
contributes to the lower rate of compliance. The gate hinges are
gun metal gray and blend with the background.. The traffic signals
at EB1 are positioned in an unusual way (see Photo 2). There are
three signals. Signal 1 on the left side is closer to the eastbound
driver than Signal 2 on the right side. Signal 2 in the standard
position on the far side of the intersection on the right side.
Signal 3 is unusual and is on the nearside of the intersection on
the right. If anything one would expect the addition of a signal on
the nearside on the right to cause people to stop further back from
the stop line. This may also have contributed to better compliance
at EB1 than at EB2.
Photo 2. Positioning of Traffic Signals at EB1
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 7
4.2.7 Miscellaneous Observations
Twice we saw queues of buses on the transitway outbound from
Fallowfield Station (one queue of 3 and one queue of 4 buses) while
trains crossed, raising the question of why they cannot cross
simultaneously. On one occasion we noted that buses were not given
priority after the train crossed. However, we understand from the
City of Ottawa that the Peer Review/Safety Audit found that the
safest operation of the traffic signal was to hold the intersection
in an all-red state to prevent any vehicle movement during the
passing of trains at the crossing. The Peer Review/Safety Audit
also stipulated that following the passing of a train at the
crossing, the traffic signal would exit the all-red state to
service east-west traffic on Fallowfield Road before servicing
Southwest transitway buses. As such, the signal operation/phasing
here will not be revised. We observed that when snowplows
approached the crossing they slowed considerably and raised their
plows to go over the tracks. Within a two minute period, we saw two
snowplows, an ambulance with siren sounding, two buses waiting for
the crossing and a train in the crossing. We observed that buses
with many passengers have to wait more time to activate the lights
to cross Fallowfield Road than does a single driver exiting from
Barrhaven Crossing plaza have to wait for a signal change on
Fallowfield Road. We understand from the City of Ottawa that at all
times of day, bus traffic on the Southwest transitway receives
transit priority through advanced detection on the northbound and
southbound approaches to Fallowfield Road. The Fallowfield Road and
Southwest transitway traffic signal is coordinated for Fallowfield
Road traffic for six hours (25%) of each weekday during which time,
traffic on the Southwest transitway may experience slightly more
delay. For the remaining 18 hours (75%) of each weekday and all day
Saturday and Sunday, the Fallowfield Road and Southwest transitway
traffic signal operates uncoordinated so that delay to bus traffic
on the Southwest transitway is minimized. The coordinated operation
of the traffic signal here will not be revised at this time.
5 MONTRAL SITE VISIT Crossings similar to the Fallowfield rail
crossing can be found in the South Shore area of Montral, where in
St-Bruno-de-Montarville trains are travelling at 100 mph going over
4 crossings (Segneurial 62.18, de Boucherville 60.87, du Millenaire
60.04, des Trinitaires 59.36), all with two mainline tracks that
intersect Boulevard Sir Wilfrid Laurier. All have traffic lights
adjoining the rail crossing with pre-emption. Two of these
crossings were selected as being most similar to the Fallowfield
rail crossing and observations of stop line compliance were made.
Boulevard Segneurial (Crossing 1) is a four-lane divided arterial
with two lanes in each direction and a posted limit of 50 km/h. The
subject southbound approach widens to three lanes with one left
turn lane, one right turn lane, and the middle lane has the option
of continuing straight or turning right. There is a sidewalk and a
bus stop adjacent to the stop line. The pavement surface between
the stop line and the gates is hatched but the paint was partially
worn. There is no pedestrian crosswalk (Photo 3). Boulevard du
Millenaire (Crossing 2) is a four-lane divided arterial with two
lanes in each direction and a posted limit of 50 km/h. The subject
northbound approach widens to three lanes with one left turn lane,
one right turn lane, and the middle lane has the option of
continuing straight or turning right. There is a sidewalk and a bus
stop adjacent to the stop line. The area between the stop line and
the gates is not hatched. There is a pedestrian crosswalk between
the stop line and the gates (Photo 4).
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 8
Photo 3. Crossing 1 (Boulevard Segneurial)
Photo 4. Crossing 2 (Boulevard du Millenaire)
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 9
5.1 Site Visit Observations The site visit was made on a sunny
day, on January 27, 2015 between 11:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. The roads
were dry. Observations were made of vehicles in all three lanes.
Large vehicles were a small percentage of the overall traffic and
so were not included in the sample. The stopping location was
observed in terms of the front bumper of the vehicle relative to
the stop line. Vehicle positions were classified as bumper:
Behind the stop line On the stop line Or so many quarter metres
beyond the first line (e.g., 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0 m).
At both crossings there was a second stop line beyond the rail
crossing and adjacent to the intersecting roadway. Observations
were also made of the number of vehicles that stopped at the second
stop line. 5.2 Results 5.2.1 Boulevard Segneurial
At Boulevard Segneurial the 18 metre distance between the stop
line and the gates was hatched for all three lanes. There was a
second narrower stop line beyond the rail crossing that was 43 m
from the first stop line. There was no pedestrian crossing. There
were traffic signals adjacent to the rail crossing warning lights,
about 15 metres beyond the stop line. Adjacent to the stop line
there were ground mounted STOP LINE signs on either side of the
roadway. The stopping locations for the 77 vehicles observed were
as follows:
86% stopped with their bumpers behind the first stop line 5%
stopped on the first stop line 4% stopped up to 1.0 m beyond the
first stop line 4% stopped 1.0 to 2.0 m beyond the first stop line
0% stopped at the second stop line
The three drivers who stopped more than 1.0 m beyond the first
stop line positioned their vehicles about 1/3 of a car length
beyond the stop line (the position of the driver was in the
vicinity of the stop line). With respect to relative compliance of
drivers in the curb lane vs. the passing lane, the following
results were found:
92% in the curb lane were at or behind the stop line; 3% (1/37)
were more than 1.0 m beyond the stop line
86% in the middle lane were at or behind the stop line; 5%
(1/22) were more than 1.0 m beyond the stop line
72% in the left lane were at or behind the stop line; 6% (1/13)
were more than 1.0 m beyond the stop line
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 10
5.2.2 Boulevard du Millenaire
At Boulevard du Millenaire the distance from the stop line to
the two crosswalk lines was 15 metres and 18 metres, respectively,
and the distance between the stop line to the gates was 24 metres.
There was a second narrower stop line beyond the rail crossing that
was 55 m from the first stop line. There was no pedestrian
crossing. There were traffic signals adjacent to the rail crossing
warning lights, about 20 metres beyond the stop line. Adjacent to
the stop line there were ground mounted STOP LINE signs on either
side of the roadway. The stopping locations for the 61 vehicles
observed were as follows:
69% stopped with their bumpers behind the first stop line 20%
stopped on the first stop line 10% stopped up to 1.0 m beyond the
first stop line 2% stopped 1.0 to 2.0 m beyond the first stop line
0% stopped at the second stop line
The one driver who stopped more than 1.0 m beyond the first stop
line positioned the vehicle about one car length beyond the stop
line. With respect to relative compliance of drivers in the curb
lane vs. the passing lane, the following results were found:
76% in the curb lane were at or behind the stop line; 5% (1/21)
were more than 1.0 m beyond the stop line
64% in the middle lane were at or behind the stop line; none
(0/22) were more than 1.0 m beyond the stop line
67% in the left lane were at or behind the stop line; none
(0/18) were more than 1.0 m beyond the stop line
5.2.3 Crossing Conspicuity
With respect to the conspicuity of both rail crossings, there
were two sets of flashers on the gantry as well as a crossbucks,
two sets of flashers on both sides of the road, crossbucks on both
sides of the road, and ground-mounted STOP LINE signs. There were
no advance pavement markings at either crossing. Only Crossing 2
had an advance rail crossing sign. The approach to both crossings
was on a tangent and the gantry in advance of the crossing was
visible at a considerable distance, as were the flashers. Both
roads were four-lane divided arterials with sidewalks on both sides
and were posted at 50 km/h. The hatched area between the stop line
and the gates at Crossing 1 showed signs of wear in all three lanes
with the most degradation in the curb lane. 5.2.4 Compliance
Compliance was best at Crossing 1, where the pavement surface
was hatched between the stop line and the gates. At this
intersection 86% stopped with their bumpers behind the first stop
line and 91% stopped with their bumpers on or behind the stop line.
In contrast, at Crossing 2, where there was a pedestrian crosswalk
and no hatched area between the stop line and the gates, 69%
stopped with their bumpers behind the stop line and 89% stopped
with the bumpers on or behind the stop line. There were no issues
at either crossing with vehicles interfering with the gates as the
stop line was so far back from them.
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 11
6 DISCUSSION 6.1 Compliance Comparing crossings in Montral and
Ottawa, drivers were more compliant at the two Montral crossings
than at the three Ottawa crossings, including the rail crossing at
Fallowfield (EB1) that we studied (see Table 1). The Montral
crossings were in 50 km/h speed limit zones (as compared to 80 km/h
speed limit in Ottawa) which may account in part for the better
compliance, given that it is easier to stop more accurately from a
lower speed. Table 1: Rail Crossing Comparisons
Inter-section
Posted Speed
N %
Stopped behind
line
% Stopped behind line or on line
% Stopped
over line
Distance stop line to gates
% Beyond gates
Stop line
signs Ped.
crossing Hatching
EB1 80 km/h 77 79 87 13 2.4 m 5%
EB2 80 km/h 36 41 58 42 -- N/A N/A
WB1 80 km/h 41 61 80 20 66 m 0
Segneurial 50 km/h 77 86 91 9 18 m 0
du Millenaire
50 km/h 61 69 89 11 24 m 0
An increased distance between the traffic signal stop line and
the rail crossing gates appeared to eliminate the problem of
vehicles stopping under or beyond the gates. This problem was
nonexistent at WB1 in Ottawa and at the two Montral crossings where
the distance between the stop line and the gates was 18 m or
greater as compared to only 2.4 m at the EB1 (Fallowfield)
crossing. At this latter crossing one of the four vehicles with
bumpers beyond the gates was a full car length beyond the stop
line. As discussed in the review of stop line literature, at four
signalized intersections in St. Petersburg, Florida, the stop line,
originally 1.2 m back from the crosswalk, was moved an additional
4.8 m back from the crosswalk, resulting in the 92% of drivers
stopping before the crosswalk, an improvement from the previous
74%. Based on this study, and based on the three other studies
showing the impact of stop line placement on compliance, improved
compliance would be expected were the stop line to be moved further
back from the railway gates. During observations of 77 vehicles
over the course of 3.5 hours, we observed 5% (4 vehicles) with
bumpers beyond the gates at EB1. In contrast, at WB1 and at both
crossings in Montral, where stop lines were 18 to 66 m from the
gates, drivers were very compliant with the stop line and no
drivers were observed to stop anywhere near the gates.
Consideration should be given to moving the EB1 stop line 5 to 18 m
further back from the gates (See Photo 5). Currently the driver has
to exceed the stop line by as little as half a car length before
coming into potential conflict with the gates. As can be seen from
Photo 5, there are no entrances or other features which might
interfere with this change in location.
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 12
Photo 5. Google Streetview image about 50 m. back from the
current stop line at the
Fallowfield crossing (EB1) The likely effectiveness of moving
the stop line is supported by several findings. First, it is
supported by studies of stop line impact on stopping location,
which showed less encroachment with pedestrian crossings when the
stop line was moved further from the crossing. One study in
particular showed greatly improved compliance when the stop line
was moved an additional 4.8 m, for a total of 6 m, from the
crossing. Second, observations in Ottawa showed high compliance
with the stop line at EB1, the approach of interest, but
interference with the railway gate by 5% of vehicles when the gate
was only 2.4 m from the stop line. Third, observations in Montral
showed that long (18 to 24 m) distances between railway crossings
and stop lines led to high compliance and no issues of stopping
near the gates. 6.2 Speed As noted earlier, we made observations of
25 free flow speeds on the eastbound approach while the two
upstream signals were green. The roads had some residual snow after
plowing which may have contributed to slightly slower speeds than
we would have observed on dry pavements. Free flow traffic speeds
ranged from 59 to 83 km/h with a mean of 73.4 km/h and an 85th
percentile of 80.2 km/h. This is an arterial with a number of
signalized intersections which are closely spaced. Based on our
speed results and the roadway environment, a 70 km/h speed limit
might be considered. However, it is our understanding from the City
of Ottawa that their speed survey data of free flowing traffic on
Fallowfield Road in the vicinity of the crossing indicates higher
speeds than we measured in non-optimum road conditions. They found
an average vehicle speed of
-
HUMAN FACTORS NORTH INC. Human Factors Review of the Fallowfield
At-Grade Rail Crossing City of Ottawa
Page 13
78 km/h and an 85th percentile speed of 85 km/h. Their Speed
Zoning Policy supports the existing 80 km/h posted speed limit. In
their opinion, a reduction of the speed limit here will likely only
result in lower driver compliance of the speed limit and
enforcement issues over the long term. In absence of any other
changes to the road design and environment, we agree with this
assessment. 6.3 Gate Conspicuity The gate hinges are gunmetal gray
they would stand out more and would not cause any more of a visual
blockage if they were painted a fluorescent colour. We understand
from the City of Ottawa that this matter is under the jurisdiction
of VIA Rail.
7 RECOMMENDATIONS We strongly recommend that the stop line at
the Fallowfield signalized intersection/railway crossing of
interest be moved upstream by 5 m (a car-length) to 18 m. As noted
above, the likely effectiveness of moving the stop line is
supported by several findings, including 1) scientific studies
showing stop lines influence stopping location, 2) observations in
Ottawa showing high compliance with the stop line at EB1, the
approach of interest, but interference with the railway gate by 5%
of vehicles when the gate was only 2.4 m from the stop line and 3)
observations in Montral showing that long (18 to 24 m) distances
between railway crossings and stop lines led to high compliance and
no issues of stopping near the gates. Based on the CIMA Technical
Memorandum, the location of the current stop lines is in accordance
with the MUTCDC in that they exceed the minimum perpendicular
distance of 5.0 m from the closest rail. There is no guideline
provided for the distance between the stop line to the railway
warning device (in this case, the gates). Thus, if the stop lines
were moved further from the crossing, they would still be in
accordance with the MUTCDC.
8 REFERENCES Mortimer, R.G. and Nagamachi, M. Effects of roadway
markings on vehicles stopping in pedestrian crosswalks. Highway
Safety Research Institute, The University of Michigan. 1969.
Mortimer, R.G., Nagamachi, M., and Carlson, W.L. Experimental
investigation of the effects of roadway markings on vehicles
stopping in pedestrian crossings. Report HuF-4. Highway Safety
Research Institute, The University of Michigan. 1969.
Retting, A. and Van Houten, R. Safety benefits of advance stop
lines at signalized intersections: Results of a field evaluation.
ITE Journal, Sept. 2000, 47-54. 2000.
Van Houten, R. The effectiveness of advance stop lines and sign
prompts on pedestrian safety in a crosswalk on a multilane highway.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 245-251. 1988.
Alison Smiley, Ph.D., CCPE Thomas Smahel, M.Arch., CCPE