"Trail Crossing Design 101"

D & L Trail Crossing Workshop

October 2, 2013

Trail Crossing Design: 101

Today’s Objectives

Construct Safe Crossing

Permitting Process

Ownership, Maintenance and Liability

Factors

Good Design

Why Good Design Matters

Remember:

Each Situation is Unique

Engineering Judgment is Needed

Document Your Design Decisions

Key Design Resources AASHTO “Guide for the Design of Bicycle Facilities” 2012 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 2009 AASHTO Green Book 2011 FHWA 2001 Study on Crosswalk Markings PennDOT Publication 46 Pennsylvania Vehicle Code

Design Guidance

Covered in Detail in New AASHTO Bike Guide Significant Expansion on Shared Use Path Design

Crossing Types

Crosswalk Context

Determining Control at Mid-block Crossings

Crossing Treatments

Sidepath Crossings

Restricting Motor Vehicle Access PBIC Webinar Archives:

http://www.walkinginfo.org/training/pbic/AASHTO_webinars.cfm

Types of Crossings

Mid-block Intersection Uncontrolled Approaches Controlled (Yield, Stop or Signal)

Figure 5-13. Mid-Block and Sidepath Crossings Relative to Intersection Functional Area

Key’s to a Good Design

PennDOT Permitting, Maintenance and Liability

Municipal Coordination

Adequate Warning Plan

Right-of-Way Assignment

Ensure Sufficient Sight Distance

Context Considerations (Speeds/Volume/Driver-Trail User Expectations)

Early Planning Considerations

Thinking Ahead: Alignment Challenges

Sight Distance Crossing Alignment Offset Intersections

Early Planning Considerations

Nor-Bath Trail at Savage Road

Allen Township (outside Borough of

Northampton).

Aligned Trail Approach:

- Slows trail users - Improves Sight

Lines Crosswalk

Alignment Challenges

Highway Context Considerations

Document Highway Conditions

Sight Distance Volumes Speed (posted and 85th percentiles speeds) Approach Grades Competing Signs Nearby Driveways Other Driver Distractions (Negotiating

complex intersections etc) Roadway Deficiencies on Approaches Road Use Expectancy of Crossing

Trail Context Considerations

Approach Sight Triangles Trail Volume Regional Trail User Profile Speed (design)

Approach Grades Consider Design Modifications

(add curve to alignment) Trail User Expectancy of Road

Crossing

Document Trail Conditions:

Sight Distance Basics

Minimum Safe Stopping Sight Distance Crossing Sight Distance Yield Sight Distance

Ensure Sufficient Sight Distance

AASHTO Stopping Sight Distance

Drivers Eye Height - 3.5’ Object Height - 3.5’ (PennDOT Publication 46, Section 11.9.6. Sight Distance) Speed (85th Percentile Speeds) Friction Factor and Reaction Times Continuous – Uninterrupted (consider season)

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/pedbike/05085/images/les8fig9.gif

AASHTO Green Book: Stopping Sight Distance

D & L Trail Middleburg Road

Crossing Sight Distance

Shared Use Path Crossing Agreement

10) CROSSING SIGHT DISTANCES – Sight distance shall be measured as follows:

d = 1.47V(tg)

d = crossing sight distance required along the highway

V = design speed (mi/hr) of the highway to be crossed

tg = time required for pedestrians to cross the highway (not including shoulder)

(include 2 seconds for perception-reaction time + crossing time at 3.5 feet per

second)

Yield Control - Sight Distance Calculation

Objective: Provide unobstructed view to allow user to slow or stop to avoid conflict

Based on adult bicyclist: fastest path user Design speed of road for motorists

Old Guide – 20 mph standards

New Guide – Not “One Speed Fits All”

Consider User Profile, Grades and Surface Considerations Typical 85th percentile is > 14 mph 18 mph on a flat approach Up to 30 mph on downhill

Yield Control – Trail Design Speeds

Yield Control

– AASHTO Sight Distance Equations-

Clear sight triangle – 15 feet 2.5 second reaction time for a pedestrian moving at 6 feet

per second

Don’t Forget the Sidewalk Conflicts

Determining Intersection Control

Principle of Mutual Yielding Intersection Control Considerations Intersection Control - AASHTO Diagrams

Right-of-Way Assignment

Principles of Mutual Yielding

Pennsylvania Vehicle Code Section 3542 (a) General rule – When traffic-control signals are not in place or not in operation,

the driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.

(b) Exercise of care by a pedestrian.- No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close as to constitute a hazard.

Principles of Mutual Yielding

• Works well with pedestrians • Does not work well with bicyclists –

AASHTO Bike Guide addresses this issues:

Intersection Control Considerations

AASHTO: Choose Least Restrictive Control that is Effective

Consider Roadway Classification, Volumes and Speeds

Consider Trail Volume and Regional Function Example:

Local low volume street intersection with a regional trail or high volume trail

Trail Stop Controlled

Trail Yield Controlled

Roadway Stop Controlled

Intersection Yield Controlled

Warn the Roadway User

MUTCD – Standard to Use (PennDOT Publication 236, Based on 2009 MUTCD)

AASHTO Bike Guide Provides Examples & Guidance

Engineering Judgment is Key Document Design Factors

Roadway and Trail User Volumes, Speeds, Approach Geometry etc.

Adequate Warning Plan

Warn the Trail User

2009 MUTCD Part 9: Traffic Control for Bicycle Facilities

2012 AASHTO Bike Guide: Examples and Guidance

Adequate Warning Plan

Crosswalks: To Mark or Not to Mark?

Adequate Warning Plan

Pennsylvania Vehicle Code MUTCD FHWA Study Pedestrian Safety Countermeasures

Mid-Block vs. Intersection Crosswalks

PA Vehicle Code Title 75: Section 102 Definitions

“Crosswalk"

(1) That part of a roadway at an intersection included within the connections of

the lateral lines of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway, measured

from the curbs or, in the absence of curbs, from the edge of the traversable

roadway; and, in absense of a sidewalk on one side of the roadway, that part

of a roadway included within the extension of the lateral lines of the existing

sidewalk.

(2) Any portion of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated

for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the surface.

Crosswalks Legally Establish the Crosswalk at “Non-Intersection” Locations

Must Meet Criteria from PennDOT Publication 46

PA Vehicle Code Title 75: Section 102 Definitions

Intersection. “…….the area within which vehicles traveling upon different highways

joining at any other angle may come in conflict.”

Vehicle “Every device in, upon or by which any person or property is or may be

transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices used exclusively upon rails or

tracks. The term does not include a self-propelled wheelchair or an electrical mobility

device operated by and designed for the exclusive use of a person with a mobility-

related disability.”

An intersection is a crossing between vehicles

A bicycle is a vehicle

Therefore:

Shared use crossings are intersections (not mid-block crossings)

Crosswalks pavement marking can be installed without violating

mid-block policy

Per Correspondence with PennDOT (BHSTE) Bureau of Highway Safety and Traffic Engineering

Mid-Block vs. Intersection Crosswalks

2009 MUTCD Section 3B.18: Crosswalk Markings

Provide guidance for pedestrians who are crossing roadways.

Help to alert the road users of a designated pedestrian crossing point.

Legally establish the crosswalk, at non-intersection locations.

Engineering study should be performed before a marked crosswalk is installed at a location away form a traffic control signal or an approach controlled by a STOP or YIELD sign.

Why Do an Engineering Study

What Looks Like This to a Trail User:

May Look Like This to a Driver:

FHWA 2001 Study: Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked

Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations

2009 MUTCD

More than a marked crosswalk is needed if:

Speed limit exceeds 40 mph Roadway has 4 or more lanes of travel

AND

ADT 12,000 (without raised median island) or

ADT 15,000 (with raised median island)

Counter Measure Resources

Use High Visibility Markings

Supplemental and Advanced Warning Signs

Increase Awareness for Drivers

In-street and Overhead Signing

Curb Extensions at Crossings

Reduce the crossing distance

Allows Pedestrian to Navigate in Two Stages

Wide Roadways with High Speeds and Traffic Volumes

Reduces Pedestrian Exposure to Traffic

Crash Reduction

Design should Consider a Design that Allows Pedestrians to Face Traffic Approaching

Minimum Width 6’ for Cyclists (10’ Preferred)

Pedestrian Refuge Island

Creative Approach in Carlisle

Advance Yield Lines/Signage

•1

Two Lanes in Same Direction Multiple Threat Solutions

Flashers and Signals

Traditional Warning Beacon/Flasher

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon aka HAWK (not approved in PA)

Pedestrian Signal

What is the Difference?

Flashing Warning Light Solutions

All require flashing signal permits from the Traffic Unit !

Provisional Approval

Standard

PennDOT

approval

Not as noticeable

during daylight

hours Rectangular rapid

flashing beacon

Advanced Warning - Sight Distance

Traditional (Wig-Wag) Warning Beacon

Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon (RRFB)

Saucon Trail – Spring Valley Road (SR 2034)

Figure 3.9: Pre- and post-RRFB installation yield rates at three intersections

December 2011 FHWA and Oregon DOT Report:

“Assessment of Driver Yield Rates Pre- and Post-RRFB Installation, Bend, Oregon”

RRFB Passive Detection – In Action

Signalized Intersections

Adequate Warning Plan

MUTCD specifies requirements Pedestrian Push Buttons Hand/Man and Count Down Signal

Equipment Audible Push Buttons Detection Options (trail users) Phasing Adjustments or Turn Restrictions

(minimize conflicts) Directional Signage ADA Ramps

Other Signalized Intersection Considerations

Other Design/Safety Features

Motor Vehicle Restriction - Bollards Lighting Accessibility Considerations at Crossings

Adequate Warning Plan

Bollards Can Ruin a Good Ride

Bollards are discouraged in AASHTO Bike Guide Sight distance issues - Rider in

front can block view for those behind)

Cause frequent injuries Rider uneasiness Slow emergency responders Vehicles often find ways

around There are alternatives to

motor vehicle restriction

Alternative Treatments of Combination

Motor Restriction Signage Flexible Delineators Split Entrance with Low Landscaping Staggered Swing Gates Not Mentioned in AASHTO Bike Guide

Reserve Bollards for Locations with Known Enforcement Issues

Photo by Steven Pohowsky

Bollards Continued…

If utilized, following principles should be applied. Use of one bollard in the center is preferred Use and odd number of bollards Ensure ADA access – 36” width minimum Minimum height of 40 inches Set back min of 30’ from road Lockable/removable/reclining bollards Ensure Visibility - Bright Retroreflective Materials Ensure Adequate Sight Distance Consider Striping Around Approach

Lighting Recommended at roadway intersections where path connects to

sidewalks (night time use is likely) Tunnels and underpasses Where nighttime riding is permitted:

Recommended at path-roadway intersections Recommended at locations where personal security is an issue

Additional lighting guidance is included in AASHTO guide

Proposed Accessibility Guidelines – Shared Use Paths –

Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR)

Trail - A pedestrian route developed primarily for outdoor recreational purposes vs. Shared Use Path - A shared use path is a multi-use path designed for both transportation and recreation purposes. Shared use paths typically are separated from motorized vehicular traffic by an open space or barrier, either within a highway right-of-way or within an independent right-of-way. Distinguishing Characteristics - “transportation” purpose and “multi-use” Shared use paths are designed primarily for bicycles and pedestrians.

Proposed Rule

Ramp/DWS Width – If provided, should be as wide as the shared use path (minimum 5’) Detectable Warning Surfaces - Where a shared use path connects to or crosses a roadway or railway crossing. No proposed requirement for DWS for shared use path or pedestrian intersections

Local Roads

MUTCD and AASHTO Must Still be Followed

(Signage, Markings, ADA Features, Directional Signage, ETC.)

Agreements / Review Process will Vary By Municipality

May Pay Review Fees - Even for a S.R. Crossing

Tips for Success

Meet EARLY with the Municipal Staff

Explain Benefits of the Trail

Address Local Concerns in Design

Be Creative – If Known Opposition Exists, Find Local Champion

Steve will Cover PennDOT Related Topics

Liability and Maintenance Agreements- Common Sticking Point for Crossings

Municipal Coordination

PennDOT Permitting, Maintenance and Liability Concerns

Steve?