Citation

Barker DJ, Wong YW, Yue WL. Aust. Road Res. 1991; 21(1): 22-29.

Affiliation

Napier Polytechnic, Edinburgh, Scotl

Copyright

(Copyright © 1991, Australian Road Research Board ARRB)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Cycle times under traffic responsive linking are often very high in many Australian cities. This often leads to apparently unnecessary delays at signalised intersections. Past observations have indicated that this results in increased disobedience of the pedestrian signal control and consequently may affect the accident potential of such facilities. This paper reports on an investigation into the relationships between the degree of pedestrian violation of signal control and the average cycle time, average pedestrian delay, crosswalk distance, conflicting vehicle movements, pedestrian volumes, signal settings and the flow rate of vehicles over the crosswalk. In the Australian States considered in the survey, pedestrian movements commence with a WALK display. This is followed by a flashing DON'T WALK display. Although technically illegal it was found that, on average, 62 per cent of arriving pedestrians stepped off the kerb during the latter. The data from 33 sites indicated there were significant correlations, at the 5 per cent level, between pedestrian violations and both pedestrian flow rates (positive) and the duration of the flashing DON'T WALK display (negative). After the flashing DON'T WALK display the pedestrian signals revert to a continuous DON'T WALK display. At 24 of the sites considered in the survey, pedestrians ignoring this control were in conflict with a through vehicle movement. The level of noncompliance of arriving pedestrians in such circumstances was 9 per cent which reflected the increase in perceived risk when compared with the noncompliance of flashing DON'T WALK displays. An analysis of the data indicated that there was a significant correlation between the level of violation of continuous DON'T WALK displays and the vehicle flow rate over the crosswalk. The variables considered in the study explained very little of the observed differences in the level of compliance for both types of DON'T WALK display.

Language: en