Study compares accident frequency at Puffins and crossings using farside facilities

Accident frequencies at pedestrian crossings using the nearside (Puffin) and farside pedestrian signals were compared in a before and after study. A review of previous Puffin crossing studies was also undertaken. Site inspections revealed that 84% of sites were considered adequate or better. A notable finding from the survey was that the cancel facility was not operating at a large number of sites, even though in most cases the kerbside detection appeared to be functional. It is likely that some authorities or their maintenance contractors may have disabled the cancel facility to avoid perceived problems. Inspection of the coverage at sites where the cancel facility was not operating showed that around 60% of sites not covering the full recommended area. Mid-block crossing control tended to be relatively responsive to pedestrian demand and there are often few opportunities to cancel. Pedestrian facilities at a junction can benefit greatly from cancel facilities in terms of delay prevention. Injury accident data collected for the 50 sites showed that there were reductions in accident frequency after conversion to Puffin facilities.

• Authors:
  • MAXWELL, A
  • KENNEDY, J
  • ROUTLEDGE, I
• Publication Date: 2010

Language

• English

Media Info

• Pagination: 11p
• Serial:
  • TRL STAFF PAPERS
  • Publisher: TRL

Subject/Index Terms

• TRT Terms: Before and after studies; Crash rates; Crosswalks; Design; Intersections; Pedestrians; Traffic signals
• ITRD Terms: 1612: Accident rate; 9148: Before and after study; 9011: Design (overall design); 455: Junction; 1733: Pedestrian; 1659: Pedestrian crossing; 565: Traffic signal
• Subject Areas: Design; Pedestrians and Bicyclists; I82: Accidents and Transport Infrastructure; I85: Safety Devices used in Transport Infrastructure;

Filing Info

• Accession Number: 01336565
• Record Type: Publication
• Source Agency: TRL
• Files: ITRD
• Created Date: Apr 15 2011 3:59PM