This paper analyzes the understanding of in-street pedestrian crossing signs and the signing preferences of pedestrians and drivers at university campus crosswalks. These perceptions are contrasted with a safety assessment based on field data collected at crosswalks with in-street signs and at crosswalks with other types of treatments. Two opinion surveys, one for pedestrians and one for drivers, were conducted to document and analyze perceptions and preferences. In addition, pedestrian and driver behavior including yield rates, courtesy yield, and pedestrian looking behavior, together with pedestrian-vehicle conflicts, were evaluated based on field data from intersection and midblock locations. Results indicate that in-street pedestrian crossing signs are perceived by both pedestrians and drivers as significantly safer than other pedestrian signs, but only 50% of them correctly understand the meaning of the signs. The other half has different degrees of misunderstanding that may create false sense of security, thereby increasing the potential for pedestrian-vehicle conflicts. Field data showed that at locations with in-street driver yield rates were significantly higher (over 80% of lead pedestrians were yielded) than with typical pedestrian signs; the occurrence of pedestrian-vehicle conflicts at crosswalks with the in-street signs was comparable to marked crosswalks (4% at intersections, 2.4% at midblocks); and a slightly lower percentage of pedestrians looked both ways before crossing the street.
Samenvatting