Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a HAWK Signal on Compliance in Las Vegas Nevada

Authors: A. Paz, M. Khadka, N. Veeramisti, B. Morris

Abstract:

There is a continuous large number of crashes involving pedestrians in Nevada despite the numerous safety mechanisms currently used at roadway crossings. Hence, additional as well as more effective mechanisms are required to reduce crashes in Las Vegas, in particular, and Nevada in general. A potential mechanism to reduce conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles is a High-intensity Activated crossWalK (HAWK) signal. This study evaluates the effects of such signals at a particular site in Las Vegas. Video data were collected using two cameras, facing the eastbound and westbound traffic. One week of video data before and after the deployment of the signal were collected to capture the behavior of both pedestrians and drivers. T-test analyses of pedestrian waiting time at the curb, curb-to-curb crossing time, total crossing time, jaywalking events, and near-crash events show that the HAWK system provides significant benefits.

Keywords: Pedestrian crashes, HAWK signal, traffic safety, pedestrian danger index.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1339516

References:

[1] Cui, Z., and S. S. Nambisan, “Methodology for Evaluating the Safety of Mid-Block Pedestrian Crossings”, In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1828, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 75-82.
[2] Pulugurtha, S. S., and S.S. Nambisan, “A methodology to identify high pedestrian crash locations: an illustration using the Las Vegas metro area”, In 82nd Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting, CD-ROM, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D. C., 2003.
[3] Zero Fatalities: Drive Safe Nevada. Nevada Department of Public Safety, Office of Traffic Safety. Carson City, NV, 2010.
[4] Ernst, M., M. Lang, and S. Davis, “Dangerous by Design 2011”. Transportation for America, 2011. http://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/livable-communities/learn/transportation/dangerous-by-design-2011-aarp.pdf. Accessed on July 10, 2012.
[5] Nambisan, S. S., M. R. Dangeti, and V. Vasudevan, “Pedestrian Safety Engineering and Intelligent Transportation System-Based Countermeasures Program for Reducing Pedestrian Fatalities, Injuries, Conflicts, and Other Surrogate Measures (Phase 2 Final Technical Report)”, FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2008.
[6] Fitzpatrick, K., S. Turner, M. Brewer, P. Carlson, B. Ullman, N. Trout, E.S. Park, J. Whitacre, N. Lalani, and D. Lord, “Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings”, TCRP/NCHRP Report 112/562, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D. C., 2006.
[7] City of Las Vegas, Nevada. Media Release. http://lasvegasnevada.gov/Publications/26223.htm. Accessed on July 10, 2012.
[8] Martin, A, “Factors Influencing Pedestrian Safety: A Literature Review”, Project report UPR SE/199/05, TRL Limited, 2006 (unpublished)
[9] Sisiopiku, V. P., and D. Akin, “Pedestrian behaviors at and perceptions towards various pedestrian facilities: an examination based on observation and survey data”, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behavior, vol. 6, No.4, 2003, pp. 249-274.
[10] Lu, G., and D. A. Noyce, “Noyce. Pedestrian Crossings at Mid-Block Locations: A Fuzzy Logic Solution for Existing Signal Operations”, In 88th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2009.
[11] Copeland, L., “Cities try to improve crosswalk safety”, USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-02-24-crosswalk_N.htm. Accessed on July 12, 2012.
[12] Zegeer, C. V., J. R. Stewart, H.H. Huang, P. A. Lagerwey, J. Feaganes, and B. J. Campbell, “Safety Effects of Marked versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations: Final Report and Recommended Guidelines”, Publication FHWA-HRT-04-100, FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2005.
[13] Arhin, S., and E. C., Noel, “Evaluation of Hawk Signal at Georgia Avenue and Hemlock Street, NW in the District of Columbia”, Publication DDOT-PPSA-HAWK-001. District Department of Transportation Planning, Policy and Sustainability Administration, 2010.
[14] Nassi, R. B., and M. J. Barton, “New Traffic Control for an Old Pedestrian Crossing Safety Problem”, APWA Reporter, June 2008, pp. 44–49. http://www.apwa.net/Resources/Reporter/Articles/2008/6/New-traffic-control-for-an-old-pedestrian-crossing-safety-problem. Accessed on July 9, 2012.
[15] Fitzpatrick, K., and E. S. Park, “Safety Effectiveness of HAWK Pedestrian Treatment”, In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2140, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2009, pp. 214–223.
[16] Fitzpatrick, K., and E. S. Park, “Safety Effectiveness of the HAWK Pedestrian Crossing Treatment”, Publication FHWA-HRT-10-042. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2010.
[17] Godavarthy, R. P., and E. R. Russell, “Effectiveness of a HAWK Beacon Signal at Mid-Block Pedestrian Crossings in Decreasing Unnecessary Delay to the Drivers”, In 89th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, CD-ROM, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010.
[18] “Effectiveness of the HAWK pedestrian activated mid-block crosswalk located in central avenue nearest to Cambridge”, Westfield Police Department, 2011.
[19] “Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (2009 Edition)”. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation. 2009.
[20] “TRINA- Traffic Records Information Access”, Nevada Department of Transportation, Carson City, NV. http://apps.nevadadot.com/Trina/. Accessed on July 8, 2012.