Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals
Restricted access
Research article
First published online January 1, 2015

Pedestrian and Bicyclist Accommodations and Crossings on Superstreets

Abstract

This research considered the unique challenges for pedestrians and bicyclists at superstreet intersections and recommends crossing alternatives for both users. For pedestrians, the options included the diagonal cross, median cross, two-stage Barnes Dance, and midblock cross. For bicyclists, the options included the bicycle U-turn, bicycle use of the vehicle U-turn, bicycle direct cross, and midblock cross. These options were analyzed through microsimulation on the basis of average stopped delay, average number of stops, and average travel time per route. Various parameters were analyzed for each crossing configuration, including two signal cycle lengths (90 and 180 s), two signal splits (60/40 and 75/25), two signal offset designs (vehicle platoons arrive simultaneously and at various offset times), and two midblock distances (600 and 800 ft). The recommended pedestrian crossing was a combination of the diagonal cross with the midblock cross. The parameters that decreased travel time for pedestrians were a 90-s cycle length, a 60/40 signal split, and an offset signal design in which the vehicle platoons arrived at different times. For bicyclists, the bicycle direct cross resulted in the lowest average number of stops and the lowest average travel time, whereas the vehicle U-turn showed the lowest stopped delay. The parameters that decreased travel time for bicyclists included a 90-s cycle length and the vehicle platoons arriving at different times. The recommended options for bicyclists at a superstreet were a combination of the bicycle direct cross and the midblock cross.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

References

1. Haley R. L., Ott S. E., Hummer J. E., Foyle R. S., Cunningham C. M., and Schroeder B. J. Operational Effects of Signalized Superstreets in North Carolina. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2223, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2011, pp. 72–79.
2. Kramer R. P. New Combinations of Old Techniques to Rejuvenate Jammed Suburban Arterials. ITE Journal, March 1987, pp. 139.
3. Sisiopiku V. P., and Akin D. Pedestrian Behaviors at and Perceptions Towards Various Pedestrian Facilities: An Examination Based on Observation and Survey Data. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2003, pp. 249–274.
4. Hummer J. E., and Jagannathan R. An Update on Superstreet Implementation and Research. Presented at 8th National Conference on Access Management, Baltimore, Md., 2008.
5. Ma W., Yang X., Pu W., and Liu Y. Signal Timing Optimization Models for Two-Stage Midblock Pedestrian Crossing. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2198, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010, pp. 133–144.
6. Ishaque M., and Noland R. Pedestrian and Vehicle Flow Calibration in Multimodal Traffic Microsimulation. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Washington, D.C., 2009, pp. 338–348.
7. Winters M., Teschke K., Grant M., Setton E. M., and Brauer M. How Far Out of the Way Will We Travel? Built Environment Influences on Route Selection for Bicycle and Car Travel. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2190, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010, pp. 1–10.
8. Hughes W., Jagannathan R., Sengupta D., and Hummer J. E. Alternative Intersections/Interchanges: Informational Report (AIIR). Report FHWA-HRT-09-060. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2010.
9. Hummer J. E. Intersection and Interchange Design. In Handbook of Transportation Engineering (Kutz M., ed.), McGraw–Hill, New York, 2004.
10. Hummer J. E., Holzem A. M., Rouphail N. M., Cunningham C. M., O'Brien S. W., Schroeder B. J., Salamati K., and Foyle R. S. Pedestrian and Bicycle Accommodations on Superstreets. Report FHWA/NC/2012-13. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2014.
11. Highway Capacity Manual 2010. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010.
12. Fitzpatrick K., Turner S. M., Brewer M., Carlson P. J., Ullman B., Trout N. D., Park E. S., Whitacre J., Lalani N., and Lord D. NCHRP Report 562–TCRP Report 112: Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2006.
13. Hunter W. W., Srinivasan R., Martell C. A. An Examination of Bicycle Counts and Speeds Associated with the Installation of Bike Lanes in St. Petersburg, Florida. University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, 2009.

Cite article

Cite article

Cite article

OR

Download to reference manager

If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice

Share options

Share

Share this article

Share with email
EMAIL ARTICLE LINK
Share on social media

Share access to this article

Sharing links are not relevant where the article is open access and not available if you do not have a subscription.

For more information view the Sage Journals article sharing page.

Information, rights and permissions

Information

Published In

Article first published online: January 1, 2015
Issue published: January 2015

Rights and permissions

© 2015 National Academy of Sciences.
Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Anne M. Holzem
Patrick Engineering Inc., 480 Pilgrim Way, Suite 1250, Ashwaubenon, WI 54304.
Joseph E. Hummer
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Wayne State University, 5050 Anthony Wayne Drive, Detroit, MI 48202.
Christopher M. Cunningham
Highway Systems, Campus Box 8601, Raleigh, NC 27695-8601.
Sarah W. O'Brien
Bicycle and Pedestrian Program, Institute for Transportation Research and Education, North Carolina State University, Campus Box 8601, Raleigh, NC 27695-8601.
Bastian J. Schroeder
Highway Systems, Campus Box 8601, Raleigh, NC 27695-8601.
Katy Salamati
Highway Systems, Campus Box 8601, Raleigh, NC 27695-8601.

Notes

The Standing Committee on Operational Effects of Geometrics peer-reviewed this paper.

Metrics and citations

Metrics

Journals metrics

This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.

VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICS

Article usage*

Total views and downloads: 95

*Article usage tracking started in December 2016


Altmetric

See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores



Articles citing this one

Receive email alerts when this article is cited

Web of Science: 0

Crossref: 20

  1. Impact of Restricted Crossing U-Turns on Vehicular Emissions
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  2. Can turbo-roundabouts and restricted crossing U-Turn be effective solu...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  3. Optimization of Signal Timing for the Contraflow Left-Turn Lane at Sig...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  4. Restricted crossing U-turn traffic control by interval Type-2 fuzzy lo...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  5. Evaluating Pedestrian Service of the New Super Diverging Diamond Inter...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  6. Evaluating safety performance of the offset diamond interchange design...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  7. Safety evaluation of unsignalized and signalized restricted crossing U...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  8. Fixed-Time Traffic Control at Superstreet Intersections by Bee Colony ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  9. Evaluation of a New Intersection Design, “Shifting Movements”
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  10. Mobility Assessment of Pedestrian and Bicycle Treatments at Complex Co...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  11. An Alternative Design for the Intersections With Limited Traffic Lanes...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  12. Flow feasibility condition analysis and design optimization of contraf...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  13. Driver Behavioral Adaptations and Expectations to Restricted Crossing ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  14. Modelling the operation of vehicles at signalised intersections with s...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  15. Saturation Flow Models of Exit Lanes for Left-Turn Intersections
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  16. Improving the Operational Efficiency of Buses With Dynamic Use of Excl...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  17. Pedestrian Delay Model for Continuous Flow Intersections under Three D...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  18. Analysis of saturation flow rate at tandem intersections using field d...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  19. Safety evaluation of intersections with dynamic use of exit-lanes for ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar

Figures and tables

Figures & Media

Tables

View Options

Get access

Access options

If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:


Alternatively, view purchase options below:

Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.

Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub