Where there are no curbs, but the roadway, pedestrian and traffic volume criteria are otherwise met, should median refuge areas be provided?
The guidance was meant to provide some middle ground between the need toimprove safety to the maximum extent possible and the reality that localities won’t be able to provide medians everywhere due to the cost, ROW constraints, etc. That said, pedestrian crash risk increases in situations where traffic volumes increase on multi-lane roads, particularly above an ADT of approximately 10,000, regardless of whether a curb exists or not. Therefore, roadway sections should be judged in terms of needs for median refuge islands based primarily on higher number of lanes greater traffic volume, higher vehicle speeds, and greater number of pedestrians who try to cross. In summary, if the criteria are otherwise met, medians should be provided in uncurbed sections meeting the criteria as well if the locality is able to provide them.
Related Questions
- With the increase in traffic volumes, the signal warrants are being met more frequently. Is the FHWA considering an increase in volume levels for traffic signal warrants?
- For the purposes of providing pedestrian refuge areas, what is considered a "significant" number of pedestrians?
- What are pedestrian refuge or traffic islands?
