01-22-19-WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 6 4. Do not install In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Signs, R1-6b, per MnMUTCD Chapter 2B.12, which states, “The In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign should only be installed on roadways with posted speed limits of 35 mph or less and should not impede normal through or turning traffic movements.” The posted speed limit on Hamline Avenue is 40 mph, therefore the guidelines for In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Signs are not met. 5. Remove the existing crosswalk blocks and replace with 8 foot wide blocks that align with the newly constructed pedestrian refuge island. Install blocks per the MnDOT Pavement Marking Typical Sample Plan for “Pedestrian Crosswalk Markings”. ALTERNATIVE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon’s (RRFB’s) are LED flashing beacons that are activated by pedestrians and rely on flashing lights attached to the crosswalk sign posts. RRFB’s can be a very useful tool for alerting vehicles of the presence of pedestrians when used in the proper locations. However, RRFB’s should be reserved for locations with significant pedestrian safety issues, as over-use of RRFB treatments may diminish their effectiveness. Studies show that RRFB’s should be installed only when there is a minimum of 20 pedestrian/bicyclists using the crosswalk in an hour and that RRFB devices are less effective on roadways of over 35 mph. Pedestrian/bicycle count information is currently not available for the subject locations. However, from a recently conducted site visit pedestrian usage was not observed. It is anticipated that the pedestrian volume is below the desired 20 peds/bikes per hour threshold. T The cost of implementing an RRFB device is not overly expensive at one location, $10,000 - $15,000 (purchase and installation per FHWA) for two units – one on either side of the street. If RRFB’s were installed at both crossing locations, the up-front cost would be an additional $25,000 on top of the standard crossing warning signs and markings updates shown in the estimated cost below. HR Green is concerned about placing RRFB crosswalks 0.2 miles (1000 feet) apart. Placing an RRFB device at both locations has the potential to diminish their effectiveness. Ultimately, the RRFB’s should be placed at both locations or neither, and the cost effectiveness for an RRFB device at these locations is not there. The pedestrian median refuges are a great option and relatively non-invasive infrastructure to construct. If the pedestrian activity increases in the future or if there is still a perceived conflict with pedestrians and vehicles, RRFB’s can be supplemented with the refuge islands.