Yielding behavior and traffic conflicts at cyclist crossing facilities on channelized right-turn lanes |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. UHasselt, Transportation Research Institute (IMOB), Agoralaan, 3590 Diepenbeek, Belgium;2. Vias Institute, Haachtsesteenweg 1405, 1130 Brussels, Belgium;3. Department of Civil, Geological and Mining Engineering, Polytechnique Montréal, C.P. 6079, succ. Centre-Ville Montréal, Québec H3C 3A7, Canada;1. George Mason University, United States;2. Parallel Consulting, LLC, United States;1. The Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (VTI), Linköping, Sweden;2. Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden;3. Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden;1. Key Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering of the Ministry of Education, Tongji University, 201804, China;2. California Department of Transportation, 111 Grand Ave, Oakland, CA 94612, United States;1. Department of Civil Engineering, University of British Columbia, 6250 Applied Science Lane, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada;2. Civil Engineering and Built Environment School, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), 2 George Street, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, QLD 4001, Australia;3. School of Civil Engineering, University of Queensland, St. Lucia 4072, Brisbane, Australia |
| |
| Abstract: | Channelized right-turn lanes (CRTLs) improve traffic flow efficiency, enabling right-turning drivers to bypass traffic lights at signalised intersections (for right-hand drive countries). Many CRTLs provide crossing facilities for pedestrians and cyclists. Previous studies examining the safety performance of CRTLs indicate that they increase overall safety levels but hint that safety issues regarding vulnerable road users exist. This study investigated these issues through site-based observations of yielding behavior and evaluated the effect of the priority rule on cyclists’ safety in two CRTL designs. Four locations in Belgium were selected for video observations: two where the priority rule favoured cyclists and two where motorists had priority.With regard to yielding, four types of crossing behavior were identified and defined. Independent of the priority rule, cyclists crossed the conflict zone first in most interactions without taking the initiative to cross first. Underlying reasons for motorists willingly giving away their right-of-way could not be determined, but possible courtesy or fear of inflicting injuries at vulnerable road users might be at hand. A safety evaluation was performed using two traffic conflict indicators (TTCmin and the TA value). High correlations between the two indicators were found (r2 > 0.83), but no conclusions about the safest priority rule for cyclists could be drawn. The results hinted, however, that locations with motorist priority and cyclists crossings from right to left (from the driver’s point of view) yields the highest proportion of safety critical events. |
| |
| Keywords: | Channelized right-turn lanes Priority ruling Traffic conflicts Surrogate measures of safety Yielding behavior |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
