An Open Access Journal
Table 4 Relative weights and Consistency Ratios (CR) for not signalized pedestrian crossings (NSPC) and signalized pedestrian crossings (SPC)
CRITERIA | Weights | Weights | CR | CR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
(NSPC) | (SPC) | NSPC | SPC | |
Perceived Safety | 0,024 | 0,004 | ||
Spatial and Temporal Design | 20% | 0,014 | 0,019 | |
Roadway width | 15% | 7% | ||
Pedes trian-vehicles conflict points | 42% | 12% | ||
Painted or rais ed pedes trian refuge is lands | ||||
(als o des igned for dis abled people) | 43% | 14% | ||
Pedes trian traffic light | – | 22% | ||
Green phas e efficiency | – | 18% | ||
Am ber phas e efficiency | – | 14% | ||
Red phas e duration | – | 7% | ||
Pedes trian Countdown s ignal | – | 6% | ||
Day-time visibility | 24% | 22% | 0,034 | 0,030 |
Minim um approach s ight dis tance | 48% | 48% | ||
Pedes trian cros s ing s igns vis ibility | 17% | 18% | ||
Pavem ent m arkings vis ibility | 21% | 20% | ||
Pedes trian cros s ing width | 5% | 5% | ||
Traffic direction s ignalization | 9% | 9% | ||
Night-time visibility | 42% | 41% | 0,004 | 0,006 |
Light conditions | 47% | 42% | ||
Minim um approach s ight dis tance | 29% | 34% | ||
Pedes trian cros s ing s igns /s ignal vis ibility | 11% | 11% | ||
Pavem ent m arkings vis ibility | 13% | 13% | ||
Accessibility | 16% | 17% | 0,004 | 0,003 |
Dropped kerbs | 26% | 22% | ||
Tactile paving | 19% | 16% | ||
Audible s ignals | – | 20% | ||
Pres ence of obs tacles | 38% | 3% | ||
Kerb width | 17% | 12% |