IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Marked Crosswalk Dilemma: Uncovering Some Missing Links in a 35-Year Debate


  • Mitman, Meghan Felig
  • Ragland, David R
  • Zegeer, Charles V.


Largely in response to several landmark safety studies, as an official or unofficial policy, many agencies across the U.S. have elected to remove marked crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections, or have shown resistance to installing them in the first place. This approach results in unacceptable pedestrian mobility restrictions, yet such restrictions are often not considered in policy-making. As such, there is a need for roadway system owners to develop strategic safety guidelines to address the marked crosswalk dilemma. Since 2005, the UC Berkeley Traffic Safety Center, in a study funded by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), has focused on developing a better understanding of driver and pedestrian behavior and safety in both marked and unmarked crosswalks in an effort to recommend more informed crosswalk policies. The study was designed to fill key gaps in the literature by analyzing pedestrian and driver behavior and knowledge of right-of-way laws regarding marked and unmarked crosswalks. The study also focused on driver and pedestrian behavior with regard to multiple threat scenarios, the most common type of pedestrian collisions at uncontrolled intersections. This paper summarizes results from field observations of driver and pedestrian behavior at marked and unmarked crosswalks on low speed, two-lane and multi-lane roads. The behavioral observations are interpreted in light of findings reported by Mitman and Ragland (2007) from surveys and focus groups regarding driver and pedestrian knowledge of right-of-way laws. The paper concludes with recommendations for a comprehensive crosswalk safety policy to strategically address crash risk at uncontrolled crosswalks.

Suggested Citation

  • Mitman, Meghan Felig & Ragland, David R & Zegeer, Charles V., 2008. "The Marked Crosswalk Dilemma: Uncovering Some Missing Links in a 35-Year Debate," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt13r7q036, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt13r7q036

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item


    Engineering; safeTREC;


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:itsrrp:qt13r7q036. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lisa Schiff). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.