Hubbry Logo
Intersection (road)Intersection (road)Main
Open search
Intersection (road)
Community hub
Intersection (road)
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Intersection (road)
Intersection (road)
Intersection (road)
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Intersection at Tverskaya Zastava Square in Moscow, Russia
The intersection between Ayala Avenue and Makati Avenue in Makati, Philippines
An intersection in rural Grande Champagne, France

An intersection or an at-grade junction is a junction where two or more roads converge, diverge, meet or cross at the same height, as opposed to an interchange, which uses bridges or tunnels to separate different roads. Major intersections are often delineated by gores and may be classified by road segments, traffic controls and lane design.

This article primarily reflects practice in jurisdictions where vehicles are driven on the right. If not otherwise specified, "right" and "left" can be reversed to reflect jurisdictions where vehicles are driven on the left.

Types

[edit]

Road segments

[edit]

One way to classify intersections is by the number of road segments (arms) that are involved.

  • A three-way intersection is a junction between three road segments (arms): a T junction when two arms form one road, or a Y junction, the latter also known as a fork if approached from the stem of the Y.
Fork in the road Y-junction
  • A four-way intersection, or crossroads, usually involves a crossing over of two streets or roads. In areas where there are blocks and in some other cases, the crossing streets or roads are perpendicular to each other. However, two roads may cross at a different angle. In a few cases, the junction of two road segments may be offset from each when reaching an intersection, even though both ends may be considered the same street.
  • Six-way intersections usually involve a crossing of three streets at one junction; for example, a crossing of two perpendicular streets and a diagonal street is a rather common type of 6-way intersection.
  • Five, seven or more approaches to a single intersection, such as at Seven Dials, London, are not common.
Intersection along the Veterans Memorial Parkway, an at-grade limited-access road in London, Ontario

Traffic controls

[edit]

Another way of classifying intersections is by traffic control technology:

  • Uncontrolled intersections, without signs or signals (or sometimes with a warning sign). Priority (right-of-way) rules may vary by country: on a 4-way intersection traffic from the right often has priority; on a 3-way intersection either traffic from the right has priority again, or traffic on the continuing road. For traffic coming from the same or opposite direction, that which goes straight has priority over that which turns off.
  • Yield-controlled intersections may or may not have specific "YIELD" signs (known as "GIVE WAY" signs in some countries).
  • Stop-controlled intersections have one or more "STOP" signs. Two-way stops are common, while some countries also employ four-way stops.
  • Signal-controlled intersections depend on Traffic light, usually electric, which indicate which traffic is allowed to proceed at any particular time.

Lane design

[edit]
  • A traffic circle is a type of intersection at which traffic streams are directed around a circle. Types of traffic circles include roundabouts, "mini-roundabouts", "rotaries", "STOP"-controlled circles, and signal-controlled circles. Some people consider roundabouts to be a distinct type of intersection from traffic circles (with the distinction based on certain differences in size and engineering).
  • A box junction can be added to an intersection, generally prohibiting entry to the intersection unless the exit is clear.
  • Some (unconventional or alternative) intersections employ indirect left turns to increase capacity and reduce delays. The Michigan left combines a right turn and a U-turn. Jughandle lefts diverge to the right, then curve to the left, converting a left turn to a crossing maneuver, similar to throughabouts. These techniques are generally used in conjunction with signal-controlled intersections, although they may also be used at stop-controlled intersections.[1]
  • Other designs include advanced stop lines, parallel-flow and continuous-flow intersections, hook turns, quadrants, seagull intersections, slip lanes, staggered junctions (junctions consisting of two opposing T-junctions where one road intersects two sideroads located diagonally opposite each other; in American English referred to as doglegs), superstreets, Texas Ts, Texas U-turns and turnarounds.[clarification needed]
  • A roundabout and its variants like turbo roundabouts, bowties and distributing circles like traffic circles and right-in/right-out (RIRO) intersections.[clarification needed]

Turns

[edit]

At intersections, turns are usually allowed, but are often regulated to avoid interference with other traffic. Certain turns may be not allowed or may be limited by regulatory signs or signals, particularly those that cross oncoming traffic. Alternative designs often attempt to reduce or eliminate such potential conflicts.

Turn lanes

[edit]

At intersections with large proportions of turning traffic, turn lanes (also known as turn bays)[2] may be provided. For example, in the intersection shown in the diagram,[clarification needed] left turn lanes are present in the right-left street.

Turn lanes allow vehicles, to cross oncoming traffic (i.e., a left turn in right-side driving countries, or a right turn in left-side driving countries), or to exit a road without crossing traffic (i.e., a right turn in right-side driving countries, or a left turn in left-side driving countries). Absence of a turn lane does not normally indicate a prohibition of turns in that direction. Instead, traffic control signs are used to prohibit specific turns.[3]

Turn lanes can increase the capacity of an intersection or improve safety. Turn lanes can have a dramatic effect on the safety of a junction. In rural areas, crash frequency can be reduced by up to 48% if left turn lanes are provided on both main-road approaches at stop-controlled intersections. At signalized intersections, crashes can be reduced by 33%. Results are slightly lower in urban areas.[4]

Turn lanes are marked with an arrow bending into the direction of the turn which is to be made from that lane. Multi-headed arrows indicate that vehicle drivers may travel in any one of the directions pointed to by an arrow.

Turn signals

[edit]
"Right turn on red" traffic light in Belgrade, Serbia. Right turn only after pedestrians and traffic pass from left.

Traffic signals facing vehicles in turn lanes often have arrow-shaped indications. North America uses various indication patterns. Green arrows indicate protected turn phases, when vehicles may turn unhindered by oncoming traffic. Red arrows may be displayed to prohibit turns in that direction. Red arrows may be displayed along with a circular green indication to show that turns in the direction of the arrow are prohibited, but other movements are allowed. In some jurisdictions, a red arrow prohibits a turn on red.[5] In Europe, if different lanes have differing phases, red, yellow and green traffic lights corresponding to each lane have blacked-out areas in the middle in the shape of arrows indicating the direction(s) drivers in that lane may travel in. This makes it easier for drivers to be aware which traffic light they need to pay attention to. A green arrow may also be provided; when it is on, drivers heading in the direction of the arrow may proceed, but must yield to all other vehicles. This is similar to the right turn on red in the US.[6]

Disadvantages to turn lanes include increased pavement area, with associated increases in construction and maintenance costs, as well as increased amounts of stormwater runoff. They also increase the distance over which pedestrians crossing the street are exposed to vehicle traffic. If a turn lane has a separate signal phase, it often increases the delay experienced by oncoming through traffic. Without a separate phase, left crossing traffic does not get the full safety benefit of the turn lane.

Lane management

[edit]

Alternative intersection configurations, formerly called unconventional intersections, can manage turning traffic to increase safety and intersection throughput.[7] These include the Michigan left/Superstreet (RCUT/MUT) and continuous flow intersection (CFI/DLT), to improve traffic flow, and also interchange types like Diverging diamond interchange (DDI/DCD) design as part of the Federal Highway Administration's Every Day Counts initiative which started in 2012.[8]

Diagram of an example intersection of two-way streets as seen from above (traffic flows on the right side of the road). The east-west street has left turn lanes from both directions, but the north-south street does not have left turn lanes at this intersection. The east-west street traffic lights also have green left turn arrows to show when unhindered left turns can be made. Some possible markings for crosswalks are shown as examples.

Vulnerable road users

[edit]

Vulnerable road users include pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, and individuals using motorized scooters and similar devices. Compared to people who are in motor vehicles (like cars and trucks), they are much more likely to suffer catastrophic or fatal injuries at an intersection.

Pedestrians

[edit]
Times Square is the hub of the Broadway theater district and a major cultural venue in Midtown Manhattan, New York City. The pedestrian intersection also has one of the highest annual attendance rates of any tourist attraction in the world, estimated at 60 million.[9]

Intersections generally must manage pedestrian as well as vehicle traffic. Pedestrian aids include crosswalks, pedestrian-directed traffic signals ("walk light") and over/underpasses. Traffic signals can be time consuming to navigate, especially if programmed to prioritise vehicle flow over pedestrians, while over and underpasses which rely on stairs are inaccessible to those who can not climb them. Walk lights may be accompanied by audio signals to aid the visually impaired. Medians can offer pedestrian islands, allowing pedestrians to divide their crossings into a separate segment for each traffic direction, possibly with a separate signal for each.

Famous intersection of Highways 61 and 49 in Clarksdale, Mississippi sung about by Robert Johnson

Some intersections display red lights in all directions for a period of time. Known as a pedestrian scramble, this type of vehicle all-way stop allows pedestrians to cross safely in any direction, including diagonally. All green for non motorists is known from the crossing at Shibuya Station, Tokyo.[10]

In 2020, NHTSA reported that more than 50% of pedestrian deaths in the United States (3,262 total) were attributed to failure to yield the right of way-- which typically occurs at intersections.[11]

Cyclists and motorcyclists

[edit]

Poor visibility at junctions can lead to drivers colliding with cyclists and motorcyclists. Some junctions use advanced stop lines which allow cyclists to filter to the front of a traffic queue which makes them more visible to drivers.

Safety

[edit]
Main article: Protected intersection

A European study found that in Germany and Denmark, the most important crash scenario involving vulnerable road users was:

  • motor vehicle turning right/left while cyclist going straight;
  • motor vehicle turning right/left while pedestrian crossing the intersection approach.[12]

These findings are supported by data elsewhere. According to the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, roughly half of all U.S. car crashes occurred at intersections or were intersection related in 2019.[13]

At grade railways

[edit]
Main article: Level crossings

In the case of railways or rail tracks the term at grade applies to a rail line that is not on an embankment nor in an open cut. As such, it crosses streets and roads without going under or over them. This requires level crossings. At-grade railways may run along the median of a highway. The opposite is grade-separated. There may be overpasses or underpasses.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Intersection (road)

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
An intersection, in the context of road transportation, is defined as the general area where two or more ways join or cross, encompassing the pavement, curbs, sidewalks, and other roadside facilities that accommodate , , and movements. These at-grade junctions represent planned points of conflict in the roadway network, where streams from different directions must merge, diverge, or cross, often requiring control measures to manage flow and prevent collisions. Intersections play a pivotal role in transportation systems, influencing overall efficiency, capacity, speed, and operational costs, while also posing significant challenges as sites of frequent crashes. , approximately one-quarter of all fatalities and one-half of injuries occur at intersections each year, highlighting their status as high-risk locations due to factors like turning movements, crossings, and issues. Effective design principles prioritize balancing the needs of motorists, s, bicyclists, and transit users, incorporating elements such as sight distance, configuration, and speed management to enhance and throughput. Common types of intersections include three-leg (T-shaped), four-leg (crossroad), multi-leg, and circular designs like roundabouts, each selected based on traffic volume, speed, and to minimize conflicts. Control methods vary to regulate movements and reduce delays, ranging from passive options like yield or stop signs to active systems such as signals and all-way stops, with roundabouts emerging as an efficient alternative that lowers speeds and crash severity through yield-based entry. Modern innovations, including protected left-turn phases and channelized lanes, further address left-turn conflicts and accommodate diverse users, ensuring intersections support sustainable and equitable mobility.

Overview

Definition

An intersection is the general area where two or more roadways join or , encompassing the roadway surfaces and associated roadside facilities that enable movements in multiple directions. This at-grade junction serves as a planned point of potential conflict among vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, and other users, where paths intersect to allow transfers between routes. The design of such areas prioritizes minimizing these conflicts while accommodating various modes of transportation. Key components of an intersection include the approaches, which are the incoming roadways leading to , influencing alignment, profile, and sight distance for safe entry. Within the core area lie the conflict zones, where vehicle, , and cyclist paths cross, often managed through channelization to separate movements and reduce collision risks. Departure paths form the outgoing roadways, requiring clear visibility for exiting , while islands or medians—raised or separated features providing refuge and separation—enhance and for all users. Intersections primarily function to facilitate continuous , enable route changes such as turns and merges, and provide access to adjacent destinations, all while systematically managing inherent conflicts between opposing movements. By integrating these elements, they support efficient network connectivity in both rural and urban settings. Simple intersections, such as uncontrolled rural crossings of minor roads, typically involve minimal components like basic approaches and open conflict areas with few users. In contrast, complex urban signalized junctions incorporate advanced features, including multiple lanes, dedicated pedestrian crossings, and medians to handle high volumes of diverse .

Historical Development

The earliest intersections emerged as simple crossroads in ancient road networks, facilitating , movement, and urban connectivity. In the , engineered roads like the Via Appia, constructed in 312 BCE to link and , exemplified early systematic planning with stone paving and drainage systems. Similar developments occurred in other ancient civilizations, such as the planned grid layouts with crossroads in the Indus Valley Civilization around 2500 BCE. During the medieval period, intersections often evolved into multifunctional spaces such as market squares in European towns, where roads converged to support and gatherings, lacking formal traffic management. The 19th and early 20th centuries marked significant advancements amid rising automobile use, shifting intersections from unregulated merges to controlled nodes. The first electric traffic signal was installed in , , on August 5, 1914, at the Euclid Avenue and East 105th Street intersection, using red and green lights to manage vehicle and pedestrian flows in a growing urban setting. Stop signs appeared shortly after, with the inaugural red octagonal version erected in in 1915 to enforce halting at hazardous junctions, evolving into widespread use by the 1920s as traffic volumes surged. Concurrently, the concept originated in around , introduced by Eugène Hénard as a circular junction to reduce collisions through continuous flow, gaining traction in before adaptation elsewhere. Post-World War II reconstruction and suburban expansion drove standardization and innovation in intersection design. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), formed in 1914, began issuing influential guidelines in the 1930s, culminating in the 1935 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), which established national standards for signage, signals, and markings to enhance safety and consistency across U.S. roadways. By the 1950s and 1960s, the U.S. emphasized grade-separated interchanges to eliminate at-grade conflicts, with federal policy under the 1956 Federal-Aid Highway Act mandating full and overpasses or underpasses for major routes, dramatically reducing rural intersection hazards. Since the 1990s, intersections have integrated Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) for dynamic management, building on earlier efforts. The U.S. Intelligent Vehicle Highway Society program, launched in the early 1990s under the of 1991, funded tests of sensor-based controls to optimize at signals. Adaptive signal systems, which adjust timings in real-time using detectors and algorithms, saw broader deployment in the 2010s, with evaluations showing reductions in delay and emissions at equipped urban corridors.

Classification

By Geometry

Intersections are classified by geometry into at-grade and grade-separated types, based on whether roadways cross at the same or different levels. At-grade intersections occur where roads meet and cross on the same horizontal plane, allowing direct interaction between streams from multiple directions. These are common in urban and rural settings due to their simplicity and lower costs. In contrast, grade-separated intersections elevate or depress one roadway to avoid direct crossing, typically using structures like overpasses or underpasses, which minimize conflicts but require more land and investment. At-grade intersections encompass various layouts, including three-way configurations such as T-junctions, where a terminating meets a continuous roadway at a , forming a "T" shape, and Y-intersections, which feature an acute angle approach for smoother merging in areas with directional flow. Four-way intersections, often plus-shaped or crossroads, allow traffic from all four cardinal directions, facilitating balanced access but increasing potential conflict points. Staggered or offset intersections position the crossing roads apart along the major route, reducing the need for a single merge point and improving visibility for turning vehicles. Continuous flow designs, such as jug-handle intersections prevalent in regions like , redirect left-turning traffic via right-side loops or ramps before the main crossing, separating movements to enhance throughput on high-volume arterials. Roundabouts represent a circular at-grade variant, where vehicles navigate a central island in a one-way flow, promoting yielding upon entry. Multi-leg intersections, with five or more approaching roads, are less common and often result from irregular , requiring complex control to manage additional conflict points. Each geometric type offers distinct advantages and disadvantages tailored to and environment. T-junctions simplify rural intersections by limiting movements to three legs, reducing conflict areas compared to four-way setups and lowering crash rates in low- scenarios, though they restrict through on the stem road and can complicate left turns from the minor approach. Roundabouts excel in , reducing injury crashes by up to 75% and fatalities by 90% relative to traditional signalized crossroads, due to slower speeds and elimination of head-on collisions, but they demand more space and may confuse unfamiliar drivers. Grade-separated designs virtually eliminate crossing conflicts, ideal for high-speed freeways, yet their high cost and footprint limit use to major highways. Staggered layouts improve sight lines and pedestrian by breaking crossings into segments, but they can extend travel distances and complicate signaling. Jug-handle configurations boost capacity on busy roads by isolating turns, decreasing delays by 20-30% in simulations, though they require additional right-of-way and initial driver adaptation. Spatial design in intersections prioritizes right-of-way allocation and sight distance to ensure safe maneuvers. In at-grade setups, the major road typically holds priority, with stop or yield controls on minor approaches dictating deference. Intersection sight distance requires drivers on minor roads to have visibility to judge adequate gaps in approaching , typically a time gap of 7.5 seconds for left turns by passenger cars, with the required distance calculated based on the speed of the major road (per AASHTO standards). These standards help ensure safe crossing or turning without obstruction from roadside elements.

By Traffic Control

Intersections are classified by traffic control based on the mechanisms used to manage , , and cyclist movements, determining right-of-way and flow priorities to enhance safety and efficiency. These methods range from passive rules relying on driver judgment to active devices like signals, with selection depending on volume, speed, and location. Uncontrolled intersections operate without dedicated signs, signals, or markings, relying on default right-of-way rules such as yielding to vehicles from the right or first-come-first-served arrival. They are prevalent in low-volume rural or residential areas where is light, minimizing costs but requiring vigilant driver awareness. For instance, , such intersections often follow state codes mandating stops at cross streets unless otherwise directed. Stop-controlled intersections use stop signs to assign priority, typically at two-way (T-intersections or side ) or all-way (four-way) configurations. In two-way stop setups, the through has priority while the minor stops, whereas all-way stops require all approaches to halt, with the first to arrive proceeding first and ties resolved by yielding to the right. These controls reduce speeds and allow orderly merging but can cause delays during peak times. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) specifies placement and signage for these to ensure compliance. Signalized intersections employ traffic signals to allocate time-based phases for movements, including for through , protected left or right turns, and dedicated pedestrian crossings. Signals cycle through phases to separate conflicting flows, often incorporating sensors for adaptive timing in high-density urban settings. They accommodate higher volumes than stop controls by providing clear visual cues, though they demand more maintenance and . Pedestrian signals, such as walk/don't walk indicators, integrate with vehicle phases to prioritize non-motorized users. Yield-controlled intersections direct vehicles to slow and yield to ongoing , commonly seen in roundabouts where entering drivers merge into circulating flow or in freeway merges. Roundabouts use yield signs at entries to promote continuous movement without full stops, reducing severe crashes compared to signalized alternatives. These are ideal for moderate volumes and can geometrically suit various layouts, such as single-lane or multi-lane designs. In comparison, signalized intersections excel at handling high volumes with predictable phasing but introduce wait times and potential , while uncontrolled and yield-controlled types reduce needs and delays at low volumes yet heighten collision risks from ambiguous priorities. Stop-controlled options balance these by enforcing pauses without the complexity of signals, though they may underperform in congested areas.

Design Elements

Roadway Configuration

The configuration of approach roads to intersections typically includes multiple lanes to accommodate traffic volume, with standard lane widths ranging from 3.0 to 3.7 meters (10 to 12 feet) per the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines, which balance vehicle accommodation and safety in both urban and rural settings. In urban areas, narrower lanes around 3.0 meters may suffice for lower speeds, while rural approaches often use the full 3.7 meters to support higher volumes and speeds. Tapers for merging lanes are designed with lengths based on speed and lane addition, typically 15:1 to 50:1 ratios (length to offset) to ensure smooth transitions without abrupt weaves. Within the intersection area, physical elements such as pavement markings guide vehicle paths, while channelization using raised islands separates conflicting movements and enhances visibility. Channelizing islands, often 1.8 to 3 meters wide, are positioned to direct turns and provide refuge, with designs minimizing size to avoid obstructing sight lines. Curb radii for turning movements generally range from 4 to 15 meters (13 to 50 feet), with smaller radii preferred in urban environments to reduce pedestrian crossing distances and larger ones in rural areas for accommodation. Alignment factors influence intersection efficiency and safety, with skew angles ideally at or near 90 degrees and deviations limited to 15 degrees, though up to 30 degrees may be acceptable in constrained sites to maintain driver expectancy. Superelevation on curved approaches or within the is applied at rates up to 6 percent for design speeds over 50 km/h, transitioning to normal crown within the to avoid adverse effects on cross-street drainage and turning stability. Vertical grades are restricted to less than 3 percent approaching and through the to prevent acceleration issues and maintain sight distance, with 2 percent preferred for optimal flow. The (FHWA) provides guidelines differentiating urban and rural configurations, emphasizing compact designs in urban settings with narrower approaches and islands to prioritize multimodal use, while rural intersections favor wider alignments and gentler curves to handle higher speeds and longer sight lines for optimized traffic flow.

Lane and Turn Facilities

Exclusive turn lanes provide dedicated spaces for vehicles to decelerate and prepare for left or right turns without interfering with through . These lanes typically consist of a deceleration section, a storage area, and a taper for merging back into the main roadway. According to the (FHWA), the deceleration length varies with approach speed, generally ranging from 30 to 90 meters to allow vehicles to slow from design speeds of 30 to 70 km/h while maintaining safe following distances. The taper length is often 15 to 30 meters in urban settings to facilitate smooth lane transitions, as recommended by American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines. Pocket designs for these lanes, such as positive offset left-turn lanes shifted 1.2 to 1.5 meters toward the median, improve sight distance and reduce conflicts, particularly in medians wider than 5.4 meters. A single exclusive left-turn lane is typically warranted when left-turn volumes exceed 100 vehicles per hour during peak periods, with dual lanes considered above 300 vehicles per hour to handle higher demands. Right-turn lanes are justified at lower thresholds, such as over 40 vehicles per hour in some states, with similar components for deceleration and storage. Storage capacity in these is designed to accommodate 1.5 to 2 times the average queue length per signal cycle, calculated using peak hour volumes and cycle times to prevent spillover into through . U-turn and jug-handle facilities serve as alternatives to direct left turns in intersections where such movements are restricted to enhance and flow. In jug-handle designs, common in , vehicles access a right-side ramp before the intersection to execute left turns indirectly, reducing crossing conflicts with opposing . These at-grade ramps are positioned upstream of the main and sized to handle turning radii for design vehicles like trucks. Similarly, configurations, also known as median intersections, prohibit direct left turns by directing drivers to continue straight or turn right, then use a crossover for a to reach the desired direction. This design is particularly effective on divided highways with high through volumes, where crossovers are spaced to minimize delays. In low-volume areas, shared lanes accommodate both through and turning movements to optimize space without dedicated facilities. Pavement markings, such as arrows indicating dual use, guide drivers in these configurations, suitable when turn volumes are below 20% of total approach traffic. Design criteria emphasize avoiding conflicts by ensuring markings provide clear lane assignment, with transitions to exclusive lanes as volumes increase to maintain capacity.

Traffic Management

Control Devices

Control devices at road intersections encompass a range of non-signal elements designed to regulate , enforce right-of-way rules, and guide drivers through passive means. These include regulatory signs, pavement markings, and physical barriers that provide clear instructions and visual cues without relying on electronic activation. Such devices are essential for maintaining order at unsignalized or partially controlled intersections, reducing confusion and enhancing by standardizing expectations for road users. Specifications follow the 11th Edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) (2023). Regulatory signs form the primary means of conveying legal obligations at intersections. Stop signs (R1-1), which mandate a full cessation of movement, are typically octagonal with backgrounds and lettering, installed on the right side of the approach, with a minimum mounting height of 7 feet above the pavement edge in urban areas or 5 feet in rural settings, and positioned as close as practical to the —not exceeding 50 feet from the edge of pavement. Yield signs (R1-2), equilateral triangular with borders and interiors, similarly require drivers to slow and yield priority, placed on the near right side of the at comparable heights and distances to optimize visibility. No-turn signs, such as No Left Turn (R3-2) or No (R3-3a), prohibit specific maneuvers and are mounted near the or adjacent to signal faces if present, ensuring they are visible to all affected lanes. signs (R2-1) reinforce intersection-appropriate velocities, positioned in advance—typically 200 to 500 feet before the on high-speed roads—to allow deceleration. Pavement markings delineate lanes, stopping points, and paths to reinforce directives and channel paths. Stop lines, consisting of solid white transverse bars 12 to 24 inches wide, are placed 4 feet in advance of crosswalks or the edge to indicate precise halting positions. Directional arrows, painted in white or , guide turns or straight movements within lanes, with sizes scaled to roadway width (e.g., 12 feet long for major roads). Crosswalk markings, often parallel or zebra-striped white lines 6 to 24 inches wide, highlight zones across approaches, enhancing and legal protection for vulnerable users. materials, applied hot and fused to the pavement, offer superior durability compared to standard , due to their resistance to and abrasion. Physical devices further aid channelization and alerting. Raised islands, constructed from or delineators, separate opposing or turning flows, with approach treatments like tapered markings to prevent abrupt obstacles; they must be of sufficient width for refuge if applicable, typically at least 4 feet. Bollards, short vertical posts often filled with for stability, serve as flexible barriers to restrict vehicle access or define channelized paths, spaced 3 to 6 feet apart and compliant with impact-resistant standards for urban intersections. Rumble strips, transverse milled or raised patterns (typically 12 inches long, 12 to 18 inches wide, and 0.375 to 0.5 inches deep), installed in advance of stop- or yield-controlled intersections, produce vibration and noise to alert inattentive drivers. These devices adhere to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), which specifies standards for visibility and reflectivity to ensure legibility under varying conditions. Signs must use meeting ASTM D4956, with minimum maintained retroreflectivity levels per Table 2A-5 (e.g., 70 cd/lx/m² for white on Type I sheeting at 0.2° observation and -4° entrance angles), to ensure nighttime visibility. Pavement markings require similar retroreflectivity, with white lines at least 50 cd/lx/m², while physical devices incorporate reflective elements for delineation. Compliance with these MUTCD provisions ensures uniform application across U.S. roadways, promoting consistent driver comprehension and reducing intersection-related incidents.

Signal Systems

Traffic signal systems at intersections consist of interconnected hardware and software components designed to manage vehicle and pedestrian movements efficiently and safely. Central to these systems are controllers, which are electronic devices housed in weatherproof cabinets at the intersection; they execute pre-programmed timing plans and respond to real-time inputs to sequence signal indications. Detectors, such as inductive loop sensors embedded in the pavement (typically 6x6 feet for point detection or 6x40 feet for presence detection) or video cameras mounted on poles, identify vehicle presence, speed, and occupancy to extend or truncate green phases accordingly. Signal poles, often mast arms or strain poles extending 30-40 feet high, support the signal heads for optimal visibility, adhering to standards that ensure indications are visible from 300-900 feet depending on approach speed. The heads themselves feature light-emitting diode (LED) modules in 8- or 12-inch diameters, providing red, yellow, and green indications, including arrows for turn movements, with five-section configurations common for protected-permissive operations. Phasing in traffic signals refers to the allocation of right-of-way to specific movements during a cycle, balancing and . Protected phasing grants an exclusive to turning vehicles, such as left turns, eliminating conflicts with opposing but potentially increasing overall cycle length and delay. Permissive phasing allows turns on a circular indication, relying on drivers to yield to oncoming vehicles and s, which is suitable for lower-volume turns but raises concerns from gap acceptance errors. Protected-permissive phasing combines both, starting with a protected followed by permissive operation, often using a five-section signal head to avoid the "yellow trap" where drivers misinterpret indications during transition. Split phasing assigns the full green interval to one approach's movements before switching to the opposing approach, useful for intersections with offset alignments or heavy volumes but at the cost of reduced capacity. Typical cycle lengths, encompassing all phases in one complete sequence, range from 60 to 120 seconds, adjusted based on and intersection complexity to minimize stops and delays (as of 2015). Coordination extends single-intersection control to , particularly along arterials, by synchronizing signals to create "green bands" where vehicles travel through multiple intersections without stopping. This is achieved through offset timing, where the start of green on one signal aligns with the arrival of platoons from upstream signals, visualized in time-space diagrams as bandwidths representing progression opportunities; for example, a 30-second bandwidth at 30 mph allows vehicles to maintain speed over a mile-long corridor. Adaptive signal systems, emerging prominently in the , dynamically adjust cycle lengths, splits, and offsets in real-time using from detectors and connected . These systems often incorporate techniques, such as in the SURTRAC system developed at , which employs to predict traffic arrivals from sensor and optimize phasing, achieving up to 25% reductions in travel time in urban pilots. Pedestrian integration in signal systems enhances accessibility and safety through specialized features. Countdown timers, displayed on pedestrian signal heads, show the remaining walk time in seconds during the change interval, mandatory for crossings over seven seconds to reduce ; these use high-visibility LED displays in Portland orange, typically 6 inches or larger. Accessible push buttons, located 1.5 to 6 feet from the ramp and no higher than 4 feet, allow activation with minimal force (under 5 pounds) and include tactile s and raised for orientation; an extended 2-second press can request additional crossing time for slower pedestrians. Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) provide non-visual cues for the visually impaired, including rapid ticking sounds (8-10 ticks per second at 880 Hz) during walk phases, vibrotactile feedback via a vibrating under the button, and verbal announcements like street names and phase status, activated via locator tones every 1 second; installation requires an engineering study to ensure compatibility with traffic operations.

Road Users

Motor Vehicles

At road intersections, drivers bear primary responsibility for safe navigation, including adherence to yielding rules that prioritize the first to arrive at unsignalized intersections or oncoming for left turns in right-hand countries. Yielding also applies to circulating in roundabouts and to any already within the intersection, ensuring orderly merges without abrupt stops. For merges at unsignalized intersections, drivers practice gap acceptance by identifying adequate time intervals—typically a critical gap of at least 4 seconds—in the major roadway's stream before entering, with follow-up times of about 2 seconds for queued . This behavior prevents conflicts but can lead to delays if gaps are insufficient, particularly under high volumes. Drivers must reduce speed significantly when approaching and executing turns, often to 15-25 km/h (9-15 mph) in urban settings or tight geometries to maintain control and visibility. In roundabouts, this reduction occurs naturally due to entry and narrow widths, with maximum entry speeds capped at 25 km/h for mini-roundabouts and up to 40 km/h for single- rural types, promoting counterclockwise circulation while yielding to vehicles already inside. Left turns in right-hand countries require drivers to position in the leftmost , yield to opposing straight-through and right-turning vehicles, and complete the maneuver into the nearest , avoiding encroachment into adjacent paths. Intersections accommodate diverse types through tailored features, such as wider turn radii for trucks—ranging from 9 meters (30 feet) in urban areas to 23 meters (75 feet) or more for large semitrailers like the WB-62 design —to prevent off-tracking and pavement damage during right or left maneuvers. Buses benefit from queue jump lanes, short dedicated approaches paired with transit signal priority that allow them to bypass general queues and receive early phases, often via a bus-only signal in right-turn lanes. These adaptations ensure larger vehicles can navigate without excessive or delays, though they require drivers to maintain awareness of signage and lane markings. Emerging vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) technologies enhance operations by broadcasting signal phases and timings to equipped vehicles, issuing warnings if a red-light violation is imminent based on speed and position, thereby reducing straight-crossing crashes. For autonomous vehicles, management often employs reservation-based systems where agents request space-time slots via first-come, first-served (FCFS) protocols, granting priority to arriving vehicles and minimizing delays compared to traditional signals. As of 2025, these systems have evolved to incorporate for optimal scheduling in mixed human-autonomous environments. These systems can extend priorities to emergency vehicles while integrating with human-driven , improving overall flow in mixed environments.

Vulnerable Users

Vulnerable users at road intersections include pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists, who face heightened risks due to their limited physical protection and lower visibility compared to occupants of enclosed motor vehicles. These users encounter conflict zones where paths intersect with vehicular , such as turning movements and straight-through flows, leading to potential collisions. Intersections generally present more structured crossing opportunities than midblock locations, but uncontrolled midblock crossings expose pedestrians to higher crash risks due to the absence of signals or stops that regulate vehicle speeds. Pedestrians benefit from dedicated crosswalks that provide marked paths across roadways, often aligned with sidewalks to guide movement through intersections. Curb ramps, essential for users and those with mobility impairments, must comply with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards, featuring a maximum running of 1:12 (8.3%) to ensure accessibility. Pedestrian refuge islands, raised medians within crosswalks, offer temporary safety by allowing users to pause mid-crossing, with a minimum clear width of 5 feet to accommodate passage. These features reduce exposure time in active travel lanes, particularly at multi-lane intersections where conflict points multiply. Cyclists require facilities that maintain separation from motor traffic to mitigate right-hook and left-cross conflicts during turns. Bike boxes, or advanced stop lines, position cyclists ahead of vehicles at signalized intersections, allowing them to start first on green and avoid being overtaken. Protected bike lanes extend through intersections via designs like bend-outs, which use corner islands to deflect cycle paths away from turning vehicles, enhancing spatial separation. Hook turns enable cyclists to make right turns from the left lane, bypassing right-side vehicle maneuvers and reducing intersection conflicts in high-volume areas. These accommodations prioritize cyclist priority and visibility, drawing from guidelines that emphasize physical barriers over shared lanes. Motorcyclists experience stability challenges during sharp turns at intersections, as their two-wheeled design offers less inherent balance than four-wheeled vehicles, increasing the of low-side falls on uneven surfaces or at high entry speeds. Visibility enhancements, such as conspicuity aids including high- gear and auxiliary lights, help mitigate detection failures by other drivers, particularly during left turns across oncoming traffic. Lane positioning strategies further improve motorcyclist detectability, encouraging riders to avoid blind spots and signal intentions clearly. Design standards for vulnerable users incorporate leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs), which activate the walk signal 3-7 seconds before the parallel green light for vehicles, giving s and cyclists a head start to establish presence in the crosswalk. Shared paths, multi-use facilities accommodating both s and cyclists, must integrate with intersections through signed crossings and minimum widths of 10 feet for two-directional flow, ensuring safe transitions from off-road alignments. These measures, informed by federal guidelines, aim to balance multimodal flows while addressing user-specific vulnerabilities.

Safety and Capacity

Safety Features

Intersections pose significant safety risks due to the convergence of multiple roadways and road users, with common crash types including angle collisions (often resulting from failure to yield), rear-end collisions (frequently at signalized stops), and pedestrian-vehicle conflicts (typically during crossing maneuvers). According to the , intersections account for approximately one-quarter of all fatal crashes and one-half of all injury crashes , highlighting their disproportionate role in urban crash statistics. To address these risks, various engineering and operational features are implemented to enhance visibility, control speeds, and deter violations. Red-light cameras automate enforcement at signalized intersections, capturing vehicles that enter on red and issuing citations, which has been shown to reduce right-angle crashes by 20-40% while potentially increasing rear-end crashes due to sudden stops. Speed humps, vertical deflections placed on approach roads, slow approaching vehicles to approximately 20-25 km/h (12-16 mph), thereby lowering impact speeds and crash severity in residential or low-volume areas. Adequate lighting is essential for nighttime visibility; standards recommend average vertical levels of at least 20 at crosswalks and key intersection zones to improve detection by drivers. Barriers, including medians and refuge islands, separate conflicting streams and provide protected spaces, reducing crossover crashes and left-turn conflicts. The effectiveness of these features is evaluated through standardized methods that assess visibility and predict crash reductions. Sight triangles ensure unobstructed views for drivers at stop-controlled , with dimensions determined by speed and required intersection sight distance to allow timely detection of cross traffic; for example, in low-speed urban settings (e.g., 20 km/h approach), approximately 35 m along the minor road leg may be needed. Crash modification factors (CMFs) quantify safety benefits; for instance, converting signalized to roundabouts yields a CMF of 0.30 for crashes, corresponding to a 70% reduction, based on empirical studies of U.S. installations. For high-risk sites, the (IIHS) outlines best practices emphasizing proactive countermeasures like roundabouts for multi-leg intersections, protected phasing to separate turning movements, and enhanced signing with dynamic warnings for high-speed approaches, prioritizing locations with elevated angle or pedestrian crash histories. These guidelines integrate data-driven site assessments to maximize crash prevention while maintaining operational efficiency.

Capacity Analysis

Capacity analysis at road intersections evaluates the ability to accommodate volumes while maintaining acceptable operational , primarily through standardized methodologies that quantify delay, throughput, and utilization. The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 7th Edition (2022), published by the Transportation Research Board, provides the foundational procedures for this assessment, including updates for connected and automated vehicles (CAVs), focusing on signalized, unsignalized, and intersections to determine multimodal mobility under varying demand conditions. These methods emphasize control delay—the additional time vehicles spend at an intersection due to traffic control—as the primary measure of effectiveness, alongside volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratios to gauge congestion levels. A v/c ratio below 0.9 indicates relatively free-flow conditions with minimal queuing, while ratios approaching or exceeding 1.0 signal oversaturation and potential . Key metrics in intersection capacity analysis include Level of Service (LOS), a qualitative scale from A (best) to F (worst) that correlates with quantitative delay thresholds for signalized intersections. LOS A represents minimal delay (0–10 seconds per ), suitable for low-volume scenarios with smooth progression, while LOS F denotes unacceptable congestion with delays exceeding 80 seconds per and frequent stop-and-go conditions. The criteria are as follows:
LOSControl Delay (s/veh)Typical Characteristics
A0–10Free flow; few stops
B10–20Stable flow; short queues
C20–35Acceptable delay; moderate queues
D35–55Approaching unstable; longer queues
E55–80Unstable; significant
F>80Oversaturated; breakdown
For v/c ratios above 1.0, LOS F applies regardless of delay. These metrics help planners identify bottlenecks during peak periods, ensuring intersections operate efficiently without excessive environmental or economic costs from idling. HCM procedures break down analysis into modules such as adjustment, saturation flow estimation, capacity calculation, and LOS determination, applicable to lane groups or entire intersections. Saturation flow rate, the maximum rate at which vehicles can discharge from a stop line during effective green time, is a core , typically 1,900 passenger cars per hour per (pc/h/ln) under ideal conditions for through movements on signalized approaches. This base value is adjusted for factors like lane width, grade, and turning movements to compute realistic capacities. Several adjustment factors refine volume and capacity estimates to reflect real-world variability. The peak hour factor (PHF) accounts for fluctuations within the peak hour, converting 15-minute peak flows to hourly equivalents; a typical urban value of 0.92 assumes even distribution, though field may vary from 0.75 to 0.95. Heavy vehicles, such as trucks, reduce effective capacity due to slower and larger gaps, with a (PCE) of 1.5 commonly applied, yielding an adjustment factor f_HV = 1 / (1 + percentage of heavy vehicles × (1.5 - 1)). For example, 10% heavy vehicles results in f_HV ≈ 0.95, scaling down the passenger car equivalent flow. Other factors include arrival type (e.g., uniform vs. platooned) and geometric elements like approach grade. Optimization of capacity involves comparing alternatives like physical widening to add , which proportionally increases saturation flow (e.g., doubling doubles base capacity), against installing or upgrading signals to allocate time more equitably among movements. Widening suits moderate-volume growth by enhancing throughput without timing complexities, but signals are preferable for high-conflicting volumes exceeding unsignalized thresholds (e.g., >300 vehicles per hour on minors), as they can achieve up to 1,900 pc/h/ln per phase versus stop-controlled limits of 300–400 pc/h. Software tools like SIDRA INTERSECTION complement HCM by simulating these scenarios, incorporating arrivals, interactions, and network effects to predict delays and queues under various configurations. For instance, SIDRA's gap-acceptance and lane-change models enable detailed what-if analyses for roundabouts or signals, often revealing that hybrid approaches (e.g., widened approaches with optimized phasing) yield the best LOS improvements.

Special Intersections

Railway Crossings

Railway crossings, also known as level crossings or grade crossings, are at-grade intersections where roadways meet railway tracks, presenting unique challenges due to the high speeds and masses of trains compared to road vehicles. These intersections require specialized control measures to mitigate collision risks, as trains cannot stop quickly and have priority over road traffic. In the United States, the (FRA) oversees safety standards, mandating that crossings be equipped with warning devices based on factors like train speeds and traffic volumes. Globally, such crossings number over 500,000, with fatalities exceeding 6,000 annually when including both vehicle and pedestrian incidents, though precise figures vary by region; for instance, the reported 224 road user deaths in 2023 at these sites. Crossings are categorized into passive and active types based on their warning systems. Passive crossings rely solely on static devices such as crossbuck signs, stop signs, yield signs, and pavement markings to alert drivers of the rail presence, without any automated activation; these are common at low-traffic or low-speed rail locations but offer limited protection against inadvertent violations. Active crossings incorporate dynamic elements like flashing lights, audible bells, and automated gates that activate upon train approach, providing a more robust barrier to traffic; FRA regulations require these for higher-risk sites, with flashing lights operating for at least 20 seconds before train arrival. A specialized active , four-quadrant (quad) gates, extends barriers across all four approaches to the tracks, including exit lanes, to prevent vehicles from being trapped on the rails or driving around lowered entrance gates; this configuration is particularly used at high-speed or multi-lane crossings to enhance containment. Regulatory frameworks emphasize advance warnings and speed-based controls to minimize hazards. In the US, FRA standards require an advance warning sign at least 100 feet (approximately 30 meters) from the tracks, with placement increasing to 500-750 feet (150-230 meters) or more based on highway speeds up to 70 mph to allow sufficient stopping distance; for example, at 55 mph, the sign is positioned about 492 feet (150 meters) ahead. Train speeds dictate control requirements: crossings with trains under 30 mph (48 km/h) may use passive devices alone, while speeds of 30-79 mph (48-127 km/h) typically necessitate active warnings like lights and gates, and operations above 110 mph (177 km/h) require impenetrable barriers or grade separations, with no at-grade crossings permitted beyond 125 mph (201 km/h). Safety enhancements include constant warning time (CWT) devices, which use motion sensors to detect train speed and provide a consistent 20-25 second activation period regardless of whether the train is accelerating, decelerating, or switching, reducing false activations from slow movements. Design features further address vulnerabilities, particularly for multi-modal traffic. Roadway separations, such as raised medians or channelization islands, are incorporated to divide opposing lanes and prevent queue spillover onto tracks during peak hours, with median widths of at least 6 feet recommended for crossings with 25 or more daily trains. Pedestrian-specific elements include swing gates or barriers that lower across walkways, ensuring safe evacuation without trapping users between tracks; these must comply with accessibility standards, allowing clear passage for individuals with disabilities and positioned 6-15 feet from the track centerline. Where railway crossings intersect signalized road junctions, integration via preemption systems coordinates activations: an approaching train triggers the nearby traffic signals to extend green phases or hold red to clear vehicles from the crossing area before gates descend, preventing backups; this interconnection is FRA-mandated for sites within 100-200 feet of signals to avoid conflicts.

Pedestrian-Focused Designs

Pedestrian-focused designs at intersections emphasize accommodating high volumes of foot traffic in dense urban settings by reallocating space and signal priority away from vehicles toward walkers. These approaches aim to minimize conflicts, reduce crossing exposure, and enhance overall accessibility. Key types include scramble crossings and shared spaces, which transform traditional vehicle-dominated junctions into more equitable public realms. Scramble crossings, also known as all-walk or Barnes Dance phases, halt all directions of vehicular traffic to permit simultaneous pedestrian movement across the intersection, including diagonal paths. This configuration reduces pedestrian-vehicle conflicts by eliminating turning movements during the walk phase and shortens overall crossing times through dedicated signal intervals. A well-known implementation is Tokyo's Scramble Crossing, where up to 3,000 pedestrians traverse the junction every two minutes during rush hours, demonstrating the design's capacity for extreme volumes. Shared spaces, by contrast, dissolve clear boundaries between roadways and areas through the removal of curbs, lane markings, and signals, compelling drivers to navigate cautiously at low speeds alongside walkers and cyclists. This blurring of lines promotes mutual awareness and yields a more fluid, plaza-like environment at intersections. Studies indicate that shared spaces can lower vehicle speeds to walking pace, thereby decreasing collision risks for . Common features in these designs include narrowed roadways via curb extensions, or bulb-outs, which protrude the sidewalk into the street to shorten crossing distances by up to 20 feet and improve sightlines for both users. , consisting of raised, detectable surfaces at crosswalk edges, guides visually impaired pedestrians and signals transitions to the roadway. Zebra crossings, marked with high-visibility stripes, are often paired with flashing beacons to alert drivers and enhance yielding compliance in moderate-traffic scenarios. The Dutch , or "," exemplifies prioritization at residential intersections, where vehicles share the space but must yield to walkers, often through raised pavements and minimal to enforce walking-speed limits. Originating in the in the 1970s and influencing global adaptations from the 1990s onward, woonerfs integrate intersections seamlessly into neighborhood fabric, yielding benefits such as reduced vehicle dominance and safer, more social crossings. These designs have been shown to decrease exposure to by integrating calming elements that facilitate quicker, less intimidated traversals. Standards from the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide recommend pedestrian-focused elements like protected crossings and extensions for intersections anticipating substantial foot traffic, typically where volumes support frequent, safe passages in commercial or mixed-use corridors. Such guidelines underscore the need for adaptive signal timing and spatial reallocations to handle urban densities effectively.

References

  1. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/local-rural/intersection-safety-manual-local-rural-road-owners/1-introduction-and-purpose
  2. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/design/documents/chp0400-092923-a11y.pdf
  3. https://www.codot.gov/business/designsupport/bulletins_manuals/2023-cdot-roadway-design-guide/chapter_8_intersections.pdf
  4. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/intersection-safety/about
  5. https://www.txdot.gov/manuals/des/rdw/chapter-13--intersections/13-2-design-considerations.html
  6. https://www.txdot.gov/manuals/des/rdw/chapter-13--intersections/13-3-types-of-intersections.html
  7. https://www.fdot.gov/docs/default-source/roadway/fdm/current/2018FDM212Intersections.pdf
  8. https://static.tti.tamu.edu/tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-4365-P2.pdf
  9. https://deldot.gov/Publications/manuals/road_design/pdfs/revisions062811/07_Intersections.pdf
  10. https://www.mass.gov/info-details/pddg-chapter-6-intersections
  11. https://www.txdot.gov/manuals/des/rdw/chapter-13--intersections.html
  12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12592351/
  13. https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1708/
  14. https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1301/trade-in-medieval-europe/
  15. https://artsci.case.edu/dittrick/2015/08/05/touch-and-go-cars-health-and-clevelands-first-traffic-signals/
  16. https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/kno-history.htm
  17. https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Programs/ResearchDocuments/ModernRoundAbout.pdf
  18. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/candc/timeline.cfm
  19. https://highways.dot.gov/highway-history/interstate-system/50th-anniversary/greatest-decade-1956-1966-part-1-essential
  20. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/30826/dot_30826_DS1.pdf
  21. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/randt/evaluations/17007/17007.pdf
  22. https://www.txdot.gov/manuals/des/rdw/chapter-15-grade-separations-and-interchanges-.html
  23. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/07032/
  24. https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/media/vdotvirginiagov/doing-business/technical-guidance-and-support/technical-guidance-documents/location-and-design/migrated/rdm/Appendix_a3_acc.pdf
  25. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/00067/00067.pdf
  26. https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Engineering/TRSDocs/Safety_Research/safety_of_4-leg_vs_t.pdf
  27. https://www.fdot.gov/agencyresources/roundabouts/benefits.shtm
  28. https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2003r1/part2/part2b1.htm
  29. https://www.txdot.gov/manuals/des/rdw/chapter-13--intersections/13-5-intersection-sight-distance.html
  30. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/08063/
  31. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_362.pdf
  32. https://www.dot.ny.gov/divisions/engineering/design/dqab/hdm/hdm-repository/chapt_02.pdf
  33. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_279.pdf
  34. https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/working/engineering/roadway/manuals-standards/location-design-vol-1/0400/0400
  35. https://globaldesigningcities.org/publication/global-street-design-guide/designing-streets-people/designing-for-motorists/corner-radii/
  36. https://api.army.mil/e2/c/downloads/2025/08/25/63eea41c/bulletin-18-03-intersection-geometric-design.pdf
  37. https://nysltap.org/nysltap-local-roads/what-maximum-recommended-angle-for-intersection
  38. https://wsdot.wa.gov/publications/manuals/fulltext/m22-01/1250.pdf
  39. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/04091/03.cfm
  40. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/other/older-road-user/handbook-designing-roadways-aging-population/chapter-7-intersections
  41. https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/urban_intersection_design_guide_fitzpatrick.pdf
  42. https://voslwi.gov/vertical/sites/%257BFD43A93D-1DA7-4F52-8644-C09DA66C3401%257D/uploads/FHWA_Access_Managemt_In_the_Vicinity_of_Intersections.pdf
  43. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/04091/12.cfm
  44. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/09060/006.cfm
  45. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/09057/
  46. https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/11th_Edition/Chapter2a.pdf
  47. https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/11th_Edition/Chapter2b.pdf
  48. https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/11th_Edition/part3.pdf
  49. https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/11th_Edition/part6.pdf
  50. https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/
  51. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/22097/chapter/1
  52. https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/11th_Edition/part4.pdf
  53. https://www.ri.cmu.edu/pub_files/2013/1/13-0315.pdf
  54. https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/handbook/california-driver-handbook/laws-and-rules-of-the-road/
  55. https://www.pa.gov/agencies/dmv/driver-services/pennsylvania-drivers-manual/online-drivers-manual/everyday-driving-skills/negotiating-intersections
  56. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/operations/tft/chap8.pdf
  57. https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/designing-safe-intersections/design-strategies-for-signalized-intersections/
  58. https://www.txdot.gov/manuals/des/rdw/chapter-13--intersections/13-10-additional-intersection-design-consideration.html
  59. https://www.transit.dot.gov/research-innovation/signal-priority
  60. https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2020-03/V2I%20Red%20Light%20Violation%20Warning%20Benefits%20Analysis.pdf
  61. https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~aim/papers/JAIR08-dresner.pdf
  62. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S219243762500007X
  63. https://vtrc.virginia.gov/media/vtrc/vtrc-pdf/vtrc-pdf/25-R6.pdf
  64. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4598311/
  65. https://www.access-board.gov/ada/guides/chapter-4-ramps-and-curb-ramps/
  66. https://www.codot.gov/business/designsupport/bulletins_manuals/2023-cdot-roadway-design-guide/chapter_12_accessible_pedestrian_design.pdf
  67. https://documents.iowa.gov/home/download/9592971
  68. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/62655/dot_62655_DS1.pdf
  69. https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/FHWA-HRT-23-052.pdf
  70. https://www.oregon.gov/odot/Programs/ResearchDocuments/SPR767_FinalReport_070815.pdf
  71. https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/Part-IV-Section-3-Citation-12_-MicroTraffic-2022.pdf
  72. https://dds.georgia.gov/section-5-street-strategies
  73. https://www.nhtsa.gov/es/document/effects-motor-vehicle-fleet-daytime-running-lights-drl-motorcycle-conspicuity
  74. https://dor.mo.gov/pdf/motorman_section2.pdf
  75. https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/Proven%2520Safety%2520Countermeasures%2520Booklet.pdf
  76. https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/11th_Edition/part9.pdf
  77. https://www.oregon.gov/odot/About/Documents/Lit_Review_LPI.pdf
  78. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/red_light_camera_systems_operational_guidelines.pdf
  79. https://pavementsurfacecoatings.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Documents/ITE-Speed-Hump-Guide.pdf
  80. https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/working/engineering/roadway/manuals-standards/tem/11
  81. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/design/standards/2001/01/sec9.cfm
  82. https://www.iihs.org/research-areas/roundabouts
  83. https://hhft.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Appendix-IIIIV.L-1_Intersection-Capacity-Analysis-Methodology.pdf
  84. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/04091/07.cfm
  85. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop08024/chapter3.htm
  86. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/hpmsmanl/appn5.cfm
  87. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2046043021000575
  88. https://www.sidrasolutions.com/software/sidra-intersection/models/powerful-multimodal-capacity-and-performance
  89. https://uic.org/safety/safety-at-level-crossings/
  90. https://unece.org/level-crossing-safety-film
  91. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Railway_safety_statistics_in_the_EU
  92. https://railroads.dot.gov/program-areas/highway-rail-grade-crossing/highway-rail-grade-crossings-overview
  93. https://toolkits.ite.org/gradecrossing/sec04c.htm
  94. https://api.army.mil/e2/c/downloads/2025/08/25/a196758c/bulletin-18-04-railroad-grade-crossings.pdf
  95. https://hsr.ca.gov/about/safety/quad-gates/
  96. https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/Graphics/5326.PDF
  97. https://toolkits.ite.org/gradecrossing/sec04a.htm
  98. https://highways.dot.gov/safety/hsip/xings/highway-rail-crossing-handbook-third-edition/chapter-2-engineered-treatments-0
  99. https://railroads.dot.gov/railroad-safety/divisions/crossing-safety-and-trespass-prevention/railroad-crossing-safety
  100. https://www.transportation.ohio.gov/working/engineering/roadway/manuals-standards/multimodal/11
  101. https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/18830/Constant_Warning_PB81205684.pdf
  102. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/trr/1986/1069/1069-018.pdf
  103. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/rail-safety-division/rceb/cpuc-guidance-on-pedestrian-treatments-for-rail-crossings-2025.pdf
  104. https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/1370/small_Jan08_Ped_Devices_GX2.pdf
  105. https://www.corada.com/documents/36-cfr-part-1190-NPRM/r305-2-5
  106. https://static.tti.tamu.edu/tti.tamu.edu/documents/1439-9.pdf
  107. https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/Los-Angeles-DOT.pdf
  108. https://japan-trails.com/media/shibuya-scramble-crossing/
  109. https://www.pps.org/article/shared-space
  110. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9012376/
  111. https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/street-design-elements/curb-extensions/
  112. https://highways.dot.gov/media/73486
  113. https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/intersection-design-elements/crosswalks-and-crossings/
  114. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/54243/dot_54243_DS1.pdf
  115. https://citygreen.com/woonerf-street-concept-for-shared-city-spaces/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.