Editing Pedestrian crossing (section)

== Criteria ==
Pedestrian crossing warrants are guidelines for the appropriate pedestrian crossing type for a site's traffic conditions. There are several guidelines in use across the world, and guidance and practice differ between jurisdictions. An over-emphasis by traffic engineers on vehicular movement in these criteria is criticised for neglecting the safety of pedestrians.<ref name=":8">{{Cite journal |last1=Jain |first1=Udit |last2=Rastogi |first2=Rajat |date=2017 |title=Re-Examination of PV 2 Criteria for Developing Pedestrian Crossing Warrants |journal=Transportation Research Procedia |language=en |volume=25 |pages=1707–1716 |doi=10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.130|doi-access=free }}</ref>

PV<sup>2</sup> warrants have been used in the UK, among other countries such as India, since they were developed in 1987. This warrant uses a calculation of peak pedestrian volume and peak vehicular volume to determine which type of crossing, if any, should be installed.<ref name=":8" /> For example, if 500 pedestrians cross the road per hour and 600 vehicles per hour use that road section, PV<sup>2</sup> dictates that a pelican crossing should be installed.<ref name=":8" />{{Rp|location=Fig. 1}}

The US [[Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices]] (MUTCD) advises that crosswalk markings should 'not be used indiscriminately' and encourages engineering studies at sites away from signalized intersections and STOP or Yield signs. Its guidance is against installing crossing markings (without extra engineering interventions) on high-traffic routes if the speed limit exceeds {{Convert|40|mph|km/h}}.<ref>{{Citation |title=Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices |date=July 2022 |url=https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009r1r2r3/part3.pdf |access-date=26 May 2023 |chapter=Part 3 – Markings |edition=2009 ed. – 3rd revision}}</ref>{{Rp|location=Section 3B.18}}