The Florida Senate
BILL ANALYSIS AND FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
(This document is based on the provisions contained in the legislation as of the latest date listed below.)
Prepared By: The Professional Staff of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic
Development
BILL: PCS/SB 1412 (289006)
INTRODUCER: Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development;
and Senator Perry
SUBJECT: Traffic and Pedestrian Safety
DATE: April 9, 2021 REVISED:
ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR REFERENCE ACTION
1. Price Vickers TR Favorable
2. McAuliffe Hrdlicka ATD Recommend: Fav/CS
3. AP
Please see Section IX. for Additional Information:
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE - Substantial Changes
I. Summary:
PCS/SB 1412 seeks to address vehicular and pedestrian safety with respect to pedestrian
crosswalks located at any point other than at an intersection with another public highway, street,
or road, which are referred to as midblock crosswalks. The bill requires, before installation of a
midblock crosswalk on a public highway, street, or road after October 1, 2021, a traffic
engineering study to be conducted, signed, and sealed by a Florida licensed professional engineer
which recommends the installation.
Notwithstanding any other law, the bill requires a midblock crosswalk:
 On a public roadway that has a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour (mph) or more to
conform to certain national standards and applicable Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT) standards and to include a pedestrian-facing sign containing language stating duties
applicable to a pedestrian; and
 On a public roadway posted at 29 mph or less to include a pedestrian-facing sign containing
language stating duties applicable to a pedestrian.
By October 1, 2022, the bill requires the FDOT to submit to the federal government a request for
authorization to allow certain traffic control devices at midblock crosswalks that use yellow
indications to be replaced by red indications. If the request is granted, the state, county, or
municipality with jurisdiction, as appropriate, must replace all such traffic control devices having
yellow indications with traffic control devices that use red indications within 12 months after the
BILL: PCS/SB 1412 (289006) Page 2
date of federal authorization. If the request is denied, the jurisdictional entity must remove all
such traffic control devices from each midblock crosswalk described in the bill by
October 1, 2025.
By October 1, 2024, the entity with jurisdiction over a public roadway with a midblock
crosswalk that is in existence on October 1, 2021, must ensure that the crosswalk is controlled by
coordinated traffic control signal devices and pedestrian control signals as required under the
bill. Alternatively, the entity with jurisdiction may remove any such existing crosswalk.
The bill also provides a finding that the act fulfills an important state interest.
The bill will likely have a significant negative fiscal impact to state and local governments to
meet the requirements of the bill by October 1, 2024, for midblock crosswalks existing on
October 1, 2021. See Section V. “Fiscal Impact Statement” for details.
The bill takes effect October 1, 2021.
II. Present Situation:
The MUTCD and FDOT Specifications
Traffic control signal devices provide for the control of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. They
assign the right-of-way to various traffic movements and influence pedestrian and vehicular
traffic flow. When properly designed such devices provide for the orderly movement of traffic,
increase the traffic capacity of an intersection, reduce the frequency and severity of crashes,
provide for predictable movement of traffic and pedestrians, and interrupt heavy traffic at
intervals to permit vehicles and pedestrians to cross safely.1
The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) “is a compilation of national
standards for all traffic control devices, including road markings, highway signs, and traffic
signals.” States are currently required to adopt the 2009 edition of the MUTCD (which includes
revisions and interim approvals) as the legal state standard for traffic control devices.2 Florida
law requires the FDOT to adopt the MUTCD as the uniform system of traffic control devices for
use on the streets and highways of this state.3 The FDOT has additional specifications that apply
to given roadway markings, highway signs, and traffic signals and that are recognized by the
Federal Highway Administration.4
The MUTCD provides transportation engineers with information necessary to make appropriate
decisions regarding the use of all traffic control devices. There are both provisions that are
1
See Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, Part
4: Highway Traffic Signals, Section 4B.03, available at https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009r1r2/part4.pdf (last visited April
7, 2021).
2
FHWA, under Current Edition of Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, available at
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/index.htm (last visited March 27, 2021).
3
Section 316.0745, F.S.
4
See FHWA, MUTCDs & Traffic Control Devices Information by State, Florida, available at
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/state_info/florida/fl.htm (last visited March 20, 2021), and Fla. Admin. Code
R. 14-15.010 (2012).
BILL: PCS/SB 1412 (289006) Page 3
mandatory and provisions that require the use of engineering judgment. Part 4 of the MUTCD
addresses highway traffic signals and recites a basic tenant found throughout the MUTCD: “The
selection and use of traffic control signals should be based on an engineering study of roadway,
traffic, and other conditions.” Further, “[e]ngineering judgment should be applied in the review
of operating traffic control signals to determine whether the type of installation and the timing
program meet the current requirements of all forms of traffic.”5
Midblock Crosswalks
Crosswalks at any location other than at an intersection are referred to as “midblock” crosswalks,
crossings, or locations in the MUTCD (and in this analysis).6 The design treatment of traffic
control and pedestrian signals takes various forms and can range, for example, from a flashing
yellow pedestrian crossing signal to use of full (red, yellow, and green displays) traffic control
signals.
The MUTCD contains a number of provisions relating to installing traffic control signals at
midblock crosswalks. For example, these provisions direct the entity with jurisdiction over the
crosswalk to consider detailed criteria related to:
 The distances to the nearest traffic control signal, side streets, and highways;7 and
 The number of vehicles using and the number of pedestrians crossing the street per hour.8
The MUTCD contains other applicable provisions. However, the focus of the MUTCD is that
installation of a traffic control signal at any location, including midblock locations, must be
based on an engineering study of traffic conditions, pedestrian characteristics, and physical
characteristics of the particular location. The same focus is present in the MUTCD with respect
to related pedestrian signals at any location, including midblock locations. “The design and
operation of traffic control signals shall take into consideration the needs of pedestrians as well
as vehicular traffic.”9
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons
A pedestrian hybrid beacon, also known as a high-intensity activated crosswalk beacon (HAWK
beacon), is a special type of hybrid beacon used to warn and control traffic at an unsignalized
location to assist pedestrians in crossing a street or highway at a marked crosswalk. A HAWK
beacon can be installed for at a location that:
 Does not meet conditions to install a traffic signal; or
 Meets conditions to install a traffic signal but a decision is made to not install a traffic control
signal.
If used, HAWK beacons must be used in conjunction with signs and pavement markings to warn
and control traffic at locations where pedestrians enter or cross a street or highway. A HAWK
5
Supra note 1 at Section 4B.02.
6
See also s. 316.003(16)(b), F.S., which defines a crosswalk, in part, as any portion of a roadway at an intersection or
elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the surface.
7
Supra note 1 at Section 4D.01.
8
Supra note 1 at Section 4C.05.
9
Supra note 1 at Section 4D.03.
BILL: PCS/SB 1412 (289006) Page 4
beacon may only be installed at a marked crosswalk.10 The device uses a sequence of both
yellow and red indications, providing yellow indications upon pedestrian activation to warn
approaching traffic and then red indications to warn traffic to stop.11 Indications facing the
pedestrian include a signal that displays a stead upraised hand to indicate “don’t walk” (on when
the traffic signal is flashing yellow) and a walking person to indicate “walk” (on when the traffic
signal is steady red).
Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons (RRBFs)
Warning beacons may be used as emphasis for midblock crosswalks.12 The standard for these
beacons are circular yellow lights. According to the FDOT, on the state highway system
midblock crosswalks are either “controlled (pedestrian traffic signal or pedestrian hybrid beacon)
or uncontrolled traffic control devices such as pedestrian-activated flashing beacons, rectangular
rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs), in-roadway lights, in-street signs, pedestrian warning signs,
and/or pedestrian crosswalk markings only.”13 Concerns have been raised about RRFBs at
midblock crosswalks which are activated by a pedestrian wishing to cross a roadway, but which
do not use red indications to warn approaching vehicular traffic of pedestrian presence and to
come to a stop.
In contrast to pedestrian hybrid beacons14 that use red indications, an RRFB is “a traffic control
device consisting of two rapidly and alternately flashing rectangular yellow indications having
LED array-based pulsing light sources that function as a warning beacon.”15 The FHWA has
granted the FDOT interim approval for optional use of certain pedestrian-activated RRFBs at
uncontrolled marked crosswalks, including midblock crosswalks, to supplement standard
pedestrian and school crossing warning signs, but under specifically detailed conditions.16 Most
10
Supra note 1 at Section 4F.01.
11
Supra note 1 at Figure 4F-3, showing a graphic of the sequence of a pedestrian hybrid beacon.
12
Supra note 1 at 4L.03. “Warning Beacons that are actuated by pedestrians, bicyclists, or other road users may be used as
appropriate to provide additional warning to vehicles approaching a crossing or other location.”
13
See FDOT 2021 Agency Legislative Bill Analysis HB 1113, updated March 11, 2021, at p. 3 (on file in the Senate
Transportation Committee).
14
A pedestrian hybrid beacon is a special type of hybrid beacon used to warn and control traffic at an unsignalized location to
assist pedestrians in crossing a street or highway at a marked crosswalk. A pedestrian hybrid beacon may be considered for
installation to facilitate pedestrian crossings at a location that does not meet traffic signal warrants, or at a location that meets
traffic signal warrants but a decision is made to not install a traffic control signal. If used, pedestrian hybrid beacons must be
used in conjunction with signs and pavement markings to warn and control traffic at locations where pedestrians enter or
cross a street or highway. A pedestrian hybrid beacon may only be installed at a marked crosswalk. Supra note 1 at Section
4F.01. See also Figure 4F-3, showing a graphic of the sequence of a pedestrian hybrid beacon, which uses both yellow and
red indications, providing yellow indications upon pedestrian activation to warn approaching traffic and then red indications
to warn traffic to stop.
15
FDOT, Traffic Engineering Manual, 2021, at Treatments for Pedestrian Crosswalks at Midblock and Unsignalized
Intersections, Section 5.2 at 5.2.3, available at https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/default-
source/traffic/trafficservices/studies/tem/tem-2021/traffic-engineering-manual.pdf?sfvrsn=c52cf4fb_0 (last visited
March 27, 2021).
16
See FHWA, Interim Approval 21 – Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons at Crosswalks, March 20, 2018, available at
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ia21/index.htm (last visited March 20, 2021). Interim approval is
necessary because the “RRFB does not meet the current standards for flashing warning beacons as contained in the 2009
edition of the MUTCD, Chapter 4L, which requires a warning beacon to be circular in shape and either 8 or 12 inches in
diameter, to flash at a rate of approximately once per second, and to be located no less than 12 inches outside the nearest edge
of the warning sign it supplements. The RRFB uses rectangular-shaped high-intensity light-emitting-diode (LED)-based
BILL: PCS/SB 1412 (289006) Page 5
relevantly, each RRFB unit must consist of two rapidly flashing rectangular-shaped yellow
indications with an LED-array-based light source, designed, located, and operated in accordance
with additional detailed requirements.17
The FHWA granted its approval based in part on a conclusion that the “RRFB offers significant
potential safety and cost benefits because it achieves high rates of compliance at a low relative
cost in comparison to other more restrictive devices that provide comparable results, such as full
midblock signalization or pedestrian hybrid beacons.”18
The FDOT advises that research and safety studies reflect beneficial results from use of RRFBs
(and other uncontrolled traffic control devices) in midblock crosswalks and cites a current survey
indicating that of 28 states responding, all allow the use of RRFBs at midblock crosswalks.19
Pedestrian and Driver Duties
In general, pedestrians are required by law to obey traffic control signal devices and pedestrian
control signals.20 If sidewalks are provided and no impediment exists to the pedestrian’s use of it,
a pedestrian is barred from walking on a roadway that is paved for vehicular traffic.21 Otherwise,
when practicable, pedestrians must walk only on the shoulder on the left side of the roadway in
relation to the pedestrian’s direction of travel, facing traffic that may approach from the opposite
direction.22 A pedestrian may not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run
into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.23 Between
intersections at which traffic control signals are in place, a pedestrian may not cross a roadway at
any place except at a marked crosswalk.24 A pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other
than within a marked crosswalk must yield to vehicles.25
A driver of a vehicle must stop for a pedestrian who is walking in the crosswalk when either a
traffic control signal or a signage directs the driver to stop. In the absence of a signal or signage,
a driver must yield to a pedestrian who is on the half of the roadway on which the vehicle is
traveling or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the roadway
as to be in danger.26 Every driver must exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian.27
III. Effect of Proposed Changes:
Section 1 cites the act as the “Sophia Nelson Pedestrian Safety Act.”
indications, flashes rapidly in a combination wig-wag and simultaneous flash pattern, and may be mounted immediately
adjacent to the crossing sign.”
17
Id. under Conditions of Interim Approval.
18
Id. under FHWA Evaluation of Results.
19
Supra note 12.
20
Section 316.130(1) and (2), F.S.
21
Section 316.130(3), F.S.
22
Section 316.130(4), F.S.
23
Section 316.130(8), F.S.
24
Section 316.130(11), F.S.
25
Section 316.130(10), F.S.
26
Section 316.130(7), F.S.
27
Section 316.130(15), F.S.
BILL: PCS/SB 1412 (289006) Page 6
In December of 2019, 12-year-old Sophia Nelson was struck and killed by a vehicle while
attempting to cross State Road A1A near Ellwood Avenue in Satellite Beach, using a midblock
crosswalk. No criminal charges were bro