TODAY S WEBINAR AGENDA

Transcription

1 TODAY S WEBINAR AGENDA 3:00 pm: Introduction 3:05 pm: Presentation 3:45 pm: Questions 4:00 pm: Webinar Ends For technical assistance during the webinar: Choose these prompts: 1, 1, 1

2 CONTINUING EDUCATION To document Professional Development Hours (PDH) or Certification Maintenance (CM) credit for the AICP: Log your attendance on the site host s sign-in sheet Site hosts: return the completed sign-in sheet to APBP after the webinar (fax to or webinars@apbp.org) A Certificate of Attendance may be downloaded and printed here: Planners: APBP has applied to the AICP for 1.0 CM credits for this webinar

3 SAFETY MANUALS THE GOOD STUFF JULY 18, 2018 For technical assistance during the webinar: Call Choose audio prompts: 1, 1, 1

4 UPCOMING TRAINING FROM APBP Monthly Webinar Series: August 15 Moving Beyond the Centerline Advisory Bike Lanes, Best Kept Secret September 19 Placemaking in the Burbs FREE Webinars: July 25 - U.S. Federal Policy Briefing August 1 Best of TRB Webinar

5 THANK YOU TO OUR GENEROUS SPONSORS SUSTAINERS SUPPORTERS

6 TODAY'S WEBINAR PRESENTERS Lauren Blackburn, AICP, VHB Lauren is a Senior Project Manager based in VHB s Raleigh, North Carolina office. She provides expertise to a variety of transportation, planning, and research projects. Her key areas of interest are bicycle and pedestrian transportation, comprehensive planning, roadway safety, and community health. Prior to joining VHB, Lauren worked for the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) as the Director of the Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation. Previously, she was the Planning Manager for the Town of Davidson, North Carolina. She has an undergraduate in landscape architecture and a master s degree in urban planning.

7 TODAY'S WEBINAR PRESENTERS Charlie Zegeer, UNC Highway Safety Research Center Charlie is a senior Technical Advisor for the UNC Highway Safety Research Center, where he has worked for the past 30 years. He has led many national safety research studies, including the 2005 Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalk study, the National Bicycling and Walking study, and numerous other studies for FHWA on safety effects of improvements for motorists and pedestrians. He was the P.I. on NCHRP 841, which quantified the effects of four pedestrian treatments on crashes. He also led the study for NHTSA on the effects of the Miami-Dade Pedestrian Safety Demonstration program, among other studies. Prior to working for HSRC, he worked for a Michigan consulting firm and was a research engineer for the Kentucky DOT. Over the past 45 years, he has authored more than 150 reports and publications, mostly related to evaluating roadway and pedestrian improvements, and has won awards from ITE, TRB and APBP, including the 2012 APBP Lifetime Achievement Award.

8 Safe Transportation for STEP Every Pedestrian Safety Guidance for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossings Lauren Blackburn Charlie Zegeer July 2018

9 U.S. Pedestrian Fatalities* *Data from FARS, NHTSA; Graphic from Systemic Pedestrian Safety Analysis, Final Guidebook 9

10 72% of pedestrian fatalities occur at nonintersection locations 10

11 The Spectacular Six: STEP Countermeasures Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements Raised Crosswalk Pedestrian Refuge Island Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) Road Diet Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon 11

12 Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements

13 Raised Crosswalk

14 Refuge Island

15 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon

16 Road Diet Before 16

17 Road Diet After

18 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon 18

19 Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations Follows a 6-step process Guides the selection of countermeasures to improve pedestrian safety Supported by a Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations 19

20

21 Collect pedestrian crash and safety data Evaluate pedestrian accommodation policies Initiate a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan Review pedestrian and traffic safety plans Conduct a walkability audit 21

22 Planning for Crosswalks 22

23 Common Crosswalk Myths MYTH: There is an MUTCD pedestrian volume warrant for marked crosswalks. REALITY: There is no pedestrian volume requirement to mark a crosswalk in the MUTCD. MYTH: Research supports the removal of crosswalks. REALITY: Marked crosswalks should not be removed without a plan for improving safety. MYTH: Not marking a crosswalk is safer than marking a crosswalk. REALITY: Research has not found measurable safety differences between marked and unmarked crosswalks along two-lane or low-volume streets. However, marked crosswalks alone along high-volume or high-speed roadways are generally not sufficient to improve pedestrian safety. 23

24 Inventory pedestrian crossings and observed traffic behavior Classify pedestrian crossings: controlled vs uncontrolled Inventory roadway characteristics Screen the network for high-crash or high-risk locations 24

25 2005 Zegeer Study Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations: Final Report and Recommended Guidelines Marked crosswalks alone (i.e., without signals or other substantial crossing improvements) are insufficient and should not be installed under the following conditions: Where the speed limit exceeds 40 mph On a roadway with 4+ lanes without a raised median; ADT of 12,000 or greater On a roadway with 4+ lanes with a raised median; ADT of 15,000 or greater 25

26 Diagram crash reports Identify crash factors Lead an informal site visit Conduct an Road Safety Audit Image Source: VDOT 26

27 DRAFT July 2018 version includes RRFB Highlights situations where a marked crosswalk alone is not sufficient Presents options for countermeasure selection Does not substitute MUTCD requirements or guidance 27

28 DRAFT Considers additional observed behaviors or crash trends Further focuses options for countermeasure selection Consult crash types and field data 28

29 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) AASHTO Guide for the Design of Pedestrian Facilities Local design guidance and selection criteria Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon 29

30 Construct improvements Monitor results of implementation Consider funding options Identify implementation opportunities Raised Crosswalk 30

31 Safety Research Terms Crash Modification Factor (CMF) A multiplicative factor used to compute the expected number of crashes after implementing a given countermeasure. If available, calibrated or locally developed State estimates may provide a better estimate of effects for the State. (Crash Modification Factors Clearinghouse.) Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) The percentage crash reduction that might be expected after implementing a given countermeasure at a specific site. CMF Clearinghouse 31

32 Recent Research Cited NCHRP Synthesis 498: Application of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments for Streets and Highways NCHRP Report 841: Development of Crash Modification Factors for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Treatments s/ aspx 32

33 CRF and CMF Summary Table 33

34 Field Guide Sample Inventory Form Worksheets for each countermeasure: Definition Roadway conditions checklist Safety issues checklist Installation guidelines and MUTCD references 34

35 35

36 FHWA EVERY DAY COUNTS / STEP For Additional Information Contact: STEP is continuing through 2021 as part of EDC-5! Becky Crowe FHWA Office of Safety (804) Rebecca.Crowe@dot.gov Peter Eun FHWA Resource Center (360) Peter.Eun@dot.gov 36

37 QUESTION & ANSWER Lauren Blackburn Charlie Zegeer

38 THANK YOU TO OUR GENEROUS SPONSORS SUSTAINERS SUPPORTERS

39 THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING Please take a short survey to tell us what you think about today s presentation. A link to the survey will be ed to the site host. If you re the host, please forward the link to anyone who attended in the webinar at your site. Return your sign in sheets promptly!