Please feel free to use this chat function to share questions and comments for the panel. We will get to as many questions as possible at the end of the presentations.

Love that raised crosswalk meme

I'm excited to see the updates coming to the MUTCD. It is one of the most referenced document in my field. Do you know how we can be notified of the progress?

Regarding speed limits. Vehicle manufactures are designing vehicles to be faster and 0-60mph in under 2 seconds. Enforcement and prosecution can be a challenge, leading to promoting excessive speeding driver behavior. Any thoughts on using technology in vehicles with sensors to ensure vehicles are unable to drive beyond local posted speed limits?

We also expect drivers to drive very near the 85th percentile speed limit. The most frequent reason that older drivers fail behind the wheel driving test in California is driving more than 10 miles below the speed limit. A California Highway patrolman also told me that drivers are supposed to drive the speed limit. Merely permitting slower speeds would be helpful.

Very impressed with the approach. You nailed it with the absurdity angle. There's a lot of strength through light satire, especially when executed humorously. It breaks through the clutter, gets attention, and really gets people to take action.

DOTs are anxiously awaiting new guidance for setting speed limits... With the Safe System approach, DOTs do not have much impact on safe speeds aside from enforcement and education. A lot of things associated with speed have to go through legislature and time is too valuable to most. Definitely looking forward to new guidance as well as the MUTCD updates.

Lots of people argue that lowering speed limits is not a good strategy - pointing to low compliance rates and the undoubtable power of new infrastructure/traffic calming. I disagree, citing that many people are influenced by speed limits and that speed limit changes can be faster and lower cost than infrastructure projects. Do you have good data that shows speed limit changes improve safety and increase comfort? Tx!

do you have links or documents on what those bills say?

On Michael's note above - I would love to see any study that compares the effectiveness of speed approaches based on the context of the street. For instance, whether certain street designs (e.g., causeways) might be better served by more separation from bike/ped infrastructure rather than speed reduction.

NYSafeStreets.org - has info on all the bills, the 100+ coalition members, etc.

Speed limit reduction with just signs with safety improvements can be found in this report: https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/SDOT/VisionZero/SpeedLimit_CaseStudies_Report.pdf

I would be curious what the correlation of the size of the vehicle is to pedestrian fatalities. Our vehicles are very large compared to some of the other countries on that graph showed. Also, more round-a-bouts could help alleviate overall aggressive driving.

I would be curious how any states such as NY moved towards allowance of this type of program. MI has no law for this type of program. Any examples of how states went from a MI (no cameras allowed) to cameras allowed, thank you in advance.

larger vehicles often hit VRUs closer to the body, rather than legs, causing more extensive damage. Not to mention the difference between 20 and 50 mph

Is there an effort to change traffic fines to a percent of the drivers income to prevent disproportionate impact to low income drivers? This would also help to address use of of the 85th percentile use in response to use of traffic fines for income generation.

Unfortunately, because the MUTCD is a federal regulation, we have as much public information as you do on the updates (federal law limits how officials are permitted to host meetings on 'active rulemakings’). That said, we were encouraged by Pollack's comments at our conference earlier this month, and FHWA has said that the next edition of the MUTCD (where we hope many or most of our comments will be incorporated) will be released by May 2023.

Re: some requested resources. Designing for All Ages and Abilities provides guidance on which bike facilities to use based on the street type and use, and City Limits is our speed limit setting guidance for urban areas.

Size of vehicles is a huge concern (we created a campaign to urge updates to NCAP as a first step–the vehicles most deadly to pedestrians universally receive 4 and 5-star federal safety ratings). That said, Canada has larger vehicles with better traffic safety outcomes, so the issue is multifaceted.

live in NYC and member of TA and Family for Safe Streets. I have been hit by yellow cab, in coma, in and out of hospitals and surgery for years.Long time anticar activist. Support and testified for more bike lines. But also concerned about bikes running lights, wrong way, on sidewalk. Live in Chelsea which has good and safer bike lanes. Mid Aug pedestrian killed by hit & run biker on 22nd St/.8th Av. How can we support more biking but monitoring for safety. ?Licensing would make for accountability and cameras would identify .argument that licensing would reduce riders and numbers bring safety irrelevant in NYC where over 100000 bikers daily. Police in area say they cannot monitor bikers at community meetings. What can TA do? Have balance problems and freq almost hit. Disability groups have testified at City Council Transportation meets about concerns about dangers from bikes. senior who is knocked over & hip has serious disabling injury

It is very possible the next MUTCD update will include a higher threshold for detailed traffic studies and local considerations can be considered in more detail.

As a traffic engineer, I recommend more studies like the Seattle study to get approval of speed limit reductions.

My personal experience since California instituted a 3-foot requirement when passing bicyclists is motorists crossing double yellow lines, often completely into the opposing lane. More emphasis is needed on slowing down and waiting to pass a bicyclist until it is safe to pass.

bike

bike

BIke

bike

train

bike

Bike + Bus + Train!

walk

walk

driving

bike

Walk

Bike

walk

Walking

Train

bus/train

Driving

Driving

walk

walk

Biking

Drive

Drive

walk

walk

Walk

Walk

walk

Train

walk

Driving

streetcar

Drive

Bike

Drive

Drive

Driving

walk

Drive

Bike

drive

Drive

scooter

walk

drive

drive

Bike

Flying

Drive

Drive

bike

walk

drive

bike

Driving

walk + bike

drive too

walk

Driving

Motorcycle

walk walk walk

drive

Drive

drive

bike

drive

drive

Walk

driving

Bike

walk driving

broom

sailing

Motorcycle

Someone said "streetcar" - love it!

Skipping.

Walking or running

Horse is really my fave

🚲

Ice skates

Bike

Motorcycle

walk and train

Gail bus and train

Drive

Rollerblading!

would love if it was biking, but don't feel safe next to traffic

re: justifications for speed limit reductions @michael @kurt @john: there are a few cities that have looked at speed limit reductions on speed and crashes - Boston, Portland, Seattle, and Toronto stand out as a few. It's also worth noting that a lot of the speed limit reductions across the US are new, so few before/after studies have been done. And also notably, a lot of cities are prevented from reducing speed limits on higher speed roads where the vast majority of serious injuries and fatalities are taking place.

dragon

On speed limits, it's also worth saying that the intent of lowering speed limits from 25 mph to 20 mph in many places is less of a traffic calming tool than it is a communications tool - "we know 20 mph is a safer, more appropriate speed for the places where people live". Also, reducing the speed limit is a critical step in better engineering - we hear from planners all the time that they simply cannot implement safety infrastructure like speed humps or traffic circles because the speed limit (usually 30 mph) is too high for a safety treatment to be...safe. Basically, some engineers will say that if a speed limit indicates a 30 mph speed, traffic calming treatments have to retain that speed, even if that speed is what's resulting in serious injuries or deaths.

Thanks, Jenny. Had a very specific road in mind that's used as a highway but classified as an arterial. It actually had a 10mph speed cut recently for the safety of people riding, but most of us on the bike/ped end agree that proper protected bike lanes are an absolute necessity. However, given the design of the road, I'm curious if a significantly protected design would negate the need for the speed reduction, thus getting more drivers onboard with the idea of a lane reduction for the protection instead. So far, the engineering end of things isn't so much a problem except the difficulty of getting bollards OK'ed.

At the local level, what type of organization is most effective in slowing traffic and making the streets safer for all people (even those in cars!)? I bike and belong to several bike orgs. They are great and pretty effective. I can't help wonder, however, whether bike organizations would be most effective for general street change. Most people don't bike and many people hate cyclists : ( The vast majority of people, however, know someone who has been a victim of traffic violence or had a very close call.

@kurt that's a great question! The City Limits guidance has a matrix showing that streets with better/more protection for people walking and biking can indeed tolerate slightly higher speed limits than streets where there's a lot of modal mixing

Michael, I've experienced this locally, and I dare say it's best for an org to frame around safe streets with bike/walk/roll (and even driving) within the safe streets discussion.

Hard to say "no" to safe streets.

@Jenny, do you have a link to that? It would be exceptionally helpful down here in Miami.

Stephanie, these are such fantastic wins. Congrats to you and the WABA. Game changing.

Yes! you can download the guide here: https://nacto.org/safespeeds/. And the explanation for the matrix i'm referring to starts on page 58

@Michael, I saw that Amy Cohen is here. She's co-founder of Families for Safe Streets and a very effective advocate.

Oh, you were referring to the NACTO guide! Fantastic. Our Public Works director is ex-NACTO.

yes, so true about fatigue

ha yes sorry! I'm jenny o'connell, from nacto 🙂

Thank you for validating my feelings. Getting no where with municipality and it is VERY discouraging. Fabulous webinar, THANK YOU.

No worries, Jenny - bouncing between a million things at the moment and trying to keep everything straight. I should have known.

Does anyone know of efforts to fully incorporate transportation education throughout an education curriculum? We currently have add-on programs, such as Safe Routes to Schools; these are add-on programs and place an extra burden on teachers, principals, etc. Transportation education can and should be included in many subject areas, fully incor the curriculum.

... incorporated into the curriculum.

Oregon's elementary school curriculum has bike safety education embedded, which is integrated into standard curriculum. Hopefully that's not the only state.

Great point, Lindell! Kansas has a Driver's ed reimbursement program but we struggle with coverage across the state.

Lindell, we've been starting to work "Education about Infrastructure" into our youth educational curriculums at the UHealth BikeSafe program and UHealth WalkSafe program

@Lindell, here's an example: https://iwalksafe.org/virtuallearning/

FHWA website: "the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act directs USDOT to update the MUTCD by no later than May 15, 2023, and at least every 4 years thereafter to promote the safety, inclusion, and mobility of all road users."

Check out Lesson 3 and Lesson 5 which take conventional shared-responsibility messaging and throws it on it's head.

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/

I know that HeadStarts have a mandatory component about walking

https://iwalksafe.org/virtuallearning/

Unfortunately, FHWA has missed their own MUTCD deadlines before. That said, we're optimistic that we'll see an updated MUTCD by May 2023 -- FHWA continues to state that they'll have a new manual out by then.

thank you