2011 Walking Survey Analysis

Before concluding my involvement, I intend to dedicate my full effort to this endeavor. I hope that an individual with a more suitable current capacity will subsequently assume responsibility.

Chris

This excerpt from the 2011 National Walking Survey provides valuable data for analyzing pedestrian safety problems from the perspectives of traffic safety and traffic engineering.

Traffic Safety Perspective:

Traffic safety focuses on understanding the factors that contribute to crashes and injuries involving pedestrians and developing strategies to prevent them. This survey highlights several key areas of concern:

• Driver Behavior: The top two concerns, distracted drivers (talking on cell phones or using other electronic devices) and speeding motor vehicles, directly point to unsafe driver behaviors as major threats to pedestrian safety. This underscores the need for:
  • Enforcement: Increased police presence and ticketing for distracted driving and speeding.
  • Education and Awareness Campaigns: Public messaging to highlight the dangers of these behaviors and encourage safer driving practices.
  • Technological Solutions: While not directly addressed in the survey, this could include in-vehicle technologies to reduce distractions and intelligent speed adaptation systems.
• Roadway Design and Infrastructure: The concerns about not enough sidewalks and unsmooth sidewalks or other walking surfaces highlight critical deficiencies in pedestrian infrastructure. This emphasizes the need for:
  • Sidewalk Construction and Expansion: Prioritizing the building of continuous and accessible sidewalks in all neighborhoods, particularly in less populated areas where they are more likely to be absent.
  • Sidewalk Maintenance and Repair: Ensuring that existing sidewalks are well-maintained, free from hazards, and comply with accessibility standards (e.g., ADA).
• Street Lighting: Poorly-lit streets are identified as a safety problem, particularly in less populated areas. Adequate street lighting is crucial for:
  • Visibility: Enhancing the visibility of pedestrians to drivers, especially during nighttime hours and in adverse weather conditions.
  • Deterrence of Crime: Although crime itself is a separate concern, better lighting can contribute to a safer perceived environment and potentially deter criminal activity.
• Pedestrian Signalization: The concern that walk signs or street signals do not give enough time to walk across the street safely is a direct engineering issue impacting pedestrian safety and accessibility, especially for older adults and those with mobility limitations. This necessitates:
  • Timing Adjustments: Reviewing and adjusting pedestrian signal timings based on established engineering guidelines (e.g., using walking speed assumptions that accommodate a range of abilities).
  • Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs): Implementing LPIs at intersections to give pedestrians a head start before vehicles get a green light, increasing their visibility and reducing conflicts.
• Cyclist Behavior: The open-ended comments mentioning cyclists who disobeyed traffic laws as a hazard highlight the importance of:
  • Education for Cyclists: Promoting awareness of traffic laws and safe riding practices among cyclists.
  • Enforcement of Traffic Laws for Cyclists: Ensuring that cyclists are also held accountable for traffic violations that endanger pedestrians.
  • Infrastructure Design: Creating separated or protected bicycle lanes to minimize interactions and potential conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists.
• Impact of Neighborhood Characteristics: The survey's finding that safety concerns vary by neighborhood type and income level underscores the need for targeted interventions. For example, densely populated, lower-income areas might require more focus on driver behavior and crime, while less populated areas need more investment in basic pedestrian infrastructure.
• Differences Among Walker Types: The varying levels of concern among instrumental, hybrid, and health/relaxation walkers suggest that different types of pedestrians may have different perceptions of risk and prioritize different safety factors. This could inform targeted safety campaigns or infrastructure improvements based on the predominant types of walking in specific areas.
• Crash Data: The reported percentages of respondents being hit by cars or cyclists provide direct evidence of pedestrian safety failures. The correlations with age, population density, and walking purpose offer valuable insights for prioritizing safety interventions. For instance, the higher incidence of being hit by a car in denser areas reinforces the need for traffic calming and pedestrian-focused infrastructure in urban environments. The higher rate of being hit by cyclists among the youngest and oldest age groups warrants further investigation and targeted safety measures.

Traffic Engineering Perspective:

Traffic engineering focuses on the planning, design, and operation of transportation systems to ensure the safe and efficient movement of people and goods. This survey data informs traffic engineering in the following ways:  

• Prioritization of Infrastructure Investments: The high percentages of respondents identifying the lack of sidewalks and unsmooth surfaces as problems provide a strong justification for prioritizing infrastructure projects that address these deficiencies. Traffic engineers can use this data to advocate for funding and develop plans for sidewalk construction and repair programs.
• Design Standards and Guidelines: The concern about inadequate walk signal timing highlights the need to adhere to and potentially re-evaluate existing design standards for pedestrian crossings. Traffic engineers can use this feedback to ensure that signal timings are appropriate for the expected pedestrian volumes and demographics.
• Intersection Design: The high incidence of distracted driving and speeding suggests the need for intersection designs that enhance pedestrian visibility and reduce vehicle speeds. This could include features like:
  • Pedestrian Refuge Islands: Providing a safe place for pedestrians to wait in the middle of wide or busy streets.
  • Raised Crosswalks: Encouraging drivers to slow down and increasing pedestrian visibility.
  • Neckdowns (Curb Extensions): Shortening crossing distances and improving visibility.
• Traffic Calming Measures: To address speeding motor vehicles, traffic engineers can implement various traffic calming techniques such as:
  • Speed Humps and Speed Tables: Physically reducing vehicle speeds.
  • Chicanes and Road Diets: Altering the roadway geometry to encourage slower speeds.
• Lighting Design: The identification of poorly-lit streets as a problem emphasizes the importance of proper street lighting design according to established illumination standards. Traffic engineers can conduct lighting audits and develop plans for upgrading or installing new streetlights.
• Data-Driven Decision Making: This survey data provides valuable empirical evidence to support traffic safety and engineering decisions. By quantifying the perceived safety problems and identifying correlations with demographic and environmental factors, engineers can make more informed choices about where to focus their efforts and resources.
• Performance Measurement: Follow-up surveys or data collection efforts could be used to measure the effectiveness of implemented traffic safety and engineering interventions in addressing the problems identified in this survey.

In conclusion, the National Walking Survey data offers critical insights for both traffic safety professionals and traffic engineers. It highlights the significant impact of driver behavior and infrastructure deficiencies on pedestrian safety perceptions and experiences. This information can be used to prioritize interventions, inform design standards, and advocate for policies and investments that create safer and more walkable communities.

The findings of the National Walking Survey directly align with the principles and goals of both Vision Zero and Complete Streets:

Vision Zero Analysis:

Vision Zero is a strategy to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries, while increasing safe, healthy, and equitable mobility for all. It operates on the ethical principle that no loss of life on our roads is acceptable and emphasizes a Safe System approach, acknowledging that humans make mistakes and the transportation system should be designed to be forgiving.  

• Driver Behavior as a System Failure: The survey's top concerns – distracted driving and speeding – are viewed within Vision Zero not just as individual errors but also as indicators of a system that has not adequately prevented or mitigated these dangerous behaviors. Vision Zero would advocate for systemic solutions such as:
  • Infrastructure Design: Engineering roads to naturally encourage safer speeds (e.g., road diets, narrower lanes, speed humps).
  • Technology: Exploring and implementing intelligent speed assistance (ISA) in vehicles.
  • Policy and Enforcement: Implementing and enforcing stricter laws against distracted driving and speeding, coupled with public awareness campaigns.
• Infrastructure for Vulnerable Users: The issues of insufficient and unsafe sidewalks directly contradict Vision Zero's commitment to protecting vulnerable road users. A Vision Zero approach would prioritize:
  • Complete Networks: Building comprehensive, connected sidewalk networks that are accessible to all.
  • Safe Crossings: Implementing measures like high-visibility crosswalks, pedestrian refuge islands, and leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs) to ensure safe street crossings.
  • Traffic Calming: Reducing vehicle speeds in areas with high pedestrian activity.
• Safe Speeds and Human Vulnerability: Vision Zero recognizes that the severity of injuries in a crash is directly related to speed. The concern about speeding vehicles underscores the need to manage speeds to levels where human bodies are more likely to survive a collision.
• Data-Driven Approach: Vision Zero emphasizes the use of data to identify high-risk areas and patterns. The survey data itself is a valuable tool for understanding pedestrian safety problems and prioritizing interventions. The variations in concerns based on neighborhood type and walker characteristics highlight the need for targeted, data-informed solutions.
• Shared Responsibility: While the survey focuses on pedestrian perspectives, Vision Zero emphasizes that safety is a shared responsibility among all stakeholders, including drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, engineers, and policymakers. Addressing the concerns raised requires collaborative efforts.

Complete Streets Analysis:

Complete Streets is a transportation policy and design approach that requires streets to be planned, designed, operated, and maintained to enable safe, comfortable, and convenient travel for all users regardless of age, ability, or mode of transportation.  

• Multimodal Infrastructure Deficiencies: The survey's findings directly point to a lack of Complete Streets implementation. The scarcity of sidewalks and unsafe walking surfaces are clear indicators that the transportation system has not adequately accommodated pedestrians.
• Safety and Accessibility for All: Complete Streets aims to create infrastructure that is safe and accessible for everyone, including children, older adults, and people with disabilities. The concerns about sidewalk conditions and insufficient crossing times highlight barriers to safe and accessible walking for these groups.
• Integration of Active Transportation: The survey underscores the need to integrate active transportation (walking and potentially cycling, as mentioned in the comments) into the overall transportation network. Addressing the identified problems is crucial for creating a truly multimodal system.
• Context-Sensitive Design: Complete Streets recognizes that the design of streets should be context-sensitive, reflecting the needs of the surrounding community. The survey's findings that concerns vary by neighborhood density and income level emphasize the importance of tailoring Complete Streets solutions to specific local contexts. For example, prioritizing sidewalk construction in less dense areas and addressing speeding and distracted driving in more densely populated areas.
• Addressing Conflicts: The mention of cyclists disobeying traffic laws and the data on pedestrian-cyclist collisions highlight the need for Complete Streets designs that minimize conflicts between different modes, such as separated bike lanes and clear rules of the road for all users.
• Prioritizing Vulnerable Users: Complete Streets prioritizes the safety and needs of vulnerable road users, including pedestrians. The survey data provides a clear understanding of the challenges pedestrians face and reinforces the urgency of implementing Complete Streets principles to address these vulnerabilities.

Synergies:

Vision Zero and Complete Streets are complementary approaches. Complete Streets provides the design and policy framework for creating a safer and more equitable transportation system, while Vision Zero provides the overarching goal of eliminating fatalities and severe injuries and a safety-first ethical framework to guide those efforts. The data from the National Walking Survey strongly supports the need for both approaches to be implemented to address the significant pedestrian safety concerns identified.

It appears WalkBikeBerks and similar organizations in Pennsylvania have several potential grant opportunities at the state level to support projects related to pedestrian safety, bicycle infrastructure, and Complete Streets initiatives. Here's a breakdown of potential avenues based on the search results:

Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) Grants:

• Behavioral Highway Safety Grants: PennDOT offers grants utilizing federal funding from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). These grants aim to improve highway safety and reduce deaths and serious injuries. While some listed opportunities focus on driver behavior (distracted driving, speeding), the general program goals and allowable costs (implementation of strategies to address traffic safety problems, public education campaigns) suggest that projects focusing on pedestrian safety, such as awareness campaigns or educational materials related to safe walking and sharing the road, could be eligible.  
• Green Light-Go Program: This program focuses on improving the efficiency and operation of existing traffic signals. While the primary focus is on signal timing and technology, projects that enhance pedestrian safety at signalized intersections (e.g., pedestrian countdown timers, accessible pedestrian signals) could potentially be eligible under the program's broader goal of improving safety and mobility.  
• Traffic Signal Technologies Grant Program (TSTG): Similar to Green Light-Go, this program provides grants to municipalities for installing and maintaining traffic signal technologies. Again, pedestrian safety enhancements at intersections could be a component of eligible projects.  
• Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside (TASA) Program (Likely administered through PennDOT): While not explicitly listed in the immediate search results, TASA funds are a federal program that PennDOT typically administers. These funds are often used for bicycle and pedestrian projects, Safe Routes to School initiatives, and other transportation enhancements that align with Complete Streets principles. You would need to check the PennDOT website for information on TASA program availability and application details.  

Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) Grants:

• While the initial search didn't directly yield DCNR grants for roadway pedestrian safety, DCNR offers grants for parks, recreation, and conservation. Projects that involve developing or improving trails, greenways, or pedestrian access to natural areas could be eligible for DCNR funding. If WalkBikeBerks has projects that connect communities to recreational trails or enhance pedestrian access to parks, DCNR grants might be a suitable option.  

Pennsylvania Department of Health Grants:

• The search for health-related grants didn't yield specific programs directly funding infrastructure. However, the Department of Health might offer grants related to community health initiatives, active living, or injury prevention. If WalkBikeBerks has programs that promote walking for health or aim to reduce pedestrian injuries through educational campaigns, these could potentially align with the Department of Health's priorities.

Key Steps for WalkBikeBerks to Pursue Grants:

1. Visit the PennDOT Grants Page: The primary source for transportation-related grants will be the official PennDOT website. Look for sections on "Grants," "Funding," or "Doing Business."
2. Review Program Guidelines Carefully: For each potential grant program (Behavioral Highway Safety, Green Light-Go, TSTG, and potentially TASA), thoroughly review the program guidelines, eligibility requirements, allowable project types, and application deadlines.
3. Identify Specific Project Alignment: Determine which of WalkBikeBerks' projects (sidewalk improvements, crosswalk enhancements, educational campaigns, Safe Routes to School initiatives, trail connections) best align with the goals and requirements of each grant program.
4. Contact PennDOT Grant Administrators: If there are questions about program eligibility or the application process, reach out to the contact persons listed on the PennDOT grants pages.
5. Explore DCNR and Department of Health: If applicable, investigate the grant opportunities offered by the DCNR (for trail-related projects) and the Department of Health (for health and injury prevention initiatives).
6. Collaborate with Municipalities: Many PennDOT grants require or favor applications from local government entities. WalkBikeBerks may need to partner with Berks County municipalities or the Berks County Planning Commission to apply for certain infrastructure-focused grants.  

By systematically exploring these state-level grant opportunities and carefully aligning their projects with program requirements, WalkBikeBerks can potentially secure funding to advance pedestrian safety and Complete Streets initiatives in Berks County. Remember to check the websites regularly for updated grant information and deadlines, as grant availability and program details can change.

Note: I am publicly supporting a particular candidate https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61572238651552