vision zero for oregon

VISION ZEROA Unifying Vision for Street Safety for Oregon

March 2015

This report had many contributors and influencers. Thank you to the staff and volunteers of Oregon Walks and the Bicycle Transportation Alliance. Our intern, Lise Ferguson, is responsible for much of the content and research. The basis of the report models a similar report from Transportation Alternatives in New York. Thank you for paving the way and providing content. The report was made possible by a grant from Advocacy Advance, a joint project of the Alliance for Biking and Walking and the League of American Bicyclists. Finally, thanks to Sarah Newsum, for design and editing.

Acknowledgments

2Vision Zero

Executive Summary

Introduction

Section 1: An Unacceptable Amount of Oregonians are Killed or Seriously Injured in Traffic Crashes How Safe Are Our Streets? How Does the Portland Metropolitan Area Compare? The Financial Burden of Traffic Crashes

Section 2: Main Crash Causes and Contributors Road Design Influences and Encourages Dangerous Driving Ensure Drivers on the Road are Safe and Informed The Culture of Noncompliance and the Culture of Acceptance

Section 3: Policies Proven to Reduce Fatal and Incapacitating Crashes Traffic Calming vs. Over-designed Roads Bicycle Accommodation Increasing Pedestrian Safety and Visibility Enforcement

Section 4: Building Consensus with a Unifying Vision Public Engagement Education and Outreach

Section 5: Recommendations and Conclusion Recommendations Conclusion

Appendix A: Model Language

Appendis B: Sample Pledge

Appendix C: Oregon Walks Position on Routine Closures of the Pedestrian Network

Endotes

Contents4-7

8-9

10-12

13-15

21

22-28

32-33

30-31

29

34-35

16-20

In recent years, numerous improvements have been made to streets in the Portland Metropolitan area in the name of safety. Sidewalks have been widened, posted speed limits have been reduced in areas with a strong pedestrian presence, and new and improved bike lanes have been added to more streets. Nonetheless, an estimated 50 people are killed in traffic crashes every year, while 482 people suffer life-altering injuries including: loss of limb, traumatic brain injury, and chronic pain.1 The number of lives lost and the degree of pain and suffering caused by traffic crashes is even more tragic given that these incidents are largely avoidable.

With so many cars on the road at any given time it is easy to accept that fatalities and serious injuries are the price we must pay for efficient transportation. But this high cost is unacceptable. The Portland Metropolitan area must no longer regard crashes as mere accidents, or as the trade-off of convenience. Instead, crashes should be viewed as preventable incidents that can be systematically eliminated. Vision Zero calls for the unified vision of zero deaths or serious injuries on our roads. In order for this vision to be realized, it must be shared by all members of the community. Everyone must be united under the common belief that loss of life and serious injury as a result of traffic crashes is unacceptable.

Today, responsibility for road safety is placed on individuals. However, humans are not infallible, mistakes are made, and roads should be designed with this in mind. Here, we explore the different methods of road design, education, and enforcement used locally and in other cities to make roads both user-friendly and safe for everyone. Additionally, we examine local traffic crash trends and make recommendations for how to eliminate road fatalities and incapacitating injuries. We can accomplish this goal through road design modification, engineering, legislative reform, enforcement, and public education and engagement. Although the Portland Metropolitan area has made significant progress regarding road safety improvements, the continued occurrence of avoidable tragedies on our roads should not be tolerated. Simply put, Vision Zero holds the position that no life is worth losing in the name of mobility, and that every crash can and should be avoided.

A number of major cities in the United States and Europe have already implemented Vision Zero or similar policies, including New York, Chicago, Boston, San Francisco, Paris, Berlin, Stockholm, and London. By implementing policies that have been proven to reduce traffic crashes, such as modifying street design to prevent speeding, these cities have seen significant decreases in traffic fatalities and serious injuries. Both New York and San Francisco have implemented Vision Zero policies with the ultimate goal of eliminating all traffic fatalities by 2024. In

Executive Summary

4Vision Zero

2014, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio released the City’s Vision Zero Action Plan. By January 2015, 50 street safety projects had been completed, including speed limit reductions, sidewalk widening, the construction of pedestrian refuge meridians, and the addition of protected bike lanes. As a result, 2014 was the safest year for pedestrians since record-keeping began in 1910, with overall traffic fatalities down 15% and pedestrian fatalities down 27% from 2013.2

By observing the actions taken by other cities and their resulting successes and challenges, the Portland Metropolitan area can begin building toward our own road fatality-free future. This ambitious but possible target requires more than government policy and programs, it needs the participation and cooperation of state legislators and lawmakers, local industries, companies, and members of the public. Vision Zero invites all citizens to join the discussion on street safety, and to do their part to ensure that our roads are safe for everyone.

Findings3

An unacceptable amount of residents are killed or seriously injured in traffic crashes.• On average, 50 people are killed in traffic crashes annually in the Portland

Metropolitan area, while an average of 482 people suffer incapacitating injuries from crashes (p. 14).

• Alcohol and drug use are the leading causes of fatal crashes in the Portland Metropolitan area cited in 57% of all deaths, while aggressive driving and excessive speeding tie for second place at 46% (p. 25).

• Using 2009 data, a study conducted by AAA found that the annual societal cost of traffic crashes in the Portland Metropolitan area outweighs that of traffic congestion. A 2005 study predicted that traffic congestion will cost the region $844 million annually by the year 2025. Currently, crashes cost the city $958 million annually.4

• 40% of all traffic congestion in Portland is non-recurring and caused primarily by crashes.5

• In Portland, pedestrians are 2.3 times more likely to get hit by a car in the highest poverty regions of the city.6

• The streets with the most crashes in Portland are designated High Crash Corridors. These ten high crash corridors make up only 3% of the road network, however 36% of all traffic fatalities occur on these streets.7

• Many state-owned highways outside of Portland city limits also see disproportionately high crash rates. Between 2008-2012, nine percent of all pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities in our region occurred on the Tualatin Valley Highway in Washington County.8

Major crash contributors are driving behaviors that are encouraged by road design.• The top contributing factors to all serious crashes in the Portland Metropolitan

5Vision Zero

Executive Summary

region are aggressive driving (40%), failure to yield-right-of way (34%), excessive speed (26%), failure to stop (25%), improper maneuvering (18%), following too close (17%), and influence from drugs or alcohol (14%) (p. 25).

• The top contributing factors to serious and fatal pedestrian crashes are failure to yield right-of-way (30%), alcohol or drugs (23%), improper driving maneuver (10%), and excessive speed (8%). These data do not specify whether the pedestrian or driver was under the influence of drugs or alcohol. All other factors are attributed to the driver (p. 48).

• The top contributing factors to serious and fatal bicycle crashes are failure to yield right-of-way (48%), alcohol or drugs (11%), aggressive driving (7%), and excessive speed (7%). This data does not specify whether the cyclist or driver was under the influence of drugs or alcohol. All other factors are attributed to the driver (p. 59).

• Crashes involving alcohol and drugs are significantly more likely to be fatal than other crashes (p. 25).

• Arterial streets have the highest rate of fatal and serious injury crashes for all road users.9

• For pedestrians, fatal and serious crashes occur more frequently after dark. For both pedestrians and bicyclists, fatal and serious crashes after dark occur more often in areas without proper street lighting.10

• Streets with more lanes have a higher crash rate, especially for pedestrians (p.29).

Successes of recent safety-oriented policies have brought forward several new ways to make our streets safer and save lives.• Cities in the U.S. and Europe that have implemented bicycle lanes have

experienced significant safety improvements for all road users.11

• During the first years of Vision Zero policy implementation, New York City has seen its lowest pedestrian fatality rate in history.12

• Improved bikeways on busy streets such as NE Multnomah, where traffic is separated with a physical barrier, provide safety improvements for people who walk, take transit, ride bicycles and drive cars. Separating traffic reduces conflicts, provides a sense of calm, and shortens the distance that pedestrians need to travel to cross a street.13

• Advanced stop boxes, sometimes referred to as bike boxes or green boxes, bring vehicles several feet back off of the intersection making it easier for both drivers and pedestrians to see one another.

• Leading pedestrian intervals give pedestrians a chance to travel with 3-4 seconds of lead time over cars, which is especially helpful for streets with multiple lanes and for individuals who need more time to cross the street.

• Recent improvements on N. Williams Street has seen the recent reduction of speeds from 30 to 25 mph, and to 20 mph in the main commercial area (Fremont to North Skidmore). Studies have shown that when speeds exceed 6

Vision Zero

Executive Summary

30 mph, the average risk of severe injury and death for a pedestrian is significantly higher than that of a car traveling at 20 mph.14

• The design of a road can significantly encourage or avert dangerous speeding. Speed bumps, incorporation of bike lanes, and elimination or narrowing of car lanes are all design techniques that have been proven to prevent speeding.15

• A cost-effective speed-prevention technique is the use of automated speed enforcement systems. Studies have shown that the presence of automated speed detectors reduces crashes by 20-25%.16

Presenting a unified vision to the public will build momentum for change.• Consensus is mandatory for achieving large-scale reductions in serious traffic

crashes and fatalities. Change can only be achieved with the cooperation of a diverse set of stakeholders, including the public, government officials, the private sector, educators, and law enforcement.

• A unifying vision helps motivate people-- it has been used to successfully generate support for policy change in cities around the world. A vision also helps stakeholders conceptualize an ideal outcome that is realistically achievable.

• Key components to eliminating traffic fatalities and serious crashes in any city are education, public engagement, and outreach. Ensuring that these efforts are accessible and culturally appropriate, and allowing for the public to meaningfully engage in the decision making process, are critical for success.

7Vision Zero

Executive Summary

Vision Zero is a new traffic safety program with the goal to eliminate all road fatalities through road design remediation, education, and enforcement. The program is based on the idea that traffic fatalities and serious injuries from crashes are avoidable, and should not be tolerated as a trade-off for transportability. Several cities across the U.S. and in Europe have introduced Vision Zero policies, with largely successful results and which will be discussed in this report.

While a flurry of recent improvements have made the streets of the Portland Metropolitan area significantly safer, our streets are still deadly, and we must continuously work toward something better. We must not concede to the idea that it is acceptable for people to die in traffic crashes. This culture of acceptance will only allow for the perpetuation of preventable deaths and life-altering injuries. A road system with a zero percent fatality rate can be accomplished through modified road design and engineering, policy and legislative reform, increased law enforcement, and public education about traffic safety. This report examines traffic crash data in the Portland Metropolitan area to determine what factors are at play behind crashes, and what can be done to further improve the safety of our streets.

Through examination of crash data, this report concludes that the leading causes of serious and fatal crashes in the Portland Metropolitan area are alcohol and drug use, followed by speeding and aggressive driving. Many dangerous driving behaviors can be prevented with simple changes to street design. Adding

complexity to the streetscape such as tree-lined medians, bike lanes, pedestrian islands, and curb extensions, forces drivers to slow down and pay attention. Additionally, communication must not be overlooked as an important factor in educating the public and changing the way people think about roads and driving. Residents need to be informed about changes

being made to their streets; why these changes are occurring, and what they mean in terms of safety. Explaining what a speed limit reduction of 5 mph means in the framework of a struck pedestrian’s chance of survival will put a human face

Introduction

8Vision Zero

Pedestrian IslandPortland, OR

Photo Courtesy of Greg Raisman

on the proposal. City officials must communicate to the public that these changes are being made not to hinder them on their morning commute, but to make their neighborhood streets safer.

This report has three main objectives: (1) to demonstrate the critical need to improve street safety, referencing the cost of inaction in human terms, (2) to present data and evidence that support the life-saving benefits of road-safety measures taken by other cities in the U.S. and internationally, and (3) to offer constructive recommendations on how the Portland Metropolitan area can build consensus for the large-scale change the region needs to eliminate fatalities and incapacitating injuries on our streets. The report has a slight focus on the Portland Metropolitan Area, but is not meant to be exclusive. We hope that this report may serve as a template for communities throughout Oregon who wish to integrate Vision Zero.

It is important to note that the success of Vision Zero is only possible because of the already great safety efforts that have been undertaken by the Portland Metropolitan area and the Oregon Department of Transportation. There have

been many partners, local non-profits, enforcement, courts, the Oregon Department of Transportation, the Oregon State Police, The Oregon Liquor Control Board, the Portland Bureau of Transportation, the Washington County and Clackamas County Transportation Departments and others who have laid the already strong foundation this initiative will build upon.

Section one uses local crash data to assess road safety in the Portland Metropol-itan area. We then assess how these data compare to crash rates in peer cities, while also exploring the cost of crashes in economic terms. Section two describes the main causes of serious and fatal crashes. Section three presents a variety of policies and road designs that have been proven to save lives. Section four dis-cusses the importance of engaging communities to build consensus for change. Finally, section five proposes some recommendations on how Cities, Counties, and the Region can eliminate all avoidable traffic fatalities and serious injuries.

9Vision Zero

Introduction

Portland Bureau of Transportation announces Vision Zero in Spring 2015

Image courtesy of Portland Bureau of

Transportation

In recent years, the Portland Metropolitan region has made significant improvements to the streets which have resulted in increasingly lower traffic crashes. However, the region’s roads are still deadly. On average, 50 people die in crashes each year, while about 482 people suffer life-changing injuries.17 Traffic fatalities and serious injuries are a harsh reality that people face every day, whether it is witnessing a crash on a morning commute, feeling the direct effect of a crash, or suffering the loss of a friend or loved one.

This section studies the relative safety of the Portland Metropolitan region’s streets by analyzing crash data. Findings are compared with crash data from peer cities across the U.S. that have adopted Vision Zero policies or similar strategies. Finally, this section examines the costs of traffic fatalities and serious crashes in both economic and social terms, to assess how crashes impact the general health and wellness of a city.

How Safe Are Our Streets?Traffic fatalities in Oregon are decreasing for all modes except motorcycles, which are increasing, according to crash data spanning the years 2003-2009.18 Also clear in the data is the strong correlation between fatality rates and annual per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT), or total miles driven. In other words, the data suggest that statewide, road fatalities are decreasing because people are driving less, as exposure to risk is decreased. The decrease in VMT can be attributed to a wide variety of factors, from public transportation improvements to increased bicycle accommodation. A report by the U.S. Census Bureau shows commuter cycling has increased in recent years, with 6.1% of people in the city of Portland claiming to ride their bike to work.19 That’s the highest percentage among the 15 major U.S. cities with the most bicycling commuters. Meanwhile, 11.9% of workers claim to commute via public transportation.

Decrease in fatalities can also be accredited to recent improvements the region has made toward road design changes and safety improvement projects. These include but are not limited to: the addition of sidewalks where previously absent, bike lanes, crosswalks, and visibility enhancements such as street lighting and improved signalization to indicate pedestrians crossing, area-specific reduced speed limits, and the addition of traffic-calming measures like speed-bumps, red-light cameras, and neighborhood greenways. It is important to remember that the progress that has been made so far is not a problem solved, but a project that needs to be built upon continuously until our goal of a road system with zero fatalities is met. The decrease of traffic deaths seen in the data should be treated as positive reinforcement to continue to make our streets safer.

Section 1: An Unacceptable Amount of Oregonians are Killed or Seriously Injured in Traffic Crashes

10Vision Zero

How Does the Portland Metropolitan Area Compare?According to the Metro State of Safety 2012 Report, the city of Portland, the Portland Metropolitan region, and the state of Oregon all have fatality rates below the national average.20 The national average is 15.1 pedestrians killed in traffic crashes per million residents and 2.4 cyclists killed per million residents. Oregon crash statistics are slightly lower than the national average in pedestrian fatalities (12.3 per million residents) but slightly higher in cyclist fatalities (3.1 per million residents), perhaps due to the disproportionate amount of bicycling culture here.21

The city of Portland ranks well on Metro’s list of safest cities in terms of roadway fatalities. It places at 8th best out of 62 cities with a population of 300,000 or more people. For comparison, the top safest cities on the list are, in descending order, New York, Boston, San Jose, San Francisco, and Seattle.22 Accordingly, all of these cities have implemented Vision Zero policies. The Portland Metropolitan region is comparable to the U.K. in terms of traffic fatalities, with 36 and 47 deaths per million residents, respectively.23 This itself is a statistic to be proud of, considering the fact that the median for U.S. cities with a population of over 300,000 is 81 deaths per million residents.24

Regional and statewide rankings obscure great variability in serious crash and fatality rates across the metropolitan region. For example, the rate of fatal and incapacitating injury crashes per million residents ranges from zero in Durham to 924 in Oregon City.25 Unincorporated Multnomah and Clackamas Counties, and cities of Clackamas County have the highest serious crash rates. These tend to be developing areas or areas with an incomplete street network.26

Unfortunately, the U.S. as a whole has a poor reputation for street safety when compared to peer countries in western and northern Europe, with traffic fatality rates 2 to 4 times higher.27 The U.S. has a fatal crash rate of 123 deaths per million residents compared to 43 deaths per million residents in the U.K. and 78 deaths per million residents in the E.U.28 The U.K. and the E.U. are included in the Metro State of Safety Report as a reference for international best practice of road safety.

The Financial Burden of Traffic CrashesAll residents of a city experience the negative impacts from traffic crashes: severe economic costs, increased traffic congestion, adverse effects on peoples’ feelings of safety, increased stress, and anxiety regarding transportation. Despite the progress made with road safety in the Portland Metropolitan region, crashes resulting in serious injury and death cost the area over $958 million per year in property damage, medical costs, and lost productivity.29 And that’s just in monetary terms. For people experiencing chronic pain from a crash, and for those who lost a loved one, the cost is immeasurable.

On the other hand, Metro’s Cost of Congestion study from 2005 predicted that 11

Vision Zero

Section 1: An Unacceptable Number of Oregonanians are Killed or Seriously Injured in Traffic Crashes

congestion would actually cost the Portland Metropolitan region less than traffic crashes, at $844 million in lost productivity per year by the year 2025.30 This has lead city officials to propose that making road safety improvements could be more beneficial to the local economy than battling congestion.31 Additionally, the prevalence of crashes imposes substantial costs on a community’s overall health. The looming possibility of getting hit by a car, for example, will affect a person’s decision to ride their bike to work. It will weigh heavily on a parent’s decision to let their child ride a bike down the street, an activity that should be encouraged, not eliminated due to fears about the dangers of traffic. Crashes are a major cause of congestion. Achieving Vision Zero would significantly improve travel time predictability for freight and commuting.

The solution is to increase access and appeal to alternative forms of transportation, including walking, bicycling, and public transit. According to a 2011 Oregon Household Activity Survey, the average trip length in the Portland Metropolitan region is 3.5 miles, a distance easily made on a bike or via transit.32 Not only do more trips made by alternative forms of transportation mean less congested roads, but safer roads, less air pollution, and a healthier population. As stressed by the Vision Zero New York report published by Transportation Alternatives, the key to increasing the use of alternative modes of transportation is to ensure that they are also the safest choices.33

12Vision Zero

Section 1: An Unacceptable Number of Oregonanians are Killed or Seriously Injured in Traffic Crashes

In the following section we will address the factors that contribute to traffic fatalities and serious injuries in the Portland Metropolitan region, including roadway design and human factors that influence the nature of and severity of crashes. Additionally, we will examine the “culture of noncompliance”, or choices made by drivers to willfully disobey traffic laws, as well as the “culture of acceptance,” which is based on the observation that despite the devastating nature of traffic crashes, society accepts the consequences as a trade-off in the name of mobility.

Road Design Influences and Encourages Dangerous DrivingThe design of a road, including its width, speed limit, signs and signals, lighting, crosswalks, etc., significantly influences its relative safety. From looking at crash statistics alone, it could be deduced that some of the safest roads in the country are interstate highways. These roads replace problematic intersections with off/on ramps, have wide, straight travel lanes, and often a contain a physical barrier to prevent the accidental crossing over of a car into the opposite travel lane. Additionally, interstate highways accommodate no pedestrians or bicyclists, resulting in a straight, wide, relatively homogenous roadway. Based on the success of these characteristics for cars and drivers in terms of safety, road engineers designed urban roads the same way: flat, straight and open.34 We now know from experience that this design does not promote the same degree of safety for road users in an urban environment. Wide, flat, open streets have actually become the most dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists, as well as drivers. Road width alone has been found to be connected to higher crash rates in urban settings.35 In the Portland Metropolitan region, arterial streets (wide roads that typically encourage high automobile speeding) account for 59% of all serious crashes, 67% of serious pedestrian crashes, and 52% of serious bike crashes.36 Arterials and other roads in the region support speeding, and as a result, many people drive over the speed limit, both consciously and accidentally. However, speeding is dangerous and a top contributing factor in the region’s serious crashes and road fatalities. Medical studies have shown that vehicle speeds over 30 miles per hour are particularly dangerous in the presence of pedestrians and cyclists, while speeds of 20 miles per hour are exponentially safer.37 A pedestrian that has been struck by a car traveling at a speed of 40 miles per hour has only a 30% chance of surviving. At 30 miles per hour, a struck pedestrian has an 80% chance of surviving. And when struck by a car moving at 20 miles per hour, a pedestrian’s chance of surviving is increased to 95%.38 Road design needs to be changed to influence drivers to drive the lower posted speed; otherwise the posted speed is not always followed. Ultimately, roads must be designed in a way

Section 2: Main Crash Causes

13Vision Zero

that prevents unsafe speeding, and protects drivers as well as the other, more vulnerable road users. Unsafe Behavior Behind the Wheel Leads to More Dangerous RoadsIn the Portland Metropolitan region, the top contributing factor to serious crashes are aggressive driving (40%), while the top contributing factor to fatal crashes is drugs and alcohol (57%).39 While drunk driving is generally a well-known problem when it comes to road safety, what is often missing from the conversation is the restaurants and bars that serve alcohol to the people who then get behind the wheel. Oregon law dictates that a liquor-licensed establishment is prohibited from allowing a visibly intoxicated person to continue to drink alcohol on the premises. Despite that, police officers still arrest 18,000 people each year for drunk driving in Oregon, people who name the establishment where they were last.40 The names of these bars are sent to the Oregon Liquor Control Board (OLCC), who keeps a running tally of every year’s top 10 worst offenders.

OLCC Public Affairs Specialist Christie Scott says that although the OLCC can prosecute bars that over-serve customers, it is very hard to win those cases in court, due to the difficult task of proving a bartender knew the customer was intoxicated but served them anyway. Instead, the public and advocacy can assess the Top 10 lists via the OLCC website, potentially using them to gather awareness and put pressure on bars that over-serve. We recommend the use of the Top 10 lists in conjunction with the police bureau to ensure bars that over-serve are held accountable. Another possibility to combating drunk driving is increasing police presence on the roads leading to and from the Top 10 bars. Another threat to road safety is the high amount of distracted drivers behind the wheel. Inattentive driving accounts for five percent of serious crashes in the Portland Metropolitan area, a contributing factor that includes driver fatigue and any kind of distraction (most commonly, distractions today are the use electronic devices to text, make phone calls, play music, etc).41 A recent study by AAA found that teen drivers are distracted about a quarter of the time they are behind the wheel.42 As the use of electronic devices become increasingly popular in American culture, it is important to educate both current and future drivers about the dangers of using them while in the car. This can be taught in driver education courses, but should also be covered in general high school curriculums. Oregon has recently legalized the use of recreational marijuana. Recreational marijuana and the personal possession limits will increase its prevalence in our transportation system. Oregon municipalities will have some control over the business licensing and locations. It is important that licensing officials consider all modes of transportation when reviewing applications or when working with OLCC on that license process.

14Vision Zero


Driving laws are constantly being updated and new laws introduced, but many people are not aware of this until they unknowingly break that law and get penalized. Or worse— they hurt themselves or someone else doing what the law was trying to prevent. Traffic safety laws do not do any good if they are not well communicated and widely known. Through more frequent testing issued by the DMV, which could be required upon getting a driver’s license renewal, or by ensuring that all residents have the ability to obtain driver’s licenses — traffic laws and education could be expanded to more people and reinforced on a regular basis.

The Culture of Noncompliance and The Culture of AcceptanceTraffic safety laws exist to prevent traffic crashes and ensure public safety, but they become obsolete when users ignore them. Noncompliance of traffic laws puts everyone at risk, and generates hostility on the road which often leads to aggressive driving, the top contributor to serious traffic crashes in the Portland Metropolitan area. Although bicyclists and pedestrians are also guilty of ignoring traffic safety laws sometimes, the failure of car drivers to obey them poses a disproportionate safety risk to the other, more vulnerable road users. This is because of the relatively heavy weight of vehicles and the speed at which they move— in a collision with a pedestrian or a cyclist, driver noncompliance is more likely to cause a serious injury or death. Despite the fact that most people know someone who was killed or seriously hurt in a traffic crash, most people seem to accept these deaths as an unavoidable trade-off of the transportation system. In contrast, we hold our air traffic system to a much higher standard: every plane crash must be analyzed such that whatever went wrong is identified and the disaster will not repeat itself in the future. In order for these policies to work, our society needs to abandon our culture of acceptance and view traffic crashes in the same light as plane crashes. Traffic crashes are tragedies that result in too many lives lost, but they can be prevented if society demands it.

15Vision Zero


Traffic Calming vs. Over-built RoadsA road’s design significantly impacts its relative safety. Wide, flat, and open (or “over-built”) roads encourage speeding and have been shown to be the most dangerous. In urban environments, roads should not be designed in a way that encourages driving speeds of 30 mph or greater, due to the increased likelihood of pedestrian death upon impact. “Traffic calming” or “road diets” are road designs that discourage speeding and make drivers aware of vulnerable road users. Traffic calming measures are taken to transform over-built roads by way of narrowing the roadway or eliminating traffic lanes. Two design guides are recommended for adoption by the Oregon Department of Transportation and municipal bodies to improve street safety: The Urban Street Design Guide (http://nacto.org/usdg/) and the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide (http://nacto.org/cities-for-cycling/design-guide/). The following are samples of some traffic calming designs proven to reduce the instance of crashes:• Roundabouts: a Maryland study found that the number of collisions

resulting in injury went down 86%, compared to traditional intersections.43 Roundabouts eliminate the incentive for drivers to speed up at an intersection in order to make the green light, while also promoting safer speeds (about 20-25 mph), since drivers must slow down when entering and circling the roundabout.

• Speed humps: Wider and flatter than speed bumps, speed humps are are considered the most traditional physical traffic calming solution, and calm traffic more gradually than speed bumps, but less so than speed tables.

• Speed tables: A speed table is basically a speed hump with a flat top that can also be used as a pedestrian crossing.

• Speed cushions: designed as several small speed humps across the width of a road, with spaces in between them. The design forces cars to slow down as they ride with one or both wheels on the raised surfaces. Unlike speed bumps, humps and tables, the spacing of the cushions is advantageous for emergency vehicles, because their wider frame allows for straddling the cushions without slowing down.

• Chicanes: a feature in the road creating extra turns a vehicle must make, requiring the driver to slow down.

• Chokers: modifications that narrow a street mid-block or at the intersection by extending the planting strip or sidewalk.

Traffic-calming measures, though proven to reduce speeds, are only effective in the immediate vicinity of the measure. A chicane, for instance, is only sure to slow vehicle speed at the intersection where it is located, after which cars can speed up again. Area-wide traffic calming is the application of these measures

Section 3: Policies Proven to Reduce Fatal and Incapacitating Crashes

16Vision Zero

through an entire neighborhood or other larger-scale area. Or, the presence of multiple chicanes throughout a residential-but-busy street will force cars to drive cautiously through the entire area. Area-wide traffic calming techniques have been found to reduce the frequency of injuries and collision by 15-40%.44

Area-wide 20 mph zones have been shown to dramatically reduce traffic fatalities in the cities that implemented them. Paris and London both introduced 20 mph zones (technically 30 kmh due to the metric conversion), with London witnessing a 42% reduction in traffic fatalities as a result.45 Pedestrians over the age of 65 are about five times more likely to die in a crash at any given speed, even at 20 mph. Under 20 mph speeds are the least likely to cause fatal crashes, and the only speeds at which those over 65 are not at an increased risk.46

Bicycle AccommodationThe presence of dedicated bike lanes has been proven to reduce injuries and fatalities for all users. A study released in 2011 directly measured the collision and injury rates for cyclists in dedicated bike lanes compared to riding in the street with mixed traffic. In Montreal, Canada, six physically separated bike lanes were compared with parallel streets with similar vehicle presence and speeds. The study found that the streets with separated bike lanes had a 28% lower injury rate than those without.47

Additionally, injury rates have been shown to decrease as the number of cyclists on the road increases, promoting a “safety in numbers” principle. Designing roads to accommodate large volumes of cyclists encourages more cyclists to ride on a particular street. One local example of a bicycle-centric road is N. Williams street in north Portland. Historically frequented by bike commuters, the city decided to increase the capacity for people who bike on the street and make improvements for overall safety for pedestrians during a construction project that took place in 2014.48 Designing streets to be safer for people who bicycle also has another intended benefit for pedestrians: slower speeds, greater visibility and shorter crossing distances.

17Vision Zero

Section 3: Policies Proven to Reduce Fatal and Incompacitating Crashes

N. Williams, Portland, OR

Le!: Before- Narrow bike lane on right hand side of the road.

Right: A!er- Wide, buffered bike land on le! hand side of the road.

Photo coutesy of Portland Bureau of

Transportation

Increasing Pedestrian Safety and VisibilityStreets with more lanes and higher posted speeds are much more dangerous to pedestrians, because pedestrians must cross a larger area while making sure they are seen by more drivers. Creating roads that have shorter crossing distances, improved visibility and frequency of opportunities to cross all make it safer for pedestrians to get across the street. Ensuring that all crosswalks, bus stops and sidewalks are accessible for anyone using a mobility device or stroller is critical to improved safety for everyone.

Seventy-nine percent of serious pedestrian crashes happen at night where proper street lighting is not present.49 It is important that streets have proper lighting, especially where pedestrians gather (near bus stops, at intersections, and at crosswalks) and anywhere speeds are likely to be high. Rapid flash crosswalk beacons, often used at midblock crossings without signals, alert drivers that a person wants to cross the street and have a driver yield rate of just over 90%.50

Reducing drivers’ tendency to speed is also beneficial to the safety of pedestrians, as the likelihood of serious injury or death increases exponentially with the speed the vehicle is traveling. The characteristics that make an area desirable for walking are often the same characteristics that slow cars down. A mixed-media streetscape has been shown to slow down drivers, because the distraction demands that drivers be attentive.51 Trees on the meridian, curb extensions, bike lanes, and parked cars all act as a physical buffer between moving traffic and pedestrians on the sidewalk, securing a feeling of safety & separation for pedestrians and requiring drivers to slow down and pay attention to the complexity of the street.

Breaking up the distance a person must travel to cross the street will also help guarantee they make it across safely. Traffic calming and road diets that decrease the number of lanes that a pedestrian must cross, can significantly increase safety for pedestrians. The ‘double threat’ of multi-lane arterials is when there is a protected crossing, and one car stops to let a pedestrian cross — blocking the visibility for both the pedestrian and cars in the adjacent lane that do not stop at the crosswalk. The ideal accommodation is to eliminate this threat through reducing vehicle lanes, or providing signalized crossings that require traffic to stop. When road design to reduce traffic lanes and speeds are not possible, pedestrian refuge islands can be used. These are raised islands that are generally places in the middle of multi-lane streets, and are utilized by pedestrians to wait at until it is safe to cross the rest of the way. The Federal Highway Administration recommends that refuge islands be contained in curbed sections and placed in multi-lane urban roadways where high traffic volumes moving at intermediate-to-high speed occur alongside a pedestrian presence.52

Reducing Risk Through TransitOne of the safest places to be on the road is riding on transit — bus or light rail.

18Vision Zero


From 2005 to 2009, only one bus occupant and zero light rail occupants were killed in Oregon — while there were 1,671 car occupant deaths, 229 pedestrian deaths and 58 bicyclist deaths.53 Supporting safe, accessible and efficient transit can drastically improve the safety of our roads by offering residents an alternative to driving — the riskiest transportation option, but often seen as the most convenient. As we develop our roadway system, prioritizing high efficiency transit options (Bus Rapid Transit or Light Rail) can provide the options needed to shift the need for automobiles and encourage more active transportation and safety investments. Ensuring that bus and light rail stations are safe to access for pedestrians is critical for the overall safety of the system — as these locations are the highest use, and bus lines are often located along higher speed and capacity arterials that are often not friendly to pedestrian and bicycle travel.

EnforcementExcessive speeding is one of the leading causes of deadly crashes in the Portland Metropolitan region, but enforcing speed limits is a burdensome and time-consuming task for police officers who are also responsible for crime prevention and other duties. Automated camera enforcement (fixed-speed cameras) allows for constant speed limit enforcement at many locations without stretching police departments thin. The visible presence of cameras also ensures that drivers expect continued enforcement and will therefore maintain legal speed limits. Enforcement has historically been applied unjustly and involved racial profiling. Fixed cameras can effectively target the unsafe behavior without unfairly targeting people based on race or appearance, as long as it also integrates community education into the roll out.

A study done in Washington, D.C. found that average speeds at sites outfitted with speed cameras dropped 14%, while the number of vehicles exceeding 10 mph over the speed limit dropped by 82%.54 Similarly, a nation-wide study in France found that fatal crashes were reduced by 65% at study sites where speed-

detectors were present.55 A report by the European Conference of Ministers of Transport recommends the use of both visible and invisible, fixed and mobile speed enforcement, because the unpredictability of invisible and mobile detectors increases drivers’ likelihood to obey speed limits. Meanwhile, visible detectors will encourage drivers to adjust their speed.56

Currently, fixed-speed cameras are illegal in the Portland metropolitan region. This report recommends that municipal leaders and police departments in the region work together to gain

19Vision Zero


Speed camera in Washington, D.C.

Photo courtesy of Washington’s Top News

legislative authority of using fixed-speed cameras. These cameras are an efficient solution to the current enforcement practice of police officers sitting stationary at the side of the road, manually monitoring vehicle speed. The use of fixed-speed cameras would allow for streets to be monitored for dangerous speeding from the unbiased eye of the camera, and serve as a cost effective measure for our police department. It should be stressed that the addition of fixed-speed cameras to the streetscape should accompany plenty of marked warnings of their presence. This will inform drivers that there is a camera ahead and they will slow down accordingly. Unmarked cameras will only make drivers feel like victims of “stings”, and will result in mistrust of the police department and the local government, decreasing morale and weakening community support for the vision.

The State of Oregon does not have a requirement for drivers education. This makes it difficult to continue to educate drivers on updated laws and best practice behaviors. In addition to education for new drivers, more frequent renewal testing for all drivers can ensure that all drivers are informed of new traffic laws and requirements.

20Vision Zero


Eliminating traffic fatalities requires the consensus of a diverse set of actors (professional drivers, police officers, bicyclists, the business community, policy makers, residents, and commuters) that traffic fatalities and incapacitating in-juries cannot be tolerated. They must make safety their priority and understand the connections between their actions and who lives and dies on the road. This understanding will help people accept revisions to road use and modifications in-tended to save lives. The World Health Organization recommends that, in order to gain motivation among these actors, the city’s highest elected officials present the public with the Vision Zero parameters, “capturing the imagination of the public” and other key stakeholders.57

By having a goal of seeing “zero traffic fatalities and zero incapacitating injuries” instead of “zero traffic crashes”, it is acknowledged and accepted that there will still be human error, and there will be crashes. However, the road system can be designed in a way to accommodate that error, such that it does not exceed the human capacity to absorb the impact of a collision. Public Engagement, Education and Outreach Unlike passenger rail or air travel, which are controlled by professionals, those who use the street system are the ones in control of it. Accordingly, improving road safety requires the cooperation of all road users. Residents must be informed of changes to occur in their neighborhood streets, understand the rationale behind them, and ultimately approve of that rationale. It is important that com-munity members understand and are engaged in developing street design that will improve safety, and how actions influence crash-related injuries and fatalities. Engagement that is inclusive is critical to the success of Vision Zero.

Section 4: Building Consensus with a Unifying Vision

21Vision Zero

RecommendationsThe Portland Metro region has made significant improvements to road safety in recent years. However, it is simply not good enough to reduce the number of people who die and get seriously hurt in traffic crashes. We must achieve the highest standard of road safety and work to completely eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries. These recommendations are meant for municipalities to incorporate and build Vision Zero plans and policies, while also calling on statewide and regional policies that impact local implementation and broaden success of local initiatives.

Present the public with a unifying vision• Present residents of the Portland Metropolitan region with a unifying vision of

dramatically safer streets. Contrast with the cost of inaction - a road system that is the cause of death and serious injury for too many of our citizens.

• City Councils should adopt a clear unifying Vision Zero policy that sets a clear goal of reaching zero fatalities and serious injuries with specific dates and mid term goals. Model ordinance is attached as Appendix A.

• The State of Oregon should integrate a clear unifying Vision Zero policy that sets a clear goal of reaching zero fatalities and serious injuries with specific dates and mid term goals into an updated Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP) and Oregon Highway Plan (OHP).

• Integrate Vision Zero in all policy documents such as local Transportation System Plans, Portland’s Comprehensive Plan, the Regional Transportation Plan and other transportation and planning guiding policies.

• Reference the success stories of other U.S. cities that have implemented Vision Zero policies.

• Policymakers, planners, designers and operators all must approach road safety issues with a focus on the value of human life. Decisions must always be based around the principle that it is unacceptable for the current rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries to continue and always work toward the goal of no fatalities or serious injuries.

• Build a regional Travel with Care Campaign and Pledge that works to reduce high risk behaviors amongst all people on the road whether they drive, bicycle, walk, or take transit. A sample pledge is in Appendix B.

• Cities, counties, and Metro should develop transportation safety action plans that address all modes of transportation, that cover all aspects and disciplines from planning to design to operations to maintenance, that are based on an analysis of regional and local crash data and risk factors, and that identify and prioritize investments in roadway projects as well as programmatic approaches such as education and enforcement.

Section 5: Recommendations and Conclusion

22Vision Zero

Engage the region’s diverse communities with an outreach and coordination program• Create a local Vision Zero Stakeholder Committee that develops a strategic

communication and outreach campaign in order to communicate policy changes with the public and with existing committees. This committee should be separate from existing committees and guide implementation & execution of jurisdictional Vision Zero Policy. This committee should include representatives from all transportation modes, senior & disability rights advocates, neighborhood & community members, racial and ethnic community advocates, and emergency response, police and transportation department leads. Similar committees should integrate into Region ACT’s to provide guidance for funding decisions.

• Reach out to historically marginalized communities and communities with large non-English speaking populations to ensure that community education and engagement strategies are culturally appropriate and they are able to influence any planned changes to their neighborhood streets and to any new laws and policies. Seek feedback on whether potential safety improvements address community needs — explaining Vision Zero goals and motivations. Develop accessible ways for communities to ask questions, voice concerns and provide feedback in ways that can affect the policy, project, or decision being made.

• Create a regional Families for Safe Streets program, which gathers victims of traffic crashes and families who have lost loved ones in crashes to advocate for street safety.

• Design assurances against racial profiling and targeting as it pertains to Vision Zero enforcement. Ensure that communities of color, police bureaus, and community leadership are included in the decision making and development of enforcement plans or policies.

• Pilot a Safe Streets Ambassadors program modeled after the City of Chicago’s Safe Routes and Bicycle Ambassadors to target risky behaviors exhibited by people who walk and bicycle.

Design and maintain street systems that are safe for everyone• The Oregon Department of Transportation and our region’s cities and counties

should adopt as standards both the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide and the NACTO Bikeway Design Guide.58 Additionally, there are guides that can help build complete streets in rural communities such as those found on the Smart Growth America site.

• Prioritize improvements in areas that are lacking even the most basic infrastructure, with a specific focus on historically under-served communities. These areas lack basic pedestrian safety measures, such as proper street lighting, crosswalks, ADA accessible curb ramps and complete sidewalks. These areas must not be overlooked while other areas receive significant design improvements to already existing infrastructure.23

Vision Zero


• Improve the state of safety for pedestrians by adding buffers between the sidewalk and the road, signalized crossings to high foot traffic destinations (transit stops, business districts, etc.) and refuge islands on streets that can not otherwise be improved for safe crossing distances. Buffers can be trees in the planting strip, curb extensions, bike lanes, parked cars, or other elements that put space between pedestrians and moving traffic. All pedestrian improvements should comply with ADA requirements for manual signal requests, crossings, unobstructed sidewalk width and transit stops.

• Implement road diets on high-crash corridors and other dangerous streets that reduce travel lanes and include safe bicycling and pedestrian infrastructure. Ensure that these roads are designed to allow for future safety treatments, transit operations and emergency response needs.

• Add traffic calming designs to neighborhood streets to reduce vehicle speed. These include roundabouts, speed bumps, speed humps, speed tables, speed cushions, chicanes, chokers.

• Improve lighting and crossings at existing bus stops, or relocate transit facilities to where pedestrian safety improvements have been made along the route, and ensure all facilities are ADA accessible.

• Install appropriate median barriers on divided highways to limit frequency of head on collisions and severity of median crashes.

• Utilize innovative uses of home zones both commercial and residential. A home zone is a living street (or group of streets) as implemented in the United Kingdom, which are designed primarily to meet the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, children and residents and where the speeds and dominance of the cars is reduced to approximately 15 mph.

• Establish construction and detour policies that prevent sidewalk and bike lane obstruction. Jurisdictions should amend building code to require developers to minimize sidewalk and bike lane closures both spatially and in duration, and to provide safe detours. Statements from Oregon Walks on sidewalk obstruction in the City of Portland are attached as Appendix C. The BTA has a guidance document available for review by agencies.

• Educate property owners on their duties to maintain safe and unobstructed sidewalks and enforce municipal code.24

Vision Zero


Artistic rendering of bike and pedestrian infrastructure

design for SW Barbur Boulevard in SW Portland

metropolitan region.

Photo courtesy of the Bicycle Transportation Alliance

Ensure drivers on the road are safe and informed• Work with the DMV to ensure that drivers are up to date on new laws, speed

zones, policy changes, street design changes, etc. The State of Oregon should require drivers education as a prelude to getting a drivers license and should implement renewal testing at more frequent intervals, or when new laws go into effect.

• Alert the public of new laws and changes to neighborhood streets via direct mail sent to all households and posters left in public spaces. Literature should include visuals and maps of areas in question, to increase public awareness of current and future projects.

• Work with the OLCC’s Top 10 list of establishments linked to DUII arrests in conjunction with police bureaus and OLCC to improve enforcement and regulatory action against establishments that over-serve patrons. Research ways to improve the ability for patrons to travel home safely at locations where access is limited.

• Use root cause analysis in major crash team investigations to identify the root causes of a crash and to prevent recurrence in the future.

• Research the benefit of adopting a no right turn in heavily congested neighborhoods, inside central business districts and high crash corridors.

• Work with state officials to require all trucks to install rail guards.• Research other cities’ limits on truck size and length and the impact of these

limitations on crash reduction.• Promote development and research of new safety technologies, particularly

pedestrian and bicycle detection, alerts and crash avoidance.• The State of Oregon should integrate Vision Zero training into commercial

vehicle licensing and testing.• The State of Oregon and its municipalities should train all of its fleet operators

in Vision Zero and common behaviors that are most likely to cause serious crashes.

• Improve safety skills of commercial drivers of taxis and new technologies such as Uber and Lyft to ensure that drivers are educated and held accountable for safety and accessibility. Methods for improvement include stricter licensing, more frequent testing, offering of ADA accessible vehicle options, and more required safety procedures.

• Work with the state to require commercial vehicles carrying passengers to display safety decals on windows to alert passengers to look for people walking and biking before opening their door.

• Encourage and promote the opportunity for educational diversion programs as a way to limit disparate impact on low-income populations of high cost enforcement mechanisms.

• Support legislation that allows for the issue of driver cards to Oregon residents who pass the State’s written and behind-the-wheel driver knowledge test, provide proof of residence in Oregon for more than one year, and provide proof of identity and date of birth.

• Examine best practices from other cities and states such as http://www.nyc.25Vision Zero


gov/html/visionzero/pages/legislation/legislation.html.

Eliminate dangerous and illegal speeding• Allow the setting of roadway design speeds at a target speed that is below the

85% observed speed, to enable the use of design treatments that encourage slower vehicle speeds. Then follow up with reduced posted speeds after those design changes.

• Encourage greater use of neighborhood greenways. Neighborhood greenways are designed to create low-stress routes for walking and biking.

• Change the state standard for residential streets to 20 mph and business districts to 20 mph. Neighborhood streets are supposed to be safe places where people walk and bike, and where children play. Lowering the speed limit will dramatically improve safety for all road users, especially in neighborhoods without sidewalks, where people have no choice but to walk in the street. Another result of this change would be that Neighborhood Greenways would have the ability to set the speed limit to 15 mph (or five mph lower than standard).• Educate the public about the effect of speed on pedestrian fatality and injury rates. Incorporate this information through driving education courses, as mandatory education

courses for drivers who have been ticketed with speeding, and thoroughly visible area-wide campaign (signs on buildings, banners on buses, billboards, ads in weeklys, etc.).

• Work with the police department and government relations to gain legislative authority to use fixed speed cameras and other automated safety laws that does not require using scarce law enforcement resources and takes out subjective nature of enforcement by individual police officers. Allow advance warnings to the public upon installment, so that people actually slow down. Design program to be revenue neutral and/or designate any net revenue for further investment in safety and not in general funds. Build on the results of automated enforcement programs to expand safety laws statewide, and thus a greater expectation of safe driving at any time.

• Build an anti-speeding campaign that frames speeding in the same context as drunk driving. A visual campaign aimed at drivers, via signs on buildings, bus banners, billboards, that calls out speeding as a dangerous and irresponsible behavior. Use infographics that show the impact of speed on pedestrians survival rates. Stress the danger of what driving five mph over the posted speed limit can to do to a struck pedestrian.

• Jurisdictions should use a Vision Zero Outreach Team to communicate the dangers of speeding to the public via verbal and written form. Possible

26Vision Zero


Jackie Dingfelder, Policy Advisor to Portland Mayor Charlie Hales, unveils new 20mph speed limit sign for

neighborhood greenway.

Photo courtesy of Greg Raisman

methods include leaflets and flyers sent to homes, put on community billboards, left at schools, places of worship, coffee shops, and other community gathering spaces.

Communicate the region’s goals with a comprehensive Vision Zero strategy• Use the local Vision Zero Stakeholder Committee to review the development

and implementation of a Vision Zero plan.• Make partnerships with existing committees, such as the modal committees

(Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Freight), to ensure Vision Zero is integrated at all levels.

• Hold community discussions with key community stakeholder groups, including organizations representing seniors, communities of color, immigrants, etc. Use community liaisons to communicate the region’s goals and inform residents about changes coming to local streets.

• Follow major street redesign projects related to Vision Zero with an open public comment process to address community concerns.

Pilot Projects: Demonstrating an Initial CommitmentPiloting Vision Zero in small geographic sections of a city can help demonstrate early successes, and put a face on the campaign through neighborhood pilots. Some communities such as Chicago have had success by taking a small eight square block area to develop a neighborhood directed safety initiative that helps inform the larger policy citywide. These neighborhood pilots will help create a robust and replicable public engagement process and help determine the most successful intervention strategies moving forward.

Recommendations:• ODOT should make innovation funds available for pilot initiatives that

will help build successful strategies that can be implemented in other neighborhoods and cities statewide.

• The Vision Zero Collaborative, a partnership between Oregon Walks and the Bicycle Transportation Alliance and other supporters, shall serve as a clearinghouse for best practices, toolkits and additional resources for communities.

• Collect before and after data to demonstrate effectiveness and to continually improve safety practices.

ConclusionSafer streets encourage more people to connect with their communities without fear. Promoting the safety of multiple forms of transportation not only improves the physical health of those choosing to hop on a bike or walk to school, but also decreases auto traffic and pollution caused by excessive single-occupancy vehicles, resulting in an improvement of the overall health and wellness of the

27Vision Zero


region.

By following the examples made by our peer cities with Vision Zero policies, the Portland region can experience similar triumphs in street safety made by New York, Chicago, Boston, San Francisco, Paris, Berlin, Stockholm, and London. This report recommends that the Portland region join forces with these cities in their vision for roads free of fatalities and incapacitating injuries. This goal may seem ambitious, however we can not continue to justify the loss of a human life in exchange for a quicker commute. When placed in the framework of ethics and safety, changing the way we utilize and think about the road system does not seem so cumbersome.

Due to the simple fact that we are human and humans are imperfect, traffic crashes will occur on even the safest, most well-designed streets. However, as has been seen in the examples discussed throughout this report, roads can be designed and behavior can be changed in a way that crashes do not result in death or serious injuries. It will require effort on the parts of all people in a community to make safer streets a reality, but it can be done. Inclusion of design changes to the street scape, thorough communication from policymakers to the public, and education of street safety to our local communities, we can achieve a road system that does not result in the serious injury or death of anyone.

We hope that this report serves as a start of the conversation and helps communities in Oregon begin the steps to implement Vision Zero policies that will ultimately save lives and make our communities more livable. We’ve done our best to provide citations and provide accurate data where possible while working with imperfect sources to begin with. We expect that we’ve made some errors or left things out, and that’s where the fun begins. We invite you to engage on Vision Zero and work collaboratively to see this exciting opportunity come through. So join us, community groups, advocacy partners, governmental agencies, police departments, district attorneys, PTA’s and school boards. Visit www.ourhealthystreets.org/visionzero for the latest on our campaign.

28Vision Zero


DRAFT: Vision Zero Policy StatementVersion: 01— March 27, 2012

Whereas, we believe no one should die or be seriously injured on the City of_______’s road network and we can build a road network that is the safest network in the world; and,

Whereas, human life and health are paramount and take priority over mobility and other objectives of the road traffic system; and,

Whereas, providers and operators of the road traffic system share responsibility with drivers and other users; and,

Whereas, road traffic systems should take account of human fallibility and minimize both the opportunities for errors and the harm done when they occur; and

Whereas, providers and operators must do their utmost to guarantee the safety of all citizens and cooperate with road users, and all three must be ready to change to achieve safety; therefore:

The City of ________ adopts a bold Vision Zero goal of a road network with zero fatalities by the year 2030. The City commits to adopting a traffic safety plan that will help reach this goal with the following principles:

1. We are open to using innovative solutions to improve road safety for all users.2. Our road safety decisions will be based on evidence.3. We will measure and evaluate our performance to enable improvement.4. We will demonstrate leadership and seek engagement in road safety through collaborative relationships with city and local community partners.5. All road users’ needs will be considered when designing, building and operating the road network with particular attention to the most vulnerable users of the road.

The City of ______ directs the ______________ to develop a Vision Zero Plan by December 31, ________ and report on the plan to Council. Additionally, a status report should be submitted to Council one year from the date of this resolution.

Appendix A: Model Language

29Vision Zero

Vision Zero Pledge (draft)

I will behave safely and courteously at all times on the public streets, respecting and empathizing with other people’s need to get where they’re going and considering it as important as mine, and recognizing that they have an equal right to travel by their preferred mode, to be on the road with me, and to cross my path.

I acknowledge that traveling on public streets can be risky, and I resolve to concentrate on traveling safely to my destination and to be alert to the surroundings both in and outside of my vehicle.

I also recognize the role of the roadways, paths, and sidewalks as public space in the community, not only a means for travel, and resolve to share the road with all users, whether they are traveling to a destination or enjoying the street appropriately as public space.

I will be a good example, and I want my neighbors to slow down, say hi, and join me in spreading the word. Let’s watch out for each other and look before we leap.

To show my commitment to this goal: I will never drive impaired or distracted. I will not drive while excessively sleepy, after drinking more than the legal limit, using recreational marijuana or while using a cell phone to talk or text.

I will travel at a safe and legal speed for conditions at all times. I will travel slowly and cautiously on neighborhood streets, and adjust my speed when it is dark, wet, or windy.

I will leave a safe following distance so I can respond to unexpected behavior from the person ahead of me.

I will always look for people approaching on foot, bicycle, or other vehicles at an intersection.

I will always yield the right of way to my fellow travelers when I am required to do so, including when turning at intersections and at stop signs, yield signs, and crosswalks.

I will not yield the right of way to another when doing so is not required and may be confusing or dangerous.

Appendix B: Sample Pledge

30Vision Zero

I will cross the street safely after looking for any traffic traveling on or turning onto the street, preferring to cross at corners and crosswalks.

I will look behind me before backing up my vehicle.

I will not block intersections or crosswalks with my vehicle.

I will obey all traffic signals, including stopping on a yellow signal when it’s safe rather than trying to “make it.”

I will wait for a comfortable gap in approaching traffic before proceeding from a stop or yield, and not try to “shoot the gap.”

I will not proceed from a stop or yield until the cross traffic has cleared the right of way. I will not worry people walking and cycling by edging out toward them while they are still in front of me.

I will pass only when there is plenty of space and time to pass and when average travel speeds significantly exceed the pace of the traveler I am passing. I will not pass too close or when the slowdown will only take a few moments.

I will pass on the left, unless passing another lane of traffic in my own lane. I will use the next lane over to pass, unless the lane is wide enough to safely share.

31Vision Zero

Appendix B: Sample Pledge

It is the position of Oregon Walks that the pedestrian network is as important to the citizens of Portland as the vehicle network. Therefore the same rules should apply to closures of the pedestrian network as to the vehicle network.

Further, it is the position of Oregon Walks that, as with the vehicle network, the pedestrian network should only be blocked for emergencies, during upgrade or maintenance, or other extreme circumstances. Permits to close the pedestrian portion of the public right-of-way (ROW) should only be issued to accommodate private development where it has been shown that no feasible alternative exists.

The majority of pedestrians have a destination and an ETA in mind. When confronted by an unexpected closure they do an unconscious risk/benefit analysis to choose their path forward. This process leads many to skirt the fence line of the closure or “jaywalk.” To ignore this reality when designing or approving a pedestrian route or detour is negligent.

In the event that closure is warranted the following conditions must be met:• The closure must only be permitted for the time it takes to handle the

emergency, finish the upgrade or maintenance, or mitigate the extreme circumstances.

• When the pedestrian portion of the public ROW is closed, a detour route immediately adjacent (i.e. requiring no significant out-of-direction travel or street crossing) must be provided.

• A policy must be written and enforced that ensures that the closure of the entire pedestrian ROW, planting or furnishing strip, and adjacent parking lane is an extremely rare occurrence.

• If the pedestrian network is blocked to allow work to be performed but is otherwise safe to use it must be reopened at times when work is not being performed (e.g. nights, weekends).

• If the closest, shortest detour route requires crossing the street anywhere other than at a marked crossing; traffic volume and speed, visibility, and street width must be considered and if deemed necessary for pedestrian safety, flaggers must be provided to facilitate that crossing as long as those conditions persist (e.g. if traffic volume lessens during certain times or days the flaggers may not be warranted).

• If the closure is for the storage of materials, construction vehicles, drop boxes, temporary construction buildings, or other movable objects not only must the shortest, closest detour be provided and made safe but a significant daily fee

Appendix C: Oregon Walks Position on Routine Closures to the Pedestrian Network

32Vision Zero

must be imposed, sufficient to motivate the developer to clear the pedestrian network as soon as possible.

• When requesting a sidewalk closure permit, the developer must provide information about any other sidewalk closures or obstruction on either side of the street in the vicinity of their site (within a block either direction). City staff must consider other sidewalk closures in the vicinity when considering the request.

We recognize that this will require amendments to the City Code and Policies. Oregon Walks welcomes the opportunity to work with PBOT and BDS staff to make those changes.

33Vision Zero

Appendix C: Oregon Walks Position on Routine Closures to the Pedestrian Network

1 Metro State of Safety Report, 2012. http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/appendix_22_safetyreport.pdf2 “Mayor de Blasio and Commissioner Trottenberg Announce Completion of More than 50 ‘Vision Zero’ Street Design Projects Making

NYC Safer.” Jan. 14 2015. http://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/035-15/mayor-de-blasio-commissioner-trottenberg-comple-

tion-more-50-vision-zero-3 All data from Metro State of Safety Report, 2012, unless otherwise noted. Metro State of Safety Report. 2012. http://library.oregonmetro.gov/

files/appendix_22_safetyreport.pdf4 “Rivera, Dylan. “Study: Crashes Cost More than Congestion.” Metro News. http://www.oregonmetro.gov/news/crashes-cost-more-than-

congestion5 Sellwood Bee Transportation Report. 2007. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/index.cfm?&a=4680206 http://www.governing.com/gov-data/pedestrian-deaths-per-capita-by-poverty-rates-for-metro-areas.html 7 https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/index.cfm?&c=548928 http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/12/where_in_the_portland_area_hav.html9 “Rivera, Dylan. “Study: Crashes Cost More than Congestion.” Metro News. http://www.oregonmetro.gov/news/crashes-cost-more-than-

congestion10 lbid11 Ibid12 “Mayor de Blasio and Commissioner Trottenberg Announce Completion of More than 50 ‘Vision Zero’ Street Design Projects Making NYC

Safer.” Jan. 14 2015. 13 https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/29139214 “Vision Zero: How Safer Streets in New York City Can Save More Than 100 Lives a Year.” Transportation Alternatives. 2011. http://www.

transalt.org/sites/default/files/news/reports/2011/Vision_Zero.pdf (p.7)15 http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/impacts_of_traffic_calming_ewing.pdf 16 Thomas et. al. “Safety Effects of Automated Speed Enforcement Programs.” Federal Highway Administration. 2008. http://safety.fhwa.

dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa09028/resources/Safety%20Effects%20of%20ASE%20Review%20of%20Intl%20Lit.pdf17 Metro State of Safety Report, 2012. http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/appendix_22_safetyreport.pdf. p.1718 Ibid p.419 McKenzie, Bian. “Modes Less Traveled-- Bicycling and Walking to Work in the United States: 2008-2012.” http://www.census.gov/prod/

2014pubs/acs-25.pdf20 Metro State of Safety Report, 2012. http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/appendix_22_safetyreport.pdf. p.1321 “Cities With the Most Bicyclists 2013.” http://bikeleague.org/content/revised-bike-data-breakdown 22 Metro State of Safety Report, 2012. http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/appendix_22_safetyreport.pdf. p.923 Ibid p.1324 Ibid p.1325 Metro State of Safety 2011 Report, Appendix p. 1626 Metro State of Safety 20111 Report, Appendix 84.27 “Vision Zero: How Safer Streets in New York City Can Save More Than 100 Lives a Year.” Transportation Alternatives. 2011. http://www.

transalt.org/sites/default/files/news/reports/2011/Vision_Zero.pdf p.1628 Metro State of Safety Report, 2012. http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/appendix_22_safetyreport.pdf. p.1329 Rivera, Dylan. “Study: Crashes Cost More than Congestion.” Metro News. 2012. http://www.oregonmetro.gov/news/crashes-cost-more-

than-congestion30 Ibid31 Ibid32 Geller, Roger. “What Does the Oregon Household Activity Survey Tell Us About the Path Ahead for Active Transportation in the City of

Portland?” http://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/45252433 “Vision Zero: How Safer Streets in New York City Can Save More Than 100 Lives a Year.” Transportation Alternatives. 2011. http://www.

transalt.org/sites/default/files/news/reports/2011/Vision_Zero.pdf p.1834 Ibid p.1835 Ewing, R. Dumbaugh, E. “The Built Environment and Traffic Safety: A Review of Empirical Evidence,” Journal of Planning Literature (2009):

23(4): p.347-367

Endnotes

34Vision Zero

36 Metro State of Safety Report, 2012. http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/appendix_22_safetyreport.pdf. p.1837 BC, Tefft. “Impact Speed and a Pedestrian’s Risk of Severe Injury or Death,” Accident Analysis and Prevention (2013) http://www.ncbi.nlm.

nih.gov/pubmed/2293534738 “Vision Zero: How Safer Streets in New York City Can Save More Than 100 Lives a Year.” Transportation Alternatives. 2011. http://www.

transalt.org/sites/default/files/news/reports/2011/Vision_Zero.pdf p.2139 Metro State of Safety Report, 2012. http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/appendix_22_safetyreport.pdf. p.2540 OSP site: http://www.oregon.gov/osp/CJIS/docs/2012/Section%208%20Agency%20Summary%20and%20Detail%20Tables%202012.pdf

[PPB arrested 1,624 people for DUII in calendar year 2012.]41 Ibid, p. 2542 AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. “Distracted Driving.” https://www.aaafoundation.org/distracted-driving43 “Vision Zero: How Safer Streets in New York City Can Save More Than 100 Lives a Year.” Transportation Alternatives. 2011. http://www.

transalt.org/sites/default/files/news/reports/2011/Vision_Zero.pdf p.2744 Bunn, F. Collier, T. Frost, C. Ker, K. Roberts, I. Wentz, R. “Traffic Calming for the Prevention of Road Traffic Injuries: Systematic Review and

Meta-Analysis.” Injury Prevention (2003): 9(3): 200-20445 Grundy, C. Steinbach, R. Edwards, Wilkinson, P. Green, J. “20 mph Zones and Road Safety in London: A Report to the London Road Safety

Unit.” London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (2008). 46 http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/pub/HS809012.html47 “Vision Zero: How Safer Streets in New York City Can Save More Than 100 Lives a Year.” Transportation Alternatives. 2011. http://www.

transalt.org/sites/default/files/news/reports/2011/Vision_Zero.pdf p.2948 North Williams Safety Project. Portland Bureau of Transportation. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/index.cfm?&c=5390549 Metro State of Safety Report, 2012. http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/appendix_22_safetyreport.pdf. p.ii50 “Evaluating Driver and Pedestrian Behaviors at Enhanced Multi-Lane Midbllock Pedestrian Crossings: A Case Study in Portland, Oregon.”

https://wiki.cecs.pdx.edu/pub/ItsWeb/TrbConferences/14-2893_DriverPedBehaviorAtCrosswalks.pdf51 Montgomery, Charles. “Happy City: Transforming Our Lives Through Urban Design.” 2013. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. p .9752 “Pedestrian Crossings: Types of Improvement.” Portland Bureau of Transportation. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/

article/29139253 http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-30/ncsa/STSI/41_OR/2009/41_OR_2009.htm54 Retting, R. Farmer, C. McCartt, A. “Evaluation of Automated Speed Enforcement in Montgomery County, Maryland,” Insurance Institute for

Highway Safety (2008). 55 “Speed Management,” Transport Research Centre, Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, International Transport

Forum (2006): http://www.bmj.com/content/330/7487/331.full.pdf 56 “Speed Management.” Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. 2006. p.15857 “Global Status Report on Road Safety: Time for Action,” World Health Organization. (2009): http://www.who.int/violence_injury_preven-

tion/road_safety_status/200958 National Association of City Transportation Officials. “NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide”. http://nacto.org/cities-for-cycling/de-

sign-guide/

35Vision Zero

Endnotes

vision zero for oregon

Documents