10/10/2017 1 Center for Urban Transportation Research | University of South Florida Application of Demographic Analysis to Pedestrian Safety Pei‐Sung Lin, Ph.D., P.E., PTOE, FITE Program Director Achilleas Kourtellis, Ph.D. Senior Research Associate CUTR, University of South Florida BDV25 TWO 977‐30 CUTR Webcast October 10, 2017 2 Introduction • The presentation is based on the BDV25‐977‐30 research project sponsored by FDOT. • This project focused on application of demographic analysis to pedestrian safety. • FDOT project manager: o Mr. Mark Plass (PM), FDOT District 4 Traffic Operations Engineer • CUTR research team: o Dr. Pei‐Sung Lin (PI) o Dr. Achilleas Kourtellis (Co‐PI) o Dr. Yu Zhang (Co‐PI) o Dr. Rui Guo (Researcher) o Ms. Elzbieta Bialkowska‐Jelinska (GIS Analyst) • This CUTR webcast will highlight all aspects of the project, and major conclusions and recommendations.
30
Embed
CUTR Webcast - Application of Demographic Analysis to ...€¦ · Center for Urban Transportation Research | University of South Florida Application of Demographic Analysis to Pedestrian
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
10/10/2017
1
Center for Urban Transportation Research | University of South Florida
Application of Demographic Analysis to Pedestrian Safety
Pei‐Sung Lin, Ph.D., P.E., PTOE, FITEProgram Director
Achilleas Kourtellis, Ph.D.Senior Research Associate
CUTR, University of South Florida
BDV25 TWO 977‐30
CUTR WebcastOctober 10, 2017
2
Introduction• The presentation is based on the BDV25‐977‐30 research project
sponsored by FDOT.
• This project focused on application of demographic analysis to pedestrian safety.
• FDOT project manager:
o Mr. Mark Plass (PM), FDOT District 4 Traffic Operations Engineer
• CUTR research team: o Dr. Pei‐Sung Lin (PI)o Dr. Achilleas Kourtellis (Co‐PI)o Dr. Yu Zhang (Co‐PI)o Dr. Rui Guo (Researcher)o Ms. Elzbieta Bialkowska‐Jelinska (GIS Analyst)
• This CUTR webcast will highlight all aspects of the project, and major conclusions and recommendations.
10/10/2017
2
3
Project Background• FDOT invested significantly more resources to enhance pedestrian
safety in Florida.
• There was still a need to effectively and systematically address the experiences of pedestrians in low‐income areas.
• Pedestrian lives were lost at disproportionately higher rates in the nation’s poorer neighborhoods.
• Pedestrian fatality rates in low‐income areas were approximately twice those of more affluent neighborhoods.
• Examining Census tract poverty rates yielded a similar pattern—the country’s poorest neighborhoods have the highest per‐capita pedestrian fatalities.
4
Presentation Outline
• Introduction
• Project Background
• Project Objectives
• Research Activities and Findings
• Summary of Research Conclusions
• Recommendations
10/10/2017
3
5
Project Objectives
• Develop a demographics‐based methodology
to identify low‐income areas with greater
pedestrian hazard
• Identify major factors associated with
pedestrian crash frequency and injury severity
• Produce recommendations for engineering
countermeasures and pedestrian safety
education/outreach plans
6
Pedestrian Fatality Rate and Income Level
10/10/2017
4
7
Example: Poverty Distribution and 5-Year Pedestrian Crash Map in Tampa
8
Agenda
10/10/2017
5
9
Potential Factors for Pedestrian Crashes
10
Demographics-based Methodology
Methodological flowchart:
Step 1. Data Collection and Compilation
Step 2. Data Preparation by Analysis Unit
Step 3. GIS Visualization and Spatial Analysis
Step 4. Statistical Tests and Modeling
Step 5. Discussion of Results of Data Analysis
Step 6. Education and Engineering Countermeasures
10/10/2017
6
11
Flowchart
12
Demographic & Social Factors
(Source: U.S. Census)
Road Environment Factors
(Sources: FDOT RCI
GTFS, Transit Agencies)
Land Use Factors
(Source: FGDL)
Individual Factors
(Source: CARS)
• Population density • Road type • Stores • Pedestrian age, gender
• Age groups & gender • Intersections • Mixed use • Driver age, gender• Ethnic minorities • Sidewalk density • Department stores • Driver action
Impaired pedestrian crashes and locations of bars and alcohol retail
10/10/2017
14
27
Effects of Environment Factors on Injury Severity
o Dark‐not lighted (21.56%); Dark‐lighted (18.82%); Bad weather (6.33%).
o Lower speed limit (11.19%); Traffic control device (6.84%).
o Moreover, 72% of pedestrian fatalities occurred at nighttime, and
o 22% of nighttime fatalities occurred on streets without lighting
28
• The potential for safety improvements (PSI) is the difference between the expected (or adjusted observed) and predicted number of crashes.
• If the PSI is positive in an area, the area is experiencing more crashes than other areas with similar features.
• All low‐income Block Groups (BGs) can be classified into three zones based on the calculated PSI values—hot, warm, and cold.
• Hot zones are defined as BGs with a top 15% PSI, cold zones refer to BGs with a PSI less than 0, and warm zones are BGs with a PSI between 0 and the top 15%.
• Hot zones are high‐risk BGs for pedestrian safety because there are many more pedestrian crashes than other BGs with similar characteristics. Cold zones are relatively safe for pedestrians.
Identified Hot Zones in Low-income Areas for Improving Pedestrian Safety
10/10/2017
15
29
Identified Hot Zones in Low-income Areas for Improving Pedestrian Safety (Cont’d)
30
• Roadway Lighting and Lighting Levels
• Treatments at Non‐intersection Locations
• Bus Stop Improvements
• Speed Reduction Treatments
• Road Safety Audits (RSA)
Engineering Countermeasures
10/10/2017
16
31
Roadway Lighting and Lighting Levels
32
Presence of Lighting
10/10/2017
17
33
Adequate lighting level and uniformity
34
Increasing illuminance from under 0.9 fc to 0.9 fc or higher will reduce the probability of fatality and serious injury in a nighttime pedestrian/bicycle crash by 8.9%.
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
Total
Ped
estrian/bicycle
Head
‐on
Angle
Others
Rear‐en
d
Sidesw
ipe
3.9%
8.9%
6.9%
5.3%4.4%
2.1%
1.2%
Adequate lighting level and uniformity
10/10/2017
18
35
Expected N
ighttim
e Crash fre
quen
cy (per 4‐years)
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
Average Horizontal Illuminance (fc)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Overall
Good Uniformity
Poor Uniformity
Adequate lighting level and uniformity
36
Pedestrian lighting placement
10/10/2017
19
37
Treatments at Non-intersection Locations
38
Treatments at Non-intersection Locations (Cont’d)
a. b.
c. d.
10/10/2017
20
39
Bus Stop Improvement
40
Bus Stop Relocation
• Inadequate sight distance or sight distance obstruction
• Excessive congestion or conflicts caused by the bus,
• Frequent vehicle conflicts with non‐motorists such as pedestrian crossings. A far‐side bus stop location typically is preferred
Bus stop relocation should be considered if any of the following situation exists
10/10/2017
21
41
Transit Bus Request Lights
42
Speed Reduction Treatments
10/10/2017
22
43
Speed Reduction Treatments (Cont’d)
a. b.
c.d.
44
Road Safety Audit
• The identified low‐income areas with higher pedestrian hazards will require an accompanying Road Safety Audit (RSA) report to determine eligibility for safety improvements.
• An RSA is the formal safety performance examination of an existing or future road or intersection by an independent, multidisciplinary team,
• The aim of an RSA is to answer the following questions: (a) What elements of the road may present a safety concern—to what extent, to which road users, and under what circumstances? (b) What opportunities exist to eliminate or mitigate identified safety concerns?
10/10/2017
23
45
• WalkWise Safety Education
• Distribution of Education Tip Cards
• Social Media Outreach
• Community Networking
• Business Sweeps
• Law Enforcement Roll‐Call Training
• Public‐Private Partnerships
Education and Outreach Plan
46
WalkWise Safety Education
10/10/2017
24
47
Distribution of Education Tip Cards
48
Distribution of Education Tip Cards (Cont’d)
10/10/2017
25
49
Social Media Outreach
50
Community Networking
• Attending meetings of Community meetings and events will help build partnerships and connect the safety initiative and message out to the community.
• Often, these partnerships lead to more safety presentations and outreach for an audience that represents more of pedestrian and bicycle crashes.
• Local non‐profit organizations working within the high crash and low‐income areas are good leads to help integrate the WalkWise presentation, as well as other safety information in the community.
10/10/2017
26
51
Business Sweeps
52
Law Enforcement Roll-Call Training
10/10/2017
27
53
Public-Private Partnerships
Example
54
10/10/2017
28
55
• Successfully identified the databases used for demographic analysis to pedestrian safety, developed and tested the
methodological flowchart, obtained major findings, and
recommended implementation strategies for pedestrian safety.
• Developed a demographic‐based methodology (flowchart) to
conduct demographic analysis for including identified inputs, outputs, and outcomes for pedestrian safety analysis.
• Identified major factors associated with pedestrian crash
frequency and injury severity, and quantified their relationships.
• Developed recommendations for both engineering
countermeasures and pedestrian safety education/outreach plans
Summary of Research Conclusions
56
Major Engineering Countermeasures o Roadway lighting and lighting levels
• Presence of lighting• Adequate lighting level and uniformityo Proper pedestrian lighting placement
o Treatments at non‐intersection locations• Midblock pedestrian crossing signals (HAWKs, RRFBs)• High‐visibility crosswalk• Medians and crossing islandso Appropriate landscaping
o Bus stop improvements• Bus stop reallocation• Transit stop request lights
o Speed reduction treatments• Slow speed zones• Road diets• Roundabouts• Traffic calming on residential streets
o Road Safety Audits (RSA)
Summary of Research Conclusions
10/10/2017
29
57
Major Pedestrian Safety educational/Outreach Plans
o WalkWise safety education
o Distribution of education tip cards
o Social media outreach
o Community networking
o Business sweeps
o Law enforcement role call training
o Public‐private partnerships
Summary of Research Conclusions
58
Recommendations
• Identify and prioritize low‐income areas to Implement the research results and findings to improve pedestrian safety.
• Conduct pilot implementations and evaluations.
• Recommend further research projects to investigate (1) land uses and midblock crossings in low‐income areas, and (2) the impact of street lighting levels on pedestrian crashes and injury severity in low income areas.
Final Report ‐ Application of Demographic Analysis to Pedestrian Safetyhttp://www.fdot.gov/research/Completed_Proj/Summary_TE/FDOT‐BDV25‐977‐30‐rpt.pdf