Oregon’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Implementation Plan
A Data-informed Approach to Reducing Crashes

1. Oregon’s Pedestrian and
Bicycle Safety
Implementation Plan
A Data-informed Approach to Reducing
Crashes
March 30, 2015
Casey Bergh, PE

2. Outline
How have we been using data to
address pedestrian and bicycle
crashes?
How does the Pedestrian and
Bicycle Safety Implementation
Plan advance the practice?
Where to go from here?

3. Evolution of Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Evaluations
Concern or
perceived
safety
problem
Crash
event
(observed)
2010
Crash
potential
(risk)
2014
Goal: reduce frequency and severity of crashes
involving pedestrians and bicyclists

4. What Tools are Engineers/Planners Using?
Highway Safety Manual (HSM)
CMF Clearinghouse
FHWA’s Systemic Safety Implementation Tool
FHWA web-based tools

5. Prioritizing Locations for Safety Improvements
Observed crashes used to prioritize locations by ODOT Region for 2017-
2021 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
Example from Region 1 All Roads Transportation Safety (ARTS) Program

6. Prioritizing Locations for Safety Improvements
How can we improve?
 Be more proactive and less
reactive
 Take into account roadway
context and characteristics that
contribute to crashes
 Prioritize improvements at
locations where the next crash
is most likely to occur
Photo source: ODOT

7. Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Implementation Plan
Identifies priority corridors for
pedestrian and bicycle safety
improvements based on a
Data-informed approach
consistent with MAP 21
“Highway safety improvement
projects must be identified on the
basis of crash experience, crash
potential…or other data-supported
means.” (23 USC 148(c)(2)(B))
Countermeasure Toolbox to
assist in identifying safety
improvements

8. Region 1 Reported Bicycle and Pedestrian Crashes
(2009-2013, Fatal and Injury A)
Bicycle/Pedestrian Crashes: 562
Urban: 534
(95%)
Pedestrian: 375 (66%)
Intersection:
193 (34%)
Segment:
182 (32%)
Bicycle: 159 (29%)
Intersection:
116 (21%)
Segment:
43 (8%)
Rural: 28
(5%)
Pedestrian:
20 (3%)
Bicycle:
8 (2%)

9. 1. Traditional
 Implement low-cost
countermeasures where
frequent and severe crashes
were reported
2. Risk-based
 Implement low-cost
countermeasures where the
greatest risk of a crash
exists
PBSIP Includes Complementary Systemic Methods
Traditional
Systemic
Projects
Risk-based
Systemic
Projects
Safety
Implementation
Plan Projects

10. Identify Risk
Factors
• Traffic and geometric
characteristics present at
fatal and severe-injury
crash sites
Select and
Prioritize
Locations
• Segments exhibiting
one or more risk
factors
Develop
Systemic
Safety Projects
• Apply counter-
measures to address
risk factors at specific
locations
Overview of Risk-Based Systemic Method

11. Crash Analysis – Example Pedestrian Trend
Reported Crashes on State Highway Segments in Urban Areas (2007-2011)
Identify Risk
Factors
Select and
Prioritize
Locations
Develop Systemic
Safety Projects

12. Crash Analysis – Example Bicycle Trend
Reported Crashes on State Highway Segments in Urban Areas (2007-2011)
Identify Risk
Factors
Select and
Prioritize
Locations
Develop Systemic
Safety Projects

13. Risk Factors - Pedestrians
Pedestrian risk factors identified:
 Number of travel lanes along
segments
 Presence of median on 4-lane roads
 Posted speed along segments
 Distance between signals or
enhanced crossings
 Average Daily Traffic
 Presence of transit stop
 Number of fatalities or injuries
resulting from a pedestrian crash
Identify Risk
Factors
Select and
Prioritize
Locations
Develop Systemic
Safety Projects

14. Risk Factors - Bicycle
Bicycle risk factors identified:
 Number of driveways
 Number of lanes on major street
at intersection
 Lack of bicycle facility on at least
one approach at intersection
 Proximity to transit stop
 Average Daily Traffic
 Number of fatalities or injuries
resulting from a bicycle crash
Identify Risk
Factors
Select and
Prioritize
Locations
Develop Systemic
Safety Projects

15. Risk-Based Network Screening
Example of risk-based correlation between risk factor and crash
frequency
Driveway locations in orange, crash locations in blue
Identify Risk
Factors
Select and
Prioritize
Locations
Develop Systemic
Safety Projects

16. Risk-Based Site Prioritization
Segments were scored based on
the number of risk factors present
Consecutive segments with high
scores were aggregated into
project corridors
Identify Risk
Factors
Select and
Prioritize
Locations
Develop Systemic
Safety Projects

17. Prioritized Corridor Maps – R1 Pedestrian Example
Identify Risk
Factors
Select and
Prioritize Locations
Develop Systemic
Safety Projects

18. Systemic Countermeasures
Countermeasures evaluated based on
 Documented effectiveness
 Ease of implementation
 Relative cost
Countermeasure toolbox developed
with input from stakeholders and
project management team
Includes several FHWA Proven Safety
Countermeasures
Identify Risk Factors
Select and Prioritize
Locations
Develop Systemic
Safety Projects
Graphic source: FHWA

19. Where to Go from Here?
Statewide
 Improve data:
 Consistency across jurisdictional boundaries
 Broader spatial coverage
 Crash reporting details for pedestrian and bicycle crashes
 Obtain exposure data
Local Agencies
 Consider implementing a risk-based methodology
Additional Research
 In Oregon PSU and OSU will compile more data and refine risk
factors as part of ODOT-sponsored research
 Nationally NCHRP Project 17-73 will refine the process to
develop a risk-based method for pedestrian safety

20. Questions?
Contact
 Casey Bergh, Kittelson &
Associates, Inc.
cbergh@kittelson.com
Plan available online at:
http://www.oregon.gov/
ODOT/HWY/TS/Pages/
Bicycle_Pedestrian_Safety
.aspx or search “Oregon
bicycle pedestrian safety
implementation”