If you are at all interested in pedestrian safety issues or are looking for possible funding for your traffic calming project, you should know about the federal Safe Routes To School (SRTS) program. The idea is to improve the ability for children to walk or ride their bikes to school. Not a bad idea for a generation that has gotten used to being chauffeured from one place to another. The program offers training, education, events and funding.

Of course, a big part of that funding goes towards grants that states can use to improve traffic safety. I recently came across an article that explained how the city of New Hope, Minnesota did just that.

With an SRTS grant of $31,200 the Minnesota Department of Transportation implemented a variety of actions to slow traffic around its Sunny Hollow Elementary School. Since the school is surrounded by busy streets, few of the students walk or bike to school. During the morning commute, local traffic is congested with parents driving to school in order to deliver their kids to the front of the building.

While a portion of the grant will be used for training and education, the majority of the funds will be used to purchase three radar speed signs. The signs will be installed next to current speed limit signs and are intended to remind drivers to check their own speed and make sure they are within the limits.

Sounds simple, but it works. A variety of government studies have shown that radar speed displays are particularly effective around neighborhood streets and school yards.

Next step? The city plans to apply for additional grants to fund similar projects near other elementary schools in the state. 

There is a growing opposition to the use of photo radar cameras that is sweeping the nation. Organizations such as Photo Radar Scam, CameraFraud and ACAPR are popping up across the country with one mission in mind – to make the use of photo radar illegal for traffic enforcement applications.

Over the last few years, their voices appear to be getting louder – and government officials are starting to take notice. Courts in Alaska, for instance, struck down as unconstitutional, the state’s use of photo radar signs. A judge in Denver, Colorado ruled that tickets issued on the bases of radar cameras were not legal and citizens in several cities in Maryland, Ohio and Texas recently began petition drives to ban the use of these devices.

So far, grass routes opposition to red light cameras has gotten them banned in over a dozen states including Indiana, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada and Wisconsin.

Group like Photo Radar Scam say their beef with the traffic enforcement technology is not about interfering with their ability to break traffic laws, but instead, about their effectiveness at reducing accidents, the legal constitutionality of their use, and their intrusive nature. More importantly, they believe photo cameras are used simply as a means of generating revenue for the cities where they are being used.

According to a recent news report, states like New York are using speed cameras to offset budget deficits. Governor David Paterson recently announced that he planned to install 50 new radar vans in the state of New York in hopes of generating $96 million in profit by 2012.

So where does this leave speedcheck radar speed signs?

Very well thank you. One of the nice things about speedcheck signs is that they typically do not take pictures of passing drivers or send speeding data to law enforcement for ticketing purposes. While many of these displays collect traffic data, they record only broad statistical information that can be used to calculate the effectiveness of the signs.

And they are effective. These unobtrusive displays simply remind drivers to check their speed and adjust accordingly. Several recent studies have shown that radar speed displays are one of the most effective means of slowing cars around neighborhoods, school zones, work zones and other places where pedestrian safety is of particular concern.

So when you see a radar speed sign, slow down and smile. You are NOT on candid camera but you are helping keep our streets safe.

I CAME ACROSS A study by Safe Kids USA that looked at distracted drivers in school zones. While it’s no surprise that distracted drivers are more likely to cause or be involved in an accident, some of the specifics noted in the report were surprising to me. For instance:

Fact. Drivers using a phone are as likely to get in an accident as drunk drivers ( .08 blood alcohol content). 

Fact. Drivers dialing a phone are six times more likely to be involved in an accident. 

Fact. Drivers texting on their phones are 23 times more likely to be involved in an accident. 

Fact. Drivers talking on a phone are four times more likely to be in an accident.      

Fact. Harvard Center for Risk Analysis estimated that in 2003, cell phone use was a factor in 636,000 crashes, 12,000 major injuries and 2,600 deaths.

But this post isn’t about bashing cell phone use. It’s about the impact of driving distractions in general and what we can do about it to increase pedestrian safety.

In the Safe Kids study, trained observers were posted in school zones located in 15 states throughout the U.S. They observed each car that passed through the school zone, making note of the drivers’ sex, the type of cars they were driving and any marked evidence of driver distractions. Of the 41,426 total drivers observed, about 7,000 of them (1 in 6) were distracted by something – eating, reaching in back, talking on a phone etc.

Specific findings include:

• Cell phone use was the number one leading distracter 
• Men and woman drivers were abut equally distracted.
• Distracted drivers appeared more frequently in school zones without flashing lights.
• Drivers of SUVs, pickup trucks and other large vehicles tended to be distracted more than car drivers.
• Drivers not using their seat belts were 35% more likely to be distracted than those who did use seat belts.

Why does any of this matter? I suggest two reasons:

1. Distractions lead to more accidents as well as a higher severity of accidents when crashes do occur.       

2. Traffic calming methods that interrupt diver distractions during critical times (such as while passing through school zones( are particularly important in reducing accidents.

As the Safe Kids report points out, a distraction that takes the driver’s mind off of his or her driving environment can have a huge impact on accident avoidance. By the time you calculate how long it takes for a driver to see a child run into the street, for the brain to process the situation and for the driver to make a decision on how to avoid the hazard, a car traveling just 30 mph will have traveled about 33 feet. Once you add driver reaction time and the time it takes the car to stp, it has now traveled about 104 feet from when the danger was first spotted.

From Safe Kids USA

That’s on a dry road…with clear conditions…without driver distractions. For each second that the driver is distracted, you can add another 33 feet to that stopping distance.

Radar speed signs, variable speed limit signs and violation alert signs are all bout refocusing a driver’s attention away from distractions and back onto his or her own driving speed and road conditions. And they work.

A variety of government studies show that radar speedcheck signs are one of the most highly effective means of reducing accidents in school zones, work zones and other places where pedestrian safety is of particular concern.

And now we know why.

If interested, you can find a nice collection of links to many of these government traffic calming studies at www.informationdisplay.com.

WELCOME TO A new year!  2010.  Sheesh!  Is it just me or does simply saying 2010 sound futuristic?  Face it.  The “future” is today. We are seeing promises of tomorrow become mainstream realities. If you don’t believe me, just go see Avatar 3D Imax or make a purchase at an Apple (computer) store…or go for a drive.

We are now entering a new era of driving where technology is taking an increasingly larger role in getting us safely to our destination. It’s all about ITS or Intelligent Traffic Systems. If you haven’t yet heard the term, I suggest you say it now a few times to yourself, because before the year is over, it will become a commonly used idiom for most Americans.

Given its relative newness, the term ITS has yet to be firmly solidified within the marketplace and so its currently being used for a fairly wide range of traffic management-related implementations. At the recent World Congress and Exhibition on Intelligent Transportation Systems and Services held this past September, the term was used to describe among other applications:

• Synchronized traffic lights coupled with active displays that tell drivers the optimal speed they should be traveling.
• In-car responder systems that notify emergency personnel of traffic accidents.
• Variable message signs that work with street sensors to instruct drivers of traffic accidents ahead, current drive times to various locations or alternative route suggestions. 
• Speed cameras that automatically record the license plate of traffic law violators.
• Instant drive-by toll collection technology.
• Emergency vehicle detectors that recognize approaching police cars, ambulances and fire trucks and automatically adjust traffic lights to give these vehicles the right-of-way.

As you can see from these examples, some ITS implementations are certain to cause controversy. In fact, the rapid increased interest in the technology is receiving support in the U.S. from various homeland security-related organizations that see a potential use of ITS for both surveillance and as a way to quickly and easily evacuate citizens in the event of an emergency.

Unclogging gridlock with Intelligent Traffic Signs

Information Display Company has already taken a leading role in marrying its display expertise with ITS technology. It is one of the first companies to offer traffic light synchronization displays and variable message signs. They are also working closely with others to adapt their radar display know-how with traffic monitoring systems. The result will be solutions that give motorists real-time information that will help them reach their destinations as quickly and safely as possible.

Stay tuned for updates.

FINDING THE RESOURCES for traffic safety programs is never a slam-dunk. Given today’s economy it’s gotten even harder. However, while many traffic safety programs are being eliminated, there are still places to find funding.

Therer are still SRTS grants available

One of the most popular and effective national programs offering traffic safety grants comes from Safe Routes To School. Launched in 2006, the program is all about encouraging kids to walk and ride their bikes to school. A first step in making this even plausible is ensuring that the routes they take are as safe as possible – and that means slowing cars. Safe Routes to School has a variety of active programs taking place across the entire U.S. with funding from the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Most importantly, they offer grants to qualified applicants. A good first start is visiting their site at www.saferoutesinfo.org.

Even in today’s economy, there are a variety of local, state and federal government programs that may be able to help. These come and go and are often difficult to find, let alone apply for. That’s why Information Display Company has an expert ready to help. If you’re wondering what grants may be available for your specific location, you may want to send an e-mail to IDC’s grant coordinator at grantinformation@informationdisplay.com.

And if you’re courageous enough to do some research on your own, chances are, you’ll stumble across a variety of private corporate grants that may also work. A great example is one offered by State Farm Insurance, which offers charitable contributions to (among other groups) qualified educational institutions and governmental entities. Their grants are focused on three areas: safety, community development and education. You can find out more about the State Farm grant program at http://www.statefarm.com/about/part_spos/grants/cogrants.asp. Specific information about their upcoming 2010 programs should be available around the first of the year.

I HEARD A disturbing statistic a while back that I can’t seem to get out of my mind. Information Display Company had loaned some radar speed signs to Feet First, a great organization all about getting kids (and their parents) to walk rather than drive to and from school. One of Feet First’s directors told me that half of school children hit by cars in school zones are actually hit by parents of students at the same school. I would think that of all the drivers on the road during school hours, these drivers would be most cognoscente of the potential hazards and therefore the most cautious. Apparently not.

Then I came across a new report just put out by Safe Kids USA that might explain this phenomenon. The report, entitled Distracted Drivers In School Zones: A National Report, highlights some statistics regarding driving behavior – particularly in school zones. What they found was that school zone drivers are often distracted and distractions have a real impact on safe driving. Consider some of these statistics highlighted in the report:

• It takes about .25 seconds for an average driver to identify a road hazard (such as a child running out into the street)
• It takes another .25 seconds for the brain to process the situation
• And another .25 seconds for the driver to determine his/her course of action

As the report lays out, if the driver is traveling 30 mph in a school zone, his car will go 33 feet before he even reacts to the hazard.  THEN…

The car will travel another 33 feet by the time the driver applies the brakes…

and another 38 feet before the car actually stops.

Total braking distance from the moment the child is spotted till the car stops…104 feet.

That is IF the road is dry and IF visibility is clear and IF the driver is totally attentive.

On the other hand, if he or she is distracted  – say, by a cell phone call, or a GPS device, or a talk show host, or grooming, or kids in the back seat, or…Well, let’s just say, stopping distance can be greatly larger.

The Harvard Center of Risk Analysis estimates that, in 2003, cell phone use by drivers was a factor in 636,000 crashes involving 12,000 major injuries and 2,600 deaths. Now, add to this other distractions like eating or reaching for that CD cover under the seat.

One more quick bit of information. In 1999, the U.S. Department of Transportation issued a report that highlighted the impact that the speed of a car has on the severity of injuries once an accident does occur. According to the report, only 5 percent of pedestrians would die if hit by a car traveling 20 mph or less. This fatality rate jumps 8X – to 40 percent – when the car is traveling just 10 mph faster, and 80 percent when traveling 40 mph.

So if there was a way to slow drivers just a bit – say from 30 to 20 mph – while driving through a school zone AND a way to draw driver attention from distractions back to their own driving speed, we can make a real impact on the number of accidents and the severity of injuries that occur in school zones.

And that, in a nutshell, is the reason why studies show radar speed signs to be so effective at increasing pedestrian safety in school zones. Long after speed limit signs and school zone posting have become all but invisible to passing drivers, radar speed signs continue to grab driver attention and refocus attention away from distractions and back on their own driving speed.

I really like Feet First’s idea of getting our children back in the habit of walking and riding their bikes to school. I like it even better when I know we are doing all we can to increase pedestrian safety around school zones. The evidence clearly points us in the required direction – eliminating driver distractions and reducing speeds.

Speed bumps. Just say the word in a crowd and chances are you’ll soon start arguments that’ll make today’s town hall meetings seem sedate. While most everyone agrees speeding cars pose a real danger to school children and other pedestrians, there is a growing contingent of people who are fervently opposed to the use of speed bumps.

While protests against these axle-grinding obstructions continue to top the news throughout the U.K., stateside opposition has also begun to make headlines. From Los Angeles to Tampa Bay; Salt Lake City to Mesa Grande, newspaper articles highlight the fact that citizens across the country are up in arms about the disconcerting use of speed bumps by local governments looking to slow traffic.

There are now social network groups such as The Anti Speed Bump Club on Facebooks and organizations like The National Motorists Association and CRASH (Citizens Against Speed Humps), web sites such as No Speed Bumps.com, and bloggers such as Richard Layman in Washington D.C. and Cartype in Chicago. There are forums and essays, commentators and editorials – all who’ve had enough with this antiquated and obstructive means of slowing traffic.

Do speed bumps work? Sure, for the 1 to 3 feet of space that they take up on the road. But according to several government studies, drivers often try to make up the “lost time” or just relieve their frustrations over their use by speeding up between each bump.

Other reasons that a growing number of people are saying “no” to speed bumps in their neighborhood include:

1. They impede emergency vehicles
2. They simply divert traffic to streets without the obstructions
3. They increase traffic noise
4. They reduce fuel efficiency
5. They increase pollution
6. They ruin car suspension
7. They can be a hazard to wheelchairs and bicyclists

The troubling part of all this is that there are traffic-calming solutions that are more effective and less troublesome. In some cases, simple changes to street design can have a huge impact on slowing cars. Radar speed signs have also proven to be highly effective and highly rated by neighborhoods where they are employed.

Bottom line: speed bumps are on the outs – and should be. They represent an antiquated solution to a legitimate problem – one where alternative solutions offer more effective results without the considerable side effects.

Choosing the Right Radar Speed Sign

1.  Displays with built-in data collection features can be valuable, saving staff time in conducting future studies or proving effectiveness.

2.  Choose sign features based upon need. In some cases, simple signs may be best. Additional features such as data collection may increase technical issues that require management. Also, additional features typically come with additional costs.

3.  Choose a sign that provides a settable speed threshold limit. This prevents drivers from testing to see how high they can get the display to register.

I would like to add a few to this list.

1. Choose signs that look official. There are lots of models out on the market today. Some simply look wrong.  MUTCD provides design guidelines that govern everything from the color and shape of the sign to the size and style of lettering. Even if your application does not require MUTCD compliance, the effectiveness of the display is contingent upon driver perceptions of its legitimacy.
2. Vandal resistance. Displays will get abused. Choose a radar speed sign that is resistant to being hit, slammed and shot at. Solid-state designs are best. Shields protecting the display are important.
3. Easy to repair. If a display is damaged, it’s important that a non expert can easily fix it - in the field. Some radar speed signs require that the display be taken down and sent back to the factory. Others can be easily repaired right from where they are mounted.
4. Clear, visible and focused. Today’s top rated display signs offer designs that make them clearly visible only to THOSE DRIVERS BEING TARGETED. Poorly designed signs can easily distract unintended drivers.

The Bellevue study has several tips for radar speed sign placement. These include:

1. 

   Mounting considerations - radar speed signs

   Set up the radar speed sign at a location that has a minimum distance of 300 feet of clear sight between the display and the drivers.

2. Choose a spot with a convenient power source nearby. If this is not possible, consider solar powered displays.
3. Solar powered signs work best where light levels are adequate for the sign application.
4. Chose a spot where the light from the display will not disrupt homeowners.
5. Avoid obstructions. Try to avoid locations where parked cars and other objects may obstruct the view of oncoming motorists.

Once the location for the radar speed sign is chosen. The Bellevue report provides the following tips on installation:

1. Install the sign at an appropriate angle so that the radar can pick up passing motorists (specified by the manufacturer).
2. Mount with concrete footing.
3. Install at a minimum height of seven feet from the bottom edge of the sign to the ground.
4. Include a posted speed limit sign above the radar speed sign.

We really owe the city of Bellevue our gratitude for sharing this information and personal experience with the rest of us concerned with traffic safety. Their report shares important data that serves as an excellent guide for others looking to slow traffic and increase pedestrian safety.

Here are some interesting statistics I gleaned from The American Public Transportation Association and elsewhere that may sway the debate:

• From 1980 to 2005, the U.S. population grew 30 percent, while the number of registered motor vehicles increased 60 percent and the number of vehicle miles traveled grew 95 percent.
• According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, congestion is one of the single biggest threats to our economic prosperity and way of life, costing America $200 billion a year.
• In 2007, congestion caused urban Americans to travel 4.2 billion hours more and to purchase an extra 2.9 billion gallons of fuel for a congestion cost of $78 billion.
• In 2007, the the average American family spent $8,758 on transportation.
• In New York, where public transportation is widely available, only 14.0 percent of consumer expenditures are for transportation. In Phoenix, where there are fewer transportation options, consumer expenditures for transportation are 21.5 percent.
• The typical automobile user consumes twice as much oil as the public transportation user.
• Each year the use of public transportation in the United States saves 1.4 billion gallons of oil, representing 4 million gallons of gasoline per day – This is the equivalent of 140,769 fewer service station tanker trucks clogging our streets each year.
• Without public transportation, Americans would have suffered an additional 541 million hours of delay and consumed 340 million more gallons of fuel in 2005. The value of the delay and fuel that would be consumed if there were no public transportation service would be an additional $10.2 billion.
• Public transportation uses reduces delays for both public transportation riders and highway users. In one study of six urban corridors served by high-capacity rail transit, public transportation passengers saved 17,400 hours daily over auto travel. The remaining road users saved an additional 22,000 hours of delay per day due to the absence of vehicles from public transportation users. Travelers on surrounding roads in the corridors saved an additional 20,700 hours daily as spillover congestion was reduced. These reductions represent an annual savings of $225 million in the six corridors analyzed.

Want a few more facts? Consider these statistics the next time you are stuck in traffic.

• Nearly 60 percent of the U.S. population lives in major metropolitan areas of over 1 million, but only 8.3 percent of households have access to subway service.
• Over 50 percent of Americans do not live within one quarter mile of a transit stop.
• Only 4.3 percent of miles on our road system are served by public transportation.
• Two-thirds of rural Americans-60 million people-are almost wholly unserved by public transportation.
• Sprawling development patterns in America’s suburban areas often provide no choice but to use private vehicles for every travel need. This increases congestion requires more roads and parking facilities.

TTI’s 2007 Urban Mobility Report offers a variety of suggestions on how to reduce congestion on U.S. streets. These range from widening and redesigning roads to changing usage patterns and offering viable public transportation alternatives.

My personal observations suggest that widening roads doesn’t work. All of the highway expansions that I’ve witnessed simply resulted in larger backups. Apparently, when it comes to traffic congestion, there is a threshold that we as Americans are willing to persevere. Widening a road allows more cars to sit in the same mess that existed before the extra lanes were added.

I am coming to the conclusion that our best hope for real traffic relief will come in the form of:

1. New technologies that allow individuals to telecommute (work from home).
2. Smart city planning (and re-planning) that creates bike friendly / pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods. Instead of suburban sprawl where cars are required for even the most basic chores, these are mixed communities where homes and businesses create neighborhoods and getting a cup of coffee or loaf of bread doesn’t require you to get in your car.
3. Viable public transportation. To be viable, it must be fast, clean, safe and convenient.

What are your thoughts? You can leave your comment hear or e-mail me at blog@informationdisplay.com