1. NOW YOU HAVE DATA: WHAT DO YOU DO WITH IT?
Traffic Records Forum
Session 23

2. What is the problem? Why should you care? Nearly 3M Injuries
43,220 Fatalities
Nearly 3M Injuries
Human consequences
Families
Friends
Citizens
Years of life lost
Economic consequences
Some of these happens on your roads.
$ per person
$230B Cost to the Nation

3. The Challenge Ahead 53% Increase 350 Deaths per Year
Total Motor Vehicle Fatality Projections
With no change in the risk of a fatal crash on a per population basis, the absolute number of fatalities will increase each decade from 41,446 in calendar year 2000 to 63,513 in 2050 – an increase of 53 percent, or 22,607 fatalities. The average increase from one decade to the next over these years will be approximately 3500 or about 350 deaths per year.
The motor vehicle fatality picture will change over time. For example, it will not remain the same for all age groups. There will be a sharp increase in the and 70+ age cohorts. These and other characteristics of future crash projections will have a profound influence on the decisions made and resources allocated to keep America on the move safely.
53% Increase
350 Deaths per Year

4. Crash Characteristics
Distracted Driving (25%)
Impaired Driving (42%)
Roadway departures (38%)
Speeding (30%)
Failure to Wear Safety Belts (13%)
Intersections (21%)
Pedestrians (13%)
Trucks (12%)
Motorcycles (7.6%)
Multivariate analysis required
Partnerships
Collaboration
Note on belts: A very high percentage of those killed in MV accidents are unbelted. The basis for the 13%, however, is as follows: 26% drive unbelted, belts are about 50% effective in preventing fatalities (with airbag), hence, 13% of fatalities are associated with failure to wear belts. In reality, the percentage is much higher.
Total = 237%

5. SCP Background
Each statewide and metropolitan planning process shall provide for consideration of projects and strategies that will increase the safety and security of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users.
TEA-21
TEA 21 established safety as one of the seven planning priorities. This requires a change in the planning culture as safety had never before been a priority requirement. Change of this sort may be difficult. As one person said at the SC SCP Forum, “Some engineers’ minds are like concrete – all mixed up and thoroughly set.”

6. Planning Considerations
Safety
Security
Economic Vitality
System Preservation
Plans, Programs, Projects
Congestion Mitigation
Environmental Quality
Planners have been telling me this is a “key slide.” I think they like the fact that we understand they have many competing priorities to deal with and safety must be balanced in with the others.
The changes to this slide involve animation.
The original of this stars with the center piece (plans, etc.); then on the first click the other circles came up one at a time starting with safety. It does not require additional clicks to bring the others up. (keep same)
Safety and security come up as complete circles while the others have a cool animation within the scheme. Please make the all the same one way or the other, preferably the latter if possible.
The arrows do not need to be animated or, if they are, they should come in at the same time the related circle does. It takes too long to have them all come in after the fact.
Operational Efficiency
Intermodal Connectivity

7. Safety Conscious Planning
Safety explicitly part of project implementation
Continuous monitoring of safety in operations
Consider education enforcement and emergency response
Safety projects programmed
Safety performance measures
System
operations
Implementation of strategies
Other sources for project ideas
Safety part of criteria set
Safety strategies considered
Short (3-5 year) Range Program
Economic Development
Alternative
improvement
strategies
Goals and
objectives
Performance
measures
Vision
Evaluation
Long Range Plan
Mobility and Accessibility
Environmental
Quality
Policies
Operations strategies
Infrastructure projects
Studies
Regulations
Education and awareness
Enforcement
Financing strategies
Partnerships
Collaboration
Safety stated
in goals
Analysis methods
Data
Safety integrated within plan
Safety included
in vision
Safety data continuously collected
Safety strategies considered
Safety included
in analysis
Collaboration with safety stakeholders, and the public

8. Monday Session What Data Do You Need for Planning It Safe
Monday Session What Data Do You Need for Planning It Safe? Today – What to Do With It
Tom Welch, Iowa Department of Transportation
Tom Bruff, Southeastern Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG)
Davin Flatten, MassSafe, University of Massachusetts
Eric Dumaugh, Georgia Tech