pedestrian safety initiative bicycle safety · countystat bike safety #2 3 12/10/2014 agenda...

53
CountyStat Pedestrian Safety Initiative – Bicycle Safety DOT, MCPD, PIO December 10, 2014

Upload: others

Post on 20-Jul-2020

2 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Pedestrian Safety Initiative –

Bicycle Safety

DOT, MCPD, PIO

December 10, 2014

Page 2: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

CountyStat Principles

Require Data-Driven Performance

Promote Strategic Governance

Increase Government Transparency

Foster a Culture of Accountability

2 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Page 3: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat 3 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Agenda

Welcome and Introductions

Overview of Bicycle Collision Data

Examination of Party at Fault Variables

Times and Dates of Bicycle Collisions

Geospatial Analysis of Bicycle Collisions

– Bethesda Central Business District

– Silver Spring Central Business District

Overview of Bicycle Safety Budget

Wrap-up

Page 4: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat 4 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Meeting Goals

Identify and discuss specific engineering, education, and

enforcement strategies for mitigating bicycle collisions based

on data trends

Utilize trends in bicycle collisions to drive targeted resource

allocation

Lower the amount of bicycle and vehicle collisions in

Montgomery County through data-driven decision making

Desired Outcomes

Page 5: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

OVERVIEW OF BICYCLE

COLLISION DATA

Section 1

5 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Page 6: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Notes on Bicycle Collision Data

Bicycle Crash Data

– Data are entered manually into the database, which can lead to data entry

errors

– Not all collisions, especially ones that do not result in property damage or

personal injuries, are reported to MCPD

– Does not include pedestrian and bicycle incidents

– Takoma Park Police data are not included

– Collision data are mapped at the nearest intersection

2014 Data

– 2014 data are not readily available due to the transition from the Maryland

Automated Accident Reporting System (MAARS) to the Automated Collision

Reporting System (ACRS)

– The State indicates access to the ACRS system will not occur until 2015 at the

earliest

6 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Analysis of bicycle crash data will not meet all standards of statistical rigor due to small

sample sizes, but comparison over time will yield meaningful results.

Page 7: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Bicycle and Pedestrian Collisions in Montgomery Co.

434 429 412 444 454 436 399 423 483

87 123 117 95 107 140 125

141 100

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

Year

Pedestrian Bicyclist

7 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

From 2005 to 2013, bicyclists averaged 21% of all bicycle and pedestrian collisions with motor

vehicles. The share that were bicycle collisions ranged from 17% in 2005 and 2013 to 25% in

2012. The ratio of bicycle to walking pedestrians involved in a collision in Montgomery County

was similar to the statewide trend.

Sources: MCPD; MCTSA

Page 8: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Cyclist Collisions by MD County –

2008 to 2012 Average per 100k Population (1/2)

8 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: Maryland Highway Safety Office; US Census Bureau 2010 population data

Cyclist Collisions per 100k:

1st Quartile: 2.6 – 6.1 Collisions

2nd Quartile: 6.1 - 7.6 Collisions

3rd Quartile: 7.6 – 14.2 Collisions

4th Quartile: 14.2 – 50.5 Collisions

From 2008 to 2012, Montgomery County averaged 11.9 cyclist collisions per 100,000 residents.

This was the 8th highest rate among Maryland counties, placing it in the 3rd quartile. However,

data were not adjusted for the population of cyclists in each county as these data are unavailable.

Page 9: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Cyclist Collisions by MD County –

2008 to 2012 Average per 100k Population (2/2)

County Collisions per

100,000 Population

Worcester 50.5

Baltimore city 29.5

Wicomico 21.3

Dorchester 18.4

Talbot 15.9

Anne Arundel 14.7

Washington 14.2

Montgomery 11.9

Cecil 11.9

Baltimore 11.2

Prince George's 10.7

St. Mary's 8.6

9 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

County Collisions per

100,000 Population

Somerset 7.6

Charles 7.5

Howard 7.3

Harford 6.9

Frederick 6.9

Queen Anne's 6.3

Caroline 6.0

Calvert 5.6

Carroll 5.4

Kent 5.0

Garrett 3.3

Allegany 2.7

Source: Maryland Highway Safety Office; US Census Bureau 2010 populations

Page 10: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2012 Bicyclist Crashes and Injuries per 100k

Population in the Washington Region

10 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: MWCOG - Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for the National Capital Region; pg. 3-10

94

38

24

15 11 10 9 8 8 7 6 6 5 4

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

% o

f C

om

mu

ters

Bik

ing

to

Wo

rk

Bik

e C

ras

he

s p

er

10

0k

Re

sid

en

ts

Bike Crashes per 100k Residents % of Commuters Biking to Work

Based on MWCOG’s data, Montgomery County had the 4th highest rate of bicycle crashes in the

region. The jurisdictions with the higher collision rates tend to be inner ring jurisdictions.

Page 11: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Cyclist Fatalities by MD County for 2012

11 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: National Highway Transportation Safety Admin.: Fatality Analysis Reporting System

As with pedestrian fatalities, Montgomery County was among the lower third for cyclist fatalities

per 100,000 population for all US counties.

Page 12: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Bicycle Collisions by Highest Injury Level*

12 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

*Due to reporting practices, only the highest level injury is recorded. Highest injury level refers to the highest recorded

bike injury for a given collision (e.g. if two cyclists are struck, and one has a level 3 injury and one has a level 1 injury,

the collision is recorded as a level 3 collision).

Source: MCPD

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

1 (No Injury/Unknown)

2 (Possible Injury)

3 (Non-Incapacitating Injury)

4 (Incapitating Injury/Disabled)

5 (Fatal)

From 2009 to 2013, the County had one bicyclist fatality each year. From 2012 to 2013, levels 2,

3, and 4 recorded injuries declined. The increases in level 1 crashes between 2010 and 2013 are

partially a result of better reporting of no injury collisions. The uptick in level 1 collisions was also

seen in the pedestrian collision data.

Page 13: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat 13 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

State

County

Municipal

Parking

Other/Unknown

Collisions by Roadway Type

48% of bicycle collisions occurred on County maintained roadways from 2009 to

2013. From 2012 to 2013, County maintained roadways saw a 42% reduction in

bicycle collisions.

Source: MCPD

Highway Lane Miles

State County Toll Municipal Total

1,395.14 4,846.58 88.01 761.36 7,091.09

20% 68% 1% 11% 100%

Page 14: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Hit and Run Bicycle Collisions

14 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

From 2009 to 2013, 8% of vehicle and bicycle collisions were recorded as hit and run collisions.

None of the bicyclist deaths (level 5 collisions) were the result of hit and run.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

% o

f C

ras

hes

in

Ye

ar

Year

Driver On Scene Hit & Run

Source: MCPD

Page 15: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

AT FAULT VARIABLES

Section 2

15 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Page 16: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Party at Fault in Bicycle Collisions

43%

54% 47%

57% 58%

44% 33% 43%

39% 38%

4% 6% 8%

1% 4% 9% 8%

2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

% o

f To

tal

NotDetermined

Both

Bicyclist

Driver

For 3 of the 5 years, drivers were at fault for the majority of collisions with

bicyclists.

12/10/2014 16 Bike Safety #2 Source: MCPD

Page 17: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Variables: Drivers At Fault

(2009 – 2013)

17 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Primary Cause Number of Collisions

Failed to Yield ROW 155 (49%)

Failed to Give Full

Time and Attention

73 (23%)

Vision Obstruction 9 (3%)

Other / NA / No

Factor Recorded

81 (25%)

Driver Movement Number of

Collisions

Making Right Turn 60 (19%)

Making Left Turn 59 (19%)

Moving at Constant Speed 52 (16%)

Accelerating 28 (9%)

Slowing or Stopping 26 (8%)

Starting from Traffic Lane 24 (7%)

Other / NA / No Factor

Recorded

69 (22%) Gender Number of Collisions

Male 181 (57%)

Female 108 (34%)

Other / NA / No Factor

Recorded

29 (9%)

Driver Condition Number of Collisions

Apparently Normal 268 (84%)

Unknown 14 (4%)

Physical Defects 2 (<1%)

Had Been Drinking 1 (<1%)

Other / NA / No

Factor Recorded

33 (10%)

Nearly a third (29%) of collisions where the driver

was at fault resulted from the cyclist and vehicle

colliding at a 90 degree angle.

Source: MCPD. 318 of 613 (52%) of collisions from 2009 to 2013 were the driver’s fault.

Collision Type Number of Collisions

Straight Movement Angle 91 (29%)

Head On Left Turn 33 (10%)

Angle Meets Right Turn 30 (9%)

Single Vehicle 24 (8%)

Same Direction Rear End 19 (6%)

Same Direction

Sideswipe

18 (6%)

Other / NA / No Factor

Recorded

103 (32%)

Page 18: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Variables: Bicyclists At Fault (2009 – 2013)

18 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Primary Cause Number of Collisions

Failed to Give Full Time

and Attention 28 (12%)

Failed to Yield ROW 26 (11%)

Illegally in Roadway 24 (10%)

Bicycle violation 12 (5%)

Other / NA / No Factor

Recorded 151 (62%)

Bicyclist Location Number of Collisions

On Roadway not at

Crosswalk

100 (41%)

On Roadway at

Crosswalk

64 (27%)

Other / NA / No

Factor Recorded

77 (32%)

Bicyclist Movement Number of

Collisions

Cross/Enter at Intersection 91 (38%)

Riding with Traffic 34 (14%)

Riding Against Traffic 27 (11%)

Cross/Enter not at Intersection 20 (8%)

Other / NA / No Factor Recorded 69 (29%)

Gender Number of Collisions

Male 203 (84%)

Female 37 (15%)

No Gender Recorded 1 (<1%)

Bicyclist Condition Number of Collisions

Apparently Normal 212 (88%)

Had Been Drinking 14 (6%)

Using Drugs 2 (1%)

Other / NA / No

Factor Recorded

13 (5%)

Bicyclist Safety

Equipment Used

Number of Collisions

None 50 (21%)

Bike Helmet 32 (13%)

Bike Eye Shield 1 (<1%)

NA / No Factor

Recorded

158 (66%)

Source: MCPD. 241 of 613 (39%) of collisions from 2009 to 2013 were the cyclist’s fault.

Page 19: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Intersection Collisions

19 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Sources: MCPD; NHTSA (pg. 152) Analysis excludes 7 collisions where the intersection data

were not recorded *Note: Does not add to the total amount of intersection collisions due to

missing or miscoded bicyclist information.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

% o

f T

ota

l C

ollis

ion

s

Year

Percentage of Collisions in Intersections

Not in Intersection In Intersection

Collision Type in Intersection Number of Collisions

Straight Movement Angle 91 (38%)

Head On Left Turn 27 (11%)

Angle Meets Right Turn 26 (11%)

Angle Meets Left Turn 22 (9%)

Other / NA / No Factor Recorded 76 (31%)

Party at Fault Number of Collisions

Driver 128 (53%)

Bicyclist 94 (39%)

Both 11 (5%)

Not Determined 9 (3%)

Traffic Signal (Y/N) Number of Collisions

No 152 (63%)

Yes 89 (37%)

Not Recorded 1 (<1%)

Bicyclist Obedience Number of Collisions*

No Pedestrian Signal 49 (21%)

Obeyed Pedestrian

Signal 49 (21%)

Disobeyed Pedestrian

Signal 25 (11%)

Other / NA / No Factor

Recorded 114 (47%)

63% of collisions occurred outside of an intersection in the County from 2009 to 2013.

Nationwide, only 29% of cyclist injuries occurred outside of an intersection in 2012.

Page 20: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Contributing Factors when Driver was at Fault

20 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Failed to Yield ROW 49%

Failed to Give Full Time and

Attention 23%

Other 28%

1st Contributing Factor

Failed to give full time and attention

61%

N/A 26%

Other 13%

2nd Contributing Factor when Failed to Yield ROW

Source: MCPD. 318 of 613 (52%) of collisions from 2009 to 2013 were the driver’s fault.

In the majority of cases where the driver was at fault, the primary or secondary contributing

factor for the collision was that the driver failed to give full time and attention.

Page 21: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Contributing Factors when Bicyclist was at Fault

21 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: MCPD. 241 of 613 (39%) of collisions from 2009 to 2013 were the cyclist’s fault.

No Factor Recorded (Blank)

47%

Failed to Give Full Time and Attention

12%

Failed to Yield ROW 11%

Illegally in roadway

10%

Bicycle violation 5%

Other 15%

1st Contributing Factor

In 47% of collisions where the bicyclist was at fault, no contributing factor was recorded.

Page 22: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Bicyclist Location

Bicyclist at Fault Driver at Fault

22 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

On Roadway Not at

Crosswalk 41%

On Roadway at Crosswalk

26%

Not Recorded/

Other 21%

Sidewalk 9%

Outside Right of Way

2%

Shoulder 1%

On Roadway Not at

Crosswalk 29%

On Roadway at Crosswalk

29%

Not Recorded/

Other 20%

Sidewalk 13%

Outside Right of Way

<1%

Shoulder 5%

In Bikeway 3%

Curb 1%

When the driver was at fault for a bicycle collision, there were a higher rate of collisions on

the shoulder of the road or in a bikeway as compared to when the bicyclist was at fault.

Source: MCPD

Page 23: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Party at Fault by Gender

Driver Bicyclist

23 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

0

50

100

150

200

250

Male Female

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

Gender

0

50

100

150

200

250

Male Female

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

Gender

Males were overrepresented as the party at fault for both drivers and bicyclists. The disparity

between the sexes was largest for the bicyclist at fault where 84% of collisions were caused

by a male cyclist. The high rate of males involved in crashes in Montgomery County was

similar to nationwide (80% in 2012) and statewide (83% from 2008-2012) trends.

Sources: MCPD; NHTSA; MD Highway Safety Office

*Excludes 29 collisions where driver gender was not captured. *Excludes 1 collision where cyclist gender was not captured.

Page 24: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Bicyclist at Fault by Gender and Age

24 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

4%

26%

19% 10% 7% 7%

2% 2% 1% 5%

3% 2% 1% 2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

% o

f A

ll C

oll

isio

ns

wh

ere

Cyc

lis

t w

as

at

Fa

ult

Age Group

Male Female

Males ages 10 to 19 represented 26% of all bicycle collisions where the bicyclist was

at fault. Across Montgomery County, this age and gender group represented only

13% of the population.

Sources: MCPD; US Census 2013 Population Estimates

Page 25: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Driver at Fault by Gender and Age

25 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

3%

7% 7%

11% 11% 10%

4% 3% 1%

5% 6% 6% 6% 3% 3% 2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

Male Female

As compared to bicyclists at fault, the age of the driver at fault was more widely distributed by

age. However, males were more likely to be at fault as compared to female drivers.

Source: MCPD; Excludes 34 collisions where the age and/or gender of the driver was not recorded.

Page 26: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Age of Bicyclists Involved in Collisions (1/2)

3%

25% 25%

14% 13% 14%

5%

1% 0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

CY2009 - 2013 Avg. % of MoCo Population

26 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

*Age/DOB was not recorded for the following shares of cyclists involved in collisions: (2009) 12.1% (2010)

22.0%; (2011) 13.3%; (2012) 0.7%; (2013 ) 4.9%

Sources: MCPD; US Census 2013 Population Estimates

The ages of 10 through 29 are overrepresented in the share of collisions as compared to the

overall Montgomery County population. However, these age groups are more likely to comprise

of a larger share of the bicycling population. The median age of a bicyclist involved in a collision

was 28 years old.

Page 27: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Age of Bicyclists Involved in Collisions (2/2)

27 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

*Age/DOB was not recorded for the following shares of cyclists involved in collisions: (2009) 12.1% (2010)

22.0%; (2011) 13.3%; (2012) 0.7%; (2013 ) 4.9%

Sources: MCPD; National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)

3%

13%

15%

10%

19

%

13%

14%

9%

2%

0%

4%

16%

14

%

10%

18%

10%

14

%

10%

4%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

CY2009 - 2013 Avg. 2012 US Cyclist Injuries

Montgomery County’s bicycle collisions mirror national trends for the age of the cyclist involved.

Page 28: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Age of Drivers Involved in Collisions

28 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

4%

16% 18% 18% 19%

15%

7%

3%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Drivers Involved Montgomery County Licensed Drivers

*Age/DOB was not recorded for the following shares of drivers involved in collisions: (2009) 9.0% (2010) 10.2%;

(2011) 8.7%; (2012) 5.0%; (2013 ) 10.1%

Sources: MCPD; Maryland Highway Safety Office

No age group of drivers involved in collisions with cyclists was disproportionately represented as

compared to the total number of licensed drivers. The median age of a driver involved in a

collision was 46 years old.

Page 29: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

TIMES AND DATES OF

BICYCLE COLLISIONS

Section 3

29 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Page 30: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2009-2013 Bicycle Collisions by Month

30 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

Month

Total Collisions Level 4 & 5 Collisions

July through September accounted for 40% of all bicycle collisions recorded between 2009 and

2013. The rate of severe crashes (levels 4 and 5) mirrored the overall trend.

Source: MCPD

Page 31: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2009-2013 Bicycle Collisions by Day of Week

31 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

Day of Week

Total Collisions Level 4 & 5 Collisions

18% of all bicycle collisions (112 out of 613) occurred on Thursdays from 2009 to 2013.

Saturdays were the lowest at 12%, then the rate increased each day to the peak on Thursday.

Source: MCPD

Page 32: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2009-2013 Bicycle Collisions by Time of Day

32 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

27% of all bicycle collisions from 2009-2013 occurred between 5:00PM and 7:59PM. For the

morning commute, from 7:00AM-9:59AM, 16% of incidents occurred during this timeframe. The

overall trend in the time of day bicycle incidents occur was similar to walking pedestrian incidents.

Lighting

Conditions

Number of

Collisions

% of

Total

Dark: No

Street

Lights

11 2%

Dark:

Street

Lights On

81 13%

Dawn/

Dusk 28 5%

Daylight 491 80%

Total 611 100%

Lighting Conditions for All

Collisions* (2009-2013)

*Excludes 2 collisions where

lighting conditions were not

captured in report.

Source: MCPD

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

12

AM

1 A

M

2 A

M

3 A

M

4 A

M

5 A

M

6 A

M

7 A

M

8 A

M

9 A

M

10

AM

11

AM

12

PM

1 P

M

2 P

M

3 P

M

4 P

M

5 P

M

6 P

M

7 P

M

8 P

M

9 P

M

10

PM

11

PM

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

Hour of Day

Total Collisions Level 4 & 5 Collisions

Page 33: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat 33 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Bic

ycle

Co

llisi

on

s &

Ho

urs

of

Dar

knes

s

Month

5 Year Avg. of Bike Crashes Between 5pm and 8pm by Month

Bike Crashes Between 5pm and 8pm Avg. Daily Hours of Darkness

Bicycle Collisions: Evening Commute

The relationship between average hours of darkness and the number of bicycle collisions during

the evening commute was opposite of the trend seen in pedestrian collisions. The different trends

are likely due to more people bicycle during warmer months and bicyclists, especially casual

riders, are less likely to ride in the dark. Therefore, lighting and visibility are less of an issue for

bicycle collisions as compared to overall pedestrian collisions for the evening commute.

Source: MCPD

Lighting

Conditions

Number of

Collisions

% of Total

Dark: No

Street Lights 2 1%

Dark: Street

Lights On 23 14%

Dusk 17 10%

Daylight 124 75%

Total 166 100%

Lighting Conditions for

Collisions Occurring Between

5pm and 8pm (2009-2013)

Page 34: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

GEOSPATIAL ANALYSIS OF

BICYCLE COLLISIONS

Section 4

34 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Page 35: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2009-2013 Bicycle Collisions by Bicycle Pedestrian

Priority Area (BPPA) (1/2)

35 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Outise of BPPA 70%

Bethesda CBD 6%

Silver Spring CBD 4%

Medical Center 3%

Wheaton CBD 2%

North Bethesda 1%

Aspen Hill 1%

Other BPPAs 13%

The majority of bicycle collisions from 2009 to 2013 occurred outside of identified bicycle

pedestrian priority areas. 59 collisions (10%) were recorded in the Bethesda and Silver Spring

central business districts. According to the County’s 2014 Mobility Assessment Report, the

Bethesda CBD had the highest level of bicycling activity in the County.

Sources: MCPD, Park and Planning (pg. 39)

Page 36: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2009-2013 Bicycle Collisions by Bicycle Pedestrian

Priority Area (BPPA) (2/2)

36 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: MCPD

Page 37: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2009-2013 Bicycle Collisions by Municipality or CDP (1/2)*

37 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: MCPD

*CDP = Census Designated Place

Bethesda 16%

Rockville 11%

Silver Spring 9%

Gaithersburg 8% Wheaton

8% Potomac

5%

Germantown 4%

North Bethesda 4%

Aspen Hill 3%

Montgomery Village 2%

Other 30%

Bethesda and North Bethesda CDPs accounted for 121 of 613 (20%) bicycle collisions

from 2009 to 2013.

Page 38: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2009-2013 Bicycle Collisions by Municipality or CDP* (2/2)

38 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: MCPD *CDP = Census Designated Place.

30 collisions that occurred outside of either a municipality or CDP are not shown above

Page 39: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

BETHESDA CENTRAL

BUSINESS DISTRICT

Section 4A

39 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Page 40: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Bethesda Central Business District (1/2)

40 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Road Number of Collisions

Woodmont Ave. 8 (4 in 2010)

Wisconsin Ave. 7

Bethesda Ave. 4

Parking Lot 4

Other 14

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

12

AM

1 A

M

2 A

M

3 A

M

4 A

M

5 A

M

6 A

M

7 A

M

8 A

M

9 A

M

10

AM

11

AM

12

PM

1 P

M

2 P

M

3 P

M

4 P

M

5 P

M

6 P

M

7 P

M

8 P

M

9 P

M

10

PM

11

PM

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

Time of Day

Fault Number of Collisions

Driver 20 (54%)

Bicyclist 13 (35%)

Both 2 (5%)

Not Determined 2 (5%) *No fatality (level 5) collisions occurred in Bethesda CBD

Source: MCPD

Page 41: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Bethesda Central Business District (2/2)

41 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Primary Cause Number of Collisions

Cyclist Illegally in

Roadway 5

Failed to Obey Other

Traffic Controller 1

Failed to Obey Traffic

Signal 1

Stopping in Lane/

Roadway 1

None Recorded 5

Primary Cause Number of Collisions

Failed to Yield ROW 8

Failed to Give Full Time

and Attention 6

Other/ Not Recorded 6

Driver At Fault Bicyclist At Fault

Driver Age Group Number of Collisions

0 to 9 0

10 to 19 0

20 to 29 3

30 to 39 3

40 to 49 5

50 to 59 5

60 to 69 0

70 to 79 2

80+ 0

None Recorded 2

Cyclist Age Group Number of Collisions

0 to 9 0

10 to 19 4

20 to 29 2

30 to 39 2

40 to 49 2

50 to 59 1

60 to 69 0

70 to 79 0

80+ 0

None Recorded 2

Page 42: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

SILVER SPRING CENTRAL

BUSINESS DISTRICT

Section 4B

42 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Page 43: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Silver Spring CBD (1/2)

43 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

0

1

2

3

4

5

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Level 5

Road Number of Collisions

Fenton St. 5

Colesville Rd. 4

Georgia Ave. 4

Parking Lot 2

Other Roads 7

Fault Number of Collisions

Driver 12 (55%)

Bicyclist 9 (41%)

Both 1 (4%)

0

1

2

3

4

5

12

AM

1 A

M

2 A

M

3 A

M

4 A

M

5 A

M

6 A

M

7 A

M

8 A

M

9 A

M

10

AM

11

AM

12

PM

1 P

M

2 P

M

3 P

M

4 P

M

5 P

M

6 P

M

7 P

M

8 P

M

9 P

M

10

PM

11

PM

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

llis

ion

s

Time of Day

Page 44: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Silver Spring CBD (2/2)

44 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Primary Cause Number of Collisions

Failed to Give Full Time

and Attention 2

Cyclist Illegally in

Roadway 1

Failed to Obey Other

Traffic Controller 1

Failed to Drive within a

Single Lane 1

None Recorded 4

Primary Cause Number of Collisions

Failed to Yield ROW 6

Failed to Give Full Time

and Attention 2

Vision Obstruction 1

Improper Backing 1

Improper Turn 1

None Recorded 1

Driver At Fault Bicyclist At Fault

Driver Age Group Number of Collisions

0 to 9 0

10 to 19 0

20 to 29 2

30 to 39 2

40 to 49 1

50 to 59 2

60 to 69 0

70 to 79 1

80+ 0

None Recorded 4

Cyclist Age Group Number of Collisions

0 to 9 0

10 to 19 2

20 to 29 4

30 to 39 1

40 to 49 0

50 to 59 1

60 to 69 0

70 to 79 1

80+ 0

None Recorded 0

Source: MCPD

Page 45: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Bicycle Collision Hotspots for 2009 - 2013

45 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Sources: MCPD, Park and Planning (pg. 39)

For the five most recent years, downtown Bethesda and Silver Spring have the highest

concentrations of bicycle collisions. According to the County’s 2014 Mobility Assessment Report,

the Bethesda CBD had the highest level of bicycling activity in the County.

Page 46: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2009

46 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: MCPD

Page 47: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2010

47 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: MCPD

Page 48: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2011

48 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: MCPD

Page 49: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2012

49 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: MCPD

Page 50: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

2013

50 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: MCPD

Page 51: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

BICYCLE SAFETY ITEMS

IN COUNTY BUDGET

Section 5

51 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Page 52: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Bicycle Specific Budget Items in Ped. Safety Budget

Department Budget Project/ Program FY15

MNCPPC CIP Trails $1,350,000

DOT CIP MacArthur Blvd. Bikeway

Improvements

$863,000

DOT CIP Frederick Road Bike Path $657,000

DOT CIP Bikeway Program- Minor Projects $1,000,000

DOT CIP Bethesda Bikeway and Pedestrian

Facilities

$936,000

DOT CIP Metropolitan Branch Trail $1,740,000

52 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014

Source: OMB

Note: The budget information above only includes funds listed in the pedestrian safety

section of the budget. Other funds and dept. activity also affect bicycle safety.

Funds dedicated directly for bicycle safety are used for bikeway improvement projects around the

County. Operating funds for pedestrian safety education and enforcement could also be utilized to

reach out to the bicyclist population where HIAs for the two populations overlap.

Page 53: Pedestrian Safety Initiative Bicycle Safety · CountyStat Bike Safety #2 3 12/10/2014 Agenda Welcome and Introductions Overview of Bicycle Collision Data Examination of Party at Fault

CountyStat

Wrap-Up

Follow-up items developed during the meeting will be

distributed to meeting participants and posted online

53 Bike Safety #2 12/10/2014