Road Safety in Cities

Street Design and Traffic

Management Solutions
Acknowledgements The International Transport Forum
The work for this booklet was carried out in the context of the Safer City Streets initiative of the International The International Transport Forum is an The Members of the Forum are: Albania, Armenia,
Transport Forum (ITF) and funded by the FIA Road Safety Grant Programme, supported by the FIA Foundation intergovernmental organisation with 63 member Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus,
The author of the booklet is Dominic Streuber (ITF), who worked under the supervision of and in co-ordination countries. It acts as a think tank for transport policy Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada,
with Alexandre Santacreu (ITF), the project lead of the Safer City Streets initiative. and organises the Annual Summit of transport Chile, China (People’s Republic of), Colombia, Croatia,
ministers. ITF is the only global body that covers all Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France,
This booklet presents measures that effectively reduce road traffic deaths and serious injuries in cities. It transport modes. The ITF is politically autonomous Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India,
covers urban street design, traffic management and improving mobility options. Measures are illustrated with and administratively integrated with the OECD. Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea,
examples reported by cities collaborating in the ITF Safer City Streets network and include information on cost Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta,
and effectiveness. The case studies draw on interviews held with city officials and Safer City Streets partners by The ITF works for transport policies that improve Mexico, Republic of Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro,
telephone or email. The ITF would like to fully acknowledge their contributions and also take responsibility for any peoples’ lives. Our mission is to foster a deeper Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand,
errors in representing the policies of their jurisdictions. The interviewees were: understanding of the role of transport in economic North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania,
growth, environmental sustainability and social Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia,
Catherine Pérez, Agència de Salut Pública de Barcelona inclusion and to raise the public profile of transport Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine,
Caio Assunção Torres, Departamento de Engenharia de Transportes, Fortaleza policy. the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the
Nathaly Milena Torregroza Vargas, Secretaría de Movilidad, Bogotá United States and Uzbekistan.
Adriana Corssy Martínez, Secretaría de Movilidad, Bogotá The ITF organises global dialogue for better
Claudia Mercado Velandia, Secretaría de Movilidad, Bogotá transport. We act as a platform for discussion and
Amy Pidwill, Transport for London pre-negotiation of policy issues across all transport
Nishma Mistry, Transport for London modes. We analyse trends, share knowledge and
Inês Castro Henriques, Câmara Municipal de Lisboa promote exchange among transport decision-
Pedro Machado, Câmara Municipal de Lisboa makers and civil society. The ITF’s Annual Summit is
Rob Viola, New York City Department of Transportation the world’s largest gathering of transport ministers
Selma van der Zwart, Gemeente Den Haag and the leading global platform for dialogue on
Wernher Brucks, City of Zurich transport policy.
Brian Deegan, Urban Movement
David Braunstein, Together For Safer Roads
Enrico Pagliari, Automobile Club d'Italia
Lucia Pennisi, Automobile Club d'Italia
Irene McAleese, See.Sense Case-Specific Policy Analysis Reports About Safer City Streets
Nikita Luke, World Resources Institute
Siba El-Samra, World Resources Institute The ITF’s Case-Specific Policy Analysis series presents The International Transport Forum (ITF) at the OECD
topical studies on specific issues carried out by the launched the ITF Safer City Streets initiative at the
Other members and partners of the Safer City Streets network kindly provided comments through online ITF in agreement with local institutions. Any findings, UN Habitat III conference in 2016. It brings together
workshop meetings organised on the 10th and 17th November 2021. interpretations and conclusions expressed herein road safety experts from 48 cities and explores the
are those of the authors and do not necessarily solutions developed at a local level. Cities in the
The booklet was reviewed internally by Alexandre Santacreu and Stephen Perkins at the ITF. reflect the views of the International Transport network improve their urban road safety performance
Christopher Marquardt (independent) copy-edited the draft and Hilary Gaboriau (ITF) co-ordinated production. Forum or the OECD. Neither the OECD, ITF nor the by sharing data, experience and knowledge and
Layout by Ana Cuzovic (ITF). authors guarantee the accuracy of any data or other learning from each other. Safer City Streets replicates
information contained in this publication and accept at city-level the International Road Traffic Safety
no responsibility whatsoever for any consequence Analysis and Data (IRTAD) group, a global road safety
of their use. This work is published under the network of countries hosted by the ITF, which has run
responsibility of the Secretary-General of the ITF. for more than 25 years. The IRTAD group has been
This document, as well as any data and map included commended by the World Health Organization as “a
herein, are without prejudice to the status of or model of a multi-country effort”.
sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation
of international frontiers and boundaries and to the
International Transport Forum name of any territory, city or area.
2 rue André Pascal
F-75775 Paris Cedex 16 Cite this work as: ITF (2021), Road Safety in Cities:
contact@itf-oecd.org Street Design and Traffic Management Solutions,
www.itf-oecd.org International Transport Forum Policy Papers, No. 99,
OECD Publishing, Paris.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 1
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Content
Introduction4

Allocation of protected
space for walking and cycling 8

Speed management  12

Roadside safety treatment  16

Traffic management  18

Improved mobility options 22

Junction treatment 26

Hot spot identification

and treatment 30

Improving road surfaces  34

Traffic signalling and intelligent

transport systems36

Further reading  40

References  41

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

2 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 3
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Introduction Costs and effectiveness
Every minute, someone in the world dies in city traffic. In order to stop this epidemic of road This booklet provides examples of the reported effectiveness of some road safety measures. Such
deaths, cities worldwide have taken action to improve urban road safety and local authorities performance may, however, depend on the context in which the measures are applied. In other
have adopted ambitious targets to make their streets safe. Cities are complex and there are words, findings are not necessarily directly transferable from one city to another. The booklet
many and competing demands placed on their transport systems. No single safety intervention thus provides case studies to help illustrate the order of magnitude of changes that one could
will achieve all of the desired safety outcomes or achieve unanimous public support. Every expect. Road safety practitioners should develop trials, together with robust evaluation protocols,
intervention will come at a cost – to the city, to other users and to other transport modes. Finally, in order to make sure their actions reduce the number of traffic deaths and serious injuries. By
the mix of interventions that works in one city may not be sufficient in another. Cities must doing so, they will also contribute to the global body of research on road safety measures.
carefully analyse their own safety needs and decide on the most effective mix of interventions,
together with mutually reinforcing measures, in line with the Safe System approach. The cost of a road safety measure depends on the local context in which it is implemented, and
reflects the precise way in which a local authority chooses to deliver it. In addition, some high-
This booklet introduces measures for urban street design and traffic engineering, speed cost measures, such as a bypass road or mass transit system, are typically funded outside of the
management and improved mobility options, three of the fundamental action areas of a Safe road safety budget. With this in mind, the present booklet offers examples of the costs of road
System approach to improving road safety (Figure 1). It presents nine groups of measures that safety measures where this information is available. It does not, however, attempt to provide a
have proven effective in reducing road traffic deaths and serious injuries in cities, outlining framework comparing costs or cost-effectiveness across different measures.
experience and case studies from some of the cities that are implementing such measures
successfully. The focus is on infrastructure-related measures that contribute considerably to The figures on road treatment costs and effectiveness presented in this booklet are taken mainly
reductions in casualties (World Road Association, 2019). Technological measures and other action from The Handbook of Road Safety Measures published by Norway’s Institute of Transport
areas inspired by the Safe System approach are also briefly addressed, but remain to be covered Economics (Elvik et al., 2009), a definitive compendium of international research on the
in future Safer City Streets publications. effectiveness of safety interventions. Many of the other figures for costs and effectiveness are
drawn from research undertaken for SafetyCube (the EU Road Safety Decision Support System)
Street design in cities around the world has focussed on private motor vehicles, but policy and from interviews with city officials (see the “Acknowledgements” and “Further reading”
makers are increasingly shifting the focus to making cities liveable for citizens and safe for all road sections of this booklet). Other sources are cited in the text and listed in the References section.
users. Space is being reallocated and streets (re)designed to maximise safety and improve the
environment for pedestrians and cyclists, and for safe access to public transport. Better traffic
management and signalling systems are part of the improvements being made to infrastructure.
Each specific measure discussed in this booklet is briefly reviewed in terms of costs and
effectiveness.

A large range of measures are potentially available to address road safety problems, so it is
important to consider the local context when selecting the most effective interventions. Most
measures require skilled consultation with citizens and road users because they imply changes of
behaviour and because benefits may be difficult to appreciate until they have been experienced.
Building public and political support for intervention requires that effects on traffic flow, health,
climate change and pollution are considered when selecting measures.
Policy makers should prioritise vulnerable road users, as they constitute the great majority of
fatalities on urban roads. Policy makers need good information on the benefits and costs of
measures so that they can maximise improvement with the limited budgets available. Costs
depend on the scope and specific design of measures, but the costs described in this booklet
provide an idea of the order of magnitude of the costs by category of measure.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

4 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 5
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Figure 1. Principles, Core Elements and Action
Areas of the Safe System Approach
Adapted from WRI (2018)

The Safe System Humans

No Death or
Serious Injury
Make Errors
is Acceptable
A Safe System proactively and holistically reduces risks in all areas of a road
safety system. It fosters safe behaviour while also addressing risks inherent Principles
in the design of the road network. Crashes are prevented by elements of the
system that guide users to act safely. At the same time, measures are taken to Proactive vs.
Responsibility
try to ensure that the crashes that inevitably still occur do not result in serious Reactive
Is Shared
injury or death. Humans Are
Vulnerable
to Injury
Four guiding principles are central to a Safe System:

1. People make mistakes that can lead to crashes. The transport system
needs to accommodate human error and unpredictability. Strong Comprehensive
Targets and Governance and
Data Management
2. The human body has a known, limited physical ability to tolerate crash
forces before harm occurs. The impact forces resulting from a collision Core
must therefore be limited to prevent fatal or serious injury. Elements

Economic Monitoring
3. Individuals have a responsibility to act with care and within traffic laws. Analysis and
A shared responsibility exists with those who design, build, manage and Evaluation
use roads and vehicles to prevent crashes resulting in serious injury or Priorities and
Planning
death and to provide effective post-crash care.

4. All parts of the system must be strengthened in combination to multiply The highlighted action
their effects, and to ensure that road users are still protected if one part of areas identify the areas
covered in this booklet.
the system fails. tify
iden
as klet
are is boo Speed
Source:n ITFh (2016).
tio in t Management
Post-crash
d Street
ov ac

Design and Emergency

e
s c ted
er

Engineering Response and

the a hligh

Care
rea
ig
The h

Improved Vehicle
Mobility Design and
Options Technology

Action Areas

Land Use Education and

Planning Capacity
Enforcement, Building
Laws and
Regulation

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

6 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 7
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Measure 01
Inadequate sidewalk space can force pedestrians to walk on the carriageway and in cycle lanes.
Wider sidewalks improve accessibility. Physical barriers can prevent the parking of motor vehicles
on sidewalks and at crossings. At-grade signalised pedestrian crossings (crossings with traffic
signals and road markings) help to increase pedestrian safety and promote walking and are
therefore preferable to pedestrian bridges and tunnels in most circumstances. Safe and direct
routes for walking and cycling facilitate a modal shift that of itself can significantly enhance road
safety in dense urban areas and deliver public health benefits associated with increased physical
activity and improved air quality. Mixed use of space by pedestrians and cyclists is common, but at
the highest pedestrian densities this ceases to be an attractive solution for either group.

The construction of one kilometre of cycling lane in Europe costs around EUR 100 000 and a
cycling track costs around EUR 760 000 per kilometre (Elvik et al., 2009). Light segregation brings
the cost of developing a cycling network down to EUR 100 000-250 000 per kilometre (Deegan,
2018). Sidewalks cost between EUR 54 000 and EUR 188 000 per kilometre of 1.5- to 2-meter-wide
shoulder (Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System, 2013). Maintenance
costs should be factored into the choice of pavements as well as budget planning, as degraded
surfaces are unsafe and unattractive. The implementation of protected sidewalks and cycle tracks
and the widening of sidewalks can be controversial despite the low costs because they reduce the

Allocation of protected space allocated to motor vehicle traffic lanes and parking bays.

space for walking and cycling Figure 2. Modal shares of road fatalities, by city and by population density group, 2013-15
Vulnerable road users – i.e. people walking, cycling and using powered two-wheelers – make up
Paris City 47% 8% 39%
the vast majority of urban traffic fatalities in the cities participating in the ITF’s Safer City Streets Inner London 54% 17% 19%
Barcelona
initiative (Figure 2). Cities should therefore intensify their efforts to improve street design for Madrid
36%
50% 6%
52%
34%
vulnerable road users and provide better-protected infrastructure for walking and cycling. Dublin City 56% 7% 26%
Bogotá D.C. 52% 10% 23%
Stockholm 50% 10% 25%
Sidewalks and cycle tracks protect the most vulnerable road users by physically separating them Paris area 41% 5% 37%
Copenhagen 38% 25% 21%
from motor vehicle traffic. Different degrees of separation are possible, defined in standard terms The Hague 13% 52% 17%

as follows. A cycle track provides a hard separation with curbs, vegetation, a parking lane or a Milan
Greater London
42%
49%
10%
9%
28%
22%
combination of these barriers. A cycle lane is separated only by road markings, such as a solid white Fortaleza 40% 7% 32%
Warsaw
line. This creates clearly delineated space for cycling (when free of illegal parking) but, in practice, Riga
59%
64%
7%
5%
12%
9%
the markings can have the counter-productive effects of 1) reducing the passing distance between New York City 58% 6% 13%
Berlin 39% 21% 16%
motor vehicles and cyclists (Harkey and Stewart, 1997) and 2) increasing overtaking speeds (Shackel Vancouver 58% 4% 13%
and Parkin, 2014). Another measure to consider is light protection of cycle lanes. This consists of Buenos Aires
Zürich
37%
55%
35%
10% 5%
the use of physical objects intermittently placed alongside a cycle lane marking to give additional Mexico City 54% 13%
Rome
protection from motorised traffic. Light protection is adaptive and can be built quickly and cheaply. Montreal
27%
40%
36%
13% 9%
It also offers an improved sense of subjective safety that makes cycling more attractive (Deegan, Guadalajara 51%
Lisbon 45% 13%
2018). Adding intermittent separators has proven effects on road user behaviour, with motor Brussels 44% 11%
vehicles encroaching less into cycle lanes (Koorey, Wilke and Aussendorf, 2013). Edmonton
Melbourne
35% 10%
25% 17%
Calgary 25% 18%
Auckland
The treatment of road junctions is critical to cycling safety and should be the starting point for 19% 13%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
allocating space to cycling rather than an afterthought to the introduction of cycle tracks or cycle
lanes. Treatments include separate signal phases for cyclists and conspicuous road markings to
guide cyclists on predictable routes through junctions and indicate priority (see the section on Pedestrian Bicycle Powered two-wheeler Other road users

Junction treatment).

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

8 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 9
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Lively squares and sidewalks programme in Light protection of cycle lanes in London,
Fortaleza, Brazil United Kingdom
A rapidly growing number of cities are making radical improvements to pedestrian The Camden district in the northwest of London introduced a cycle lane with light protection
infrastructure that are transforming accessibility, improving safety and cutting congestion. on Royal College Street as part of a wider policy to improve conditions for cycling. This project
In 2018, the Fortaleza City Council implemented a "Lively Sidewalk" programme at Barão was the first one in the United Kingdom to use light protection to protect cyclists from traffic.
da Rio Branco Street. Developed in consultation with the local population, the programme Prior to the changes, a bi-directional cycle track was segregated from the general carriageway
included the conversion of one traffic lane into an interim sidewalk extension. Before the by a curb. However, traffic safety records were poor as drivers failed to notice the approaching
implementation, many pedestrians were forced to walk on the road between motor vehicles. contra-flow cyclists at intersections. The new project aimed to improve conditions for both
At the writing of this booklet they have a safe and accessible space to walk. In order to make cyclists and motorists and test the concept of light protection as a measure that can be
the adjacent squares more lively, kiosks for street vendors, accessibility ramps, three new implemented faster and at a lower cost than conventional cycle tracks.
at-grade raised crossings and urban furniture were installed. The programme aimed to make
walking more attractive and increase pedestrian mobility. It was developed in partnership The Council removed the bi-directional cycle track and replaced it with cycling routes, using
with the Bloomberg Initiative for Global Road Safety and the National Association of City light protection measures instead of curb separation. In addition to low profile “armadillo”
Transportation Officials. separators, planters, flexible posts and vehicle parking were used on most of the route as
protection from motor vehicle traffic. A before-and-after study revealed a 50% reduction
Low-cost and fast-implementation materials – paint, benches, bollards and planters – made it in both the number of crashes involving cyclists and the severity of resulting injuries. This
possible to test the measure and evaluate its impact rapidly. The changes to the urban space reduction was achieved while the total number of people cycling in both directions increased
reduced the number of pedestrians walking in the road by 92%. Vehicle speeds above 30 km/h by 70%. Motor vehicle traffic levels and speeds dropped while 71% of cyclists said that Royal
and 40 km/h dropped by 65% and 84%, respectively. The programme was also successful at College Street offered a better experience than the rest of their route. The cost of the light
regenerating activity, with pedestrians taking advantage of the kiosks and public benches. protection measures amounted to EUR 80 000, bringing the cost per kilometre of the project
Several other cities, attracted by the programme’s success and low cost, have replicated it to EUR 120 000. Maintenance costs of replacing damaged planters and “armadillo” separators
in several of their own neighbourhoods. As of the writing of this booklet, one kilometre of were EUR 15 000 in 2014/15.
sidewalks have been widened, 2 100 square meters of public space have been reclaimed
and 32 crosswalks have been improved permanently through the programme (Pompeo and
Abdulsamad, 2021).

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

10 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 11
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Measure 02

Several studies show clearly that speed limit reductions in combination with physical
measures reduce casualties significantly (by around 25%) and conclude that 30 km/h speed
limits should be combined with physical interventions (see, for example, Li and Graham,
2016; Seya, Yoshida and Inoue, 2021). Street design and traffic signals are also an important
part of ensuring compliance, which can otherwise be challenging.

Signs that inform of the speed-reducing measure cost between EUR 200 and EUR 500
per sign; speed humps cost between EUR 1 000 and EUR 3 000 (Elvik et al., 2009). The
implementation of speed limits is controversial. Engagement with the community is required
to achieve acceptance of and adherence to reduced speed limits. Communities initially
sceptical about the value of speed management are likely to demand interventions to reduce
speeds when the benefits are demonstrated and communicated effectively, as experience in
Bogotá shows (ITF, 2020b).

Speed management
Speed is a contributory factor in about 30% of fatal accidents in urban areas (European
Commission, 2018). Consequently, speed management is one of the most effective
urban road safety policies. Reducing speeds can reduce the risks and severity of crashes
significantly. A 1% increase in average speed results in approximately a 2% increase in injury
crash frequency, a 3% increase in severe crash frequency, and a 4% increase in fatal crash
frequency. The risk of a pedestrian being killed in a collision with a car is almost five times
higher at 50 km/h than at 30 km/h (Kröyer, Jonsson and Varhelyi, 2014). The benefits of
lower speeds on urban streets have been documented in Safer City Streets Case Studies (ITF,
2020b). They were also highlighted in the Stockholm Declaration issued at the 2020 Global
Ministerial Meeting on Road Safety, which recommends limiting speeds to 30 km/h wherever
vulnerable road-users mix with motor vehicle traffic, and limiting all speeds on urban roads
to 50 km/h (see also ITF, 2018).

Interventions limited to signposting 30 km/h limits are not always successful at lowering
speeds. More often, 30 km/h zones include engineering measures to reduce speed, such
as road narrowings, speed humps, curb extensions and raised pedestrian crossings and
junctions. Speed limiting devices such as humps have to be designed carefully; otherwise,
they can hinder emergency vehicles and cause discomfort, particularly for bus passengers.
Lower limits have also been introduced in areas of some cities, for example, to create urban
play streets where motor vehicle speed is limited to a walking speed of 10 km/h. For over
a decade, 15 km/h and 20 km/h zones have been implemented in shared spaces of many
cities, including Belgium, France and the Netherlands.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

12 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 13
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Speed management in Bogotá, Colombia Curb extensions in Lisbon, Portugal
Bogotá developed a speed management programme, the Programa de Gestión de la Velocidad As part of efforts to enhance accessibility and safety, Lisbon has implemented curb
(PGV), after identifying the main factors contributing to crashes. The programme aims to extensions, including at the site illustrated in the photos below, at Alexandre Herculano
improve the road environment and guarantee the safety of all road users. The city evaluated Street. At first sight, this intervention is simply a junction treatment. However, curb
existing speed limits in relation to road function, infrastructure condition, land use and extensions and other street design changes are also part of effective speed management and
operational characteristics. An appropriate speed was then defined for each road type. The traffic calming. This intervention reduces the crossing distance for pedestrians and increases
programme also provides guidelines to ensure compliance with speed limits. the curve radius on all corners, which slows cornering speeds. Shorter curves with better
sightlines are particularly useful at intersections where cars are permitted to turn right at
The initiative first targeted the five corridors with the highest casualty rates. The speed red lights. The shorter crossing distances for pedestrians bring the crossing into conformity
limit was lowered from 60 km/h to 50 km/h, and speed cameras were installed to enforce with national legislation for the speed at which pedestrians have to walk to cross on a green
compliance on five corridors. The programme took an incremental approach, testing the pedestrian light (0.4 m/s – 1.4 km/h). The intervention has had a traffic-calming effect,
benefits of speed reduction and disseminating results before expanding to other roads. Fatal with no reported increase in traffic congestion. Drivers approach the intersections at lower
crashes were monitored corridor by corridor, and results were compared with the average for speeds, and pedestrians report feeling safer (+18%) with less pressure from drivers to walk
the preceding three years. Results were reported weekly to the public via social media, using faster (-14%).
headline indicators of the number of lives saved since implementation and days accumulated
without recording a death. The demonstrated reduction in lives lost convinced many of the
administration’s strongest critics to accept the speed management programme as effective.

Interventions were extended to ten arterial corridors, with forty-six lives saved in 2019 due to
the programme. This represents a 21% decrease in traffic fatalities compared to the average
for the three preceding years 201518. Data from speed cameras indicates an improvement in
compliance, with lower excess speeds, although the rate of vehicles exceeding speed limits was
unchanged at around 20%.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

14 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 15
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Measure 03
Removing pedestrian guard railings in London,
United Kingdom
Removing pedestrian guard railings appears paradoxical at first thought. The railings are a
common measure implemented in the United Kingdom and most other countries. A reduction
of risk for vulnerable road users is the overriding result when installed at critical locations.

When over-used, however, railings can become more of a barrier to access than an aid to
safety, limiting crossing points and increasing the time needed to cross roads. They can give an
unintended visual message to drivers that they have priority over pedestrians, and they can
result in pedestrians climbing railings or taking shortcuts across adjacent junctions where they
are exposed to the greatest risk.

Transport for London has implemented a policy to remove sections of pedestrian railings along
main roads where they are counter-productive. The removals have included a large number
of staggered junctions. An evaluation of the project revealed that removing safety railings at
Roadside safety treatment pedestrian crossings can lead to a significant reduction in pedestrian deaths and injuries. In this
case, removing the railings reduced the number of fatal and serious pedestrian collisions by 53%.
In cities where speeds are limited to 50 km/h or less, out-of-control vehicles are unlikely to kill Crashes for all road users decreased by 47% at junctions where barriers had been removed.
their drivers and occupants but represent a lethal threat to vulnerable road users. Roadside Transport for London argues that the reduction is caused by a shift in driver attitudes toward
obstacles such as lamp posts, planters and parked vehicles can protect pedestrians and cyclists giving way to pedestrians following the removal. Perhaps the conclusion of this experiment
from vehicles that leave the carriageway. Safety barriers and guardrails at the roadside are is that some roadside treatments perform better than others due to subconscious effects on
designed to protect pedestrians from motor vehicles, to stop pedestrians from walking into driver behaviour (Transport for London, 2017). Authorities making changes to street design are
the road, and to guide pedestrians towards designated crossings. However, although they are encouraged to develop protocols for robust evaluation of the effects of such changes.
intended to reduce conflicts between pedestrians and drivers, they can be counter-productive
depending on how they are deployed.

Well-designed safety barriers can reduce the number of severe crashes and increase the level
of road safety. If properly designed, installed and maintained, the barriers should reduce the
severity of crashes involving out-of-control vehicles (iRAP, 2010). Guardrails can be effective
in channelling pedestrians towards dedicated crossings, and small sections of guardrail can
prevent pedestrians (especially children) from inadvertently stepping onto the road, for
example, at school entrances or park exits (City of Bristol, 2014).

However, excessive segregation of vulnerable road users and motor vehicles can create risks.
Roadside barriers can encourage motor vehicle drivers to adopt higher vehicle speeds. They
can cause drivers to perceive a reduced risk of conflict, leading to tunnel vision (Transport for
London, 2017). They can also force pedestrians to make long detours to cross roads, which
severs communities.

More accessible and open street design is increasingly recognised as more appropriate in most
urban contexts (Transport for London, 2020). The removal of roadside barriers and pedestrian
guardrails can have a positive safety impact by increasing the visibility of all road users and
inducing more careful driving and slower speeds.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

16 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 17
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Measure 04
Superblocks in Barcelona, Spain
The “superblock” model developed in Barcelona has proved an effective way of reprioritising
access in central parts of the city, with clear safety benefits. Pedestrians and cyclists have
priority in superblocks. Space that was formerly occupied by cars has been reallocated to
pedestrians, playgrounds and public benches while preserving essential access by motor
vehicles. Car traffic is redirected to the periphery of each block, with traffic inside the block
allowed on one remaining one-way street, with speeds limited to 10-20 km/h, to serve
local access and delivery. This is a very complete example of improving traffic management
by combining new traffic circulation plans with traffic-calming measures. In creating
superblocks, the city aims at recovering space for public use to foster social cohesion.

Since 2016, interventions have been carried out to implement superblocks in three
neighbourhoods: Poblenou, Sant Antoni and Horta. The environmental and health effects
of these urban transformations have been assessed by the Agència de Salut Pública de
Barcelona (Public Health Agency). Road safety in these neighbourhoods improved due to
the reduction in the number of motor vehicles. Residents reported better rest in a quieter,
Traffic management more comfortable and safer environment that encourages interaction between neighbours.
A major expansion of the superblock initiative is estimated to cost EUR 37.8 million over the
Traffic can be managed through many different approaches but is strongly dependent on street next ten years (Carey, 2020).
design. The first objective of traffic management is to prevent conflicts between road users.
The management of both traffic volume and speed is important as they are fundamental
determinants of the number and severity of crashes and injuries.

Traffic management measures include the implementation of pedestrian streets, low-traffic

neighbourhoods and traffic-calming measures such as new circulation plans. Where streets
are pedestrianised, most motorised traffic is prohibited. Typical exemptions enable motorised
deliveries at certain times of the day. A spectrum of pedestrian prioritisation exists and access
may be extended to cars for off-street resident and hotel parking, taxis and access for people with
impaired mobility. Low-traffic neighbourhoods are residential areas with no through-route for
motor vehicles; residents are still able to drive to their homes while profiting from improved air
quality and reduced noise pollution. Traffic-calming measures and circulation plans unburden the
city centre of traffic while providing more space for pedestrians and cyclists and for community or
commercial use of public space. New bypass roads may be included in traffic circulation plans to
relieve congestion in central areas, in conjunction with measures to avoid traffic induction.

Traffic reduction measures can be highly effective. The Handbook of Road Safety Measures
reports that on streets with high pedestrian traffic, a 60% reduction in the number of crashes can
be expected from pedestrianisation, with a 25% drop on neighbouring streets (Elvik et al., 2009).
The same source found that area-wide traffic calming reduces the number of crashes by 15% due
to the overall reduction in traffic. Overall there is a strong correlation between traffic volume and
crash rates. The bypasses evaluated in the Handbook, which are designed to high safety standards
as part of integrated traffic-management plans, were found to reduce collisions on both new and
existing roads, with results ranging from 19% to 66% (Goldenbeld and Schermers, 2017).

The main cost of creating pedestrian streets is that of renewing of street surface, which is
estimated to be around EUR 750 000 for a 200-metre-long street. Costs for traffic calming vary
depending on the individual measures. Building a bypass road costs around EUR 1.9 million per
kilometre (Elvik et al., 2009).
ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES
18 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 19
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Traffic reduction in school zones in Lisbon, Portugal
Home-school trips in Lisbon are characterised by the use of cars (the modal split of cars in
2020 was 51.4%). “Mexe-te pela tua cidade!” (move for your city) is a municipal initiative
promoting sustainable mobility and a change in habits for commuting from home to school.
This initiative is part of an overall school-mobility programme and consists in limiting motor
vehicle access to areas around schools, particularly at the beginning and end of the school
day. During these periods, schools can be accessed only on foot or by public transport,
bicycle, skateboard, rollerblades or scooter. Access to the area by car is reserved for residents
only. The measure both encourages active mobility and improves safety by reducing
exposure to motor vehicle traffic.

Lisbon launched the pilot programme in two areas of the city: every Tuesday in the
surroundings of the Dona Filipa de Lencastre schools, in the Arco do Cego neighbourhood;
and every Wednesday in Jardim-Escola João de Deus. Five bicycle lanes with light protection
were also established to serve the Dona Filipa schools and one for Escola João de Deus.
The pilot project started in December 2019 and included an awareness-raising campaign
organised by members of the school community to explain the initiative to local residents.
Since the beginning of the initiative, a considerable reduction of motor vehicles in school
areas has been achieved, leading to safer conditions for children to walk and cycle to school.
Although there is no clear data available yet, research from Edinburg University finds that
perceived road safety increases on the surrounding streets of school-streets closures as well
as on the closed streets themselves. This evidence suggests that there is an implied road
safety benefit based on fewer motor vehicle movements (Davis, 2020).

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

20 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 21
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Measure 05
14th Street Busway in New York City, United States
In October 2019, the New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) implemented
a pilot programme on 14th Street, a major connector road in Manhattan, with the goal of
improving the bus service and increasing safety on this Vision Zero Priority Corridor. Within
the pilot programme, only buses, trucks and emergency vehicles may travel along 14th Street
from 3rd Avenue to 9th Avenue between 6 AM and 10 PM. All other vehicles may make local
trips to access businesses, residences and garages along 14th Street, but drivers must exit at
the next available right turn. Additional elements of the pilot include new pedestrian space,
painted curb extensions to shorten pedestrian crossings, and bus boarding platforms.

The project has successfully reduced crashes with injuries by 42% in the study area
(Schwartz, 2020). Meanwhile, bus travel times have increased by as much as 24% and
ridership by as much as 30% (NYCDOT, 2021). After the successful pilot, the 14th Street
Busway was made permanent in June 2020, with a plan to extend bus lanes further east.

Improved mobility options

One of the fundamental action areas of the Safe System approach is the provision of improved
mobility options. Public transport is the safest mode of urban transport, and substituting transit
for car traffic is central to road safety policy in an increasing number of cities (ITF, 2019; WRI,
2013). Good-quality public transportation systems, particularly late-night public transport, can
significantly reduce crashes and enhance road safety (Lichtmann-Sadot, 2019; APTA, 2016).
People who have access to an efficient public transport system are less likely to drive under the
influence of alcohol, drugs or medicine, and to drive a car or ride a powered two-wheeler at a
young age, when crash rates are highest.

A range of mobility options are available to improve road safety. Walking and cycling
infrastructure reduces the risk of fatalities while promoting healthier modes of transport
(Jacobsen, 2003; WRI, 2013). High-quality public transport outperforms all other choices of
transportation in terms of safety. Besides urban bus and rail networks, other interventions
such as bus priority at junctions, bus priority lanes and adequate protected pedestrian
infrastructure for stops and stations can contribute to improved road safety.

The costs of providing and maintaining public transportation infrastructure are high. The cost of
running a public transport system ranges from EUR 200 to EUR 1 000 per year, per inhabitant,
in major European cities. Most of these cities cover 40-60% of this cost with fare revenues
(EMTA, 2020). In 2018/19, Transport for London had a total budget of about EUR 11.5 billion,
of which about EUR 5.6 billion was generated from fare income (Transport for London, 2018).
However, the primary benefit of public transport systems is the very large number of daily trips
they can accommodate. Existing public transport systems can be enhanced by investment in
safe pedestrian access to stops and stations. Protected crossings, sidewalk widening and traffic
calming represent very small costs in comparison with the overall public transport budget.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

22 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 23
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Bus Rapid Transit and cable cars in Bogotá, Colombia
Bogotá provides a successful example of improving road safety by reorganising transit. The
city’s TransMilenio Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system was developed to improve mobility and
travel times and to cut crashes and emissions. The system started operation in December
2000. The first line saw a thorough reconfiguration of the major Avenida Caracas corridor,
eliminating a series of poorly configured junctions with multiple traffic-conflict points. The
introduction of BRT saw a reduction in traffic fatalities of more than 50% on the corridor
(WRI, 2013; Duduta et al., 2012).

A before-and-after comparison shows that annual traffic fatalities on the corridor decreased
from an average of 61 before the implementation of the transport system to an average of 21
during the first nine years of operation, with roughly half of the improvement attributed to
the BRT system itself and half to other road safety policies (Figure 3). In the total area where
TransMilenio operates, a reduction of 92% in road-related deaths, 75% in injuries and 79% in
collisions was observed. According to more recent data, in 2015 the BRT system was involved
in 34 fatalities compared to 21 in 2019, for a fatality reduction of 38%. Likewise, according
to official fatality data registered during 2021, a projection shows that there will be a further
reduction, contributing to increased road safety in Bogotá.

The total costs of the system from the year 2000 until now are estimated at USD 2.2 billion,
with the national government covering 64% of investment costs and the District of Bogotá
the remaining 36% (Urban Sustainability Exchange, n.d.).

The safety and capacity of BRT infrastructure have been improved by separating priority bus
lanes and increasing the number of buses by 40%. Other major projects include the new
cable car system TransMiCable, which was put in service in 2018. The new cable car line
connects one of the lowest-income neighbourhoods in Bogotá, Ciudad Bolívar, directly to the
BRT system. The cable car system has significantly reduced travel times in these inaccessible
neighbourhoods.

Figure 3. TransMilenio’s traffic safety impact on Avenida Caracas, Bogotá,

before and after the implementation of the BRT system

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

24 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 25
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Measure 06
crashes. Converting a conventional signalised 4-leg junction to a single-lane roundabout
reduces crashes by 38% (Soteropoulos and Stadlbauer, 2017b). Roundabouts require minimal
maintenance and reduce delays at lower traffic volumes. Daylighting and other sight-distance
improvements have been found to reduce the number of collisions significantly by 12%
(Soteropoulos and Stadlbauer, 2017c).

Daylighting involves very low costs. Depending on the type of channelisation, costs are
estimated to lie between EUR 20 000 and EUR 160 000 (Elvik et al., 2009). By contrast, the
cost of grade-separating a junction is estimated at EUR 3.8 million (Elvik et al., 2009). Despite
its effectiveness, grade-separation is not always appropriate as it can dominate cityscapes
and sever communities as ramps create physical barriers (Anciaes, Jones and Mindell, 2016).

Safe junctions in Fortaleza, Brazil

Fortaleza City Hall implemented a Safe Junctions Programme in 2017. The programme was
designed to be easy to implement and to produce rapid results. Junctions were modified
Junction treatment mainly with highly visible paint markings to channel traffic, shorten pedestrian crossing
distances and widen pavements with some light protection. Other road marking were
Most crashes occur at junctions, where different categories of road users cross paths refreshed and signs added to alert motorists to the existing prohibition of parking near
(USDOT, 2020). Interventions to improve junctions, therefore, have the potential to reduce junctions. The interventions were supported by a realignment of communication and
road fatalities substantially. Junction design must allow all road users to cross safely. Several enforcement activities.
different measures to improve road safety at junctions exist.
A before-and-after study of the measures implemented demonstrated the programme’s
Channelling is a measure that separates certain flows of traffic from the overall traffic. effectiveness. The main findings were a reduction of 53% in the total number of crashes and
Converting junctions to roundabouts slows traffic and alters the angle of collisions to reduce a reduction of 60% and 48% for crashes involving injury and property damage, respectively.
the severity of crashes. Staggered junctions replace crossroads with two T-intersections, Cost-benefit analysis using these results (and assuming systematic annual engineering
reducing the complexity of conflict points and making crossing junctions easier. Grade- maintenance at the treated intersections) estimated a return of USD 103 for every dollar
separated junctions segregate primary traffic streams from each other by placing them invested. To date, 450 intersections have been improved with these treatments.
on separate levels; this measure is used for high-traffic-volume roads. Other treatments to
redesign junctions include changes to the angle between roads and measures to improve
lines of sight and eliminate objects that obscure approaches. Daylighting describes the
removal of parking spaces in front of the curbs around an intersection, increasing visibility for
pedestrians and drivers.

Evaluations by the European Road Safety Decision Support System indicate that these
junction treatments are effective (Soteropoulos and Stadlbauer, 2017). Strong positive effects
are reported for left- and right-turn channellisation, with the number of crashes reduced
by 27% and 19%, respectively. Grade separation of intersecting roads is the most effective
measure for preventing collisions at junctions, with reductions of between 15% and 45%,
depending on the previous junction type (Botteghi, Ziakopoulos and Papadimitriou, 2017).
However, this measure involves very high costs and can have several negative effects. Grade
separation can cause a “halo effect” with drivers adopting higher speeds. It can also make
junctions more difficult to cross for pedestrians and cyclists. Roundabouts and staggered
junctions reduce the number of conflict points and lower the number and severity of

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

26 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 27
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Turn Calming programme in New York City,
United States
As part of its Vision Zero initiative, New York City is making efforts to reduce left and
right turn speeds to increase safety at junctions. As of December 2020, its Turn Calming
programme covered 468 intersections, with several types of treatment applied to redesign
the junctions. “Slow turn wedges” combine daylighting and road markings with a raised
plastic or rubber pad placed several metres out from the curb. This channels turning vehicles
around a steeper turn, reducing speed. The humps can substitute for what would have to
be very large curb extensions and can be driven over when necessary by long trucks that
would not be able to make a turn around an extended curb. Drivers of light vehicles very
rarely chose to mount the humps. “Hardened centrelines” are also used to slow down left-
turning traffic and improve the visibility of pedestrians. The “hardened centreline” treatment
consists of a hard rubber or plastic curb with bollards that are installed along a centreline at
the intersection. (More recent installations omit the bollards as these have proved expensive
to maintain and the treatment remains effective without them.) A “complete hardened
centreline” combines a “hardened centreline” with a “slow turn wedge”. “Bike Island
channelisation” is also used, consisting of a box (the “slow turn wedge”) with flexible plastic
posts or rubber speed bump, separating cyclists from motor vehicles and allowing them
to turn on the inside of the box. At these intersections, the city has documented reduced
turning speeds and fewer incidents (NYCDOT, 2021b).

The implementation of the Turn Calming programme in New York City has led to a significant
decrease of pedestrian injuries of 20%, declining faster than nearby comparable locations.
Additionally, average left-turn speeds have decreased by 53% and average right-turn speeds
have decreased by 34%. These measures have significantly increased vehicle turning safety
at low cost (NYCDOT, 2021b).

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

28 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 29
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Measure 07
Hot spot identification through video analytics in
Bellevue, Washington State
A project was developed in Bellevue (WA), United States, to identify hot spots with the
city’s network of 360degree, high-definition traffic cameras, which have been installed at
40 intersections. The video feeds were analysed to collect data on traffic volumes, road
user speeds, and near-crash traffic conflict indicators. Through a public-private partnership,
advanced artificial intelligence algorithms and video analytics were then developed to
process, analyse and identify safety issues at the intersections. Based on over 5 000 hours
of video footage, it was concluded that intersection conflicts and near-crash events are an
accurate predictor of where crashes will occur.

Video-based monitoring was also successful in detecting speeding infractions and lane
violations. Data collection from all road users and modes of transportation was better
than with GPS or Bluetooth sensor data, which only capture some road users. The cameras
are relatively easy to deploy and maintain, and videos are easy for people to review and
understand, unlike many other data collection technologies that simply provide numerical
outputs. The project shows that video analytics for hot spot identification, together with
surrogate safety analysis, can assist practitioners in identifying problematic intersections.
Video analytics can also help with diagnosing site-specific issues, selecting and implementing
improvements, and evaluating outcomes.

Hot spot identification

and treatment
With a limited budget, authorities must identify dangerous locations, called “hot spots”, where
injury risk should be addressed as a matter of priority and where road safety gains are maximum.
Hot spot identification enables countermeasures to be deployed where they are most needed,
contributing to enhanced road safety (Johnsson, Laureshyn and De Ceunynck, 2018).

Various tools and techniques exist to identify high-risk locations. Crash data can reveal an
accumulation of serious injury and fatal crashes, which calls for immediate countermeasures.
Police crash reports can reveal that crashes are caused by recurring factors such as road layout,
road surface condition or vehicle manoeuvres; in locations where such factors contribute to a
high crash risk, this information can help address risk in a proactive manner before casualties are
reported. Such data may support the mapping of high-risk locations. Surrogate safety metrics
are quantitative indicators that are designed to correlate with and predict the number of serious
and fatal crashes. Many such metrics are derived from automated video analytics that assess the
number and severity of events in which crashes are narrowly avoided.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

30 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 31
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Increasing safety of critical pedestrian crossings
in Siena, Italy
In Siena, high-risk pedestrian crossings were first identified through the analysis of collision
data, then assessed using the criteria of the European Pedestrian Crossings Assessment
(EPCA) programme. EPCA is an independent assessment process aimed at highlighting better
crossing solutions and at improving behaviour by road users. EPCA considers a broad range
of safety factors. First, it conducts a general assessment, including factors such as crossing
distance, pedestrian-vehicles conflict points, road surface, and maintenance of markings
and signs. Day- and night-time visibility of pedestrian crossings is also assessed. Finally,
accessibility for pedestrians is assessed, taking into account sidewalk width and accessibility
for persons with disabilities.

Under the programme, six sites have been assigned for priority improvement, including a
crossing on Via Armando Diaz that scored poorly on most of the safety assessment criteria.
The crossing has no traffic light and crosses a sloping two-lane road to the city centre
with high driving speeds. Its weaknesses include poor visibility for drivers and pedestrians
(because of a bend in the road) and nearby parking spaces on both sides of the road that
mask the crossing. Traffic signs are also hidden by trees. Following the assessment, several
measures are being implemented. Sidewalk width will be extended to ensure good visibility
for pedestrians and oncoming vehicles. Ramps will be created for wheelchairs on both sides
of the pedestrian crossing. Horizontal traffic markings on both sides of the road will be
installed to warn drivers of the pedestrian crossing ahead, with rumble strips installed to
slow drivers down. Lastly, a vertical and horizontal lighting system will be installed, which
is activated by a sensor detecting nearby pedestrians. Due to Covid-19, the planned safety
works have been postponed and are scheduled for spring 2022.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

32 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 33
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Measure 08
Improving the road surface for cyclists in Dublin,
Ireland
Dublin City Council is using mobile data technology to improve road surfaces for cyclists
following a project supported by the SynchroniCity initiative with support from an EU
research grant. The Council collected data with the help of See.Sense’s GPS tracking devices,
which monitor braking, swerving, collisions, and road surface conditions as well as location.
Data was also collected on speed, dwell time, collisions and near-miss events. Traditionally,
the Council is dependent on physical observation and reporting from citizens to identify poor
road conditions. The project transformed the quality and coverage of information available
to the Council.

Anonymised data from See.Sense was shared with the city and allowed planners and
engineers to improve the infrastructure where the road surface was found to be problematic.
The data was gathered through the distribution of bicycle lights that record harsh
movements due to road surface defects or emergency manoeuvres. Two hundred project
participants received the tracker bicycle lights and agreed to share the data collected by the
sensors. The project results showed which road surfaces were particularly challenging for
cyclists. The information gathered from the project was used to plan the development of
Dublin’s most recent cycle infrastructure improvements (Smart Dublin, 2019).

Improving road surfaces

Road conditions are an important part of safe street design. Potholes can be a lethal hazard
for cyclists and motorcyclists and poor surfaces discourage the use of bicycles. Regular
maintenance is essential, and improved surfaces may be required for durability in difficult
weather environments.

Maintenance of road surface friction and control of unevenness and rutting of the road
surface is essential to the safety of all road users. Depending on the scale of degradation,
defective road surfaces require resurfacing or rehabilitation and reconstruction that bring
them up to current design standards. Regular surface maintenance extends the lifetime of
pavements and should include maintenance of the quality and visibility of road markings
and signage.

The Handbook of Road Safety Measures identifies road surface rehabilitation and
reconstruction, resurfacing and regular winter maintenance as effective measures for
reducing crashes. The costs of road surface treatments depend on the specific measures.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

34 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 35
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Measure 09
The introduction of Intelligent Speed Assistance, mandatory on new vehicles models in the
EU from 2022, will facilitate intelligent use of speed limits on city streets. These systems use
a GPS-linked speed-limit database, and sometimes sign-recognition video cameras, to help
drivers keep to speed limits (ETSC, 2018). When speeds exceed regulated limits, the driver is
alerted or the speed is automatically reduced, thereby reducing the exposure of road users
to crash risks as well as the risk of speeding fines for drivers equipped with the system. Local
governments have to digitise their speed limit maps and keep them up to date in order for
these systems to deliver their full potential benefits. Stockholm’s government earmarked
funds in its 2020 budget to equip all municipal vehicles with intelligent speed adaptation and
to use geofencing to prevent them from exceeding speed limits across the city (Closer, 2020).

Improved traffic signal timing, such as leading pedestrian intervals, can reduce the risk of
pedestrian-vehicle crashes substantially, with some studies reporting up to 60% (Fayish and
Gross, 2010). Traffic signal installation at uncontrolled junctions can also reduce collisions
significantly by 29% (Ziakopoulos, Botteghi and Papadimitriou, 2017). The European
Transport Safety Council (ETSC, 2018) expects that the mass adoption and use of intelligent
speed assistance technology can reduce collisions by 30% and deaths by 20%; however,
robust safety benefits need to be evaluated in the future.

The purchase and installation of a traffic signal costs around EUR 215 000 to EUR 430 000
(WSDOT, 2021). Maintenance costs have to be considered. Costs for changing the signal
timings are low.

Traffic signalling and intelligent

transport systems
Technology plays an increasingly important role in road safety, and smart traffic signalling can
contribute to improved road safety. Innovative solutions include traffic surveillance and control
systems to provide speed control and warnings, lane departure warnings, and control and
exchange of information with urban traffic control systems (ROSEBUD, 2006).

The timing and configuration of traffic lights are particularly important. For example, leading
pedestrian intervals to indicate “walk” to pedestrians several seconds before turning traffic gets a
green light improves pedestrian safety. This measure gives pedestrians a head start, which makes
them more visible and decreases the risk of being hit by a car (Fayish and Gross, 2010).

Vehicles are becoming increasingly connected by devices that interact with each other and
the road infrastructure. This interaction is captured by the term Cooperative Intelligent
Transport Systems (C-ITS) and the data can be shared with traffic managers. Vehicle-to-vehicle
communication and vehicle-to-infrastructure communication channels are used for emergency
braking warning, distance sensing, improper-driving detection, collision-avoidance systems,
weather-related skid warnings and optimised intersection management.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

36 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 37
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Pedestrian head starts in New York City,
United States Figure 4. Traffic signals with a leading pedestrian interval

In New York City, left turns account for more than twice as many pedestrian and bicyclist
fatalities as right turns, and over three times as many serious injuries and fatalities. As
a result, The New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) has prioritised the
treatment of left-turn pedestrian and bicyclist injuries under its Vision Zero initiative. In 2015,
the city started installing over 400 Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs) at priority Intersections;
since 2016, 800 LPIs have been installed every year. In total, almost 5 000 LPI crossings have
been implemented in the city. These signals hold traffic for several seconds at the beginning
of the pedestrian “Walk” phase, allowing pedestrians or cyclists to establish their presence in
the intersection before turning traffic is permitted to proceed. Additionally, on major urban
one-way arterial roads with high pedestrian and bicycle volumes, traffic signals have been
modified to entirely separate left-turning traffic from the “walk” phase for pedestrians and
cyclists. This measure provides pedestrians and bicyclists with a conflict-free crossing while
turning traffic has to wait.

A before-and-after crash analysis of 104 intersections with LPIs found that left-turn
pedestrian and bicycle injuries declined by 14% and the number of left-turning pedestrians
and bicyclists killed and seriously injured declined by 56%. Intersections where green lights
for motor vehicles and vulnerable road users have been split experienced a reduction of 33%
for left-turn pedestrian and bicyclist injuries and a 25% reduction for total pedestrian and
bicyclist injuries. This simple and invisible treatment is cheap and scalable and has delivered
Leading pedestrian intervals hold all through and turning traffic for a number of seconds after
tangible road safety improvements.
the pedestrian “Walk” signal begins (above). When the traffic signal turns green, turning vehicles
must yield to pedestrians already in the crosswalk (below).

Source: NACTO (n.d)

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

38 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 39
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Further reading References
The resources below can support cities with evidence-based policy making for enhanced Anciaes, P.R., Jones, P. and Mindell, J.S. (2016), “Community Severance: Where Is It Found and at What
road safety. They provide detailed information on road safety measures that can be Cost?”, Transport Reviews, 36:3, 293-317, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2015.1077286.
implemented in urban areas.
APTA (2016), The Hidden Tra¬ffic Safety Solution: Public Transportation, American Public
BIKESAFE, Bicycle Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System, Transportation Association,https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/Resources/resources/
http://www.pedbikesafe.org/BIKESAFE/index.cfm. reportsandpublications/Documents/APTA-Hidden-Traffic-Safety-Solution-Public-Transportation.
pdf (accessed 08 November 2021).
Elvik, R., Høye, A., Vaa, T. and Sørensen, M. (2009), The Handbook of Road Safety Measures,
Second Edition, Emerald Group Publishing, Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo, Norway, Botteghi, G., Ziakopoulos, A., Papadimitriou, E. (2017), Convert at-grade junction to
https://doi.org/10.1108/9781848552517. interchange, European Road Safety Decision Support System, developed by the H2020 project
SafetyCube, https://www.roadsafety-dss.eu/assets/data/pdf/synopses/Convert_atgrade_
iRAP (2010), Road Safety Toolkit, http://toolkit.irap.org/. junction_to_interchange_20102017.pdf (accessed 08 November 2021).

National Association of City Transportation Officials, Urban Street Design Guide, Carey, C. (2020), “Barcelona to expand ‘superblocks’ to city centre district”, https://cities-today.
https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/. com/barcelona-to-expand-superblocks-to-city-centre-district (accessed 08 November 2021).

PIARC, WRA Road Safety Manual, https://roadsafety.piarc.org/en. City of Bristol (2014), “Pedestrian Guardrails”, https://www.trafficchoices.co.uk/traffic-
schemes/guardrails.shtml (accessed 08 November 2021).
PEDSAFE, Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System,
http://www.pedbikesafe.org/PEDSAFE/index.cfm. Closer (2020), “Speeders in Stockholm to be stopped with geofencing”, https://closer.lindholmen.
se/en/news/speeders-stockholm-be-stopped-geofencing (accessed 08 November 2021).
SafetyCube, EU Road Safety Decision Support System,
https://www.roadsafety-dss.eu/. Davis, A. (2020), School Street Closures and Traffic Displacement: A literature review and
semi-structured interviews, Transport Research Institute, Edinburgh Napier University, https://
WRI Ross Center for Sustainable Cities, Cities Safer By Design, www.napier.ac.uk/~/media/images/news/school-street-closures/school-streets-closure-traffic-
https://publications.wri.org/citiessafer/. displacement-literature-review-final2.pdf.

Deegan, B (2018), “Light Protection of Cycle Lanes: Best Practices”, Discussion Paper,
International Transport Forum, Paris.

Duduta, N., Adriazola, C., Hidalgo, D., Lindau, L.A. and Jaffe, R. (2012), “Understanding the Road
Safety Impact of High Performance BRT and Busway Design Characteristics”,

Transportation Research Record 2317: 8–14, http://www.brt.cl/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/

Duduna-et-al-2012.pdf.

EMTA (2020), “EMTA Barometer 2020”, https://www.emta.com/IMG/pdf/2018_emta_

barometer-200526.pdf (accessed 08 November 2021).

ETSC (2018), “Briefing: Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA)”, European Transport Security Council,
https://etsc.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018-05-ISA-briefing_updated-Nov-18.pdf (accessed 08
November 2021).

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

40 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 41
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 European Commission (2018), “Speed and Speed Management”, European Road Safety Kröyer, H. R. G., Jonsson, T., Varhelyi, A. (2014), “Relative fatality risk curve to describe the
Observatory, https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/sites/default/files/pdf/ effect of change in the impact speed on fatality risk of pedestrians struck by a motor vehicle”,
ersosynthesis2018-speedspeedmanagement.pdf (accessed 08 November 2021). Accident Analysis and Prevention, 62, pp. 143-152, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.09.007.

Fayish, A. C. and Gross, F. (2010), “Safety Effectiveness of Leading Pedestrian Intervals Evaluated Li, H. and Graham, D. (2016), “Quantifying the causal effects of 20mph zones on road casualties
by a Before–After Study with Comparison Groups”, Transportation Research Record, 2198(1), in London via doubly robust estimation”, Accident Analysis and Prevention, Volume 93, pp. 65
pp. 15–22, https://doi.org/10.3141%2F2198-03. 74, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.04.007.

Goldenbeld, Ch. and Schermers, G. (2017), “Creation of bypass roads, European Road Safety Lichtman-Sadot, S. (2019), “Can public transportation reduce accidents? Evidence from the
Decision Support System”, developed by the H2020 project SafetyCube, https://www. introduction of late-night buses in Israeli cities”, Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol. 74,
roadsafety-dss.eu/assets/data/pdf/synopses/Creation_of_bypass_roads_24052017.pdf https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2018.11.009.
(accessed 08 November 2021).
NACTO (n.d.), National Association of City Transportation Officials, website, https://nacto.org/
Harkey, D.L. and Stewart, J.R. (1997), “Evaluation of shared-use facilities for bicycles and motor publication/urban-street-design-guide/intersection-design-elements/traffic-signals/leading-
vehicles”, Transportation Research Record 1578, 111–118, Paper No. 970840, https://doi. pedestrian-interval/ (accessed 24 November 2021).
org/10.3141%2F1578-14.
NYCDOT (2021), “14th Street Busway”, New York City Department of Transportation, https://
ITF (2016), Zero Road Deaths and Serious Injuries: Leading a Paradigm Shift to a Safe System, www1.nyc.gov/html/brt/html/routes/14th-street.shtml (accessed 08 November 2021).
OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789282108055-en
NYCDOT (2021b), “Turn Calming Program”, New York City Department of Transportation, https://
ITF (2018), “Speed and Crash Risk”, IRTAD,https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/ www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/pedestrians/turn-calming.shtml (accessed 08 November 2021).
speed-crash-risk.pdf.
Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System (2013), “Sidewalks, Walkways
ITF (2019), “Road Safety in European Cities: Performance Indicators and Governance Solutions”, and Paved Shoulders”, http://www.pedbikesafe.org/PEDSAFE/countermeasures_detail.
International Transport Forum Policy Papers, No. 67, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.itf- cfm?CM_NUM=1 (accessed 08 November 2021).
oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/road-safety-european-cities-performance-indicators.pdf.
Pompeo, E. and Abdulsamad M. (n.d.), ,Measure What Matters: Reclaiming Space for
ITF (2020a), “Monitoring Progress in Urban Road Safety”, International Transport Forum Policy Pedestrians in Downtown Fortaleza”,https://globaldesigningcities.org/2019/12/10/metrics-
Papers, No. 79, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/ matter (accessed 08 November 2021).
monitoring-progress-urban-road-safety.pdf.
ROSEBUD (2006), Examples of assessed road safety measures, Road Safety and Environmental
ITF (2020b), “Best Practice for Urban Road Safety: Case Studies”, International Transport Forum Benefit-Cost and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Use in Decision-Making, https://ec.europa.
Policy Papers, No. 76, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/ eu/transport/road_safety/sites/default/files/pdf/projects_sources/rosebud_examples.pdf
docs/best-practice-urban-road-safety.pdf. (accessed 08 November 2021).

Jacobsen, P.L. (2003), “Safety in Numbers: More Walkers and Bicyclists, Safer Walking and Santacreu, A. (2018), “Safer City Streets Global Benchmarking for Urban Road Safety”
Bicycling”, Injury Prevention 9: 205–9, https://doi.org/10.1136/ip.9.3.205. International Transport Forum Working Document, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.itf-
oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/safer-city-streets-global-benchmarking-urban-road-safety.pdf.
Johnsson, C., Laureshyn, A. and De Ceunynck, T. (2018), “In search of surrogate safety indicators
for vulnerable road users: a review of surrogate safety indicators”, Transport Schwartz, S. (2020), “14th Street Transit and Truck Priority Project”, https://static1.squarespace.
com/static/5bc63eb90b77bd20c50c516c/t/5ec421b14abb5b1fa619df9e/1589912002654/14+S
Reviews, 38:6, 765-785, https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2018.1442888. treet+Report+2+Winter+2020.pdf (accessed 18 November 2021).
Koorey, G., Wilke, A., Aussendorf, J. (2013), Assessment of the Effectiveness of Narrow Separators
on Cycle Lanes, Dunedin, New Zealand: IPENZ Transportation Group Conference 2013.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

42 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 43
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Soteropoulos, A., and Stadlbauer, S. (2017), “Convert 4-Leg Junction to Staggered Junction, U.S. Department of Transportation (2020), “Intersection Safety”, https://highways.dot.gov/
European Road Safety Decision Support System”, developed by the H2020 project SafetyCube, research/research-programs/safety/intersection-safety (accessed 08 November 2021).
https://www.roadsafety-dss.eu/assets/data/pdf/synopses/
WRI (2018), Sustainable and Safe: A Vision and Guidance for Zero Road Deaths, Ross Center
Convert_4LegJunction_to_Staggered_Junction_03052017.pdf (accessed 08 November 2021). for Sustainable Cities with the Global Road Safety Facility, https://www.wri.org/research/
Soteropoulos, A. and Stadlbauer, S. (2017b), “Convert junction to roundabout, European sustainable-and-safe-vision-and-guidance-zero-road-deaths.
Road Safety Decision Support System”, developed by the H2020 project SafetyCube,
https://www.roadsafety-dss.eu/assets/data/pdf/synopses/Convert_junction_to_ WRI (2013), Saving Lives With Sustainable Transport, EMBARQ, https://wrirosscities.org/sites/
roundabout_03052017.pdf (accessed 08 November 2021). default/files/Saving-Lives-with-Sustainable-Transport-EMBARQ.pdf.

Soteropoulos, A., Stadlbauer, S. (2017c), “Sight Distance Treatments, European Road Safety WSDOT (2021), “Traffic signals”, Washington State Department of Transportation, https://
Decision Support System”, developed by the H2020 project SafetyCube, https://www. wsdot.wa.gov/Operations/Traffic/signals.htm#:~:text=It%20costs%20the%20taxpayer%20
roadsafety-dss.eu/assets/data/pdf/synopses/Sight_Distance_Treatments_02052017.pdf %24250%2C000,%2C%20time%20delay%2C%20and%20accidents (accessed 14 October 2021).
(accessed 08 November 2021).
World Road Association (PIARC) (2019), “Infrastructure Safety Management: Policies,
Smart Dublin (2019), “Smart Bike Lights – Support Safer Cycling Infrastructure”, https:// Standards, Guidelines and tools”, Road Safety Manual, Chapter 9, https://roadsafety.piarc.org/
smartdocklands.ie/project/smart-bike-lights-synchronicity (accessed 08 November 2021). en/planning-design-operation/infrastructure-management (accessed 08 November 2021).

Shackel, S.C. and Parkin J. (2014), “Influence of road markings, lane widths and driver behaviour Ziakopoulos, A., Botteghi, G., Papadimitriou, E., (2017), “Traffic signal installation, European
on proximity and speed of vehicles overtaking cyclists”, Accident Analysis and Prevention, 73 Road Safety Decision Support System”, developed by the H2020 project SafetyCube, https://
(2014), pp. 100 108, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2014.08.015. www.roadsafety-dss.eu/assets/data/pdf/synopses/Traffic_signal_installation_20102017.pdf
(accessed 08 November 2021).
Stockholm Declaration and 3rd Global Ministerial Conference on Road Safety, https://www.
roadsafetysweden.com (accessed 08 November 2021).

Seya, H., Kazuki Yoshida, K. and Inoue, S. (2021), “Verification of Zone-30-policy effect on
accident reduction using propensity score matching method for multiple treatments”, Case
Studies on Transport Policy, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp. 693-702, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cstp.2021.03.007.

Transport for London (2017), “Collisions Before and After the Removal of Pedestrian Railings at 70
Junctions and Crossings on the Transport for London Road Network”, Photo credits: cover Lélio Ivo/AMC; p. 8 SEMOVI/CDMX; p. 9 adapted from WRI (2018);
https://content.tfl.gov.uk/pedestrian-railings-removal-report.pdf (accessed 08 November 2021). p.10 Paulo Winz/NACTO-GDCI; p. 11 Camden Council, Urban Movement; p. 12 Patrick
Shutterstock/ Shutterstock; p. 13 Authors (ITF); p. 14 Secretaría de Movilidad de Bogotá; p. 15
Transport for London (2013), “Safe Streets for London, The Road Safety Action Plan for London” Pedro Alves Nave/CML, Pedro Alves Nave/CML; p. 17 Willy Barton/Shutterstock; p. 18 Jeremy
2020, http://content.tfl.gov.uk/safe-streets-for-london.pdf (accessed 08 November 2021). Menzies/SFMTA Photo Archive; p. 19 Barcelona City Council; p. 21 Américo Simas/CML, p.21
Américo Simas/CML; p. 22 SEMOVI, CDMX; p. 23 NYCDOT; p. 24 WRI, based on data from
Transport for London (2018), “Transport for London Budget 2018/2019”, http://content.tfl.gov. TRANSMILENIO S.A.; p. 25 Secretaría de Movilidad de Bogotá; p. 26 Tupungato/Shutterstock; p.
uk/transport-for-london-budget-2018-19.pdf (accessed 18 November 2021). 27 Lélio Ivo/AMC; p.29 NYCDOT; p. 29 NYCDOT; p.30 Have a nice day Photo/Shutterstock p.31
Together For Safer Roads; p. 33 Estherpoon/Shutterstock, Enrico Pagliari/ACI; p. 34 Volodymyr_
Urban Sustainability Exchange (n.d.), “TransMilenio Bus Rapid Transit System”, https://use. Shtun/Shutterstock; p. 35 See.Sense, See.Sense; p. 36 Vereshchagin Dmitry/Shutterstock; p. 37
metropolis.org/case-studies/transmilenio-bus-rapid-transit-system#casestudydetail (accessed Blue Planet Studio/Shutterstock; p. 39 NACTO, NACTO
08 November 2021).

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

44 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC 45
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS
 Road Safety in Cities
Street Design and Traffic
Management Solutions
This booklet presents measures that
effectively reduce road traffic deaths and
serious injuries in cities. It covers urban street
design, traffic management and improving
mobility options. Measures are illustrated with
examples reported by cities collaborating in
the ITF Safer City Streets network and include
information on cost and effectiveness.

ROAD SAFETY IN CITIES

46 STREET DESIGN AND TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS