No Community Should Have To Wait a Year or More To Take Action After a Traffic Death
(Source: Flickr/Tony Webster.)
The lack of urgency shown by local officials in response to dangerous conditions on their streets is a disturbing recurring theme we are seeing since we launched the Crash Analysis Studio. This pattern is not unique to the horrific crashes nominated in the Crash Analysis Studio. Rather, it’s a consequence of standard practice in managing public streets. When bad things happen, we need to be prepared to take immediate action.
I understand some of the reasoning behind the “cautious pause” approach of the typical city engineer. Public streets are a huge financial investment used by all residents. When an improvement is proposed, it makes sense to fully study all the possible outcomes on paper before you mobilize a bulldozer or roll asphalt. The intent of this approach is well intentioned so we can do it right the first time.
At Strong Towns, we describe this as a top-down approach, one which is very orderly. Each request to modify or improve a street is reviewed in the order it is received. Regardless of the scale or complexity of the request, all of the same thorough studies and reports are completed. For example, something as small as the request to stripe a crosswalk is reviewed with the same methodical process that would be used to remove or add travel lanes.
When unsafe road conditions contribute to a person’s death, this practice of thorough deliberation becomes a barrier to taking prompt, appropriate action. We are discovering through the Crash Analysis Studio that it frequently takes months to complete a formal investigation of a crash. The more horrific the crash, the longer the process.
If the goal of an investigation is to assign blame, it is worth the wait. The approach of this analysis and the review of these crashes should be thorough, as the outcome of these reports will forever impact all those directly involved in the crash.
But what if you have a different objective? What if the objective is not to assign blame, but to prevent a similar type of crash in the future?
If we want to prevent repeating another crash, we should not wait months or years to take action. Improvements to make a street safer should be implemented within days or weeks. These horrific crashes need to be assigned a level of urgency from both the public and the city engineer. The objective should be prevention so that this incident is not repeated.
Doing the Next Smallest Thing
We have seen instances where a community responded to a crash by immediately doing the next smallest thing they could to prevent further loss of life. For instance, in Richmond, Virginia, where Mahrokh Khan was struck and killed while crossing an intersection at the Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) campus, the university responded the very next day with a communication campaign to all university students and staff. VCU Police increased traffic and parking enforcement around campus. Within a week, the VCU Police developed an creative outreach program in which officers dressed as referees blew whistles and threw flags at pedestrians who tried to cross the street outside the marked crosswalk. These actions were immediate responses to increase the safety of the VCU student body.
These steps are all a great start to raise awareness through activism, but they do not address the underlying design issues we found when we examined these crashes. In fact, in the Richmond Crash Analysis Studio, we found through our speed study that 30 days after this enforcement campaign, 15% of drivers continue to exceed 32 mph, which is well in excess of the posted 25 mph.
If prevention of future harm is our objective, what is the next smallest thing we can do today?
We created the Crash Analysis Studio to model how communities can create a platform to ask and answer that question. The purpose of each studio is not to assign blame for a crash, but to discuss the factors that contributed to a crash. The panelists include broad expertise of local and national experts and they have a focus on prevention. The panelists share observations in an hour-long session. Through a process of mutual discovery, the participants are able to identify and communicate the contributing factors to the crash, and provide immediate and long-term recommendations.
The immediate recommendations are actions that can be implemented within days or weeks. These recommendations are the next smallest step or action that can be taken by a local community to eliminate the factors of a crash and to prevent the next crash. I would describe these as the actions that a public works or street crew could undertake through their normal street maintenance duties with paint, cones, or signs. Once installed, the changes could be evaluated for effectiveness in eliminating contributing factors, such as excessive speed.
The most interesting observation I have witnessed through the Crash Analysis Studio is the high level of awareness and technical aptitude our local experts have for roadway design. This expertise is not limited to the city engineer’s office. The residents and business owners of these communities where crashes have occurred often have many common sense ideas that could be implemented in a matter of 24 hours to make these streets safer. They have a sense of urgency and the clear objective to prevent another crash, and are not bogged down in a system of blame.
This is a different type of advocacy. The Crash Analysis Studio shifts the conversation from blame to prevention. When we turn our sights to prevention, we gain the sense of urgency we need. And we identify actions that can be undertaken right now. For example, we need to prevent drivers from making a right turn on red, so we will take actions to make drivers aware they cannot make a right turn on red. This raises awareness to the broader community by showing and explaining the factors that contributed to a crash and opens the conversation up to exploring solutions.
Prevention is a conversation we can all initiate in our communities with our neighbors, at our local coffee shop, and with our coworkers. This is a humble discussion that builds a coalition with the focus on making your community safer. Strong Towns has committed to develop the basic tools and simple procedures to host your Crash Analysis Studio. I will be hosting “How To Start Your Own Crash Analysis Studio” at the Strong Towns National Gathering (May 30–31, in Charlotte, North Carolina). This session will introduce the tools and best practices from the studio, as well as share some lessons we have learned during the program, so far.
Edward Erfurt is the Director of Community Action at Strong Towns. He is a trained architect and passionate urban designer with over 20 years of public- and private-sector experience focused on the management, design, and successful implementation of development and placemaking projects that enrich the tapestry of place. He believes in community-focused processes that are founded on diverse viewpoints, a concern for equity, and guided through time-tested, traditional town-planning principles and development patterns that result in sustainable growth with the community character embraced by the communities which he serves.