Improving W&OD Trail Safety: A Stakeholder Workshop

Improving W&OD Trail Safety:A Stakeholder Workshop

Algonkian Regional Park47001 Fairway Drive, Sterling, VA

Friday, April 11, 2014, 10 a.m. – 4 p.m.

Hosted by the Northern Virginia Regional Park AuthorityFacilitated by the University of Virginia Institute for Environmental Negotiation

Improving W&OD Trail Safety | A Stakeholder Workshop

MEDIA CONTACT

Brian Bauer(703) 352-5900

Marketing & Communications Administrator Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority

REPORT CONTENT AND DESIGN TEAM

Tanya Denckla Cobb, Patrick Torborg, Natalie Raffol, Kelly WilderUniversity of Virginia Institute for Environmental Negotiation

SMALL GROUP FACILITATION TEAM

Tanya Denckla Cobb, Institute for Environmental NegotiationLaura Grape, Northern Virginia Soil and Water Conservation District

Alma Abdul-Hadi Jadallah, Kommon DenominatorUrsula Lemanski, National Park Service

Natalie Raffol, Institute for Environmental NegotiationMichelle Vigen, 18 Lake Creative

Kristina Weaver, Institute for Environmental Negotiation Kelly Wilder, Institute for Environmental Negotiation


Executive Summary Page ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 5

Purpose of the Workshop ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 6

Issue Assessment ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 7

Workshop Participants ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 9

Workshop Process ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 11 Trail Safety Presentations ..... . . . . . . . . . . Page 12 Social Marketing Presentation ..... . . . Page 13 Situation Assessment Findings ..... . . Page 13 Carousel Discussions ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 13 Workshop Closing ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 14

Outcomes ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 15

Overarching Themes from Discussions ..... Page 20

Conclusion ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 22

Appendices A. Workshop Agenda ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 23 B. PowerPoint Presentations ..... . . . . . . Page 25 C. Small Group Discussions ..... . . . . . . . . Page 29 D. Situation Assessment ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 44 E. Workshop Participants ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 62 F. Instant Polling Results ..... . . . . . . . . . . . Page 64 G. Workshop Evaluation Results ..... . Page 66


Table of Contents

Executive Summary

The W&OD trail, spanning 45 miles from Northern Virginia near Washington D.C. into rural Loudoun County, is a popular recreation-al amenity, commuter corridor, equestrian path, and fitness resource for many diverse user groups. As the region has grown and become more developed, the trail has become not only more popular, but more congested, posing nu-merous safety concerns. User conflicts along the trail and at intersections between trail traffic and automobile traffic have occured. The Northern Virginia Regional Park Author-ity (NVRPA), which owns and manages the trail, has been working to improve safety for years and has initiated numerous studies that consider best practices for trail design and maintenance.

In 2013, the General Assembly passed a law enabling Northern Virginia jurisdictions to adopt their own ordinance requiring bikes to stop at stop signs on the W&OD. Both NVRPA and localities now have the ability to require a stop by law, which threatens to enable a patchwork of varying rules related to inter-sections along the trail. NVRPA believes this would be confusing for trail users and could have an adverse impact on trail safety. This

situation was the impetus for NVRPA contract-ing with the University of Virginia's Institute for Environmental Negotiation to convene a stakeholder workshop, with the goal of developing a set of priority recommendations to guide enhancements to the trail and other methods for improving safety.

The 52 participants of the workshop met in small groups to discuss specific strategies and ultimately voted on each strategy as a large group, in terms of its effectiveness for improving safety and feasibility for implemen-tation. There was general agreement among participants that all proposed strategies could effectively improve trail safety, although par-ticipants had divergent views on which could best be implemented in one to three years. In addition, five overarching priority recommen-dations emerged that will provide guidance to NVRPA and its partners. Workshop attendees expressed appreciation that NVRPA sought stakeholder input on this important issue.


Purpose of the Workshop

Safety has escalated as a concern on the W&OD Trail as the Northern Virginia region continues to experience growth and the trail becomes more popular with greater numbers and types of users. Bicyclists, pedestrians, and others can experience conflicts with each other and with vehicles traveling on intersecting roadways, raising concerns for trail users, NVRPA, and its partner groups and agencies. Between 2006 and 2009, NVRPA instituted a number of safety improvements with a focus on intersections but also on overall trail design, with an eye toward improving safety. In 2009, the nationally recognized firm Toole Design audited the im-plemented intersection improvements, which included rumble strips, "stop ahead" pavement markings, and sight line upgrades. The finding of this audit noted that the intersection approach treatments meet or exceed Ameri-can Association of State Highway and Trans-portation Officials (AASHTO) and Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) re-quirements for trail approaches to roadways. Also noted was that NVRPA's application of intersection standards is generally uniform-ly applied on trail approaches to roadways throughout the entire length of the W&OD.

New developments arose in 2013 surrounding stop signs, which had been installed on the trail for over 30 years, and questions of whether the signs are legally enforceable. The General Assembly passed a law enabling Northern Virginia jurisdictions to adopt ordinances allowing enforcement of W&OD stop signs. In response, NVRPA requested from the Attorney General an opinion about whether trail users are

required to come to a stop at current trail stop signs. The Attorney General advised that NVRPA has the ability to institute regulations along the trail that have the force of law. In effect, then, both the individual localities and NVRPA have an independent ability to legally make stop signs enforceable.

In light of continuing concerns about safety, coupled with this ambiguous legal situation NVRPA feared this could lead to a piecemeal approach to enforcement along the trail, the NVRPA Board requested that staff seek stake-holder input. Improving W&OD Trail Safety: A Stakeholder Workshop emerged from this request, with the goal of developing a set of priority recommendations to guide the trail into the future and ensure it remains a safe and welcoming community asset.


Issue Assessment

Key Interest Group Organization Represented by Interviewee

CyclingFairfax Advocates for Better Bicycling

Bike Loudoun

SafetyLoudoun County Sheriff’s Office

Falls Church Police Department

Local Government Town of Herndon

Transportation and Other PlannersVirginia Department of Transportation

Fairfax County

Other Trail Users and Groups Safe Routes to School Coordinator

Friends of the W&OD FOWOD

1. Legal interpretation of intersections

One major trend across interviews was the confusion over safety-related laws and their enforcement. Different groups, such as cyclists and law enforcement, hold conflicting beliefs about what safety signals such as stop signs mean along the trail. Clarification of the legal interpretation of stop signs and expectations at intersections are crucial issues along the trail for all user groups. A number of inter-viewees expressed the hope that a consistent interpretation could be applied and enforced in all localities.

2. Enforcement

Many interviewees felt that increased enforce-ment would assist in clarifying the "rules of the road." Despite the sense from most inter-viewees that additional enforcement would quickly lead to increased safety on the trail, most also recognized that the barriers to in-creased enforcement (mainly lack of resourc-es) were significant and likely insurmountable.

3. User trail education

Virtually all interviewees emphasized the urgent need for educating all user groups on safety rules and behavior. Four areas of focus were highlighted.

a. Children and the elderly

In preparation for the workshop, IEN conducted a detailed assessment of the issues surrounding safety on the W&OD. The results of this assessment are includ-ed in the report Improving Safety on the W&OD Trail Summary of Findings, in Appendix D. An overview of this report is included here.

NVRPA first provided IEN with the names of nine people familiar with safety issues on the W&OD, representing six key interests, with whom to conduct in-depth interviews (see table below). A robust list of safety concerns and strat-egies emerged from these conversations, which helped to inform the remainder of the process. Overall, three top findings emerged:

Several interviewees emphasized the importance of educating users about the unpredictable nature of children: they make sudden, erratic movements; they are likely to not stay in the correct travel lane; they will run out onto the trail without warning; and they may not understand certain practices of cyclists such as calling out "on your left/right." Similarly, the elder-ly may be unsteady on their feet, become afraid when cyclists pass by them at a fast speed, and interpret the "on your left/right" call as a request for them to move to the left or right. Parts of the trail pass through schools and a community center, where these user groups cross the trail frequently.


Overall, there was wide agreement on which strategies would be most effective for improv-ing safety. Based on the survey results, the strategies with the greatest opportunity to improve safety are described below.

1. Physical design of intersections

Improved physical design of intersections includes strategies like making vehicle cross-ings with the trail more visible, implementing advanced warning signals like a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB), and improving the responsiveness of activated signals. De-sign features to increase intersection visibility include pavement markings like "stop ahead," rumble strips before intersections, and zig-zag marks painted on the road as an intersection approaches.

2. Physical design of the trail in between intersections

Strategies along the trail include creating separate lanes for cyclists and pedestrians and implementing speed zones through special asphalt treatments where heightened awareness is required.

3. Community outreach and education

Improving safety requires behavioral change, which the majority of respondents believe can be accomplished through community outreach and education. Trail users can be educated on safety rules through information disseminated by groups, clubs, and leaders of charity bike rides. Car drivers can be educated through increased attention to biking in driver's edu-cation programs.

4. Developing a uniform ordinance or regulation to reduce confusion and foster consistent behavior

A uniform ordinance or regulation would streamline laws across jurisdictions to reduce confusion, foster consistent user behavior, and enable consistent law enforcement. The most important safety issue around intersections is that vehicles and trail users behave in consis-tent and predictable ways. Consistent rules for what trail users should do at stop signs will greatly improve safety.

Many users are unclear on what behavior is expected of them due to lack of consis tent signage and messaging along the trail. Rules about cyclists passing in the middle of a lane, unplugging from ear buds while on the trail, or leash laws for dogs, are examples of what could be disseminated in safety pamphlets or through community fairs throughout all jurisdictions to communicate the same safety rules and etiquette.

b. Etiquette and "rules of engagement"

c. Speed

The trail is used for many different pur-poses, which creates a wide range of ex-pectations about speed and, in particular, a difference of opinion between those using the trail for training or commuting and those using it for recreational purposes. All user groups felt that cars are also an issue, and that safety could be improved by making drivers more aware that they are approaching an intersection and by using different cues to force cars to slow down as they approach the trail.

d. Community and respect

Since the trail is an amenity for multiple communities and many different types of users, interviewees generally advocated for strategies that would increase commu-nication and understanding, arguing that it is vital for all user groups to respect one another to achieve a safe environment.

In addition to these overall findings, the stakeholder telephone interviews resulted in the identification of 44 different possi-ble physical and cultural strategies for en-hancing safety. NVRPA worked with IEN to narrow these down to 28 possible safety enhancement strategies, which were then used to construct an online survey open to the public. Respondents were polled about their background and use of the trail and were asked to rank the effectiveness of specific physical and cultural safety strat-egies. The response rate was excellent, with almost 1,700 people completing the survey.


Workshop Participants

NVRPA invited 115 stakeholders from the cy-cling, public safety, local government, planning, and parks and recreation communities, as well as trail user groups, the Friends of the W&OD (FOWOD) leadership, and NVRPA staff and Board members. Over a quarter of those who attended were from local government. NVRPA staff and law enforcement were also heavily represent-ed, with the balance of participants reporting affiliations with cycling, parks and recreation, the NVRPA Board, planning, FOWOD, community advising, and other communities.

A total of 52 people attended the workshop, including NVRPA staff. Park staff provided essential information on trail history and infrastructure and insight into conflicts be-tween users. Their active participation was essential because of their stake in the outcome and interest in enhancing safety on the trail. The largest proportion of participants lived in Fairfax County, though a sizable number also hailed from Loudoun, with the remainder of the W&OD Trail area fairly well represented. Almost three-quarters reported using the trail most often for cycling, either for recreation, commut-ing, or fitness training. A remaining quarter of participants used the trail primarily for walking or jogging, with a small number of horseback riders and other users. Over half of all types of users access the trail for recreation, relaxation, or fitness training. Falls Church to Reston was the most popular segment of the trail among workshop participants, but all other segments were represented as well.


9%11%

13%

30%

9%

2%

22%

4%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Place of Residence


Workshop Process

The workshop was designed to be a highly participatory effort at eliciting priority recommendations for improving safety on the W&OD. The workshop agenda can be found in Appendix A. The morning program offered presentations about trail safety, intersection studies, social marketing, and the pre-work-shop assessment process. Following lunch, participants rotated between seven stations where they discussed different categories of safety strategies in detail.

Opening the day, NVRPA Board Chair Brian Knapp praised attendees for gathering to dis-cuss an amenity they are passionate about, that serves over two million users each year. NVRPA Executive Director Paul Gilbert then provided an overview of the safety challenges facing the trail and its diverse user base. He articulated the goal of emerging from the workshop with a set of priority recommendations for improving trail safety. IEN Associate Director Tanya Denck-la Cobb and Senior Associate Kelly Wilder ex-plained the day's agenda and led the group in introductions and icebreakers through the use of computer-based instant polling.


Trail Safety Presentations

NVRPA Director of Park Operations Chris Pau-ley gave an overview of eight recent studies, explaining how the Park Authority has been responding to the rising need for enhancing safety on the trail:

• Intersection standards (2008)• Intersection audit (2009)• Trail lighting policy research (2011)• Existing Conditions Report (2012)• Six Intersection Priority Study (2012)• Belmont Ridge Road RRFB pilot (2013-

2014)• Parallel pedestrian trail assessment

(2013-2014)• Sterling Boulevard & West Street crossing

design (2014)

Pauley pointed out that NVRPA does not con-sider itself to be the only expert on trail safety and sought out the opinions of the communi-ty, local jurisdictions, and law enforcement in conducting these studies.

Pauley then turned the presentation over to Bill Schultheiss, Principle Engineer of Toole Design, the firm that assisted NVRPA with many of its studies over the past years. Schultheiss explained in detail the results of the Six Intersection Study, in which Toole ob-served user behavior at six urban and subur-ban trail intersections, using field evaluations, 24-hour video counts and analysis, trail user surveys and interviews, and speed measure-ments. The study found the following:

• Trail users overestimate how long they wait at intersections by almost double, increasing the likelihood that they will engage in risky behavior to cross.

• Signal timing at some signalized intersec-tions can be improved.

• Trail users find stop signs on the trail to be confusing.

The study made a number of general recom-mendations:

• Intersection sightlines should be im-proved.

• Higher speed roads should have actuated devices to alert automobile traffic about an approaching trail crossing (e.g., signals or RRFBs, rectangular rapid flashing beacons).

• In some locations, crossing islands or medians should be considered.

• Signals in urban areas should be re-timed to allow more trail-crossing or "protected" time.

• Educational efforts could be expanded.

Workshop attendees asked a number of questions about the study's methodology and findings, to which Pauley and Schultheiss responded.


IEN Situation Assessment Findings

Kelly Wilder presented IEN's findings on trail safety that emerged from telephone interviews and the online survey. This issue assessment is explained in detail above. Workshop attendees were offered another op-portunity to ask questions, and many respond-ed by discussing the perceived ambiguity of rules and etiquette and hazardous conditions experienced on the trail. One participant not-ed in particular the need to reach out to the equestrian community when discussing safety.

Workshop participants then broke for lunch before returning for the afternoon "carousel" discussions.

Carousel Discussions

After lunch, participants broke into groups and rotated through seven facilitated discus-sion stations:

1. Speed Zones/Slow Zones2. Separate Travel Lanes for Pedestrians and

Cyclists3. Visual Improvements at Trail Crossings

for Drivers and for Trail Users4. Signal Timing Adjustments5. Education about the Trail for both Motor-

ists and Trail Users 6. Outreach/Marketing to Promote "Trail

Etiquette"7. Legal Framework around Intersections

During each rotation, participants introduced themselves, and the facilitator reviewed the decision criteria of safety, effectiveness, and feasibility, which had been developed by NVR-PA in advance of the workshop.

The goal of the small group discussions was to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of the top safety strategies. The online survey had tested 28 safety strategies, selected from the 44 ideas proposed during stakeholder interviews. From the online survey results, NVRPA selected 12 of the most supported strategies for further discussion at the work-shop. These top 12 strategies were divided among the seven discussion stations. At each station, a facilitator reviewed the de-

Community-based Social Marketing Presentation: Facilitating a Safe and Sustainable Trail Community

Michelle Vigen of 18 Lake Creative contin-ued the workshop by offering an overview of the emerging field of social marketing and ideas about how it could apply to improving trail safety. She explained that traditional information-intensive outreach efforts inform and raise awareness but do little to change behavior. Vigen suggested that communi-ty-based social marketing, a framework that uses psychology and social marketing to af-fect behavior change, should be considered by organizations as an alternative to these tradi-tional outreach efforts. Three strategies were suggested as being particularly promising: 1. Creating social norms capitalizes on the

human "herd mentality" by making a desired behavior more visible, and hence more likely to be emulated by others.

2. Creating visual or other prompts that are close in time and place to a desired be-havior makes it easier for people to make good decisions.

3. Finding ways for people to model good behavior will show others exactly how to undertake the desired behavior, again making it easier for them to adopt it.

Participants asked whether Vigen had ex-amples of social marketing efforts aimed at changing trail user behavior, and she respond-ed that there is little on the topic in the liter-ature. Others provided insight into the area's cycling and driving cultures and encouraged more work in this area. Overall, participants were intrigued and thought social marketing offered great promise for enhancing safety on the trail.


Workshop Closing

In closing the workshop, Paul Gilbert thanked participants for taking time to attend and to contribute to NVRPA's efforts to improve safe-ty on the W&OD Trail. For next steps, IEN told participants that its workshop report would be completed shortly. NVRPA will bring the results of the workshop to its next Board of Directors meeting and will pursue implemen-tation of priority recommendations. In re-sponse to questions, IEN agreed that it would list participants in the workshop without their contact information. IEN's final workshop re-port, along with its situation assessment, will be posted on the NVRPA website for public access.

cision criteria developed by NVRPA in advance of the workshop. Participants were guided through a series of questions to identify ways to improve each strategy to make it as effec-tive as possible. They were asked to provide specifics, where appropriate, such as particu-lar times, places, or ways in which a strategy might be implemented. Finally, they were also asked to identify the pros and cons ("clear sailing" and "red flags") of the strategy.

Seven rounds of discussion enabled each participant to contribute to each discussion station. After the seventh round, participants came back together, and the small group facilitators reported back to the full group on how participants suggested improving each strategy. After each report, participants voted via instant polling on whether they thought the strategy would first effectively change behavior to improve safety and second be fea-sible to implement within one to three years.

Workshop Decision Criteria

• Safety: Does this impact trail safety in a positive way?

• Effectiveness: Will this change behavior of trail users or oth-ers who interact with the trail?

• Feasibility: Is this possible to achieve?


Outcomes

Through the instant polling that closed the meeting, little variation emerged among the seven major strategies in terms of how likely they are to improve trail safety - between 60 percent and 77 percent of participants agreed or strongly agreed that each strategy would be effective at improving trail safety. There was, however, wide variability in how likely participants thought it was that a strategy would be feasible to implement within one to three years - only 16 percent agreed or strongly agreed that separate lanes would be feasible, but a full 85 percent agreed that on-trail signage would be feasible. In addition, strategies voted highest for improving safety did not necessarily score highest for feasibili-ty. In other words, little correlation was found between the two criteria tested. Because the instant polling occurred at the end of the workshop, there was no time for facilitators to ask participants to discuss why they might think a strategy would improve safety but would not be feasible to implement in the

near term. In the absence of this information, one could speculate that their lack of support for near-term implementation may reflect a variety of factors, such as participant percep-tion of funding or political constraints. How-ever, it is important to note that most partici-pants supported the merit of the strategies for improving safety.

Each discussion topic is presented on the following page. The first column contains re-lated sub-strategies gleaned from the phone interviews IEN conducted during its pre-work-shop assessment. The second column contains improvements to the overarching strategy suggested during the carousel discussions, which facilitators relayed to the larger group before the instant polling was opened for each strategy. The seven strategies are ranked below by the percentage of participants who agreed or strongly agreed that they would improve trail safety.


1. Signal Timing Adjustments

2. Outreach/Marketing to Promote "Trail Etiquette”

Signal timing adjustments proved the strongest perceived strategy for enhancing safety, with 77 percent of participants agreeing or strongly agreeing that it would enhance trail safety. Participants noted that the bike and pedestri-an signals could embrace newer technology, and thereby become more responsive and informative at intersections. For this strategy to become effective, changing the culture of the trail was another important consideration for a number of participants. Trail users would need to become willing to stop at intersections. Participants also favored making adjustments to signal timing only where adjustments are needed to increase safety. Participants also noted that some barriers to implementation in-clude VDOT regulations, working with multiple jurisdictions, and potential impacts to vehic-

ular traffic. These barriers could be reflected in the second vote, which showed that, in terms of implementation, only 49 percent of participants agreed or strongly agreed that the strategy would be feasible to implement within one to three years.

be feasible to implement in one to three years. During the small group discussion, participants noted that this strategy offers great opportunity because it can incorporate creative messages and slogans and even help re-brand the trail. One popular idea for how to use signage included a "Thank you for ____" campaign, in which trail users are thanked for stopping, or staying to the right, or for other desired behavior. Other popular ideas included using art to display messages, and con-firming the trail as multi-use rather than solely a bike trail. Participants thought this strategy would be particularly effective because of its potential to use positive messaging and encourage interaction between user groups.

Increasing safety through outreach and mar-keting to promote "trail etiquette" received the overall strongest participant support, with 75 percent agreeing or strongly agreeing that it would enhance trail safety. Moreover, a full 85 percent agreed or strongly agreed that it would


Specific strategy:1. Improve responsiveness of ac-

tivated crossing signals where warranted to reduce waiting time for trail users.

Improvements suggested by the groups:• Embrace technology through

having bike and pedestrian signals at the same intersection and using signals such as Hawk and RRFB.

• Improve feedback and respon-siveness through signals with countdown feature for both stop and walk condition, communicate wait times, and auto detect/cancel request ability.

• Focus on culture through aware-ness/enforcement and change perception to “we stop at intersec-tions.”

• Match conditions and only imple-ment where needed.

Improvements suggested by the groups:• Ideas include a “Thank you for _____”

campaign, Burma shave, bike-scaled signs, and art/messages.

• Branding for all users.• Serve as a community symbol and con-

tribute to the “we”-ness of community as a shared use path or trail.

• Target areas with media and PR.

Specific strategies:1. On-trail signage and other efforts

to promote safe, courteous behav-ior.• Single point messaging and

slogans: “Stay Right May Save Your Life” or an equivalent to “Click It or Ticket.”

2. Programming like community fairs or trail days to promote safety and “trail etiquette.”• E.g. A W&OD Fair Day where

trail etiquette cards are passed out, trail safety days across jurisdictions to relay the same safety message and enforce-ment procedures.

3. Separate Travel Lanes for Pedestrians and Cyclists

Participants favored the idea of separate travel lanes for pedestrians and cyclists to enhance safety, with 70 percent agreeing or strongly agreeing that it would improve safety. Participants had a less favorable view of the strategy's feasibility to be implemented in one to three years, with only 16 percent agreeing or strongly agreeing. In the report back from the facilitator, multiple red flags were noted, including the potential for negative impacts to the environment through vegetation and tree removal, harms to historic elements of the trail, faster cyclist speeds if cyclists have

4. Legal Framework around Intersections

The majority of participants, 67 percent, agreed or strongly agreed that developing a legal framework around intersections could effectively enhance safety. However, partici-pants had very divergent views on the fea-sibility of implementing this strategy in one to three years, with 47 percent agreeing or strongly agreeing. Challenges to this strategy discussed in the small groups include the de-sire to see a consistent law for all stop signs coordinated with all the jurisdictions and area law enforcement agencies. Participants also saw this strategy as presenting opportunities such as developing a ordinance or regulation, allowing consistent enforcement of rules after a law is passed, and creating consistent knowledge of rules across the length of the entire trail.

their own lane, and the high cost of widening the trail. Participants did see potential for this strategy to relieve trail congestion and allow different users separate space to avoid conflict, and suggested that a pilot study in a designated area of the trail would be a useful way for NVRPA to determine the strategy's effectiveness.


Specific strategy:1. Separate lanes for pedestrians and

cyclists.• E.g. “Heels and Wheels” lanes.

Improvements suggested by the groups:• Physical separation between lanes.• Widen trail in congested areas.• Educate users about the lanes. • Encourage more people to use other

existing trails.• Develop a plan for the entire trail,

customized to actual needs.• Develop a pilot to test the strategy.

Specific strategy:1. Development of a uniform ordi-

nance or regulation for stop signs on the W&OD that would apply in all jurisdictions, to reduce confu-sion, foster consistent user behavior, and enable consistent enforcement.

Improvements suggested by the groups:• Develop an NVRPA regulation

in coordination with local gov-ernments and other interested/related parties for one consistent regulation across the region with:• Clear and simple language.• Define stop as meaning stop.

• Recognition that stop signs don’t need to be everywhere. NVRPA can conduct a study of intersections/soft crossings that would be better served by yield/cautionary signs.

• Letters or memorandums of agreement between NVRPA and law enforcement across the region for consistent knowledge and enforcement. A recognition that ju-risdictions shouldn’t have different sets of rules.

• NVRPA champion changes to Vir-ginia State Code on roads and trail crossings.

5. Visual Improvements at Trail Crossings for Drivers and for Trail Users

Visual improvements at trail crossings for drivers and for trail users had 65 percent of participants agreeing or strongly agreeing that it could effectively enhance safety. A similar 62 percent of participants also agreed or strongly agreed that this strategy could be feasible to implement in one to three years. This strategy includes road markings, trail markings, signs, and signals. Perceived barriers

to the effectiveness of different pavement markings, signs, and signals are mainly due to VDOT and MUTCD regulations that limit the types of signage and markings localities or NVRPA can use without approval. Some participants noted that some strategies, like RRFBs, are not only experimental, but expen-sive. At the same time, compared to other strategies considered, participants in small group discussions viewed pavement markings like zig-zags and "ped crossing ahead" signs as relatively easy to implement as well as effec-tive, as they are very attention grabbing.


Specific strategies:1. Visual road improvements for

drivers.• E.g. Painted or other markings

on pavement, improved cross-walk design or markings.

2. Additional visual signage or sig-nals for drivers at crossings.• E.g. More bike/ped signals,

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB).

3. Visual improvements on the trail.• E.g. More visual cues that note

an approaching intersection. Trail markings/changes in col-or show approaching intersec-tion, bollards, planters, etc.

Improvements suggested by the groups:• Colored pavement/trail markings

as approaching intersections, e.g., colors, zig-zag lines on both the street and the trail.

• RRFB/on-demand flashing lights that are pedestrian activated rath-er than constantly flashing. These should only be placed where appropriate, not everywhere.

• Creative and unique signs and symbols to avoid sign burnout.

• Consistent, yet context appropriate signs and signals.

6. Speed Zones/Slow Zones

The majority of participants voted speed zones/slow zones to be relatively effective and implementable, with 63 percent of par-ticipants agreeing or strongly agreeing that the strategy could effectively enhance safety. More so, 76 percent agreed or strongly agreed it could be implemented in one to three years. Participants' small group discussions sug-gested that the key to making this strategy effective is that it only be used in congested areas or problem areas that require special attention, such as around schools. Specific colors and consistent markings can add to

the effectiveness. Participant concerns noted in the small group discussions include that certain user groups may not be able to use different pavement treatments that are either slippery or bad for tires, or that the markings would not be meaningful without user knowl-edge of their purpose.


7. Education about the Trail for both Motorists and Trail Users

Education about the trail for both motorists and trail users had 60 percent of participants agreeing or strongly agreeing that it could effectively enhance safety on the trail. It was also voted as one of the most implementable strategies, with 76 percent of participants agreeing or strongly agreeing that it could be implemented in one to three years. In small groups, participants noted this strategy's potential to have long-term impact by inte-grating trail safety principles into the school

curriculum and having children promote change. Participants also saw schools as one of the challenges, as it may be difficult to alter school standards and curriculum. Discus-sion from the small groups also reveals that participants viewed this strategy as likely to be effective for creating behavioral change beyond the W&OD Trail, therefore having a more widespread impact.

Specific strategies:1. Use asphalt treatments such as

colored transitions in areas where the trail users should slow down or exercise caution (for example in congested areas or near a school.) • E.g. “See Brown, Slow Down.”

2. Develop a definition of what is a safe speed for cyclists.

Improvements suggested by the groups:• The color and texture of asphalt

treatments should be thoughtfully chosen for maintenance, cost, abili-ty, perception, and education.

• Creative signage developed for “slow” messaging that targets the full spectrum of users, is visible to everyone, and results in positive behavior modification.

• Should be used at intersections, ac-cess points, and congestion zones.”

• Support for conducting a pilot study first with advisory speeds in high-risk zones.

Specific strategies:1. Develop a set of clear guidelines to

distribute about the trail. 2. Work with external groups to

discuss and educate others on trail rules, so that everyone has a shared understanding of what the law means and what practices are appropriate

Improvements suggested by the groups:• Work with schools – kids are great

messengers. • External groups to partner with

include HOAs, DMV, and trail patrol. • Focus on long-term change. • Develop clear safety guidelines and

rules of the road.• Engage social marketers. • Educate on the trail for users who

do not use technology. • Bike Rodeo.

Overarching Themes from Small Group Discussions

1Priority Recommendations

2


Five broad priority recommendations emerged from the facilitated group discussions. These recom-mendations coalesced from the input of over 50 committed trail users and were repeated throughout all topic stations, demonstrating their importance to those who use the trail. While these main ideas are highlighted, full notes from the discussions are included in Appendix C.

Develop consistent safety ap-proaches along the trail

Across all discussion groups, participants discussed the need for consistent safety approaches. These ranged from the need for consistent signage to consistent laws. Participants at the station discussing asphalt treatments for slow zones noted the need for consistent coloring, markings, and applications along the trail. Participants in the visual enhance-ments at intersections group also noted the need for consistent road treatments for car drivers. Others mentioned the need for external groups to convey the same safety messages and rules through clear and simple language. From all group discussions, it is evident that consistent appearance of physical signs and signals, as well as consistent approaches to applying and communicating these tactics, are vital elements to improving safety.

Target varied safety strategies to avoid overuse and user blindness

Participants identified the need to target safety strategies only where appropriate. For example, they suggested that asphalt treatments or safe speed requirements should only be used in conflict areas, in-tersection warnings should reflect the nature of the intersection, and cultural messaging should target high traffic areas. Participants thought that overusing safety signs and messages might reduce their effectiveness if users become blind to seeing them. An example is the RRFB signal and zig-zag pavement markings at the Bel-mont Ridge crossing. This treat-ment is proving to be effective, but if it were implemented at every intersection, its effectiveness could diminish. Similarly, participants discussed that changing out or rotating signs with cultural safety messages may be more effective than having the same signs in place at all times. The goal is to heighten user awareness by using signs and signals that will not be easily overlooked or blend into the surrounding environment over time.

3 4

Ad Agency: Mother New York


Develop creative messaging and social marketing targeting all users groups

Participants across groups dis-cussed the need for creative messaging and social marketing. They advised that messaging be attention grabbing and go beyond the traditional "stop." Participants suggested ideas such as using symbols or icons to represent different user groups, a mascot for trail safety, or sequences of signs conveying a message. Examples like the "Bikers of New York" cam-paign with faces of bikers or the provocative texting and driving commercials were mentioned as exemplary creative messaging strategies. Some participants in the trail design at intersections group suggested placing "ghost bikes" at intersections where cyclist fatalities had occurred. Cre-ative messaging can also include slogans such as "bells not yells," "take an earbud out," or a "thank you for _____" campaign, all to promote behavioral change among users.

Educate users on safe behaviors & expectations

Participants suggested that edu-cating users on trail safety rules, behavior, and the meaning of signs and signals is crucial, both on and off the trail. Groups discussing physical changes to signs and pavement markings noted the need to educate the public about their meaning. For example, driv-ers may be confused about what zig-zag lines on the pavement mean, or may not understand the significance of a ghost bike on the trail. These efforts may not be as effective without understanding by all trail users. Education on rules and accepted behaviors is also important. Participants suggested educating others by modeling desired behavior, such as the idea that "we stop at intersections," and using this language as positive reinforcement for safe behavior.

Participants discussed how ed-ucating users on safe behaviors and expectations could promote ownership of the trail. Some participants also found the need to re-identify the trail as multi-use rather than solely a bike trail and promote an overall idea of courte-sy rather than a strict set of rules. Educating users about not only safety rules, but also appropriate safety behavior, both on and off the trail, are elements participants found crucial. External groups that participants identified to partner with include schools to encour-age long-term behavioral change, driver's education programs, bike stores, and cycling groups.

The purpose of the workshop was to test the viability of the top 12 safety enhancement strategies that had emerged from the online survey, and to develop priority recommenda-tions for W&OD Trail safety enhancements. The workshop brought together 52 partici-pants who broadly represented W&OD Trail users and engaged them in discussing the pros and cons of these top strategies as well as how they could be further improved. At the outset of the workshop, it was unclear wheth-er participants would eliminate some of the strategies through their focused discussions. However, through this active engagement, the workshop confirmed that all 12 safety enhancement strategies do offer viable oppor-tunities for improving safety on the W&OD. One surprise from workshop was that while participants largely thought all 12 strategies could be effective at improving safety, they did not necessarily view them as equally feasible to implement in the near term. This dichotomy may not represent a barrier, however, as the feasibility of implementation is ultimately in the hands of the NVRPA and other funding and oversight bodies.

Conclusion

A number of overarching priority recommen-dations also emerged from these discussions that will guide NVRPA efforts to improve safety in the years ahead. These priority rec-ommendations offer broad guidelines around consistency, developing targeted and integrat-ed approaches, creative messaging and social marketing, and user education.

Overall, participants found the workshop itself, presentations, and afternoon discus-sion to be at least useful or very useful. The majority strongly agreed that their ideas were heard, they were treated respectfully, they listened to the ideas of others, and they treated others with respect. Most attendees also reported leaving the workshop feeling more hopeful than before about safety on the W&OD Trail in the coming years.

5


Develop integrative approaches toward safety

Integrative approaches towards safety are needed on the W&OD trail. Many of the same ideas and strategies were repeated in facil-itator notes across groups, illus-trating the need to use multiple strategies in conjunction with one another. For example, participants mentioned that a ghost bike is only effective at promoting aware-ness of dangerous intersections if users know what it means. Sim-ilarly, separate lanes for cyclists

and pedestrians should be used along with creative safety signs and safe/slow zones. Participants suggested trail safety days as one way to improve overall safety for multiple strategies. Positive mes-saging targeting all user groups to promote long-term behavioral change and acceptance of other safety strategies like signs, signals, and pavement markings, were popular strategies among partici-pants. Participants also suggested promoting safety off of the W&OD Trail as a way to improve long term and overall safety.

!

!

AGENDA&IMPROVING&W&OD&TRAIL&SAFETY&

A"Stakeholder"Workshop"!

Algonkian&Regional&Park:&47001!Fairway!Drive,!Sterling,!VA&Friday,!April!11,!2014,!10!a.m.!–!4!p.m.!!

!Hosted&by&the&Northern&Virginia&Regional&Park&Authority&

Facilitated)by)the)University)of)Virginia)Institute)for)Environmental)Negotiation)!

9:30& CHECKKIN/REFRESHMENTS&&

& !

10:00& WELCOME/WORKSHOP&GOALS/OPENING&PRESENTATIONS&& &

& & ) )& Welcome&and&Today’s&Goals&

!Paul)Gilbert,)Executive)Director) ))

Northern)Virginia)Regional)Park)Authority)

& & ) )& Agenda&and&Introductions& Tanya)Denckla)Cobb,)

Associate)Director)Institute)for)Environmental)Negotiation,)University)of)Virginia)

& & ) )& Intersections&and&

Engineering&Studies&Chris)Pauley,)Director)of)Park)Operations)


& & ) )& Social&Marketing&& Michelle)Vigen) 18)Lake)Creative)& & ) )& Safety&on&the&W&OD&Trail&

Findings&Kelly)Wilder,)Senior)Associate)

Institute)for)Environmental)Negotiation,)University)of)Virginia)

& & ) )11:50& LUNCH&

& &12:20& CAROUSEL&DISCUSSIONS&&

& &A. Speed!Zones/Slow!Zones!B. Separate!Travel!Lanes!for!Pedestrians!and!Cyclists!C. Visual!Improvements!at!Trail!Crossings!for!Drivers!and!for!Trail!Users!D. Signal!Timing!Adjustments!E. Education!about!the!Trail!for!both!Motorists!and!Trail!Users!!F. Outreach/Marketing!to!Promote!“Trail!Etiquette”!!G. Legal!Framework!around!Intersections!


$SSHQGL[�$��:RUNVKRS�$JHQGD

Kelly Wilder

!

3:00& 10&MINUTE&BREAK&

& &3:10& REPORT&BACK&FROM&FACILITATORS&&

& &3:25& PRIORITIZATION&OF&STRATEGIES&&

& & ) )& Instant&Polling&& Tanya)Denckla)Cobb,)

Associate)Director)Institute)for)Environmental)Negotiation,)University)of)Virginia)

& !Criteria!!• Safety:!Does!this!impact!trail!safety!in!a!positive!way!!• Effectiveness:!Will!this!change!behavior!of!trail!users!or!others!that!interact!with!the!trail!• Feasibility:!Is!this!possible!to!achieve!&

3:45& WRAPKUP/NEXT&STEPS&&

& && WrapKup&and&Next&Steps& Kelly)Wilder,)Senior)

Associate)Institute)for)Environmental)Negotiation,)University)of)Virginia)

& & ) )& Closing&Remarks&&

!Paul)Gilbert,)Executive)Director) ))


& &4:00& ADJOURN&WORKSHOP&

&&

Thank)you)for)attending!))Please)turn)in)your)evaluations)on)the)way)out.)

&!Today’s!facilitators:!

• Alma!AbdulYHadi!Jadallah,!Kommon!Denominator!• Tanya!Denckla!Cobb,!Institute!for!Environmental!Negotiation!!• Laura!Grape,!Northern!Virginia!Soil!and!Water!Conservation!District!!• Ursula!Lemanski,!National!Park!Service!• Natalie!Raffol,!Institute!for!Environmental!Negotiation!• Michelle!Vigen,!18!Lake!Creative!• Kristina!Weaver,!Institute!for!Environmental!Negotiation!!• Kelly!Wilder,!Institute!for!Environmental!Negotiation!


Kelly Wilder

! !


$SSHQGL[�%��3RZHU3RLQW�3UHVHQWDWLRQV

Kelly Wilder

! !


Kelly Wilder

!

!

!


Kelly Wilder

Group A: Speed Zones/Slow Zones

Strategy One: Asphalt Treatments

Improvements ! Passing lane – bypass at intersections

and downtown squares ! Divert bikes in pedestrian zones –

short distance, i.e. schools, commuting centers

! Color and texture o green for conflict areao some people can’t use textureo but there are sophisticated

coatings that might beappropriate

o Change yellow lines, redbefore intersection

o Concrete vinylo Red, yellow, green colorso Use yellow for warning +o Zebra pattern, striping pattern

to give perception change topromote bike calming traffic

o Run double yellow lineswhere its dangerous to passor hashed white line

! Speed bumps – or what would work for downhill sections

! “Brown slow down”

o Yellow in entry, brown insection

! Cross paths, high pedestrian volume ! Indicators pressed into asphalt:

stamped ! Color links to less conscious self ! Use infrequently, but purposefully in

far out areas to promote education ! 3D renderings ! Strips in advance of intersection ! Need to work at night ! Arrows to direct pedestrians; keep

right signage ! Only use paint in conflict zones ! Use zones sparingly where they’re

needed ! What’s evaluative criteria for

application? ! 3 foot tall barrier forces cyclists to

stop ! Color change and consistent signage ! Don’t target cyclists – “High Traffic

Zone” applies to everybody ! Start with VDOT/national standards

for passing

Red Flags ! Need to determine the purpose of

them ! Consistency with color and where ! Slower due to mixing vs. separation ! Bikes don’t like thermoplastic

(slipperier and maintenance) are there newer versions?

! Be aware of not over-using treatment ! Education would be critical ! How meaningful would this really be? ! Can’t use it for both slow and

diversion

! Impact of texture on folks with disability

! Cyclists often don’t like texture ! Safe behavior even when trail is

empty ! Bikes don’t know what speed they are

going ! Take care not to surprise cyclists ! Must work at night also ! Concerns about effectiveness of paint ! No enforcement ! Maintenance cost varies by color ! Stamping a problem for skaters

Improving W&OD Trail Safety | A Stakeholder WorkshopImproving W&OD Trail Safety | A Stakeholder Workshop



$SSHQGL[�&��6PDOO�*URXS�'LVFXVVLRQ�5HSRUWV

Kelly Wilder

! Signs get vandalized ! Sign pollution ! 8-10% don’t have majority color

vision ! Plowing and maintenance ! Non-standard colors would require

massive education

! “conflict zones” and time/context ! Some treatments are slippery in rain

but easier to maintain ! Different color/surface is not enough,

need signs too

Clear Sailing ! Thoughtful use ! Marketing ! Colored/textured paint to signal slow

down ! Establish small numbers of high

pedestrian areas ! Messaging targets everyone

! Develop criteria for application ! Color and signs on the concrete ! Not just intersection but interchange ! Better apply what we already using

(e.g. solid lines and signs) ! Green/brown colors being used are

effective

Strategy Two: Definition of Safe Speed

Improvements ! Dependent on conditions ! Base definition on level at which life

threatening injury occurs ! Can’t put a number ! Educate about average speed by user

groups and safety given who is on the trail.

! Condition ! Put a number on safe peed if passing

child or arrival ! 8 miles an hour (speed limit in crosswalks in Boulder, CO)

! Twice a jogging speed ! Kids and elderly are the concern ! Radar display ! Behavior and cultural ! Times of day for different safe speeds ! Rules of the trail simply stated and

posted at trail heads ! Cyclist on cyclist too ! Education at the club’s bike shop

! Advisory speeds: training cyclists do not have speedometers

o 15 miles per hour (like outWest)

o Would “block” strava Appo Only in conflict areas, e.g.

downtown Vienna 8mpho Consistent with what people

know! Can’t put a specific speed on it ! Slow zones make sense ! “congestion zones” rather than speed

zone ! Runners can be just as dangerous ! Defined as “reasonable speed” but

how do you define that? ! Courtesy and respect whenever you

share the trail ! Fines doubled in congestion zones

(e.g. leash law)


Kelly Wilder

Red Flags ! How would you enforce it? ! Only legal on park land ! Bikes don’t have speedometers ! May not be legal methodology for

enacting off park lands ! No authority to enforce and potential

to fall out for law enforcers ! What does “slow” mean? ! Public education re: “advisory” speed

! Advisory speed will be resisted ! Speed zone makes less sense –

implies no limit on speed elsewhere ! Don’t separate the users ! Enforcement ! VDOT behind the times – be more

creative drawing on best practices ! How would you identify a congestion

zone? First step would be to pilot

Clear Sailing ! Trail etiquette – SLOW for

pedestrians (not yield) ! Target pedestrian intensive areas ! Reinforce good behavior to leverage

positive peer pressure ! Design signs/symbols for cyclists --

different signs by user groups ! Advisory speeds in a few congested

areas to try it out

! Small portions of asphalt treatment as you enter zones

! Ground and vertical combination ! Test “congestion” zones with creative

signage (e.g. icon with many uses illustrated pictorially)

! Should not define safe speed

Bike Rack ! Width of the trail ! wider trail ! Diversions ! 3 foot barriers with stop on it

! Slow down device for cyclists ! Adjust grading

Key Minority Views ! Advisory speed in high risk zones with

pilot approach ! Just extend what we have (e.g. VDOT

standards, solid line, signage

Summary ! Asphalt treatments: color and texture

o Thoughtfully chosen(maintenance, cost, ability, perception, education)

! Creative signage for “slow” o Target full user spectrumo Make sure everyone sees ito Positive behavior modification

! At intersections, access points, and “congestion zones”

! Pilot first


Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

Group B: Separate Travel Lanes for Pedestrians and Cyclists

Improvements ! Separate the trail users ! Physical separation ! Only necessary in high traffic areas ! Widen trail (real wide) + ! Widen the trail vs. separate lanes + ! Widen trail keep 2 lanes/specify what

they are for ! Wider trail with center passing lane ! “share the road” ! educational piece

for biking community ! Designated lanes for recreational ! Signs are important (trail or not?) ! Indicate whether it is a multi-use trail ! Have enough room for mother and

child to be on a lane ! Include a module on trail use with all

DMV test ! Allow enough - widen trail ! 14 feet

1 b/w cyclist/walkers ! Create separate lanes or barriers ! Improve existing gravel/trail and

encourage people to use it ! There are pre-existing trails to

separate traffic ! (use a bell)… ! Clear signage/different colors ! Bike left/walk right ! Wheels and heels ! Different surface materials ! Visual markers/symbols ! HOV lanes ! Do it in congested areas ! Educate users ! Get more people to use existing

gravel trail ! Master plan entire trail to actual

needs

! Increase trail use and safety ! Define speed zones/safe zones ! Designate congested areas/transition ! Create a master plan on what kind of

facilities you want for different segments on the corridor “a descriptive map” ! policy and becomes template to work with others

! Not just expanding asphalt, i.e. what is happening to your left and right?

! Separating directions, slow users vs. higher? (B-1) group 2 (1)

! Address multiple speeds, i.e. divide by speed not by use

! Express lanes ! 16 feet ! Education – having a vision for the

future/growth ! “not a place to teach child to ride a

bike” ! provide places to do that ! Create a training loop for new users ! Encourage more pedestrians to use

second trail (unpaved) ! Be informed - reference the second

trail, improve kind of gravel ! Customize approach based on data

available ! Use existing trails to re-route traffic

establish an alternative route and publicize (optional)

! Widen existing trail (16 inches) ! Use existing/or advertise existing

success stories to educate ! Wider where congested ! Widen trail, but keep 2 way traffic


Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

Red Flags ! What to do with slow bikers vs. fast

bikers ! Geology of the

land/limitations/historical landmarks (where applicable)+

! More people in a given area increases likelihood of collision

! Need to indicate what they (lanes) are for

! Winter management ! Environmental impact +++ ! Vegetation buffer & tree loss ! Safety issues/speed/transitions ! Historic aspect of trail – entire

W&OD is a historical resources/can be difficult

! Cost +++ ! Could create other user interaction

issues ! Right of way ! Bridges (width/cost)+ ! Retaining walls ! Operational issues/introducing

intersections (switching use) ! If it increase usage and leads to extra

amount of traffic ! Issues related development ! You may still have two way bicycle

traffic in one trail/various users/speed ! Issue of added intersections, crossings ! What’s the trail being promoted for? ! Issue of dual traffic

! Maneuverability of cyclists ! Clear understanding of what

separation lane means ! What to do with attitudes related to

ownership of lane ! Safety issues ! - Gravel trail/safety issues ! - How to handle multiple

speeds ! High speed bike hitting a user ! Might add to congestion ! Not enough space to expand the

area+ ! Compliance/enforcement ! Would park authority want to enforce

dedication ! How to accommodate increases,

widening ! - width constraints/cost ! Change of character ! Perception that a wider trail leads to

faster speeds, encourages speeding ! - Speed by users/by-passing

each other ! The physics (separation of the lane) ! No way to enforce the rules (man

power, time) ! Right of way ! People may not understand not to get

in each other’s way ! Would it address user conflicts which

we are trying to address

Clear Sailing ! Start in high traffic areas to avoid

disruption/feeling of safety ! Do a priority study ! Pilot/test ! Education with jurisdictions/with

public ! Recognition that trail is a

transportation corridor vs. just recreation

! Lay it out visually/study/planning

! Do 45 miles/not only congested areas ! A public process ! Outreach process – what to

expect/how to use it ! “models” (existing) WW bridge/Mt.

Vernon ! Metrics ! More cyclists to street right of way ! Consider urban areas vs. conventional

use of the trail



Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

! Sensitivity to density and geographical area

! Use technology to assist – set standard of on/above trial signage

! Look at use of trail now and do it when necessary

! Education/educational marketing

! Joint efforts between other jurisdictions to market

! Create a joint marketing tool across jurisdictions

! Limit to congested areas ! Effective marking of the trails/users ! Designated lanes

Summary ! Physical separation ! Widening in congested areas ! Educate users ! Get more people to use existing trails ! Put together a master plan for entire

trail customized to actual needs

! Clear sailing: do a pilot study, education in collaboration with other jurisdictions

! Red flags: environmental impact, safety issues/speed/transitions, historical aspect of trail, cost, could create other user interaction issues

Group C: Visual Improvements at Trail Crossings for Drivers and for Trail Users

Strategy One: Visual Road Improvements for Drivers

Improvements ! Street lighting at crossings + ! Colored pavement in crossing (red

suggested) + ! Zig-zag marks +++ ! Speed bumps/traffic calming ! Narrow roadway ++ ! Don’t block box+ ! Rumble strips +++ ! Bike lanes (to also narrow road) ! Speed table/raised crosswalk +

! Bike stencil painted on the road in MUTCD color

! Striping (create shoulder) ex. Falls Church

! Colored pavement before intersection ! Flashing crosswalk (lights in

pavement flash once button is activated)

! Pedestrian median/refuge

Red Flags ! VDOT regulations/standards ! Drivers vs. cyclists – feels like

favoring one over the other ! Damage to cars from speed bumps ! Lighting may disrupt neighbors ! Zig-zags are still experimental and

not standard so harder to put on road ! State law dictates speed bumps ! Colored crosswalks subject to VDOT

regulations ! Wait time

! Flashing crosswalk expensive ! Pedestrian medians require additional

space ! Zig-zags could become normal and

less effective ! Narrowing road may compromise

driving ! Real estate availability ! Rumble strips not effective at all

speed limits


Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

Clear Sailing ! Zig-zag easy to implement and

attention grabbing, not negative to cars

! Lighting needed ! Red colors – more visible cues,

coloring is economical

! Stop ahead/warning are useful ! Expert studies exist showing what’s

proven to work – use this as basis of what to implement

Strategy Two: Signage/Signals for Drivers

Improvements ! Have advisory signs where there is

high pedestrian volume ! Consistent signage between

communities and on the trail and the road, but base signage on character of crossing (not all are the same so they all won’t have the same signage)

! More crossings like RRFB at Belmont Ridge – lights only flash when button pressed

! Timer on crosswalk signals so drivers know how long they are waiting

! Stop signs for drivers where trail traffic is greater than road traffic

! Have slower speed limit with change in pavement color in select areas and enforce it

! Less optional stop signs/strategies ! put in place strategies that must be followed

Red Flags ! There will be cultural

resistance/resistance from localities regarding reduced speed limit since they would have to enforce it and deal with public backlash

! So many jurisdictions – NVRPA can’t control what happens on all roads

! Lights/technology is expensive ! Would stop signs for drivers be

ignored?

! Cost-effectiveness of strategies in some areas (how many users would be benefitting)

! Yield signs in the middle of a road may not work in counties with high road speed

! Signs/marks may not be meaningful to people

! Effectiveness of RRFB may depend on location – only use where it’s determined appropriate

Clear Sailing ! Yield signs in the middle of a street

are effective ! Consistency of signs across

communities ! On-demand flashing lights (RRFB)


Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

Strategy Three: Trail improvements

Improvements ! Yield sign at intersection is better

than stop sign in some areas ! Use technology: flashing lights to

warn trail users of approaching intersection (as is done with cars)

! Color the pavement or use zig-zag lines on the trail +

! Use same color for this as on the road ! consistency

! Striping leading up to intersection

! Barrier to force stopping and getting off bike at intersection

! Creative signs, not just “stop” ! Increase mile markers so people are

aware of where they are ! Ghost bike: symbol of fatality ! Audio warning for trail users ! Curve the trail as it approaches

intersections (if it’s not straight bikes must slow down)

Red Flags ! Barriers that force stopping are

dangerous for cyclists, cause injury. If they are removable or too flimsy they will fall over – turn into a nuisance

! Barriers that block trail may also be a barrier to maintenance vehicles

! Sign immunity/burnout ! Would something like ghost bike be

meaningful? How to convey its message?

! MUTCD regulations are limiting ! Some strategies may take away from

consistency across the trail (ex. Yield signs & stop signs)

! False sense of security – people may think they can just walk out into intersection

! Can the trail be curved?

Clear Sailing ! Colored pavement not too difficult ! Obtain counts of trail users to justify

improvements

! Yield vs. stop generally supported where appropriate

Bike Rack ! Problem in Vienna where they do not

use the same signs – issue of VDOT controlled roads vs. state roads

! Sharrows/bike lanes on main roads

! Signs to integrate trail with location/community it’s passing through

! Education of what signs mean


Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

Summary ! Road Improvements

o Improvements: zig-zag marks,rumble strips, road narrowing/striping, colored pavement/block box, speed bumps/speed table, pedestrian median refuge

o Red flags: VDOT regulations,state laws, MUTCD, land availability, confusion

o Clear sailing: expert studies,most economical, attention grabbing

! Signs/signals o Improvements: RRFB/on

demand lighting, high ped volume signs, consistent signage across localities, timer on walk signals, stop signs for drivers where less vehicle traffic

! Trail improvements o Improvements: colored

pavement/stripes/zig-zags, flashing lights on trail, yield vs. stop signs-dependent on

character, creative signs/slogans, ghost bike

! Overall: o Colored pavement/trail

markings as approaching intersections ex. Colors, zig-zag on both street and trail

o RRFB/on-demand flashinglights – should be pedestrian activated, not constant. Location is important – not everywhere.

o Creative/unique signs andsymbols ex. Ghost bike – avoids sign burnout

o Consistent, yet contextappropriate signs and signals

o Red flags: VDOT/MUTCDregulations, many localities, confusion of what newer signs mean, sign burnout with too many, technology like lights is expensive

o Clear sailing: markings areeasy and effective, attention grabbing, expert studies, on demand lights

Group D: Signal Timing Adjustments

Improvements ! Communicate how long people are

actually waiting ++ ! Audible and visual so people know

how long they’re waiting ! Change perception to “it’s just

something you have to do” ! Status bar and pong game (!) ! LOS for drivers and alternative

transportation must realte ! Find out numbers on trail to inform

LOS ! Technology that

o Sense people (passivedetection)

o Can cancel requests! Add a few key more signals ! Hawk beacon and bike signals and

RRFB ! Feedback to user -- detection ! Prioritizing countdown at

intersections where there are currently signals

! Halving wait times ! W&OD signals should be timed along

with roadway signals


Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

! “Rest in walk” on side street crossings ! Need better metrics/counts ! Safety/crossing apps ! Consistency ! Can signals be accelerated if hasn’t

stopped/been activated in X mins. ! Countdown condition for stop and

walk + ! Feedback that signal has been

activated + ! Not a lot of accidents ! Timing appropriate to crossing ! Acknowledge that not all crossings

need signals – can cause accidents o Reverse stop so trail has right

of way

! Communicating effectiveness of system

! Separate queues ! Increased frequency of sounds ! Responsiveness to level of traffic ! Set more realistic expectations ! Pedestrian advance (LPI) if near an

intersection ! Barnes dance ! Overpass/underpass = safest ! Match control to condition ! Need education whenever introducing

new device ! Need real data and evaluation

Red Flags ! Balance trail users vs. drivers ! Across jurisdictions/VDOT ! Right turns on red ! Impacts on vehicle traffic ! Signals do not equal panacea ! Standardization and legality per

VDOT

! Enforcement comes from standardization

! Standardization between vendors and VDOT approved

! Unrealistic expectations lead to noncompliance

Clear Sailing ! Couple bike and ped signals at same

intersection +++ ! Twin heads – peds do not equal

bikes, improves legal issue ! Pull stop signs

! Responsiveness ! Auto detection of bikes + ! Catoctin circle is good ! Awareness/enforcement day

Summary ! Embrace technology

o Bike and pedestrian signals atsame intersection

o Hawk, RRFB, etc.! Improve feedback and responsiveness

o Countdown for both stop andwalk condition

o Communicate actual waittimes

o Auto detect and cancelrequest ability

! Focus on culture o Awareness/enforcemento Change perception (“we stop

at intersection”)o Pong game across intersection

! Match conditions/only implement when and where needed


Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

Group E: Education about the Trail for both Motorists and Trail Users

Strategy One: Education Through External Groups

Improvements ! Work with schools; kids are great

messengers (recycle example) ! Focus on long term change ! Safety and rules of road ! Bike rode; safety town at NVRPA site

(other than W&OD) ! Engage bike groups ! Sponsor station on trail ! Outreach to bike shops (Distribute

information with purchase) ! DMV-needs to be involved ! Outreach through neighborhood

association, newsletter etc. ! Engage social media/ aps,

technology/ QR code

! Outreach to motorist ! Outreach at farmers market ! Educate as part of permit for group

events ! Trail awareness day ! Safety day-education ! When get new license (Juvinile), have

judge address ! Safety (generic, not just WTOD) ! Outreach to bike racing ! Groups—reduce speed ! Need to have consistent message

between safety and user groups ! Hand out information when register

bike

Red Flags ! May be difficult to get into school

standards ! How do we reach pedestrians? (less

organized) ! Getting into schools

Clear Sailing ! Long-term impact ! Benefits past just W&OD ! State group working on this ! Test on pedestrian +bike rules+ rights ! New signage—what does it mean? ! Larger discussions—need alternatives

to disperse use to their facilities

! 3-minute YouTube video - City of Fall Church produced

! Park authority “ranger” to patrol work with trail patrol

! Off-duty police, hire to patrol

Strategy Two: Develop a Clear Set of Guidelines

Improvements ! Need one unified message ! Don’t mix legal vs etiquette ! Work with social market experts on

best approaches and messaging ! On the trail and newer tech to reach

multiple audiences ! Consider negotiation option. “Video-

text while driving” ! Need to “re-identify” as multi-use

trail, not just a bike trail ! Clarify right of way/ legal rules of the

road ! Don’t mix legal vs etiquette ! Need to be located “on the trail”—

Improving W&OD Trail Safety | A Stakeholder WorkshopImproving W&OD Trail Safety | A Stakeholder Workshop


Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

work with behavior experts on most effective location (trail head, adjacent to park, comfort station, etc)

! Outreach through bike patrol ! Add information on stats/ crashes ! Need impact (like texting movie) ! More in-depth on website

! Work with social market experts on “messaging”

! Forward in pace (trail patrol) ! Leverage this group to share the

message ! Needs to happen on the trail (target

advantage on trail)

Red Flags ! Should WTOD be a training facility? ! Should there be another facility for

these users? ! Guidelines need to be backed up with

enforcement

! Make sure you understand sub-segments, i.e. racers different than tri. athletes

! Positive re-enforcement standard for trail patrol

Clear Sailing ! Offer/ require class for “certificate”,

for racers, for all users ! Forward in pace (trail patrol) ! Leverage this group to share the

message

! Needs to happen on the trail (target advantage on trail)

! Multiple ways of communication to reach multiple audiences

Summary ! Work with schools; kids are great messengers (recycle example) ! Focus on long term change ! Safety and rules of road ! Bike rodeo; safety town at NVRPA site (other than W&OD)

Red flags ! May be difficult to get into school standards

Clear sailing ! Long-term impact ! Benefits past just W&OD


Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

Group F: Outreach/Marketing to Promote Trail Etiquette

Strategy Two: Programming for Trail Etiquette

Improvements ! Rules of the trail ! Trail markings to convey proper use ! Signs ! Community gathering ! Cycling vs. car behavior ! Don’t’ thread the needle---open

streets day on the trail o Situational awareness

! Image of users—social meetings between groups

! “bikers of NY “ “Faces” ! Signage of behind ! Security riders handing out

compliments ! “common sense” ! Mascot example of etiquette –

image/visual, branding+ ! Why – can have dangerous results –

most important is hardest ! positive reinforcement ! sequence of signs ! bike-scale signs ! create ownership of yours and others

behavior “we aspect” ! bike ambassador/trail patrol ! positive message, token ! thank you for ______ ! entering a drawing ! sampling ! speed feedback test for passing ____

(possible rubber neck) ! social media badges – public

commitment – youth ! mascot ! leading by doing – feedback ! respect, not a race a track ! turtle ! instructions “stay to the right” ! recreational times ! training ! commuters

! “recreation” ! Feedback – movable – recreational

trail speed ! Sequential signs ! Social/peer ! Switch out messages/keep them fresh ! Pull off/passing piece ! Walkers and joggers vs. fast bikers ! “center of universe” ! shared ! What is the purpose ! Recreation ok ! Fitness ! road ! Safety/enjoyment ! Multi-use share ! Stop referring as bike – rebrand to

multi-use community/shared use path ! All users, general publicity ! Call out – no excuse to not be careful ! Bike training loop/gardens ! Responsibility for everyone ! “pay attention” ! “don’t assume” ! “willingness to alter behavior,

accommodate users” ! Take an earbud out ! PR campaign ! Responsible speed ! For yielding ! Sharing the road ! Courtesy/etiquette – partnering with

bikeshares ! Positive reinforcement “thank you for” ! Witty/humor ! “bells not yells” ! Positive language of etiquette vs.

compliance ! “cyclists make us look good” ! “share the road/trail” ! “For your safety, light required at

night”



Kelly Wilder

Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

Red Flags ! congestion ! big brother ! technical limitations to speed testing ! validates cyclist ! multi-use ! separate jurisdictions ! PAL awful/predicable ! Bike to work day, good bells ! Shared, congestion = different rules

! Target crowd: pedestrians, bike, don’t react – naturally to each other, can’t hear

! Signs are pedestrian scale – make bike scale

! Burma shave signs, bike-scale ! Feedback ! Peds on opposing side?

Clear Sailing ! share the trail and instruction ! “target high traffic areas”

! Media, earned ! +++interaction, positive message

Bike Rack ! Transient community ! Awareness/ed-trail available and

etiquette

! People that need it the most don’t come to events

! Regular use vs. Visitor’s use

Summary 1) Thank you campaign

! Tokens by security team/ volunteers! “Thank you for “! targeted areas + media/ PR

2) Burma shave/ Bike-scale signs

! art/ messages 3) Branding for all uses

Community symbol---contribute to “we”-ness/ shared use path or trail

Group G: Legal Framework around Intersections

Champion legislative changes of VA state code to recognize trails and crossings in VDOT standards

Improvements ! Simple and clear language ! Stop=absence of motion ! (Same as VDOT highway standards) ! Establishment of LOA/MOU between

NVRPA and law enforcement ! Technology can be used to help

implement the ordinance ! Apply to all trail users (example:

pedestrian and roller bladders) ! Consistent criteria for placement of

stop signs vs. option for yield (a warrant already in guidelines for

streets ! Possible stop signs for motorists ! Consider all cross traffic (pedestrian

included) ! Vienna, Custus trail coordination ! Leg-trails – same status as roadways ! Change all signs to yield ! NVRPA champion state leg changes

to Virginia codes ! “stop” enforcement in conjunction

with yield sign placement ! Education during driving test


Kelly Wilder

!!

!!

Red Flags ! Defining pedestrian in the crosswalk ! Technology also needs further education ! Clearly define who has their right of way ! Have a coordination forum with local

governments and related agencies ! Possible conflicts with other trails ! Who owns the land? Will determine

jurisdiction of trails ! Creation of dangerous situation ! ASHTDE standards ! Inappropriate behavior and inappropriate

control ! “Big brother” introducing on recreation/

nature

Clear Sailing ! Bring to MWCOG as model ! NVRPA model ordinance ! Passing an ordinance will allow

enforcement ! “stop means stop”

! Consistent knowledge of the rules across the length of trail

! Study of stop sign vs. cautionary signage ! Volume of traffic and speed, visibility,

length of road

Summary 1. Develop a NVRPA regulation in

coordination with local governments andinterested/ related parties! Simple and clear language ! “Stop means stop”

2. Conduct a study of intersections/ soft

crossings that would be better served through yield/ cautionary signs

3. Establish letters of/ memorandums ofagreement between NVRPA and law enforcement agencies for consistent understanding and enforcement


Kelly Wilder

Mail: P.O. Box 400179 • Charlottesville, VA 22904-4179 • Phone 434-924-1970 • Fax 434-924-0231 • www.virginia.edu/ien Page 1

!!!!!

Improving!Safety!on!the!W&OD!Trail!Summary!of!Findings!

April&8,&2014&&

Prepared'by'the'University'of'Virginia'Institute'for'Environmental'Negotiation!&The&Institute&for&Environmental&Negotiation&(IEN)&was&contracted&to&assist&the&Northern&Virginia&Regional&Park&Authority&(NVRPA)&in&designing&a&workshop&to&develop&priority&recommendations&from&stakeholders&for&improving&safety&on&the&W&OD&Trail.&This&report&presents&IEN’s&findings,&drawn&from&nine&telephone&interviews&with&local&government&and&trailMuser&expert&stakeholders&and&an&online&survey&that&drew&over&1,500&responses.&&&EXPERT!INTERVIEWS!! !NVRPA&provided&IEN&with&the&names&of&nine&people&familiar&with&safety&issues&on&the&W&OD,&from&various&governmental&and&trailMuser&groups.&Together,&these&nine&individuals&represented&six&key&interests&that&are&relevant&to&W&OD&Trail&safety.&The&nine&individuals&interviewed&are&listed&in&Appendix&A.&&

Key!Interest!Group! Specific!Organization!Represented!!by!Interviewee!

Cycling& Fairfax&Advocates&for&Better&Bicycling&Bike&Loudoun&

Safety& Loudoun&County&Sheriff's&Office&Falls&Church&Police&Department&

Local&Government& Town&of&Herndon&Transportation&and&Other&Planners&

Virginia&Department&of&Transportation&&Fairfax&County&

Other&Trail&Users&and&Groups& Safe&Routes&to&School&Coordinator&

Friends&of&the&W&OD& FOWOD&&In&consultation&with&NVRPA,&IEN&developed&and&sent&each&stakeholder&an&interview&invitation&via&email.&IEN&then&conducted&30&to&60&minute&phone&interviews&with&each&person&during&February&and&March&of&2014,&using&an&interview&protocol&developed&in&collaboration&with&NVRPA.'! !


$SSHQGL[�'��6LWXDWLRQ�$VVHVVPHQW

Kelly Wilder


Interview!Protocol'&IEN&began&by&explaining&that&the&interviewee&was&being&contacted&because&of&their&(or&their&organization’s)&involvement&with&the&W&OD&and&to&elicit&ideas&for&improving&safety&on&the&trail.&Ideas&would&be&used&to&assist&in&the&design&of&a&workshop&on&trail&safety,&to&be&hosted&by&NVRPA&on&April&11.&IEN&is&based&at&the&University&of&Virginia&and&assists&public&agencies&and&others&in&mediating&and&facilitating&stakeholder&dialogues&around&planning&and&natural&resources&issues.&Interviewees&were&asked&if&they&had&preliminary&questions.&&&Interviewees&were&asked&to&describe&their&(or&their&organization’s)&involvement&with&the&trail.&IEN&explained&that&the&goal&of&the&workshop&is&to&assist&NVRPA&in&developing&a&consistent&approach&to&safety&on&the&W&OD&that&is&uniform&across&all&of&the&localities&intersected&by&the&trail.&NVRPA&has&identified&three&areas&of&the&trail&to&be&discussed&at&the&workshop:&urban/congested&areas,&intersections,&and&along&the&trail&between&intersections.&&&Interviewees&were&asked&whether&they&had&ideas&for&physical&strategies&–&such&as&flashing&lights,&bollards,&stop&signs&–&that&might&help&with&trail&safety&in&any&of&these&three&areas.&They&were&then&asked&to&suggest&cultural&strategies&–&like&“Say&Hello”&signs&or&encouraging&users&not&to&wear&earbuds&–&aimed&at&changing&behavior&and&culture&on&the&trail.&&Because&the&workshop&is&by&invitation&only,&interviewees&were&asked&to&recommend&others&who&NVRPA&should&be&sure&to&invite,&in&addition&to&the&representatives&already&invited&from&the&cycling,&jogging,&rollerblading,&hiking,&equestrian,&public&safety,&transportation&planning,&and&local&government&communities.&IEN&concluded&by&thanking&the&interviewees&for&their&time&and&asking&if&they&had&any&final&questions&or&comments.&&&Interview!Findings!&A&summary&of&the&findings&from&the&telephone&interviews&is&below.&A&complete&list&of&physical&and&cultural&strategies&compiled&from&the&interviews&is&included&in&Appendix&B.!&Legal&interpretation&of&intersections&&One&major&trend&across&interviews&was&the&confusion&over&safetyMrelated&laws&and&their&enforcement.&Different&groups,&such&as&cyclists&and&law&enforcement,&hold&conflicting&beliefs&about&what&safety&signals&such&as&stop&signs&mean&along&the&trail.&For&example,&people&expressed&very&strong&opinions&about&whether&a&full&stop&is&required,&and&what&exactly&constitutes&a&full&stop,&whether&slowing&to&look&both&ways,&unclipping&one&foot&and&putting&it&down,&or&unclipping&both&feet&and&putting&them&down.&Different&interpretation&of&laws&in&different&jurisdictions&along&the&trail&exacerbates&confusion&over&users’&rights.&Further,&trail&users’&status&changes&as&they&pass&from&the&trail&into&a&crosswalk,&shifting&from&cyclist&to&pedestrian.&Lastly,&the&potential&for&the&creation&of&entirely&different&laws&by&different&jurisdictions&along&the&length&of&the&trail&is&a&major&concern&for&some&stakeholders.&Clarification&of&the&legal&interpretation&of&stop&signs&and&expectations&at&intersections&are&crucial&issues&along&the&trail&for&all&user&groups.&A&number&of&interviewees&expressed&the&hope&that&a&consistent&interpretation&could&be&applied&and&enforced&in&all&localities.&


Kelly Wilder


Enforcement&&Many&interviewees&felt&clarification&of&rules&could&be&achieved&through&increased&enforcement.&Ideas&such&as&stationing&police&at&particularly&busy&and&troublesome&intersections&to&inform&users&and&enforce&rules&were&suggested.&An&extension&of&this&idea&was&to&schedule&information&and&outreach&days&where&additional&enforcement&resources&are&available&and&police&are&stationed&at&intersections&for&educational&purposes&and&to&ticket&those&who&break&rules.&Lastly,&some&felt&the&trail&patrol&should&be&empowered&to&enforce&rules,&although&there&was&recognition&that&this&could&have&a&negative&impact&on&the&trail&culture&and&be&unrealistic&for&NVRPA&to&implement.&Despite&the&sense&from&most&interviewees&that&additional&enforcement&would&quickly&lead&to&increased&safety&on&the&trail,&most&also&recognized&that&the&barriers&to&increased&enforcement&–&mainly&lack&of&resources&–&were&significant&and&likely&insurmountable.&&&User&trail&education&&Virtually&all&interviewees&highlighted&the&urgent&need&for&increasing&the&education&of&all&user&groups&on&safety&rules&and&behavior.&The&interviewees&especially&focused&on&three&areas&of&education&that&are&crucial&for&improving&safety&on&the&trail.&&1. Children'and'the'elderly''Since&the&W&OD&trail&runs&through&very&urban&and&congested&areas,&there&are&widely&diverse&user&groups.&Children&and&the&elderly&are&two&groups&that&warrant&special&attention&in&terms&of&safety.&Several&interviewees&emphasized&the&importance&of&educating&users&about&the&unpredictable&nature&of&children:&they&make&sudden,&erratic&movements;&they&are&likely&to&not&stay&in&the&correct&travel&lane;&they&will&run&out&onto&the&trail&without&warning;&and&they&may&not&understand&certain&practices&of&cyclists&such&as&calling&out&“on&your&left/right.”&Similarly,&the&elderly&may&be&unsteady&on&their&feet,&become&afraid&when&cyclists&pass&by&them&at&a&fast&speed,&and&interpret&the&“on&your&left/right”&call&as&request&for&them&to&move&to&the&left&or&right.&Parts&of&the&trail&pass&through&schools&and&a&community&center,&where&these&user&groups&cross&the&trail&frequently.&&&&2. Etiquette'and'“rules'of'engagement”'''Many&users&are&unclear&on&what&behavior&is&expected&of&them&due&to&lack&of&consistent&signage&and&messaging&along&the&trail.&Interviewees&shared&numerous&behaviors&that&reduce&safety&and&create&dangerous&situations,&or&“accidents&waiting&to&happen.”&Pedestrians&may&walk&severalMabreast&down&the&path,&walk&on&the&wrong&side,&walk&a&pet&without&a&leash,&or&wear&earbuds&so&that&they&can’t&hear&cyclists&coming&from&behind&–&all&of&which&can&make&it&difficult&and&frustrating&for&cyclists&to&pass.&Children&may&be&running&or&meandering&across&the&trail,&creating&additional&challenges&and&hazardous&situations&for&cyclists.&Cyclists&may&travel&at&high&speeds&without&stopping&at&stop&signs&or&intersections&and&may&pass&in&the&middle&of&two&users,&making&others&afraid&to&use&the&trail.&Cyclists&using&the&trail&for&racing&or&training&purposes&were&especially&noted&to&instill&a&sense&of&fear&with&their&high&speeds&and&perceived&lack&of&awareness&of&their&impacts.&Rules&about&cyclists&


Kelly Wilder

Kelly Wilder

Kelly Wilder


passing&in&the&middle&of&a&lane,&unplugging&from&earbuds&while&on&the&trail,&or&leash&laws&for&dogs,&are&examples&of&what&could&be&disseminated&in&safety&pamphlets&or&through&community&fairs&throughout&all&jurisdictions&to&communicate&the&same&safety&rules&and&etiquette.&&&3. Speed''The&trail&is&used&for&many&different&purposes,&which&creates&a&wide&range&of&expectations&about&speed.&Those&who&expect&to&be&able&to&use&the&trail&at&a&high&rate&of&speed&include&commuters&as&well&as&those&who&are&using&the&trail&for&training.&Those&who&have&different&expectations&about&speed&on&the&trail&include&those&using&the&trail&for&recreation&or&nonMbusiness/nonMtraining&purposes.&Some&interviewees&feel&pedestrians&are&not&mindful&that&the&trail&is&used&for&multiple&purposes,&and&create&unnecessarily&hazardous&situations&when&they&wear&ear&buds&that&prevent&easy&communication&among&users.&User&perceptions&of&each&other&are&very&much&driven&by&their&own&intended&use.&For&example,&cyclists&who&are&using&the&trail&for&business/training&purposes&perceive&others&who&do&not&remain&aware&of&their&surroundings,&who&are&inconsiderate&of&staying&to&the&right,&and&who&are&generally&uneducated&about&trail&etiquette,&as&a&primary&hazard.&Parents&with&children,&the&elderly,&or&others&pedestrians&perceive&cyclists&traveling&at&high&rates&of&speed&who&don’t&slow&down&in&congested&areas&as&a&primary&hazard.&Each&user&group&seems&to&feel&that&the&other&user&groups&do&not&understand&how&their&behavior&makes&other&users&feel.&All&user&groups&felt&that&cars&are&also&an&issue,&and&that&safety&could&be&improved&by&making&drivers&more&aware&that&they&are&approaching&an&intersection&and&by&using&different&cues&to&force&cars&to&slow&down&as&they&approach&the&trail.&&4. Community'and'respect''&Apart&from&providing&all&users&with&the&same&rules&and&etiquette&information,&fostering&a&sense&of&community&and&respect&on&the&trail&is&important.&Interviewees&felt&some&users&have&a&lack&of&concern&for&how&their&behavior&makes&others&feel.&Since&the&trail&is&an&amenity&for&multiple&communities&and&many&different&types&of&users,&interviewees&generally&advocated&for&strategies&that&would&increase&communication&and&understanding,&arguing&that&it&is&vital&for&all&user&groups&to&respect&one&another&to&achieve&a&safe&environment.&&!

!Source:&Flickr&user&BeyondDC!

!!! !


Kelly Wilder


ONLINE!SURVEY!!!!Drawing&from&the&interview&findings,&IEN&drafted&survey&questions,&which&were&then&reviewed&and&refined&by&NVRPA.&The&survey&was&available&online&for&two&weeks&in&midMMarch,&during&which&time&NVRPA,&its&partners,&and&other&W&OD&stakeholder&groups&encouraged&their&constituents&to&take&the&survey.&The&response&rate&was&excellent,&with&1,695&people&completing&the&survey.&&&Online!Survey!Results!!&Results&of&both&the&interviews&and&the&survey&assisted&IEN&and&NVRPA&in&designing&the&April&11&stakeholder&workshop.&Survey&results&are&presented&below.&&Respondents&'Most&survey&respondents&lived&in&Arlington&and&other&localities&along&the&trail&and&nearby.&Over&half&were&in&their&30s&and&40s,&but&all&ages&except&those&under&19&were&represented&well&in&the&survey,&as&were&both&male&and&female&stakeholders.&&&

!!

& &

0!50!

100!150!200!250!300!350!

Arlington&

Vienna&

Reston&

Falls&Church& DC&

Ashburn&

Alexandria&

Herndon&

Fairfax&

Leesburg&

Sterling&

Oakton&

McLean&

Annandale&

Chantilly&

Centreville&

Springgield&

Oak&Hill&

Other&

Location!!

<19&1%&

20s&10%&

30s&27%&

40s&28%&

50s&19%&

>60&15%&Age!

Male&58%&

Female&42%&

Other&0%&

Gender!


Kelly Wilder


Trail&Use&'Trail&use&was&also&well&represented&among&those&responding&to&the&survey.&Half&use&the&trail&at&least&weekly,&and&at&least&two&thirds&of&respondents&commonly&use&the&trail&on&weekday&evenings&as&well&as&weekend&mornings,&midday,&and&afternoons.&Although&fitness&training&was&the&most&popular&use,&recreation/relaxation&and&overall&health&were&also&listed&as&primary&motivations&for&using&the&trail.&Over&90&percent&of&respondents&use&other&area&trails&in&addition&to&the&W&OD.&While&the&Shirlington&to&Falls&Church&segment&of&the&trail&was&used&most&often,&all&segments&of&the&trail&were&substantially&represented.&&

When!do!you!most!frequently!use!the!trail?!(Choose!all!that!apply)!

! Weekday! Weekend!Morning! 57%& 75%&Midday! 30%& 86%&Afternoon! 55%& 73%&Evening! 92%& 31%&

!

!!

!& &

Daily&18%&

Weekly&51%&

Monthly&20%&

<Monthly&10%&

Never&1%&

Frequency!of!use!

Leesburg&to&Purcellville& Sterling&to&

Leesburg&

Reston&to&Sterling&

Falls&Church&to&Reston&

Shirlington&to&Falls&Church&

MostSoften!used!trail!segments!


Kelly Wilder


!!!! !&Trail&Safety&'Over&half&of&respondents&always&or&almost&always&stop&at&intersections,&and&another&third&often&do.&Still,&17&percent&of&respondents&rarely&or&never&stop,&confirming&that&a&sizable&population&of&trail&users&choose&not&to&obey&trail&stop&signs.&Respondents&believe&that&just&over&10&percent&of&trail&users&are&always&safety&conscious&–&leaving&almost&90&percent&who&they&believe&are&never&or&only&sometimes&safety&conscious.&&&

!!!! !&Just&over&half&of&respondents&report&having&observed&a&conflict&on&the&trail,&and&conflicts&between&bikes&and&pedestrians,&cars,&and&other&bikes&are&the&most&commonly&observed.&&!

Types!of!use! Use!of!other!area!trails!

Always&18%&

Almost&always&36%&

Often&30%&

Rarely&16%&

Never&0%&

Full!stop!at!intersection!crossings!

Never&2%&

Sometimes&87%&

Always&11%&

Trail!users!are!safety!conscious!


Kelly Wilder


!! !&Respondents&were&split&on&whether&to&implement&a&trail&speed&limit,&with&just&over&40&percent&replying&both&in&favor&and&in&opposition.&Education&was&rated&highest&among&strategies&to&improve&trail&safety,&while&more&enforcement&was&rated&lowest.&&&

&& &&Half&of&respondents&were&in&favor&of&expanding&afterMhours&use,&which&currently&extends&from&Arlington&to&Herndon,&to&include&the&entire&trail.&&&&&

&&&&&&& &

Types!of!conTlicts!observed!

Better&education&

More&safety&signage&

Physical&improvements&

More&enforcement&

Improving!trail!safety!

Not&sure&14%& Yes:&

entire&trail&16%&

Yes:&certain&areas&26%&

No&44%&

Trail!speed!limit!

Yes&51%&No&&

6%&

Unsure&43%&

Extending!afterShours!use!


Kelly Wilder


Safety&Enhancement&'The&stakeholder&telephone&interviews&resulted&in&the&identification&of&44&different&possible&physical&and&cultural&strategies&for&enhancing&safety&(listed&in&Appendix&B).&NVRPA&then&identified&the&strategies&most&feasible&for&them&to&implement,&and&therefore&worth&presenting&to&the&public.&This&assessment&narrowed&the&strategies&down&to&28&possible&safety&enhancement&strategies,&which&IEN&then&used&to&develop&a&public&survey.&Survey&respondents&were&asked&to&rank&each&strategy&in&terms&of&whether:&&

1. The&strategy&would&improve&trail&safety.&2. The&strategy&would&be&helpful&to&them&directly.&&3. The&strategy&should&be&discussed&at&the&workshop.&

&Using&the&first&ranking&criteria&of&“improving&trail&safety,”&the&28&strategies&are&ranked&below&from&most&supported&to&least&supported,&based&on&how&many&respondents&agreed&or&strongly&agreed&that&the&strategy&would&improve&trail&safety.&&&Strategies)for)Improving)Trail)Safety)&

Strategy!

Agree/!

strongly!

agree!

1. Improve&design&at&intersections&so&that&the&trail&is&more&prominent&as&it&crosses&the&street.& 93%&

2. Make&vehicle&crossings&(for&drivers&on&the&road)&more&visible&through&tactics&such&as&"stop&ahead"&painted&on&the&pavement,&rumble&strips&before&intersections,&zigMzag&marks&before&intersections,&raised&crosswalks,&and&increasing&the&width&of&crosswalk&markings.&

91%&

3. Install&Rectangular&Rapid&Flashing&Beacons&(RRFB)&at&problem&intersections.&An&RRFB&is&comprised&of&two&lights&that&alternate&rapid&flashing&when&trail&users&press&a&button.&

84%&

4. Use&asphalt&treatments&such&as&colored&transition&in&areas&where&trail&users&should&slow&down&or&exercise&caution&(for&example&in&congested&areas&or&near&a&school).&

81%&

5. Improve&the&surrounding&bike&infrastructure&so&that&the&W&OD&trail&is&not&the&only&option&for&bike&commuters.& 80%&

6. Improve&the&responsiveness&of&activated&crossing&signals&to&reduce&waiting&time&for&trail&users& 78%&

7. Encourage&groups&and&clubs&to&discuss&and&educate&others&on&trail&rules,&so&that&everyone&has&a&shared&understanding&of&what&the&law&means&and&what&practices&are&appropriate.&

76%&

8. Create&separate&lanes&for&pedestrians&and&cyclists& 74%&9. Work&with&leaders&of&charity&rides&to&communicate&that&riders&must&be&safe&

and&courteous&by&slowing&down&when&passing&pedestrians&and&not&passing&in&the&middle&of&two&lanes.&

72%&


Kelly Wilder


Strategy!

Agree/!

strongly!

agree!

10. Encourage&bike&education&through&driver&education&programs& 72%&11. Disseminate&information&on&current&laws&so&that&everyone&has&the&same&

understanding.& 72%&

12. Install&additional&trail&markings&to&alert&users&to&approaching&intersections.& 71%&13. Develop&a&uniform&ordinance&for&all&intersection&crossings&that&would&apply&in&

all&jurisdictions,&to&reduce&confusion,&foster&consistent&user&behavior,&and&enable&consistent&enforcement&(for&example,&proceed&with&caution,&stop,&full&stop,&may&not&cross&against&the&signal,&etc.).&

69%&

14. Better&integrate&the&trail&with&the&communities&it&passes&through&using&signage&and&maps&about&surrounding&local&businesses&and&amenities.& 68%&

15. Install&more&signs&that&include&safetyMoriented&messages.& 68%&16. Promote&a&Friends&of&the&W&OD&App,&which&will&show&things&like&bike&shops&

and&coffee&shops&in&the&area&around&the&trail.& 66%&

17. Work&with&race&and&triathlon&groups&to&communicate&that&the&trail&is&not&for&racing&or&team&training.& 64%&

18. Install&more&of&the&standard&signage&repeated&along&the&trail&about&trail&etiquette.&Ideas&for&signage&include&using&single&point&messaging&("Click&It&or&Ticket”)&encouraging&bikers&to&slow&down,&that&is&easy&for&children&and&other&trail&users&to&understand.&(Note:&NVRPA&is&developing&and&implementing&standard&signage&along&the&trail&this&year.)&Install&more&of&the&standard&signage&repeated&along&the&trail&about&trail&etiquette.&Ideas&for&signage&include&using&single&point&messaging&("Click&It&or&Ticket”)&encouraging&all&user&groups&to&be&mindful&and&respectful&of&each&other.&Signs&should&be&easy&for&all&trail&users&to&understand.&(Note:&NVRPA&is&developing&and&implementing&standard&signage&along&the&trail&this&year.&

64%&

19. Hold&community&fairs&where&information&can&be&distributed,&such&as&a&W&OD&Fair&Day&with&trail&etiquette&cards.& 62%&

20. Time&bike&signals&to&more&efficiently&match&car&signals.& 62%&21. Hold&trail&safety&days&across&all&jurisdictions&to&get&the&same&message&out&and&

use&the&same&enforcement&procedures.& 61%&

22. Improve&trailheads&to&make&it&clear&that&the&trail&is&not&a&road.& 61%&23. Install&bicycle&signals&with&red,&yellow,&and&green&lights&to&direct&bicycle&traffic.& 53%&24. Develop&a&definition&of&what&is&a&safe&speed&for&cyclists.& 51%&25. Develop&a&set&of&policies&and&distribute&every&spring&and&summer&to&new&users.& 43%&26. Have&police&and&trail&patrol&distribute&safety&pamphlets&on&the&trail,&and&make&

them&available&in&kiosks.& 39%&

27. Institute&a&trail&speed&limit&(for&example&15&MPH),&along&all&or&part&of&the&trail.& 35%&28. Targeted&enforcement&by&police&at&intersections&to&encourage&users&to&

complete&a&full&stop&at&crossings&and&ticket&users&who&do&not.& 34%&

29. & &&&& &


Kelly Wilder


Overall,&there&is&wide&agreement&on&which&strategies&are&most&effective&for&improving&safety.&All&of&the&top&10&strategies&have&over&70&percent&agreement&and&all&of&the&top&seven&have&over&75&percent&agreement.&Based&on&the&survey&results,&the&strategies&with&the&greatest&opportunity&to&improve&safety,&in&order,&are&described&below.&&1. Physical'design'of'intersections')

!There&is&broad&agreement&that&the&physical&design&of&intersections&must&be&improved&in&order&to&increase&safety.&Improved&physical&design&of&intersections&includes&strategies&like&making&vehicle&crossings&with&the&trail&more&visible,&implementing&advanced&warning&signals&like&a&Rectangular&Rapid&Flashing&Beacon&(RRFB),&and&improving&the&responsiveness&of&activated&signals.&Design&features&to&increase&intersection&visibility&include&pavement&markings&like&“stop&ahead,”&rumble&strips&before&intersections,&and&zigMzag&marks&painted&on&the&road&as&an&intersection&approaches.&These&types&of&tactics&are&what&over&75&percent&of&survey&respondents&feel&will&lead&to&increased&safety.&'2. Physical'design'of'the'trail'in'between'intersections'!Improving&safety&along&the&trail&in&between&intersections&provides&the&second&greatest&opportunity&for&improving&safety.&Strategies&along&the&trail&include&creating&separate&lanes&for&cyclists&and&pedestrians&and&implementing&speed&zones&through&special&asphalt&treatments&where&heightened&awareness&is&required.&&

!3. Community'outreach'and'education)&Improving&safety&requires&behavioral&change,&which&the&majority&of&respondents&believe&can&be&accomplished&through&community&outreach&and&education.&Community&outreach&can&be&achieved&through&better&integrating&the&trail&with&the&communities&it&passes&through&by&using&signage&and&maps,&and&also&by&promoting&a&“Friends&of&the&W&OD”&app.&&

&Outreach&to&specific&user&groups,&for&example&the&biking&community,&is&prominent&among&these&responses.&Trail&users&can&be&educated&on&safety&rules&through&information&disseminated&by&groups,&clubs,&and&leaders&of&charity&bike&rides.&Car&drivers&can&be&educated&through&increased&attention&to&biking&in&driver’s&education&programs.&&!4. Developing'a'uniform'ordinance'to'reduce'confusion'and'foster'consistent'behavior')&Developing&a&standard&definition&of&the&law&is&one&critical&step&towards&improved&safety,&with&69&percent&of&survey&respondents&agreeing&this&strategy&would&be&effective.&A&uniform&ordinance&would&streamline&laws&across&jurisdictions&to&reduce&confusion,&foster&consistent&user&behavior,&and&enable&consistent&law&enforcement.&&! !


Kelly Wilder


Survey!Analysis!!&Across&the&three&questions&respondents&were&asked&to&rank&for&each&strategy,&there&is&fairly&wide&correlation&among&which&strategies&were&deemed&to&be&effective.&The&chart&on&the&following&two&pages&demonstrates&that&seven&of&the&top&10&strategies&are&supported&as&a&strategy&that&can&improve&safety,&will&directly&benefit&the&respondent,&and&should&be&discussed&at&the&workshop.&This&underlines&their&overall&importance&as&strategies&for&further&consideration.&&&The&chart&also&reveals&other&trends&across&all&three&categories&of&improving&safety,&directly&benefitting&the&respondent,&and&worthiness&for&discussion&at&the&workshop.&&1. Enforcement&is&the&least&preferable&strategy&among&respondents.!This&may&also&show&

the&bias&of&the&average&user&who&resists&additional&enforcement&and&punishment&on&a&trail&that&currently&has&ambiguous&standards&for&safety.&

2. The&top&six&of&the&bottom&10&strategies&have&50&percent&or&greater&agreement&that&they&can&improve&safety&on&the&trail,&meaning&they&may&still&be&worth&pursuing.&&

3. Only&the&top&two&strategies&in&the&“this&would&be&directly&useful&to&me”&category&have&over&75&percent&agreement,&and&none&of&the&strategies&for&discussion&at&a&workshop&have&over&75&percent&agreement.!

4. Respondents&have&broader&agreement&on&what&will&improve&safety&than&on&which&strategies&should&be&discussed&at&a&workshop.&

5. There&is&declining&agreement&as&to&what&is&directly&helpful&to&respondents&and&what&should&be&discussed&at&a&workshop&compared&to&how&the&strategy&will&improve&overall&safety.&

6. Overall,&given&the&above&correlations,&respondents&find&it&easier&to&agree&on&what&will&improve&safety&than&on&what&will&they&will&directly&benefit&from&–&which&may&suggest&that&most&respondents&tend&to&view&improved&safety&as&something&that&will&help&others.&

&&&&


Kelly Wilder

Comparison*of*ranked*strategies*across*the*three*survey*questions

Color%sig

nifie

s%where%a%stra

tegy%was%in

%the%top%10%acro

ss%all%th

ree%categories.

RANK

#TH

IS*STRATEGY*WOULD*IM

PROVE*TRAIL*SAFETY

%*agree/*

strongly*agree

#TH

IS*STRATEGY*WOULD*BE*H

ELPFUP*TO

*ME*

DIRECTLY

%*agree/*

strongly*agree

#TH

IS*STRATEGY*SHOULD*BE*D

ISCUSSED

*AT*A*WORK

SHOP

%*agree/*

strongly*agree

127Improve%design%at%in

terse

ctions%so

%that%th

e%tra

il%is%more%

prominent%as%it%cro

sses%th

e%stre

et.%

93%


terse

ctions%so

%that%th

e%tra

il%is%more%

prominent%as%it%cro

sses%th

e%stre

et.%

86%

25

Make%vehicle

%crossin

gs%(fo

r%drivers%o

n%the%road)%m

ore%

visib

le%through%tactics%su

ch%as%"sto

p%ahead"%painted%on%

the%pavement,%ru

mble%strip

s%before%interse

ctions,%zigK

zag%marks%before%interse

ctions,%ra

ised%cro

sswalks,%a

nd%

incre

asing%the%width%of%cro

sswalk%markings.%

69%

225

Make%vehicle

%crossin

gs%(fo

r%drivers%o

n%the%road)%m

ore%

visib


ch%as%"sto


the%pavement,%ru

mble%strip

s%before%interse

ctions,%zigK


ctions,%ra

ised%cro

sswalks,%a

nd%

incre


sswalk%markings.%

91%

25

Make%vehicle

%crossin

gs%(fo

r%drivers%o

n%the%road)%m

ore%

visib


ch%as%"sto


the%pavement,%ru

mble%strip

s%before%interse

ctions,%zigK


ctions,%ra

ised%cro

sswalks,%a

nd%

incre


sswalk%markings.

85%


terse

ctions%so

%that%th

e%tra

il%is%more%

prominent%as%it%cro

sses%th

e%stre

et.

68%

326

Install%R

ectangular%Rapid%Flashing%Beacons%(R

RFB)%at%

problem%interse

ctions.%A

n%RRFB%is%co

mprise

d%of%tw

o%

lights%th

at%alternate%rapid%flashing%when%tra

il%users%

press%a

%button.%

84%

22Improve%the%responsiveness%o

f%activ

ated%cro

ssing%

signals%to

%reduce%waitin

g%tim

e%for%tra

il%users

75%

18Improve%the%surro

unding%bike%infrastru

cture%so%that%th

e%

W&OD%tra

il%is%not%th

e%only%option%for%bike%commuters

67%

417

Use%asphalt%tre

atments%su

ch%as%co

lored%tra

nsitio

n%in%

areas%w

here%tra

il%users%sh

ould%slo

w%down%or%exercise

%

caution%(fo

r%example%in%congested%areas%or%near%a%

school).%

81%

26

Install%R


RFB)%at%

problem%interse

ctions.%A

n%RRFB%is%co

mprise

d%of%tw

o%

lights%th


il%users%

press%a

%button.

73%

16Create%separate%lanes%fo

r%pedestria

ns%and%cyclists

64%

518Improve%the%surro


cture%so%that%th

e%

W&OD%tra

il%is%not%th

e%only%option%for%bike%commuters.%

80%


r%pedestria

ns%and%cyclists

70%

26

Install%R


RFB)%at%

problem%interse

ctions.%A

n%RRFB%is%co

mprise

d%of%tw

o%

lights%th


il%users%

press%a

%button.

63%


f%activ

ated%cro

ssing%

signals%to

%reduce%waitin

g%tim

e%for%tra

il%users

78%

36

Promote%a%Friends%of%th

e%W&OD%App,%which%will%sh

ow%

things%lik

e%bike%shops%and%coffee%shops%in

%the%area%

around%the%tra

il.

69%


f%activ

ated%cro

ssing%

signals%to

%reduce%waitin

g%tim

e%for%tra

il%users

57%

730

Encourage%groups%and%clu

bs%to

%discu

ss%and%educate%

others%o

n%tra

il%rules,%so

%that%everyone%has%a%shared%

understa

nding%of%what%th

e%law%means%and%what%

practice

s%are%appropriate.

76%

35

Better%in

tegrate%the%tra

il%with%the%communitie

s%it%passe

s%

through%using%sig

nage%and%maps%about%su

rrounding%

local%businesse

s%and%amenitie

s%

67%

17

Use%asphalt%tre

atments%su

ch%as%co

lored%tra

nsitio

n%in%

areas%w

here%tra

il%users%sh

ould%slo

w%down%or%exercise

%

caution%(fo


school).

57%


r%pedestria

ns%and%cyclists

74%

18Improve%the%surro


cture%so%that%th

e%

W&OD%tra

il%is%not%th

e%only%option%for%bike%commuters

65%

35

Better%in

tegrate%the%tra


s%it%passe

s%

through%using%sig


rrounding%

local%businesse

s%and%amenitie

s%

54%

941

Work%with%leaders%o

f%charity

%rides%to

%communicate%that%

riders%m

ust%b

e%safe%and%courteous%by%slo

wing%down%

when%passin

g%pedestria

ns%and%not%passin

g%in%the%middle%

of%tw

o%lanes.

73%

42

Develop%a%uniform%ordinance%for%all%in

terse

ction%

crossin

gs%th

at%w

ould%apply%in%all%ju

risdictio

ns,%to

%reduce%

confusion,%foster%co

nsiste

nt%user%behavior,%a

nd%enable%

consiste

nt%enforce

ment%(fo

r%example,%proceed%with%

caution,%sto

p,%full%sto

p,%may%not%cro

ss%against%th

e%sig

nal,%

etc.).

58%

36



ow%

things%lik


%the%area%

around%the%tra

il.

52%

10

38Encourage%bike%education%through%driver%education%

programs

72%

17

Use%asphalt%tre

atments%su

ch%as%co

lored%tra

nsitio

n%in%

areas%w

here%tra

il%users%sh

ould%slo

w%down%or%exercise

%

caution%(fo


school).

57%

42


terse

ction%

crossin

gs%th

at%w


risdictio

ns,%to

%reduce%


nsiste

nt%user%behavior,%a

nd%enable%

consiste

nt%enforce

ment%(fo


caution,%sto

p,%full%sto

p,%may%not%cro

ss%against%th

e%sig

nal,%

etc.).

52%

11

33Disse

minate%information%on%current%la

ws%so

%that%

everyone%has%th

e%same%understa

nding.

72%

33Disse


ws%so

%that%

everyone%has%th

e%same%understa

nding.

56%

38Encourage%bike%education%through%driver%educatin%

programs

51%

Mail: P.O

. Box 400179 • C

harlottesville, VA

22904-4179 • Phone 434-924-1970 • Fax 434-924-0231 • ZZZ

.virginia.edu/ien3DJH��


Kelly Wilder

RANK

#TH


PROVE*TRAIL*SAFETY

%*agree/*

strongly*agree

#TH


ELPFUP*TO

*ME*

DIRECTLY

%*agree/*

strongly*agree

#TH


ISCUSSED

*AT*A*WORK

SHOP

%*agree/*

strongly*agree

12

20Install%additio

nal%tra

il%markings%to

%alert%u

sers%to

%

approaching%interse

ctions.

71%

38Encourage%bike%education%through%driver%educatin%

programs

55%

30


bs%to

%discu

ss%and%educate%

others%o

n%tra

il%rules,%so


understa

nding%of%what%th


practice

s%are%appropriate.

50%

13

42


terse

ction%

crossin

gs%th

at%w


risdictio

ns,%to

%reduce%


nsiste

nt%user%behavior,%a

nd%enable%

consiste

nt%enforce

ment%(fo


caution,%sto

p,%full%sto

p,%may%not%cro

ss%against%th

e%sig

nal,%

etc.).

69%

24Time%bike%sig

nals%to

%more%efficie

ntly%match

%car%sig

nals

55%

41

Work%with%leaders%o

f%charity

%rides%to

%communicate%that%

riders%m

ust%b


wing%down%

when%passin

g%pedestria

ns%and%not%passin

g%in%the%middle%

of%tw

o%lanes.

49%

14

35

Better%in

tegrate%the%tra


s%it%passe

s%

through%using%sig


rrounding%

local%businesse

s%and%amenitie

s%

68%

41

Work%with%leaders%o

f%charity

%rides%to

%communicate%that%

riders%m

ust%b


wing%down%

when%passin

g%pedestria

ns%and%not%passin

g%in%the%middle%

of%tw

o%lanes.

53%

24Time%bike%sig

nals%to

%more%efficie

ntly%match

%car%sig

nals

49%

15

15Install%m

ore%sig

ns%th

at%in

clude%safetyKoriented%

messa

ges

68%

30


bs%to

%discu

ss%and%educate%

others%o

n%tra

il%rules,%so


understa

nding%of%what%th


practice

s%are%appropriate.

52%

40Work%with%race%and%tria

thlon%groups%to

%communicate%

that%th

e%tra

il%is%not%fo

r%racing%or%te

am%tra

ining.

48%

16

36



ow%

things%lik


%the%area%

around%the%tra

il.

66%

20Install%additio

nal%tra

il%markings%to

%alert%u

sers%to

%

approaching%interse

ctions.

49%

33Disse


ws%so

%that%

everyone%has%th

e%same%understa

nding.

48%

17


thlon%groups%to

%communicate%

that%th

e%tra

il%is%not%fo

r%racing%or%te

am%tra

ining.

64%


thlon%groups%to

%communicate%

that%th

e%tra

il%is%not%fo

r%racing%or%te

am%tra

ining.

49%

28

Install%m

ore%of%th

e%sta

ndard%sig

nage%repeated%along%the%

trail%about%tra

il%etiquette.%Ideas%fo

r%signage%include%

using%sin

gle%point%m

essa

ging%("C

lick%It%o

r%Ticket”)%

encouraging%bikers%

to%slo

w%down,%that%is%e

asy%for%ch

ildren%and%other%tra

il%

users%to

%understa

nd.%(N

ote:%NVRPA%is%

developing%and%im

plementing%sta

ndard%sig

nage%along%

the%tra

il%this%y

ear.)%In

stall%m

ore%of%th

e%

standard%sig

nage%repeated%along%the%tra

il%about%tra

il%

etiquette.%Ideas%fo

r%signage%include%

using%sin

gle%point%m

essa

ging%("C

lick%It%o

r%Ticket”)%

encouraging%all%user%groups%to

%be%mindful%and%

respectfu

l%of%each%other.%S

igns%sh

ould%be%easy%for%all%

trail%u

sers%to

%understa

nd.%(N

ote:%NVRPA%is%d

eveloping%

and%im

plementing%sta

ndard%sig

nage%along%the%tra

il%this%

year.

46%

Mail: P.O

. Box 400179 • C

harlottesville, VA

22904-4179 • Phone 434-924-1970 • Fax 434-924-0231 • ZZZ



Kelly Wilder

RANK

#TH


PROVE*TRAIL*SAFETY

%*agree/*

strongly*agree

#TH


ELPFUP*TO

*ME*

DIRECTLY

%*agree/*

strongly*agree

#TH


ISCUSSED

*AT*A*WORK

SHOP

%*agree/*

strongly*agree

18

28

Install%m

ore%of%th

e%sta

ndard%sig


trail%about%tra


r%signage%include%

using%sin

gle%point%m

essa

ging%("C

lick%It%o

r%Ticket”)%

encouraging%bikers%

to%slo

w%down,%that%is%e

asy%for%ch


il%

users%to

%understa

nd.%(N

ote:%NVRPA%is%

developing%and%im

plementing%sta

ndard%sig

nage%along%

the%tra

il%this%y

ear.)%In

stall%m

ore%of%th

e%

standard%sig


il%about%tra

il%

etiquette.%Ideas%fo

r%signage%include%

using%sin

gle%point%m

essa

ging%("C

lick%It%o

r%Ticket”)%


%be%mindful%and%

respectfu

l%of%each%other.%S

igns%sh


trail%u

sers%to

%understa

nd.%(N

ote:%NVRPA%is%d

eveloping%

and%im

plementing%sta

ndard%sig

nage%along%the%tra

il%this%

year.

64%

28

Install%m

ore%of%th

e%sta

ndard%sig


trail%about%tra


r%signage%include%

using%sin

gle%point%m

essa

ging%("C

lick%It%o

r%Ticket”)%

encouraging%bikers%

to%slo

w%down,%that%is%e

asy%for%ch


il%

users%to

%understa

nd.%(N

ote:%NVRPA%is%

developing%and%im

plementing%sta

ndard%sig

nage%along%

the%tra

il%this%y

ear.)%In

stall%m

ore%of%th

e%

standard%sig


il%about%tra

il%

etiquette.%Ideas%fo

r%signage%include%

using%sin

gle%point%m

essa

ging%("C

lick%It%o

r%Ticket”)%


%be%mindful%and%

respectfu

l%of%each%other.%S

igns%sh


trail%u

sers%to

%understa

nd.%(N

ote:%NVRPA%is%d

eveloping%

and%im

plementing%sta

ndard%sig

nage%along%the%tra

il%this%

year.

45%

23Install%bicycle%sig

nals%w

ith%red,%yellow,%and%green%lights%

to%direct%b

icycle%tra

ffic.46%

19

34

Hold%community%fairs%w

here%information%can%be%

distrib

uted,%su

ch%as%a%W&OD%Fair%D

ay%with%tra

il%

etiquette%cards.

62%

39

Hold%tra

il%safety%days%acro

ss%all%ju

risdictio

ns%to

%get%th

e%

same%messa

ge%out%and%use%the%same%enforce

ment%

procedures%

45%

15Install%m

ore%sig

ns%th

at%in


messa

ges

45%

20

24Time%bike%sig

nals%to

%more%efficie

ntly%match

%car%sig

nals

62%

34



distrib

uted,%su

ch%as%a%W&OD%Fair%D

ay%with%tra

il%

etiquette%cards.

44%

39

Hold%tra

il%safety%days%acro

ss%all%ju

risdictio

ns%to

%get%th

e%

same%messa


ment%

procedures%

44%

21

39

Hold%tra

il%safety%days%acro

ss%all%ju

risdictio

ns%to

%get%th

e%

same%messa


ment%

procedures%

61%


nals%w


to%direct%b

icycle%tra

ffic.42%

20Install%additio

nal%tra

il%markings%to

%alert%u

sers%to

%

approaching%interse

ctions.

43%

22

21Improve%tra

ilheads%to

%make%it%cle

ar%th

at%th

e%tra

il%is%not%a%

road

61%

21Improve%tra

ilheads%to

%make%it%cle

ar%th

at%th

e%tra

il%is%not%a%

road

38%

34



distrib

uted,%su

ch%as%a%W&OD%Fair%D

ay%with%tra

il%

etiquette%cards.

43%

23


nals%w


to%direct%b

icycle%tra

ffic.53%

37Develop%a%definitio

n%of%what%is%a

%safe%speed%for%cy

clists.38%


n%of%what%is%a

%safe%speed%for%cy

clists.40%

24


n%of%what%is%a

%safe%speed%for%cy

clists.51%

15Install%m

ore%sig

ns%th

at%in


messa

ges

30%

19Institu

te%a%tra

il%speed%lim

it%(for%example%15%MPH),%along%

all%or%part%o

f%the%tra

il.40%

25

32Develop%a%set%of%policie

s%and%distrib

ute%every%spring%and%

summer%to

%new%users.

43%


s%and%distrib


summer%to

%new%users.

28%

21Improve%tra

ilheads%to

%make%it%cle

ar%th

at%th

e%tra

il%is%not%a%

road

39%

26

29Have%police

%and%tra

il%patrol%distrib

ute%safety%pamphlets%

on%the%tra

il,%and%make%them%available%in%kiosks.

39%

29Have%police

%and%tra

il%patrol%distrib


on%the%tra


25%


s%and%distrib


summer%to

%new%users.

31%

27

19Institu

te%a%tra

il%speed%lim


all%or%part%o

f%the%tra

il.35%

31

Targeted%enforce

ment%by%police

%at%in

terse

ctions%to

%

encourage%users%to

%complete%a%full%sto

p%at%cro

ssings%and%

ticket%yesrs%w

ho%do%not.

23%

31

Targeted%enforce

ment%by%police

%at%in

terse

ctions%to

%

encourage%users%to


p%at%cro

ssings%and%

ticket%yesrs%w

ho%do%not.

31%

28

31

Targeted%enforce

ment%by%police

%at%in

terse

ctions%to

%

encourage%users%to


p%at%cro

ssings%and%

ticket%yesrs%w

ho%do%not.

34%

19Institu

te%a%tra

il%speed%lim


all%or%part%o

f%the%tra

il.23%

29Have%police

%and%tra

il%patrol%distrib


on%the%tra


28%

Mail: P.O

. Box 400179 • C

harlottesville, VA

22904-4179 • Phone 434-924-1970 • Fax 434-924-0231 • ZZZ



Kelly Wilder

&

Mail: P.O. Box 400179 • Charlottesville, VA 22904-4179 • Phone 434-924-1970 • Fax 434-924-0231 • www.virginia.edu/ien Appendix A

Appendix!A:!Stakeholder!Interviews!!The&following&individuals&were&selected&by&NVRPA&to&be&interviewed&by&IEN&because&of&their&knowledge&and&experience&with&the&W&OD&Trail,&as&well&as&for&the&range&of&interests&that&they&represent.&&Key!Interest!

Group!Name!of!Expert!Stakeholder!

Interviewed!Specific!Organization!

Represented!by!Interviewee!

Cycling& Bruce&Wright& Fairfax&Advocates&for&Better&Bicycling&

Pat&Turner& Bike&Loudoun&

Safety& Rudy&Landon& Loudoun&County&Sheriff's&Office&James&Brooks& Falls&Church&Police&Department&

Local&Government& Cindy&Roeder& Town&of&Herndon&

Transportation&and&Other&Planners&

Randy&Dittberner& Virginia&Department&of&Transportation&&

Charlie&Strunk& Fairfax&County&Other&Trail&Users&and&Groups& Sean&McCall& Safe&Routes&to&School&Coordinator&

Friends&of&the&W&OD& Dirck&Harris& FOWOD&

& & &&


Kelly Wilder

&

Mail: P.O. Box 400179 • Charlottesville, VA 22904-4179 • Phone 434-924-1970 • Fax 434-924-0231 • www.virginia.edu/ien Appendix B

Appendix!B:!Complete!Set!of!Physical!and!Cultural!Strategies!Compiled!from!Stakeholder!Interviews!!

Physical!Strategies!

Urban/!

congested!

areas!

Intersections!

Along!the!trail!

1. Widen&the&trail.& X! ! X!2. Increase&lighting&along&the&trail.& X! ! X!3. Install&speed&bumps.& X! ! !4. Separate&lanes&for&cyclists&and&pedestrians.& X! ! !5. Asphalt&treatment&for&special&areas&of&the&trail&or&when&approaching&intersection.& X! X! !6. Improve&surrounding&bike&infrastructure&so&trail&is&not&only&option&for&commuters.& X! ! !7. Install&bike&counters.&These&quantify&show&bike&traffic&along&the&trail&to&justify&

further&improvements.& X! X! X!

8. Implement&a&speed&limit&along&part&or&all&of&the&trail.& X! ! !9. Grade&separated&crossings,&such&as&bridges&or&tunnels&over&busy&intersections.& ! X! !10. Gates/bollards/planters&at&trail&openings.&All&of&these&are&barriers&to&signal&to&cars&

that&the&trail&is&not&a&road.& X! X! !

11. Improved&trail&heads&to&clarify&that&the&trail&is&not&a&road.& X! X! X!12. Standard&pedestrian&activated&traffic&signals.&These&are&walk&signals&that&would&

allow&crossing&after&pedestrians&press&a&button.& ! X! !

13. More&responsive&activated&crossing&signals&to&reduce&wait&time&at&intersections.& ! X! !14. Bicycle&signal&heads&(active&or&passive&detection).&These&would&give&cyclists&their&

own&redMyellowMgreen&signal&with&an&increased&yellow&time&to&allow&them&to&get&across&the&intersection.&

! X! !

15. More&efficient&timing&of&bike&signal&heads&and&car&signal&heads&to&reduce&wait&time.& ! X! !16. More&highly&visible&crossings&through&tactics&such&as:&“stop&ahead”&painted&on&

pavement,&pseudo&rumble&strips,&zigMzag&lines,&raised&crosswalks,&increasing&width&of&crosswalks.&

! X! !

17. Standard&flashing&beacons,&typically&one&light&above&a&safety&sign&to&signal&to&cars&that&they&are&approaching&a&pedestrian&at&a&crossing.& ! X! !

18. Rectangular&rapid&flashing&beacons&(RRFB).&These&are&a&set&of&two&lights&that&flash&faster&than&standard&flashing&beacons&and&have&a&brighter&light&intensity&to&signal&to&cars&that&they&are&approaching&a&pedestrian&at&a&crossing.&

! X! !

19. Hawk&Signals.&These&consists&of&two&red&lights&and&a&yellow&light&facing&both&directions&of&traffic&over&a&crosswalk.&The&lights&are&dim&until&the&pedestrian&pushes&a&button,&triggering&a&flashing&yellow&light&and&then&a&steady&yellow&light&as&they&cross.&

! X! !

20. Increased&and&streamlined&signage&for&cyclists&and&motorists.& X! X! X!21. Signs&using&a&brighter&neon&yellow.& X! X! X!22. Warning&signs&with&pictures&of&pedestrians&and&cyclists.& X! X! X!23. Remove&stop&signs&before&crosswalks.& ! X! !24. Improve&landscaping&and&design&at&crossings.& ! X! !


Kelly Wilder

&

Mail: P.O. Box 400179 • Charlottesville, VA 22904-4179 • Phone 434-924-1970 • Fax 434-924-0231 • www.virginia.edu/ien Appendix B

&

Cultural!Strategies!

Urban/!

congested!

areas!

Intersections!

Along!the!trail!

1. Increase&signage&about&trail&etiquette.& X! ! X!2. Develop&standard&signage&repeated&along&the&trail&with&single&point&messaging&such&

as&“Click&it&or&Ticket”.& X! X! X!

3. Develop&signage&that&is&easy&for&children&to&understand.& X! X! X!4. Distribute&safety&pamphlets&through&police,&trail&patrol,&or&in&kiosks.& X! X! X!5. Education&through&increased&dialogue&between&groups&and&clubs&to&gain&equal&

understanding&of&what&the&law&means,&who&has&rightMofMway,&and&which&cycling&practices&are&appropriate.&

X! X! X!

6. Education&through&police&and&trail&patrol.&Ex.&Talk&to&people&at&intersections,&clarify&stop&sign&rules,&clarify&stop&vs.&slowing&down.& X! X! X!

7. Enforcement&through&police&and&trail&patrol:&station&police&at&every&intersection,&allow&park&rangers&to&enforce&rules,&targeting&enforcement&at&busy&intersections,&ticket&those&who&break&rules,&secure&additional&resources&for&enforcement.&

! X! !

8. Distribute&a&set&of&policies&every&spring&and&summer&to&new&users.& X! X! X!9. Disseminate&information&on&current&law&so&that&everyone&has&the&same&

understanding.& X! X! X!

10. Hold&community&fairs&where&information&can&be&distributed,&ex.&W&OD&fair&to&hand&out&trail&etiquette&cards.& X! ! X!

11. Integrate&the&trail&with&the&communities&it&passes&through&via&signage&and&maps.& X! X! X!12. Promote&Friends&of&W&OD&App&to&show&area&amenities.& X! X! X!13. Develop&a&definition&of&what&slow&speed&is&for&cyclists.& X! X! X!14. Speed&limits&in&crosswalks.& ! X! !15. Educate&motorists&that&users&have&a&right&to&use&the&crosswalks.& ! X! !16. Bike&education&through&Driver’s&Ed.&Programs.& X! X! X!17. Trail&safety&days&across&jurisdictions&to&promote&the&same&message&and&enforcement&

procedures.& X! X! X!

18. Work&with&race&and&trail&groups&to&communicate&that&the&trail&is&not&for&racing.& X! X! X!19. Work&with&leaders&of&charity&rides&to&communicate&that&riders&must&be&safe&and&

courteous&.& X! X! X!

20. Develop&similar&wordage&for&the&law&among&all&jurisdictions.& X! X! X!&!


Kelly Wilder

!

!

Cycling:

1. Anne Mader Mid- Atlantic Bicycle Racing Assoc. 2. Ernest Rodriguez Mid-Atlantic Off-Road Enthusiasts (MORE) 3. Pat Turner Bike Loudoun 4. Bruce Wright Fairfax Advocates for Better Bicycling

Friends of the W&OD Trail:

5. Cleopatra Burke FOWOD 6. Dirck Harris FOWOD 7. George Topic FOWOD 8. Pat Turner FOWOD

Local government:

9. Laurie Cole Town of Vienna 10. John Foust Fairfax County

Other trail user groups: Runners, hikers, equestrians, activists:

11. Jeff Anderson Fairfax County Trails and Sidewalks Committee 12. Paul Baldino Falls Church Citizens Advisory Committee on

Transportation 13. Paula Bliss Loudoun County Equine Alliance 14. Sean McCall Vienna Elementary PTA Safe Routes to School Coordinator 15. Jay Schmitz Reston Association 16. Alan Young Fairfax County Trails and Sidewalks Committee

Parks and Rec:

17. Lyndell Core Arlington Parks and Rec 18. Elizabeth Cronauer Fairfax County Park Authority 19. Cindy Roeder Town of Herndon 20. Cathy Salgado Town of Vienna 21. Kevin Stalica Arlington County Parks and Natural Resources

Safety:

22. James Brooks Falls Church PD 23. Daniel Janickey Town of Vienna PD 24. Rudolph Landon Loudoun County Sheriff's Office 25. Heather Maupin Leesburg PD 26. Michael Wall Fairfax County PD - Reston Station ! !


$SSHQGL[�(��:RUNVKRS�3DUWLFLSDQWV

Kelly Wilder

!

Planners:

27. Bob Boxer Town of Herndon 28. Randy Dittberner VDOT 29. Cindy Englehart VDOT 30. Bill King Loudoun County Planner 31. Dave Kirschner, P.E. Arlington County Department of Environmental Services 32. Ursula Lemanski National Park Service 33. Bryce Perry Town of Herndon 34. Fionnuala Quinn Alta Planning + Design 35. Bill Schultheiss Toole Design 36. Ritch Viola Arlington County 37. Chris Wells Fairfax County 38. James Zeller VDOT

NVRPA board:

39. Barry Buschow NVRPA Board 40. Dan Kaseman NVRPA Board 41. Brian Knapp NVRPA Board 42. David Pritzker NVRPA Board 43. Jeffery Tarbert NVRPA Board

NVRPA staff:

44. Roger Bornt NVRPA Staff 45. Paul Gilbert NVRPA Staff 46. Todd Hafner NVRPA Staff 47. Dan Iglhaut NVRPA Staff 48. Andy Kaganowich NVRPA Staff 49. Laura McCarty NVRPA Staff 50. Karl Mohle NVRPA Staff 51. Chris Pauley NVRPA Staff 52. Kate Rudacille NVRPA Staff ! !


Kelly Wilder

!

!

!!

!!

!!!

30%!

47%!

8%!13%!

3%!

21%!28%!

33%!

19%!

0%!

Strongly!

agree!

Agree! Not!sure! Disagree! Strongly!

disagree!

Signal'Timing'Adjustments'

will!effectively!change!

behavior!to!improve!safety!for!

users!of!the!W&OD!trail!

will!be!feasible!to!implement!

within!1G3!years!

28%!

47%!

14%! 12%!0%!

50%!

36%!

14%!

0%! 0%!

Strongly!

agree!


disagree!

On'Trail'Signage'





within!1G3!years!

35%! 35%!

12%! 9%! 9%!7%! 9%!

16%!

44%!

23%!

Strongly!

agree!


disagree!

Separate'Lanes'for'Bikes/Peds'

Responses!will!effectively!

change!behavior!to!improve!

safety!for!users!of!the!W&OD!

trail!

Responses!will!be!feasible!to!

implement!within!1G3!years!


$SSHQGL[�)��,QVWDQW�3ROOLQJ�5HVXOWV

Kelly Wilder

!

!!

!!

!!

!' '

31%!36%!

12%!19%!

2%!

26%!21%! 19%! 21%!

12%!

Strongly!

agree!


disagree!

Develop'a'Legal'Framework'





within!1G3!years!

21%!

44%!

26%!

7%! 2%!

30%!47%!

8%! 13%!3%!

Strongly!

agree!


disagree!

Visual'enhancements'on'roads'for'drivers'




7%!

56%!

27%!

7%!2%!

36%!40%!

12%! 10%!2%!

Strongly!

agree!


disagree!

Asphalt'Treatments/Slow'Speed'





within!1G3!years!

16%!

44%!

26%!

12%!2%!

29%!

48%!

10%! 10%!5%!

Strongly!

agree!


disagree!

Education'for'Motorists'&'Trail'Users'





within!1G3!years!


Kelly Wilder

!

!

!!

' ''

' ''

6!5!

7!

2! 2!3! 3!

4!

2! 2! 2!

Which'best'describes'your'afIiliation?'

21!

11!

5!G!very!

well!!

4! 3!G!

neutral!

2! 1!G!very!

poorly!

Overall'How'well'do'you'think'today's'workshop'went?'

16! 14!

2!

5!G!very!

useful!

4! 3!G!

neutral!

2! 1!G!not!at!

all!useful!

Please'rate'how'useful'you'found'NVRPA's'presentations'about'their'intersection'and'

trail'studies''

22!

8!

2!

5!G!very!

useful!

4! 3!G!

neutral!

2! 1!G!not!all!

all!useful!

Please'rate'how'useful'you'found'Michelle'Vigen's'

presentation'about'social'marketing'

7!

19!

6!

1!

5!G!very!

useful!

4! 3!G!

neutral!

2! 1!G!not!

at!all!

useful!

Please'rate'how'useful'you'found'IEN's'presentation'on'its'

situation'assessment'


$SSHQGL[�*��:RUNVKRS�(YDOXDWLRQ�5HVXOWV

Kelly Wilder

!

! !'

' ''

'! !

17!

16!

5!G!very!

useful!

4! 3!G!

neutral!

2! 1!G!not!at!

all!useful!

Please'rate'how'useful'you'found'the'afternoon's'"Carousel'

Discussion"'26!

6!

1!

5!G!

strongly!

agree!

4! 3!G!

neutral!

2! 1!G!

strongly!

disagree!

I'was'given'the'opportunity'to'contribute''

27!

6!

5!G!

strongly!

agree!

4! 3!G!

neutral!

2! 1!G!

strongly!

disagree!

'I'felt'my'ideas'were'heard'and'that'I'was'treated'respectfully'

26!

7!

5!G!

strongly!

agree!

4! 3!G!

neutral!

2! 1!G!

strongly!

disagree!

I'listened'to'the'ideas'of'others'and'treated'others'with'respect''

12! 12!

8!

1!

5!G!more!

hopeful!than!

before!the!

workshop!

4! 3!G!neutral! 2! 1!G!less!hopeful!

than!before!the!

workshop!

How'do'you'feel'about'safety'on'the'W&OD'Trail'in'the'coming'1S3'years?'


Kelly Wilder

!

What'were'the'most'important'things'you'learned'during'this'workshop?'!

Comments' #'of'responses'• Working!with!different!groups!of!people!and!getting!views!from!

various!stakeholders.!7!

• NVRPA!wants!to!address!trail!safety,!is!open!to!creative!solutions,!and!wants!to!work!with!local!jurisdictions.!

5!

• NVRPA's!plans!to!address!and!improve!safety!at!six!major!intersections.!

3!

• Trail!safety!is!a!very!complex!topic!with!many!variables!and!moving!parts.!

3!

• Networking!with!trail!caretakers!and!users.! 2!

• Importance!of!design!and!data!collection.! 2!

• Helpful!facilitators.! 1!

• The!need!for!cooperation!among!jurisdictions.! 1!

• The!need!for!a!unified!statute/ordinance.! 1!

• There!are!many!great!ideas.! 1!

• The!expectation!of!law!enforcement!presence/action!on!the!trail.! 1!

• Social!marketing!presentation.! 1!

'What'did'you'find'least'helpful'in'this'workshop?''

Comments' #'of'responses'• Carousel!rounds!ended!up!being!repetitive.!It!would!have!been!better!

with!fewer!rounds!and!longer!discussion.!5!

• Confusing/not!well!defined!carousel!topics.! 2!

• Separate!bike!and!ped!paths!not!a!useful!strategy.! 2!

• Not!enough!focus!on!motorist!behavior!"education."! 1!

• Speed/slow!zones!off!topic.! 1!

• Lack!of!real!data!to!support!ideas!and!safety.! 1!

• The!voting!on!options.!A!data!driven!process!would!be!more!effective!than!an!"expert"!driven!process.!

1!

• More!examples!in!morning!session!about!current!situations.! 1!

• IEN!presentation!of!survey!and!interview!results.!Got!the!impression!there!might!be!gaps!in!survey!after!audience!follow!up!questions.!

1!

• Would!have!liked!a!panel!on!police!reporting!their!observations!and!thoughts!on!consistent!law!enforcement!and!ideas!on!safety.!

1!

• More!structure!for!discussion!on!legal!framework.! 1!

'


Kelly Wilder

Improving W&OD Trail Safety: A Stakeholder Workshop

Documents

Transcript of Improving W&OD Trail Safety: A Stakeholder Workshop