Council Member Julie Won questions DOT on crosswalk yield rates and LPIs

Thank you so much, Chair Abreu.

What percentage of drivers yield to pedestrians at both marked and unmarked crosswalks?

And what infrastructure improvements increase yield rates at pedestrian crossings?

And have these infrastructure improvements been considered in the Vision Zero reimagined plan?

So I don't know that we have that specific data point, but we do know that yielding to pedestrians is an incredibly important thing, and that's something both we work on with PD from an enforcement perspective, but it's also something that we try to design into the street infrastructure.

Just for example, you talked a little bit earlier about design of bike lanes at protected intersections, and one of the very specific ways that that improves safety

is by using the physical infrastructure to force drivers to turn more slowly and to turn at an angle where they can better see both cyclists and pedestrians.

So what we want to do is have people turning slowly so that they can see pedestrians crossing and therefore yield.

So can you just clarify, you don't have the percentage of drivers for yielding to pedestrians at unmarked and marked crosswalks, or you don't have it with you right now?

So that's not something we've measured on a citywide basis, no.

Is that something that you could consider measuring with the Vision Zero reimagined plan so that we have that data?

Let's talk about that and get back to you.

Okay.

And leading pedestrian intervals, LPIs, are the cheapest intersection improvement given that they require no infrastructure changes.

Is Vision Zero reimagined aware that only half of the signalized intersections have LPIs?

Yeah, we've seen great results from LPIs, and we've put in over 6,000 to date.

We continue to roll them out.

You're right, Council Member, that they're really a...

much more easier on the wallet, I guess you could say.

They're easier to roll out in that way.

Yeah, we remain committed to using it.

I think it's, you know, again, it's one of the tools that we have.

And so it's part of the mix of all the safety improvements that we're making.

So is there a hard commitment from the mayoral admin of how many LPIs would be installed going forward with the Vision Zero reimagined plan?

Yeah, the Vision Zero reimagined doesn't include a commitment specifically around LPIs.

Would you be willing to add them?

I mean, I think it's the treatment that we remain committed to.

We, you know, as you mentioned, they're at, I guess, roughly half of signalized intersections.

We prioritize them at locations where we think they can have the greatest benefit.

That's places where we're seeing a lot of turn conflicts.

So what happens over time is that the more intersections, you know, we put them at, the impact may be a little less.

Doesn't mean it's not a good idea.

It just means like when we're balancing in a world of finite resources, you know, where to focus, we may find other things that will have a greater benefit.

So I guess what I'm struggling with is it's clear that we are aligned as a council and with the DOT on what your vision is for safety and what the advocates want.

But what I'm having a hard time understanding.

every single year is the decision tree or the process in which you make what safety measures are put into what intersections.

So if you could share that after this hearing as a follow-up to the chair as well as the members of this committee, it would be really helpful for us to really concretely understand what it is that you're quantifying and qualifying these decisions on.

Because there's so many tools in the toolbox, and we want to see all of them implemented.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member.

I'll meet with the team on that.