This report card was produced by: 995 Market St, Suite 1450 San Francisco, CA

Download (0)

Full text

(1)

This report card was produced by:

995 Market St, Suite 1450

San Francisco, CA 94702

www.walksf.org

Special thanks to interns Christina Blackston and

(2)

Table of Contents

• Introduction + Overall Grade 3

• Walkability + Pedestrian Safety 4

• Funding + Engineering

5

• Enforcement + Education

6

• Conclusion

7

• Appendix 8

(3)

Introduction

Walking is the heart and “sole” of cities. It connects us to our neighbors, allows us to experience

hid-den gems and public art, which we miss otherwise, and keeps our air clean, mind clear and hearts

healthy. Every trip in San Francisco begins and ends with walking, and it’s essential to the overall

health of a city that walking is safe and enjoyable.

However, each year in San Francisco more than 800 pedestrians are injured and 100 experience

se-vere injuries or death due to unsafe walking conditions. Vision Zero is a goal to eliminate all traffic

deaths in San Francisco in the next 10 years by implementing

concrete policies that will build and support a safe, equitable

transportation system. As pedestrians account for 50% of all

traf-fic deaths in San Francisco

1

, improving pedestrian safety is a

ma-jor component of Vision Zero.

San Francisco’s

Pedestrian Strategy

is a plan to cut pedestrian

injuries and fatalities in half. It includes engineering, enforcement,

and education components, with measurable goals for 2014. The

Pedestrian Strategy was released on San Francisco’s first annual

Walk to Work Day, April 12, 2013.

In honor of the second annual Walk to Work Day, April 11, 2014, Walk San Francisco is evaluating

progress towards the goals in the Pedestrian Strategy, and Vision Zero. Street Score: Walk San

Francis-co’s Report Card on Walking analyzes where we are, and where need to go to create a safe,

walk-able San Francisco. We’ve compared San Francisco’s progress to our city-adopted goals, and to the

three U.S. cities that rank higher than San Francisco on levels of walking (Boston, Washington, D.C.,

and New York). Walk San Francisco believes that San Francisco can and should be the safest, most

walkable city in the U.S. The metrics used to assess the city’s progress towards achieving the measures

outlined in the Pedestrian Strategy and beyond along with data sources can be found in the

Ap-pendix.

The metrics:

• A: excellent (exceeds goal)

• B: good (meets goal)

• C: fair (just below goal)

• D: needs improvement (below goal/minimal progress made)

• F: failing (well below goal/no progress made)

Overall Grade: Progress towards Vision Zero C+

San Francisco earned a C+ on the city’s overall progress towards Vision Zero. This grade is based on

six different categories that are essential to creating a safe and healthy city for walking, including

walkability, pedestrian safety, funding, engineering, enforcement, and education. The remainder of

this report explains how we’re doing in each category. Many San Francisco leaders have made

ex-citing commitments to Vision Zero in the last four months alone, and we look forward to seeing San

Francisco’s overall grade improve each and every year until we achieve Vision Zero in 2024!

1 Second only to New York City, and double the national average; source: Alliance for Biking & Walking, 2014 Benchmarking

Report.

Vision Zero

is a

goal to

eliminate

all traffic deaths in

San Francisco in the

(4)

Walkability: A+

Where San Francisco stands today:

• San Francisco earns a Walk Score of 84, the second highest in the

country after New York City, demonstrating the city’s vibrant, mixed use districts and myriad destinations accessible on foot.

Approximately 24% of trips made in SF are by foot, and 10% of San

Franciscans commute to work on foot; the national average for commuting on foot is 4.9%.

In San Francisco, 9.9% of residents commute to work by walking;

the fourth highest percentage in the country after Boston, Washington, D.C, and New York City.

Despite the fact that walking to work is fairly equal across income levels, low-income San Franciscans are

more likely to be victims of traffic collisions. Where San Francisco needs to go:

• Shift half of short trips (currently 33% of trips <1 mile are made by car) made by driving to walking and/or

walking and transit to earn an A in this metric.

• Improve walkability by requiring all new developments improve pedestrian safety with the countermeasures

available in the city’s WalkFirst program, along with best practices from the Better Streets Plan.

Pedestrian Safety: D+

Where San Francisco stands today:

• After a modest decrease in pedestrian injuries and fatalities from 2000 - 2011, injuries and fatalities have

in-creased over the past two years (21 deaths in 2013; highest number since 2007).

• Pedestrians account for 51% of all traffic fatalities, but only 24% of all trips.

• Seven pedestrians have been killed on San Francisco’s streets so far this year (2014.

• San Francisco has a rate of 4 pedestrian fatalities per 10,000 daily pedestrians walking to work; compared

to peer cities, this is better than the rate of 5.8 in Philadelphia, but worse than Boston’s rate of 0.9.

• Seniors account for 41% of pedestrian fatalities, but only 17% of the population.

• Some neighborhoods are disproportionately impacted by injuries and fatalities, including the Tenderloin,

Chinatown and South of Market; these neighborhoods are also among the city’s lowest income, and have

the lowest rates of car ownership.2

• The San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH) is in the process of hiring a staff member to monitor

pedestrian safety and Vision Zero metrics. Where San Francisco needs to go:

Vision Zero was adopted by the City of San Francisco in 2014 to eliminate all traffic fatalities by 2024; a B

would be earned for this metric if fatalities decrease by 10%/year, and an A for a decrease of greater than 10%/year.

• As we approach Vision Zero, a focus should be on minimizing inequities across neighborhoods and

popula-tion groups.

• More data is needed on injuries involving people with disabilities to help inform strategies to eliminate

inju-ries among the disabled community.

• SFDPH should have ongoing funding for a full-time epidemiologist to monitor traffic safety metrics to earn an

A on this metric.

(5)

Funding: D+

Where San Francisco stands today:

• San Francisco’s per capital spending on combined pedestrian and bicycle planning is on par with other

large urban cities, except Washington, D.C., which spends far more than SF and other peer cities ($13.80 vs. $1.31 per capita).

• San Francisco spends a disproportionately lower share of dollars on pedestrian infrastructure compared to

the share of trips taken on foot (1.3% vs. 24%).

• There is a 75% shortfall between the funding allotted to the Pedestrian Capital Improvements Program for

2015 – 2019 and the amount needed to fully implement the Pedestrian Strategy. Where San Francisco needs to go:

• Pass the transportation ballot measures proposed for November 2014 to fund a substantial portion of

planned pedestrian improvements.

• Fill the 75% funding gap in order to support pedestrian safety and Vision Zero to earn an A on this metric.

• Develop a “catalyst fund” for local businesses and technology companies to invest in Vision Zero projects to

save lives.

Engineering: C+

Where San Francisco stands today:

• The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency and Department of Public Works met or exceeded

goals for making improvements around schools and senior centers.

• The SFMTA and DPW did not meet critical safety goals for improvements to eight miles of high injury corridors

per year3 and 20 stand-alone intersections per year.

Where San Francisco needs to go:

• Improving all 70 miles of high injury corridors and 20 intersections per year in the next five years (by 2019)

would help transportation agencies earn a B; going above this goal would justify an A on these metrics.

• SFMTA should report on progress towards eliminating high injury corridors.

• DPW should prioritize high injury corridors in their five-year paving plan.

• All agencies should adopt and implement a complete streets checklist to ensure streets receiving significant

maintenance, or undergoing reconstruction, meet the highest possible safety standards while doing so.

3 Eight miles factors in additional miles of high injury corridors accrued since the release of the 2013 Pedestrian Strategy (70

(6)

Enforcement: B

Where San Francisco is today:

• The number of citations San Francisco Police Department has given increased 43% from January 2013 to

January 2014, demonstrating the prioritization of traffic safety.

• Enforcement targeted at the 5 most dangerous driving behaviors increased from 22% of citations to 33% in

January 2014, but has not met the goal of 50%.

• SFPD changed enforcement practices to prioritize and recognize preventable nature of traffic collisions

(use of term “collision” instead of “accident”).

• The District Attorney’s office prosecuted 6 out of nine of at-fault drivers involving vehicular manslaughter in

2013, and has publicized these cases to inform the public that traffic crimes are taken seriously. Where San Francisco needs to go:

• Meet goal of 50% of traffic citations given to the five most dangerous driving behaviors to earn a B on this

metric.

• Increase the number of red light cameras and introduce automated speed enforcement optimize limited

personnel resources.

• Fund and establish the Vehicular Manslaughter Unit proposed by the District Attorney’s office in the 2014

budget cycle.

• Explore additional options to strengthen penalties for people who injure and kill others on our transportation

system.

Education and Outreach: B-

Where San Francisco is today:

• A one-year walking educational campaign will be rolled out in Summer 2014, and the Mayor launched an

interim pedestrian safety education campaign.

• Numerous citywide encouragement events were held in 2013 to open streets for pedestrians and to

pro-mote walking.

• Safe Routes to Schools successfully doubled school participation in Walk and Roll to School Day in 2013.

Where San Francisco needs to go:

• Secure funding for an ongoing walking and safety

out-reach campaign.

• Expand special events, like Sunday Streets, to one per

week, and/or reach all schools through Walk and Roll to School Day to get an A on this metric.

• Launch a full website to regularly track performance

against the Pedestrian Strategy’s metrics and progress towards Vision Zero to earn an A on this metric.

• Expand the Safe Routes to School program from 15 to 40

schools beginning in the 2014-2015 school year (funding already secured).

(7)

Conclusion

San Francisco scores well in walkability, but this represents only a portion of what is necessary to create a safe, vibrant environment for walking in a city.

While these grades measure progress towards the pedestrian elements of the Pedestrian Strategy over the past year, the City has made significant progress towards Vision Zero in the past four months alone.

City staff are clearly dedicated to the Vision Zero goal, and are among the nation’s brightest and most talented engineers, planners, epidemiologists, law enforcement professionals and attorneys.

San Francisco has the capacity to achieve Vision Zero, but must invest its transportation dollars to completely fund the WalkFirst engineering improvements that will build safer streets, as well as the more com-prehensive Pedestrian Strategy, to reduce serious and fatal traffic-related injuries. The November 2014 transportation ballot measures will provide a significant and critical source of funding for these

im-provements.

With greater investments in safety, through improved street design and more targeted enforcement, San Francisco can achieve Vision Zero to elimi-nate all traffic fatalities in 10 years.

(8)

Metric Average 2000-2013 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 D 1 Pedestrian Injuries* 832 961 917 888 823 743 755 743 798 805 734 823 875 948 TBD D 1 Pedestrian Deaths* 19 32 19 18 24 20 14 16 24 13 16 13 17 16 21

Source: San Francisco Police Department

Appendix:

KEY GPA A 4.0 B 3.0 C 2.0 D 1.0 F 0.0

C+ 2.4 OVERALL SCORE: Progress Towards Vision Zero

A 3.8 Walkability

Metric San Francisco New York City Boston Washington, D.C.

A 4 Commute to Work by Walking 9.9% 10.3% 15.0% 11.8%

A 4

City Rank for Commute to

Work by Walking 4 3 1 2

A 4

County-Level Sprawl Index measured by density, land use mix, and proximity to activity centers, and street network

2nd least sprawling county in country

1st least sprawling county in country

Walk to Work by Income, Less

than $15,000 22%

Greater than $65,000 28%

Source: Alliance for Biking & Walking, 2014 Benchmarking Report, ACS, 2009-2011, and Smart Growth for America Measuring Sprawl 2014

Walk Bike Auto Transit Shuttle

B 3Share of all trips by mode in SF, 2013 24% 2% 53% 20% 1%

Source: San Francisco Transportation Plan, San Francisco County Transportation Authority, 2013

Metric SF New York City Boston Washington, D.C. National Rank

A 4 WalkScore 84 88 80 74

Ranked 2nd most walkable large city in US

Source: WalkScore, Accessed March 2014 D+ 1.4 Pedestrian Safety

Metric

Demongraphics of Fatalities in

San Francisco San Francisco Population

F 0Percentage of traffic fatalities that are pedestrians 51.0% 24% of trips are on foot

A 4Percentage of pedestrian fatalities with victims under 16 0% 14.7% F 0Percentage of pedestrian fatalities with victims over 64 41.2% 17.5%

Source: Alliance for Biking & Walking, 2014 Benchmarking Report, FARS, ACS, 2009-2011

Metric San Francisco New York City Boston Washington, D.C.

D 1

Pedestrian fatality rate per 10K daily pedestrians, walking

to work only 4.0 4.0 0.9 3.3

Source: Alliance for Biking & Walking, 2014 Benchmarking Report, FARS, ACS, 2009-2011

Metric Status

C 2

Develop an ongoing monitoring and surveillance system*

Position has been created but not yet been filled; long term funding is not yet secured NOTES

Excellent (exceeds goals) Good (meets goals) Fair (just below goal)

Needs improvement (below goal/minimal progress made) Failing (well below goal/no progress made)

(9)

C+ 2.33 Engineering

Improvement Goal (per year) Annual outcome

Cumulative outcome (Jan 2011-Jun 2013)

D 1 High-injury corridors (miles)* 8 4.8 12

F 0 Stand-alone intersections* 20 1.6 4

A 4 Schools* 5 8.8 22

A 4 Senior Centers* 2 3.6 9

D 1

Complete Streets Checklist in

progress* 6 0 0

A 4

Development of WalkFirst, the City's first capital

improvement plan to address pedestrian safety

Source: San Francisco Pedestrian Strategy Progress Report, SFMTA, April 2013; December 2013

B 2.85 Enforcement Prioritization of Traffic Enforcement 2013 2014 (January) 2014 (goal) 22% 33% 50% A- 3.7

Increase in citations from

2013 - 2014** 43%

A 4

Replaced term "accident" with "collision," and now citing at fault parties at scene of collision**

Source: San Francisco Police Department CompStat, accessed March 2014

2013 Prosecution rate for vehicular manslaughter cases involving pedestrians

Number of Cases presented

to the DA At-Fault Drivers charged Cases still under investigation

Prosecution rate, not including cases still under investigation

C 2 9 6 3 67%

Source: San Francisco District Attorney, 2014

B- 2.5 Education and Outreach

Education Type Goal Status

B 3Walking and Safety Outreach Campaign* Create continual program

1 year campaign in progress, no funding secured for continual program

B 3 Special Events* Hold 11 per year

Held 12 citywide events in 2013: 9 Sunday Streets, 1 Park(ing) Day, 1 Walk to Work Day, 1 ShapeUp SF Walking Challenge

D 1

Website with Strategy

Information and Click It, Fix It* Ongoing

Basic information available online, but complete website was never launched

B 3 Safe Routes to School* Expand SRTS within 1-2 years

Program remained steady in 2013; annual event, Walk and Roll to School Day increased by approximately 50%

* = Metric from the San Francisco Pedestrian Strategy ** = Metric set by the San Francisco Police Department

Focus Enforcement on the Five Most Dangerous Driving Behaviors**

1.7

Figure

Updating...

References

Related subjects :