What is the Toolbox?

This Multimodal Safety Engineering Toolbox was initiated in Arlington’s first five-year Vision Zero Action Plan under Action Item B7: Multimodal Safety Toolbox. The objectives of this Toolbox are to:

1. Inform stakeholders about safety improvement options and their appropriate uses and contexts,
2. Communicate tools to a community audience using easy-to-understand language,
3. Facilitate coordination between staff, contractors, developers, and the community when discussing transportation safety improvements, and
4. Create a shared understanding and realistic expectations around safety treatments.

The Toolbox describes each tool, how it is applied in Arlington to address safety, and its expected impact on safety. Each tool includes an evidence-based expected crash reduction or other research indicating the tool’s safety benefits. The Toolbox also includes general information about each tool’s application, typical placement, estimated costs, and delivery timelines.

This Toolbox is not meant to replace engineering investigations, feasibility evaluation, and design. The selection of tools for a specific location is always subject to professional judgement of traffic engineers and context-sensitive design, as described in each section of this document.

The Multimodal Safety Engineering Toolbox is also not intended to be a menu from which community members can request safety tools for their street. Before staff consider a tool or tools to use in a certain situation, they must first conduct an analysis to understand the existing safety issue. Therefore, to achieve desired safety benefits, community-reported concerns should focus on observing and communicating safety issues rather than asking for specific tools.

To learn more about Arlington’s process to identify safety issues and move issues forward for tool selection and implementation, please see the Appendix on Safety Issue Identification & Tool Selection.

The tools in this Engineering Toolbox are primarily able to address the following safety target areas: Intersections, Pedestrians, Bicycles, Speed, and Work Zones.

While engineering plays a large role in addressing transportation safety issues, these tools alone cannot achieve our public safety goals. Other actions set forth within the Action Plan are intended to make strides in other target areas over the course of the next five years. For example:

• To reduce crashes on our High Injury Network Corridors, staff are committed to conducting road safety audits on the High Injury Network and prioritizing tools and projects (both small- and large-scale) to improve this network.
• To minimize dangerous behaviors like Alcohol and Distraction, we will deploy public education and engagement campaigns with community partners to help the community understand the gravity that their decisions have on the people around them.
• To achieve Equity in transportation safety—ensuring that all people have access to safe travel options, and no one is disproportionately affected by traffic violence—we conducted a Transportation Safety Equity Analysis to confirm imbalances in crashes, injuries, and self-reported safety concerns across neighborhoods and demographics. The recommendations work to operationalize equity in Arlington’s safety analysis, project prioritization, and engagement and will be tracked moving forward.
• To improve Information Quality for transportation decision-making, we are working with police to ensure crash reports recorded accurately, collecting data from local trauma centers to catch severe transportation injuries not reported to police, developing transportation inventories to allow for safety analysis that goes beyond crash histories, and enhancing outreach efforts so that the feedback we collect is representative of the are entire community.
• To serve our community with Transparency & Accountability, we are reporting out on our Vision Zero Performance Metrics and progress toward each individual action item set forth in the plan every quarter. We are also promoting open data through our Program Dashboard and Crash Data Dashboard, as well as publishing transportation data and guidelines.

To create a true Safety Culture in Arlington, we are actively partnering with the community, community organizations, nonprofit organizations, fellow government organizations, transportation service providers, and more to share and collect information and experiences about transportation safety—so that there is a shared responsibility to travel safely in Arlington no matter who you are and where you are going.

Arlington’s Department of Environmental Services (DES), Transportation Division identifies and assesses potential safety issues using a three-step process:

• Step 1: Location Identification – Initial identification of a potential safety issue through either data analysis findings or through observational/experience-based suggestions.
• Step 2: In-Depth Location Analysis – Once a potential safety issue is initially identified, transportation staff further investigate using additional data or professional observation findings to confirm if there is a fact-based safety issue.
• Step 3: Tool/Treatment Selection for Location – If the safety issue is confirmed during Step 2, the issue will move on for needs assessment, during which engineers will determine which tool or tools to use to address the safety issue

   

  

Step 1: Location Identification

DES identifies potential transportation safety issues using a variety of sources—some based on data and others based on observation:

• Annual Crash Analysis and Hot-Spot Identification: The County conducts annual analysis of crashes to identify spot-based safety issues (crash hot spots and corridors) and countywide safety issues like common roadway types and contexts for certain types of crashes. 
• High-Injury Network Assessment: The County identified a Vision Zero High-Injury Network in 2020 as part of the development of the Vision Zero Action Plan. The corridors on the network were identified because they have high densities of crashes that resulted in a fatal or severe injury. Staff conduct road safety audits and assessments on these corridors to identify both short term and bigger picture improvements. Staff will revisit and update the High-Injury Network every three years.
• Systemic & Predictive Analysis: The County reviews crash data in combination with land use variables, infrastructure/network variables, demographic variables, and equity indicators to assess how crash factors intersect with these various environmental factors. These analyses, which will be conducted every three years, will lead to the identification of and investment in systemic safety improvements and set the stage for continuous systemic assessment of change and progress over time.
• Repaving: The County’s annual repaving program assesses the road network for pavement quality and identifies roads to be resurfaced. When a street is being repaved, it presents an opportunity for new markings, changes to the street configuration, safety, accessibility, and other improvements. Staff conduct a crash analysis and review the Annual Crash Analysis and Systemic & Predictive Safety Analysis results when a street is being repaved to identify potential safety issues that can be addressed when remarking the street.
• Capital Projects: At the initiation of a project funded through the County’s Capital Improvement Plan, staff review crash data to understand if there are existing safety issues at the site that can be addressed in the project plans. This is also true for smaller-scale projects or changes to a street.
• Development Projects: When coordinating plans for new development projects, staff collaborate with developer staff to understand existing safety issues and needs at the site. Staff will provide the latest crash data to the developer and identify crash trends that can be mitigated through design coordination.
• Studies or Plans: Staff may study crash histories and safety needs during the Existing Conditions Analysis of a corridor or sector plan or study. These safety analyses may lead to short- or long-term recommendations for safety projects within the study area.
• Community Feedback & Requests: The County receives inquiries from members of the community through Report A Problem (RAP) submissions. County staff review community input and analyze these comments alongside crash and traffic data to identify potential for improvements. Within the Vision Zero program, the County is also working toward more proactive engagement on safety, including more dedicated engagement with hard-to-reach populations through focus groups and pop-up community outreach efforts to ensure that the feedback the staff receives reflects the entire Arlington community. Community requests may also be submitted in the form of applications to various neighborhood programs, such as the Neighborhood Complete Streets Program and the Arlington Neighborhoods Program.
• Coordination with Partners: County staff coordinate across departments to share information, which can help identify safety issues. For example, if Arlington County Police Department (ACPD) staff see a safety issue while monitoring traffic, they can bring that issue to transportation staff. Similarly, if Arlington Public School (APS) staff identify a safety issue on a school route, they can alert staff to review the issue. Business improvement districts and alliances, County commissions and committees, and community advocacy groups can also be partners in communicating potential safety issues.

Step 2: In-Depth Location Analysis

 Some safety issues identified through programmatic analysis lead to rapid selection and implementation of countermeasures designed to avert specific crash types. In these cases, field verification of the existing conditions and applicability of the selected countermeasure(s) is still usually required.

 In other cases, the potential safety issues identified through the channels above may prompt a more in-depth analysis. To further investigate locations where safety concerns have been identified and to develop appropriate countermeasures, the County may collect and analyze crash, roadway, vehicle, pedestrian, and/or bicycle data for the site through the following methods:

• Collection by staff using County-owned equipment,
• Contracting out to private data collection entities, and
• Using pre-existing data (the County may already have data available for a given location).

Three major factors affect the County’s ability to collect data:

• Seasonal conditions that affect travel patterns (e.g., we generally do not collect volume data while schools are not in session),
• Weather conditions that affect travel behavior (e.g., we generally do not collect data in adverse weather conditions), and
• High volumes of data collection needs (i.e., we will add new data requests to an existing queue, safety priorities can be escalated).

Collection and analysis of this data may take several months to review conditions holistically.

Step 3: Tool/Treatment Selection for Location

Once staff review conditions, they can confirm whether the safety issue exists and why it exists. Once a safety issue is confirmed, the next step is for staff to identify the appropriate tool or tools to address the safety issues and patterns found. 

Arlington County’s Division of Transportation delivers safety improvements using signage and marking, policy/regulation, pilot, quick-build, and capital projects. The sections below describe the general resources, timelines, and considerations associated with each project delivery method.

Other departments within Arlington County are involved in the deployment of safety improvements or projects. For example, the Arlington Neighborhoods Program or the site plan development process may implement projects that deliver safety benefits. Transportation staff and the Vision Zero team collaborate with other teams to ensure that all projects consider safety and deploy multimodal engineering safety tools consistently and effectively.

Signage and Marking Projects

• Cost is low and typically funded through general operating funds, repaving capital funds, or Street Safety Improvement Program- Vision Zero funds to address documented safety issues.
• Can be implemented within a year.
• Includes the deployment of a sign or pavement markings to address a safety concern.
• Typically, does not include data collection or community engagement.

Policy or Regulation Projects

• Cost will vary based on the scale and impact of the initiatives.
• Includes any change that requires adjustment of County policies, codes, or regulation.
• Significant policy changes will likely require before/after data collection to assess impacts.
• Timeline is likely to be over a year to allow for community engagement and process needs for adjusting County Code (if needed).

Quick-Build Projects

• Cost is typically low to mid-range (and funded through general operating and maintenance funds or the Street Safety Improvement Program – Vision Zero funds or other capital funds).
• Can be implemented within one to three years.
• May use temporary or permanent materials depending on the project.
• Intended to be permanent projects or provide an interim condition while the County identifies funding for a permanent solution.
• Data may be collected after a quick-build project is built to evaluate its effectiveness.
• The planning and design of quick-build projects is lower intensity compared to longer-term, capital-funded projects.
• Community engagement is typically offered at the Communicate Level (per the 6-Step Communications Guide) for quick-build safety improvements, because they are targeted safety measures with proven safety benefits that are being deployed to address a documented safety issue in a timely manner.
• In some cases, quick-build projects can begin with temporary materials and later be followed up with permanent materials. This provides an opportunity to adjust the design based on real-world operating conditions.

Capital Projects

• Cost is typically mid-range to high (funded through budget set aside in the capital Improvement Program or can be implemented as part of a site plan development).
• Have longer implementation timeframes (three or more years).
• Are typically built with permanent materials that cannot be easily adjusted or removed.
• Often require significant data collection before implementation to ensure appropriate long-term design. Data may also be collected after implementation for evaluation.
• The planning and design of individual capital projects is the most intensive. For example, acquiring any number of temporary or permanent construction easements can take from six months to three or more years.
• Capital projects may also require procurement for construction management and services. The procurement process for bidding construction contracts is typically about six months, and the construction can range from six months to three or more years.

The highest level of community engagement is typically required for capital projects

Following the implementation of a new safety tool, Arlington County takes steps to evaluate the performance of the measure and to see whether adjustments need to be made to further improve safety. Evaluation of effectiveness is particularly important for new innovative tools. View the Pilot Safety Projects page to view before/after evaluations and public engagement results for various types of tools and projects.

Arlington County is also actively tracking crash rates at locations with recent improvements, quick-build projects, and on the High-Injury Network. This tracking allows staff to layer on additional safety treatments if the original tools or projects implemented did not effectively reduce crash rates and improve safety at the location.

How does Arlington County consider and apply new safety tools?

Arlington’s Safety Pilot Project initiative allows testing of new safety tools or strategies. Pilots can also be used to test an existing tool in a new type of location. Pilots apply temporary materials that can be adjusted or removed based on field conditions. They can last one month to over a year depending on the scale and/or impact of the pilot.

The cost for safety pilot projects is typically low and funded through general operating funds or the Street Safety Improvement Program – Vision Zero funds. Pilots can typically be implemented within one to two years based on complexity of planning and materials acquisition. Pilot projects may be included as part of a larger-scale capital project when needed to assist in determining the best safety solution for a location.

Safety pilot projects involve substantial data collection before and during pilot projects to evaluate their effects on roadway operations or safety. Community members are informed about pilot project implementation, and feedback is collected as part of subsequent analysis as necessary.

If a safety pilot project involves a new safety tool, once the pilot process completes and the tool is deemed to be an effective safety measure, the tool will be incorporated into this Multimodal Safety Engineering Toolbox and may be installed through any of the applicable project channels listed in this section.

How can I track where safety tools are located?

Arlington has a Vision Zero Program Dashboard that visualizes crash information, program initiatives, ongoing community outreach, and the locations of safety tools listed in this Toolbox. Where appliable, the tool cut sheets in this Toolbox will include a link to its respective tab on the Program Dashboard to illustrate locations in the county where the tool is in use.  

Traffic engineers and planners across the world are constantly seeking and implementing new tools to make roadways safer for vehicles, bikes, pedestrians, and other user groups. Therefore, this Toolbox will be updated to include new tools over time, as appropriate.