HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-09 Adopting the Vision Zero Philosophy and Action PlanRESOLUTION NO. 2024-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
OCOEE, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE VISION ZERO
PHILOSOPHY AND ACTION PLAN; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the State of Florida is one of the most dangerous states for pedestrians, consistently
ranking high on the Pedestrian Danger Index by Smart Growth America, with the metro area of
OrlandoKissimmee-Sanford, Florida ranking as one of the most dangerous metropolitan areas for
pedestrians in the country; and
WHEREAS, fatal and severe crashes are preventable, and death and severe injury are not an
acceptable cost for using our public roadway system; and
WHEREAS, The Ocoee City Commission recognizes the need to ensure pedestrian and bicycle
safety and provide facilities to meet the travel needs of all mode users within the City, regardless of age
or ability; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ocoee is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the
continuing transportation planning systems and adoption of transportation plans and programs; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ocoee will hereby commit to decreasing these crash statistics by
endorsing Vision Zero which is a data-driven strategy focused on eliminating traffic fatalities and
severe injuries, while increasing safe, healthy, and equitable mobility for all; and
WHEREAS, Vision Zero is founded on a Safe System approach that recognizes that people will
make mistakes and roadway systems and policies should be designed to protect them through
humancentered safety redundancies and shared responsibilities; and
WHEREAS, key elements of the Vision Zero strategy include: reframing traffic fatalities as
preventable, focusing on system failures, reducing the impact of collisions, adopting a safe system
approach for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians, making data -driven decisions, prioritizing safety
improvements in areas that have historically been underserved, and building robust engagement
strategies to reach those who are most vulnerable on the roadways; and
WHEREAS, the United States Department of Transportation has adopted the Safe System
approach; and
WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Transportation has adopted a Target Zero Initiative; and
WHEREAS, there are over 50 Vision Zero jurisdictions in the United States, including Orange
County, and this is expected to increase significantly in the coming years; and
WHEREAS, it is anticipated that implementation of Vision Zero methodologies will make City
of Ocoee streets safer for all road users, particularly those who are most physically vulnerable, such as
seniors, youth, and people with disabilities, and will further encourage people of all ages and abilities to
walk, bike and take transit;
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Safety Action Plan
AUGUST 2024
Bluford Avenue in the City of Ocoee
Public engagement at Ocoee Fire Department Open House
City of Ocoee 2
Preparation of this Safety Action Plan was funded by a $3.79 million Safe Streets
and Roads for All Federal Grant that was awarded to MetroPlan Orlando.
Public engagement at Ocoee Fire Department Open House
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 3
Statement of Protection of Data from Discovery and Admissions
SECTION 148 OF TITLE 23, UNITED STATES CODE REPORTS DISCOVERY AND ADMISSION
INTO EVIDENCE OF CERTAIN REPORTS, SURVEYS, AND INFORMATION — Notwithstanding
any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data compiled or collected
for any purpose relating to this Vision Zero Safety Action Plan, shall not be subject to
discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered
for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at the location
identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or other data.
Key Terms
Crash/Collision – An occurrence where a road
user collides with another road user or a moving
or stationary obstruction. It may result in injury or
loss of life, trauma, and/or property damage and
can involve a single party or multiple parties.
High Injury Network – The mapping of corridors
where high numbers of people have been
killed or seriously injured in traffic crashes.
KSI Crash – A crash that results in someone
being Killed or Seriously Injured.
Safe System Approach – A guiding safety
approach that builds and reinforces multiple
layers of protection to both prevent crashes
from occurring and minimize the harm caused
to those involved when a crash does occur.
Serious Injury – Serious injuries may include broken
bones, severed limbs, burns, traumatic brain injuries,
and other major injuries. These injuries usually require
hospitalization and transport to a medical facility.
May also be referred to as an incapacitating injury.
Transportation Underserved Communities –
Communities where people experience greater
transportation inequities to access jobs, housing, food,
health care, education, and other destinations due to
overlapping factors, including demographics, features
of the built environment, and in some instances a lack
of prior investment in the transportation system.
Vision Zero – A road safety philosophy which
states that no loss of life or incapacitating
injury due to traffic crashes is acceptable.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan – A comprehensive
plan focusing on reducing and eliminating traffic-
related injuries and fatalities. For the purposes of
this document, Ocoee will refer to its Vision Zero
Safety Action Plan as “Safety Action Plan.”
Vulnerable Road User – For the purposes of this
Safety Action Plan, a person outside of a car or truck,
which includes pedestrians, bicyclists, or motorcyclists.
This also includes people in wheelchairs and on
e-mobility devices, like scooters and golf carts.
City of Ocoee 4
List of Abbreviations
AASHTO – American Association of
State Highway Transportation Officials
ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act
BIL – Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
DUI – Driving Under the Influence
ETC – Equitable Transportation
Community
FDOT – Florida Department
of Transportation
FHWA – Federal Highway
Administration
HIN – High Injury Network
HSIP – Highway Safety
Improvement Plan
KSI – Killed or Seriously Injured
MTP – Metropolitan
Transportation Plan
NACTO – National Association of
City Transportation Officials
PPL – Prioritized Project List
PROWAG – Public Right-of-
Way Accessibility Guidelines
SRTS – Safe Routes to School
SS4A – Safe Streets and Roads for All
SSA – Safe System Approach
TIP – Transportation
Improvement Plan
USDOT – United States
Department of Transportation
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 5
City of OcoeeVision Zero Safety Action Plan
PAGE 08
Chapter 1: Executive summary
High-level overview of
the plan components,
actions, next steps, and
key takeaways from the
Safety Action Plan.
PAGE 14
Chapter 2: Ocoee Has a Vision of Zero Fatal and Serious Injury Crashes
Call to action and
overview of Vision
Zero and the Safe
System Approach.
PAGE 20
Chapter 3: Ocoee Vision Zero Statement and Plan Framework
The City’s commitment to
zero fatalities and serious
injuries and an outline of
the Safety Action Plan.
McKey Street in the City of Ocoee
City of Ocoee 6
PAGE 24
Chapter 4: Crash Analysis and Trends
Summary of key findings
and trends from the
crash analysis.
PAGE 36
Chapter 5: Listening to the Community
How regional and local
community engagement
activities informed the
Safety Action Plan.
PAGE 42
Chapter 6: Recommended Programs and Policy Updates
Programs and policy
updates recommended
for implementation.
PAGE 48
Chapter 7: Recommended Safety Projects
Engineering projects
identified for
implementation.
PAGE 66
Chapter 8: Monitoring and Implementation
Process for tracking
progress toward Vision
Zero on an annual basis.
PAGE 74
Chapter 9: Technical Appendix
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 7
CHAPTER 1
Executive Summary
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee 8
CITY OF OCOEE
adopted a Vision Zero
resolution, committing
to reaching zero traffic
fatalities and serious
injuries on City roads
by or before 2045.
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan 9
In the last five years, 12 people were killed and 102 people were seriously injured in traffic crashes on roads in the City of Ocoee.
Vision Zero is a road safety
philosophy stating no loss
of life or incapacitating
injury due to traffic crashes
is acceptable. The City
of Ocoee adopted, by
resolution, the Vision Zero
philosophy on August
20, 2024. This Vision Zero
Safety Action Plan, known
as the Safety Action Plan,
is the City’s roadmap to
reaching the goal of zero
crashes that result in a
fatality or serious injury.
This Safety Action Plan is part of a larger
regional safety effort funded by a $3.79 million
Safe Streets for All (SS4A) grant and conducted
by MetroPlan Orlando, the metropolitan
planning organization for Orange, Osceola,
and Seminole Counties. MetroPlan guides
the region toward envisioning a 25-year plan
for transportation for all Central Floridians.
During a typical week in the MetroPlan
Orlando Region, 5 people are killed and 35 are seriously injured in traffic crashes on the
region’s roads. In the last five years (2018 to
2022), 12 people were killed (in 10 crashes) and 102 people were seriously injured (in 83 crashes) in traffic crashes on Ocoee’s roads.
To address this reality, this Safety Action
Plan turns to the core elements of Vision Zero and the Safe Systems Approach.
A bicyclist on the road after being struck by a vehicle.
City of Ocoee 10
1.1 What Are the Transportation Safety Issues?
A large share of fatal or serious injury crashes (referred to as KSI crashes) happen on a small percentage of the overall roadway network. While most crashes only involve people in motor vehicles, crashes that result in a fatality or severe injury disproportionately involve someone walking, bicycling, or riding a motorcycle.
This Safety Action Plan identifies, among other things, Ocoee’s High Injury Network (HIN), which is a map of State, County, and City roads within the city where KSIs have occurred in the past five years. All the City’s traffic deaths between 2018 and 2022 have occurred on eight (8) percent of the roads within the City. Figure 1 shows a map of Ocoee’s HIN.
1.2 Getting to Zero
There is no one solution to reach zero traffic deaths and serious injuries. Rather, it will require a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach along with community input. This Safety Action Plan incorporates community feedback and provides a tailored Safe System Approach that includes non-engineering and engineering countermeasures Ocoee may use, including working with MetroPlan Orlando, Orange County, FDOT, and others to achieve zero fatalities and serious injuries on roadways within the City’s jurisdiction. Finally, this Safety Action Plan provides monitoring strategies, outlined in the City of Ocoee Progress Monitoring section, the City can use to track its progress toward zero.
1.3 Vision Zero Resolution
The City of Ocoee adopts, by resolution, the Vision Zero Philosophy relating to road and traffic safety in the City and commits to working towards a goal of zero fatal and serious injury crashes by or before 2045. The full resolution is included in Appendix A .
1.4 Grants and Other Implementation Sources
The Federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) established the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) discretionary program with $5 billion in appropriated funds over 5 years, 2022-2026. The SS4A program funds regional, local, and Tribal initiatives through grants to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries. To facilitate future SS4A grant applications by the City, the 2024 SS4A Safety Action Plan Component Checklist was completed, and summarized in Appendix B.
1.5 Tracking the City’s Progress
Monitoring progress towards meeting zero fatal and serious injury crashes within the City is important. On an annual basis, the City will reflect on progress towards zero through an assessment of the crash trends from the prior year and comparing them to the base-year trends documented in this Safety Action Plan.
All the City’s traffic deaths between 2018
and 2022 have occurred on eight (8)
percent of the roads within the City.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 11
Crown Point
Beulah
Beach
Summerport
Heights
Paradise
Fullers
Gotha
Lake Butler
Windermere
Clarcona
437
COUNTY
ORANGE
435
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGEMaguire RdMaguire RdN Kissimmee Ave408
TOLL
50
438
429
TOLL Lady AveSilver Star Rd
Orlando Ave
B
l
u
f
o
r
d
A
v
e
S
W Colonial Dr
Old Winter Garden Rd
Moore Rd
E Plant
S
t
Story Rd Clark Rd NOcoee Apopka RdClarcona O c o eeRdC la rc o n a O co ee Rd
N Apopka Vineland Ave0 0.5 1 Miles
LEGEND
Local Road High Injury Network
State and County Road
High Injury Network
Local Road High Crash Intersection
State and County Road
High Crash Intersection
West Orange Trail
Figure 1: Map of Ocoee High Injury Network
Legend
Local Road
High Crash Intersection
State and County
High Crash Intersection
Local Road
High Injury
Network
State and
County
High Injury
Network
West Orange
Trail
City of Ocoee 12
Crown Point
Beulah
Beach
Summerport
Heights
Paradise
Fullers
Gotha
Lake Butler
Windermere
Clarcona
437
COUNTY
ORANGE
435
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGEMaguire RdMaguire RdN Kissimmee Ave408
TOLL
50
438
429
TOLLLady AveSilver Star Rd
Orlando Ave
B
l
u
f
o
r
d
A
v
e
S
W Colonial Dr
Old Winter Garden Rd
Moore Rd
E Plant
S
t
Story RdClark Rd NOcoee Apopka RdClarconaOcoeeRdClarconaOcoeeRdN Apopka Vineland Ave00.5 1Miles
LEGEND
Local Road High Injury Network
State and County Road
High Injury Network
Local Road High Crash Intersection
State and County Road
High Crash Intersection
West Orange Trail
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 13
CHAPTER 2
Ocoee Has a Vision of Zero Fatal and Serious Injury Crashes
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee 14
THIS CHAPTER
describes the need
for a Vision Zero
transportation Safety
Action Plan and
highlights how it differs
from other safety
plans. This chapter
also outlines Vision
Zero and the Safe
System Approach.
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan 15
Too frequently, visitors and residents in Ocoee lose their
lives or have them permanently changed in traffic crashes.
This Safety Action Plan addresses the City of Ocoee’s
roadway safety issues by offering concrete, data-backed
solutions.
2.1 Vision Zero Makes Roads Safer
Correcting Ocoee’s roadway safety issues requires a holistic approach shaped by technical assessments and forward-minded thinking. That’s where Vision Zero and the Safe System Approach come into play.
Vision Zero is a road safety philosophy that views any loss of life or serious injury due to traffic crashes as unacceptable. Vision Zero aims to eliminate crashes that result in death and serious injuries by anticipating human mistakes and minimizing impacts on the human body when crashes do occur. To accomplish this goal, Vision Zero draws from the Safe System Approach (SSA).
How Is Vision Zero Different?
1. Reframes traffic deaths as preventable.
2. Integrates human failure into the approach.
3. Focuses on preventing fatal and severe injury crashes rather than eliminating all crashes.
4. Aims to establish safe systems rather than relying on individual responsibility.
5. Applies data-driven decision-making.
6. Establishes road safety as a social equity issue.
City of Ocoee 16
2.2 The Safe System Approach
As an engineering strategy, the SSA insists the responsibility for
safety must be shared between all road users, including drivers,
motorcyclists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, and those who plan,
design, maintain, and enforce the transportation system.
The SSA defines five elements of a safe transportation system:
Safer people: Encourage
safe, responsible driving,
bicycling, and walking
behavior by people who
use the roads and create
conditions that prioritize their ability to reach their destination unharmed.
Safer vehicles: Proactively
plan for a connected
and autonomous vehicle
fleet and encourage
the purchase of vehicles
that feature crash
prevention technology.
Safer speeds: Use a
multidisciplinary approach
that induces drivers to travel
at speeds appropriate for
the context, thus reducing
injuries even when human
error leads to a crash.
Safer roads: Prioritize
roadway design changes,
inclusive of bike lanes,
sidewalks, crosswalks,
and intersections, that
address the factors
contributing to severe
injury and fatal crashes.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 17
Post-crash care: Partner
with law enforcement
and emergency response
to identify strategic
investments in crash
response and to clearly
prescribe protocols for
uniform, comprehensive,
and consistent crash
assessment and
crash reporting.
The SSA approach relies
on layering interventions
in each of these areas
atop one another to
provide cumulative,
redundant safety for all
users. The relationship
between these elements is
represented in Figure 2 .
In addition, the SSA is driven by its core principles:
Death and serious injury are unacceptable which is why Ocoee is focused on eliminating crashes resulting in death and serious injuries in Ocoee by or before 2045.
Humans make mistakes that
can lead to a crash, regardless
of whether they are walking,
bicycling, or driving. The goal
of the SSA is to design and
manage a transportation system
to ensure these mistakes do not
have life-altering impacts.
Humans are vulnerable and
bodies can only withstand
a limited amount of impact
from a crash before death
or serious injury occurs.
Responsibility is shared by every person in the transportation system, from everyday users to elected officials, planners, and engineers. Each person has a role to play in reaching zero fatalities and serious injuries.
Safety is proactive, so instead
of waiting for a crash to occur,
transportation agencies should
seek to proactively identify
dangerous situations and
develop solutions to eliminate
them before a crash occurs.
Redundancy of safety measures is crucial to ensure there are multiple
layers of the transportation system
working together towards safer
outcomes so that if one layer
fails, people are still protected.
Figure 2: Safe Systems Approach
Saferspeeds
Safervehicles
Post-crashcare
Saferpeople
Saferroads
THESAFE SYSTEMAPPROACHREDUNDANCY IS CRUCIALSAFETY I
S
P
R
O
A
C
TIVE
RESPONSIBILIT Y I S S H A R E D HUM ANS ARE VULNERABLEH
U
MA
N
S
MAKE MISTAKESDEA TH /S E R IO U S I N JURY IS UNACCEPTABLE
Source: Adapted from Federal Highway Administration, 2024.
City of Ocoee 18
2.3 Safe System Approach Framework
Achieving a safe system requires the coordination of planning, design, operations, and law
enforcement to anticipate human errors and proactively compensate for human vulnerabilities.
As shown in Figure 3, the SSA tiers roadway interventions broadly by their impact. While this hierarchy offers a general prioritization of safety projects, the SSA does not present
a one-size-fits-all solution to roadway safety. Instead, the approach prioritizes context-
sensitive design. Every site in a region’s HIN will require a different combination of
countermeasures depending on what the crash trends reveal at those locations.
The SSA treats safety as a systemic quality and requires regional partners to work together. As
such, this Safety Action Plan is meant to work in tandem with MetroPlan Orlando’s Regional Vision
Zero Safety Action Plan and other concurrent safety efforts being undertaken by neighboring
municipalities, Orange County, and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT).
Figure 3: FHWA Safe Systems Solutions Hierarchy
More effective
Easier to implement
Remove severe conflicts
Eliminate the most severe conflicts between road users, such as by relocating a utility pole, constructing
a roundabout, or adding a median barrier.
Manage vehicle speeds
Reduce the speed of vehicles to align with the context of the road, hazards, and conflicts between road users;
include horizontal and vertical deflection elements.
Manage conflicts in time
Where conflicts cannot be removed, consider if they can be separated temporally through signal timing or by
providing dedicated space for other road users.
Increase attentiveness and awareness
Where conflicts cannot be removed, work to improve the visibility of the conflicts.
Implement enforcing features to slow traffic
Features like speed feedback signs can help enforce the desired speed.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 19
Source: Modified from Federal Highway Administration, 2024.
CHAPTER 3
Ocoee Vision Zero Statement and Plan Framework
Crosswalk at Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee 20
THIS CHAPTER
provides Ocoee’s
Vision Zero Statement
and outlines its
Safety Action Plan.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 21
City of Ocoee’s Vision Zero Statement
The City of Ocoee is committed to implementing
measures that lead to eliminating deaths and serious
injuries caused by crashes by or before 2045 through
a local and regional safety approach that is proactive,
data-informed, and community-based. From 2018 to
2022, 12 fatalities (in 10 crashes) and 102 serious injuries
(in 83 crashes) occurred in traffic crashes in the City.
Implementing the projects and strategies identified in
the Safety Action Plan will help achieve the vision of
safer, accessible, and convenient travel in Ocoee for all
road users, especially the most vulnerable road users.
Ocoee City Hall
City of Ocoee 22
3.1 Vision Zero Safety Action Plan Framework
The Safety Action Plan plays a key role in eliminating fatal
and serious injury crashes. This section outlines the framework
used to develop this Safety Action Plan. The framework
consists of four key elements, the High Injury Network, Projects,
Policy Changes, and Next Steps. Each of these elements are
described in further detail below along with where these
elements can be found within the Safety Action Plan.
1. Identify Ocoee’s HIN, which is a network of roads having
the highest incidence of death or serious injury crashes.
Forty-one percent of the region’s deaths between 2018 and
2022 occurred on 2 percent of the roads. In Ocoee, all of
the City’s traffic deaths between 2018-2022 occurred on 8
percent of the roads within the City. The HIN is discussed in
further detail in Chapter 4: Crash Analysis and Trends.
2. Recommend policy changes that support design and
maintenance of safe roadways. The recommended
policy changes are discussed in further detail in Chapter
6: Recommended Programs and Policy Updates.
3. Prioritize feasible projects that have the greatest safety
impacts. The prioritized projects are discussed in further
detail in Chapter 7: Recommended Safety Projects.
4. Define next steps so the City may begin working with MetroPlan
Orlando, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and
Orange County to implement changes and monitor long-term
progress towards roadway safety. Next steps are discussed in
further detail in Chapter 8: Monitoring and Implementation.
The City of Ocoee Safety Action Plan is the result of a
coordinated planning effort led by a City Staff Working Group
and supported by MetroPlan Orlando and FDOT.
1
2
3
4
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 23
CHAPTER 4
Crash Analysis and Trends
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee 24
THIS CHAPTER
describes the key
findings and trends
from the crash analysis.
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan 25
In order to provide Ocoee’s residents, visitors, and
businesses with improved roadway safety, this Safety
Action Plan identifies the areas of the Ocoee roadway
network that pose the greatest safety threats. This
section identifies Ocoee’s crash data trends in order
to identity the City’s High Injury Network (HIN).
4.1 Who Is Involved in Crashes?
While anyone on the road is at risk of being involved in a
crash, certain users in Ocoee
are more at risk. For example,
people walking and bicycling
were involved in only 3 percent of all crashes but account for 22 percent of the serious injury crashes between 2018 and 2022. While there were no fatal bicycle crashes from 2018 to 2022, pedestrians were involved in 30 percent of fatal crashes. This is shown in Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure 6, which
show the proportion of road
users involved in all crashes,
fatal crashes, and serious injury
crashes. As shown in Figure 5, no bicycle or motorcycle
fatal crashes occurred in the
City from 2018 to 2022.
It should be noted the vehicle
crashes include crashes with
multiple vehicles (left turn, rear-
end, etc.) and a single vehicle
(run off road). The pedestrian,
bicycle, and motorcycle crashes
occurred exclusively between
a vehicle and a pedestrian,
bicycle, or motorcycle (there
were no motorcycle-bicycle
crashes, for example).
Figure 4: All Crashes within Ocoee by Travel Mode (2018-2022)
1.7%61 Total Pedestrian
Crashes
0.9%32 Total Motorcycle
Crashes
1.5%54 Total Bicycle Crashes
95.9%3,414 Total Vehicle
Crashes
Figure 5: Fatal Crashes within Ocoee by Travel Mode (2018-2022)
30.0%3 Fatal Pedestrian
Crashes
0.0%0 Fatal Motorcycle
Crashes
0.0%0 Fatal Bicycle
Crashes
70.0%7 Fatal Vehicle Crashes
Figure 6: Severe Injury Crashes within Ocoee by Travel Mode (2018-2022)
16.9%14 Serious Injury
Pedestrian Crashes
12.0%10 Serious Injury
Motorcycle Crashes
4.8%4 Serious Injury
Bicycle Crashes
66.3%55 Serious Injury
Vehicle Crashes
City of Ocoee 26
A “serious” or
“severe injury”
crash results in
an incapacitating
injury, such as
burns, lacerations,
spinal cord injuries,
or broken bones
that require
hospitalization.
These are
frequently life-
altering injuries that
affect a person’s
quality of life and
capacity to do
tasks—sometimes
permanently.
1.6 crashes per
month in Ocoee
result in severe
injuries or fatalities.
An overview of crashes by year
and severity is shown in Figure 7.
This figure identifies the total
number of crashes, severe injury
crashes, and fatal crashes. It
is important to note that some
of these crashes had multiple
severe injuries or fatalities.
Figure 7: Crashes within Ocoee by Year and Severity
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Number of Serious Injury and Fatal CrashesNumber of Total CrashesSevere Injury Fatal Total Crashes (All Severities)
24 21 15 11 12
1 2 1 3 3
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 27
4.1.1 Focus on Transportation Underserved Communities
Every community has its unique transportation advantages and disadvantages based on factors, such as land use, road network characteristics (i.e. the presence of sidewalks and streetlights),
and demographics. Transportation disadvantage occurs when people are underserved by the
area transportation network and are unable to access the needs of their daily life regularly,
reliably, and safely. To better understand the disadvantages, the US Department of Transportation
(USDOT) developed the Equitable Transportation Community (ETC) Explorer which uses a set of
criteria to identify transportation underserved communities. These criteria served as the basis
of MetroPlan Orlando’s Transportation for All: Overcoming Obstacle Report, which included
five components or indicators of transportation disadvantage as summarized below:
Transportation Insecurity: When people are unable to get to where they need to go to meet the needs of their daily life regularly,
reliably, and safely.
Environmental Burden: Natural or built
environments making
transportation challenging
or burdensome, such
as pollution, physical
barriers (i.e. waterways,
bridges, unsafe roadways),
hazardous facility exposure,
and the built environment.
Social Vulnerability:
Socioeconomic
indicators such as lack
of employment, under-
employment, educational
attainment, and poverty.
Health Vulnerability:
Increased frequency of
health conditions that may
result from exposure to air,
noise, and water pollution,
as well as lifestyle factors
such as poor walkability,
car dependency, and
long commute times.
Climate and Disaster Risk Burden: Impacts
from sea level rise,
changes in precipitation,
extreme weather, and
heat which pose risks to
the transportation system.
These hazards may affect
system performance,
safety, and reliability.
55% of all crashes and 70% of fatal crashes occur in or
adjacent to
transportation
underserved
communities
In Ocoee, 46 percent of the population lives in a community considered to be transportation
underserved (as defined by USDOT) and 55 percent of all crashes and 70 percent of
fatal crashes occur in or adjacent to transportation underserved communities. Many
of these crashes involved a severe injury or fatality. As fatal and severe injury crashes
disproportionately occur in transportation underserved communities, improvements in
transportation underserved communities will be prioritized. The identified transportation
underserved communities in the City of Ocoee are shown in Figure 8.
City of Ocoee 28
Crown Point
Beulah
Beach
Summerport
Heights
Paradise
Fullers
Gotha
Lake Butler
Windermere
Clarcona
437
COUNTY
ORANGE
435
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGEMaguire RdMaguire RdN Kissimmee Ave408
TOLL
50
438
429
TOLL Lady AveSilver Star Rd
Orlando Ave
W Colonial Dr
Old Winter Garden Rd
Moore Rd
E Plant
S
t
Story Rd Clark Rd NOcoee Apopka RdClarcona O c o e eRdC la rc o n a O c o ee Rd
N Apopka Vineland AveLEGEND
Transportation Disadvantaged Areas
West Orange Trail
0 0.5 1 Miles
Figure 8: City of Ocoee Transportation Underserved Communities
Legend
Transportation
Underserved
Communities
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 29
4.2 Where Are Crashes Happening?
Figure 9 is a heat map showing where crashes are occurring. On the map, red indicates a
higher concentration of crashes where green indicates fewer crashes. Crash concentrations
are most apparent on W. Colonial Road (S.R. 50) and Silver Star Road (SR 438), as well as the
intersections of Clarke Road and Silver Star Road and Maguire Road and W. Colonial Road.
Figure 9: Crash Locations in Ocoee
Crown Point
Beulah
Beach
Summerport
HeightsParadise
Fullers
Gotha
Lake Butler
Windermere
Clarcona
437
COUNTY
ORANGE
435
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGEMaguire RdMaguire RdN Kissimmee Ave408
TOLL
50
438
429
TOLL Lady AveSilver Star Rd
Orlando Ave
W Colonial Dr
Old Winter Garden Rd
Moore Rd
E Plan
t
S
t
Story Rd Clark Rd NOcoee Apopka RdClarconaOcoeeRdClarconaOcoeeRdN Apopka Vineland AveLEGEND
Few Crashes
More Crashes
0 0.5 1 Miles
439
COUNTY
ORANGE
Bluford Ave SFrequency of Crashes
West Orange Trail
Legend
Frequency of Crashes
Few Crashes
More Crashes
City of Ocoee 30
Crown Point
Beulah
Beach
Summerport
Heights
Paradise
Fullers
Gotha
Lake Butler
Windermere
Clarcona
437
COUNTY
ORANGE
435
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGEMaguire RdMaguire RdN Kissimmee Ave408
TOLL
50
438
429
TOLL Lady AveSilver Star Rd
Orlando Ave
W Colonial Dr
Old Winter Garden Rd
Moore Rd
E Plant
S
t
Story Rd Clark Rd NOcoee Apopka RdClarcona O c o e eRdC la r c o n a O coee Rd
N Apopka Vineland AveLEGEND
Few Crashes
More Crashes
0 0.5 1 Miles
439
COUNTY
ORANGE
B
l
u
f
o
r
d
A
v
e
S
Frequency of Crashes
West Orange Trail
4.3 What Behaviors Are Contributing to the Crash Trends?
Based on the evaluation of 5-year crash data, it is likely that the
following factors played a role in causing crashes in Ocoee:
Behavioral/Driver Factors
• Crashes involving alcohol and drug use, distraction, aggression, speeding, and passengers not wearing seatbelts are more
likely to result in a fatality.
Contextual Factors
• Time of day and road conditions can affect crash
severity. For example, nighttime lighting and wet roadways both can increase crash severity.
• Certain parts of the roadway are more dangerous, including near intersections and when the vehicle leaves its lane.
Regionally, fatal and severe injury crashes are most likely to occur on roads that have been designed to accommodate vehicle travel at 45 mph or above, that are also expected to serve pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit, all while providing direct and convenient access to a variety of destinations.
A breakdown of the contributing behavioral factors that resulted in fatal crash outcomes
in Ocoee is shown below in Table 1 , similar results for contextual factors are shown in Table 2 . Some crashes may have multiple factors, so the total and fatal crash values
shown in these tables may be different than shown in other tables and figures.
Table 1: Behaviors that Contributed to Crashes in Ocoee
BEHAVIOR TOTAL NUMBER OF CRASHES NUMBER OF FATAL CRASHES
Alcohol or drugs involved 137 6
Distraction 545 1
Aggressive driving 127 6
Speeding*101 4
Not wearing a seatbelt 74 5
*Crashes involving speeding are based on the reporting officer’s assessment of travel speed
and are likely an under count of crashes with a direct correlation to speeding.
Table 2: Contexts that Contributed to Crashes in Ocoee
CONTEXT TOTAL NUMBER OF CRASHES NUMBER OF FATAL CRASHES
Nighttime 1,004 7
Wet Roadway 427 1
Intersection related 1,274 1
Lane departure 1,074 6
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 31
4.4 High Injury Network
Ocoee’s High Injury Network (HIN), Figure 10, represents the corridors and intersections where a disproportionate number of fatal or serious injury crashes occur, with added emphasis on crashes involving people walking, bicycling, and motorcycling.
The HIN map provides a comprehensive set of locations for the City of Ocoee and partner
jurisdictions to prioritize safety improvements and resources, on both local and county/state
roadways, to achieve the greatest and most cost-efficient benefits. Table 3 , Table 4 , and Figure 10
show the HIN on both local and State/County roadways. Details of how the HIN was calculated are
provided in Appendix C. Notable local roadways on the HIN include Maguire Road, Bluford Avenue,
and Old Winter Garden Road. Multiple State roadway segments of Colonial Drive and Silver Star
Road are included in the HIN as well.
Table 5 shows the amount of total, serious injury, and fatal crashes that occurred on local roadways
and County/State roadways within the City’s boundaries between 2018 and 2022. There were more
total and serious injury crashes on local roadways, but more fatal crashes on County and State
roadways. Table 6 shows the amount of total, serious injury, and fatal crashes that occurred on the
HIN network (both local and County/State roadways) within the City’s boundaries between 2018 and
2022. About half of the City’s total (56 percent) and serious injury (54 percent) crashes occurred on
the HIN network, while all of the fatal crashes occurred on the HIN network. The HIN only encompass
8 percent of the total roadway miles within the City’s boundaries.
Table 3: High Injury Network Segments
ROADWAY FROM TO HIN TYPE LENGTH (MI.)
Winshire Blvd.Grovesmere Lp. Maguire Rd.Local Road 0.09
Old Winter Garden Rd.Bluford Ave. W. of Walmart Dwy.Local Road 0.19
Bluford Ave. Old Winter Garden Rd. SR 50 Local Road 0.30
Maguire Rd./
Kissimmee Ave.Marshal Farms Rd. N. of Washington St.Local Road 0.53
Story Rd.SR 429 Bluford Ave.Local Road 0.98
Kissimmee Ave.Silver Star Rd. Lee St. Local Road 0.24
Christine Ave./
Mack Ave.Rewis St./Lakewood Ave.Mack St./End Local Road 0.21
Lady Ave./
Maureen Ave.Wurst Rd./Perce St. Nicole Blvd./
Mona Ave.Local Road 0.87
Clarke Rd.SR 50 Twinbranch Tr.Local Road 4.29
Maguire Rd.Publix Dwy.Tomyn Blvd.Local Road 0.76
Maguire Rd.S. of Old Winter
Garden Rd. SR 50 Local Road 0.35
Colonial Dr.W. of Maguire Rd. E. of Bluford Ave.County Road/
State Road 0.83
Silver Star Rd.Maguire Rd. Roberts Rise Dr.County Road/
State Road 0.66
Silver Star Rd.W. of 1st St.Roddy Red Rd.County Road/
State Road 1.43
Ocoee Apopka Rd.Silver Star Rd. Clarcona Ocoee Rd.County Road/
State Road 2.11
City of Ocoee 32
Table 4: High Injury Network Intersections
INTERSECTION HIN TYPE
Bluford Ave. & Rew Cir.Local Road
Maguire Rd. & Marshall Farms Rd. Local Road
Lakewood Ave. & Rewis St.Local Road
Christine Ave. & Mack St.Local Road
Jamela Dr. & Wurst Rd.Local Road
Lady Ave. & Maureen Ave.Local Road
Maguire Rd. & Old Winter Garden Rd.Local Road
Bluford Ave. & Ohio St.Local Road
Maguire Rd. & SR 50 County Road/State Road
Bluford Ave. & SR 50 County Road/State Road
Ocoee Apopka Rd. & Silver Star Rd.County Road/State Road
Kissimmee Ave. & Silver Star Rd.County Road/State Road
Cumberland Ave. & Silver Star Rd. County Road/State Road
1st St. & Silver Star Rd. County Road/State Road
3rd St. & Silver Star Rd. County Road/State Road
Ocoee Hills Rd. & Silver Star Rd. County Road/State Road
Clarke Rd. & Silver Star Rd. County Road/State Road
Clarke Rd. & SR 50 County Road/State Road
Blackwood Ave. & SR 50 County Road/State Road
Table 5: Number of Crashes within City by Severity (2018-2022)
ENTIRE ROADWAY NETWORK BY JURISDICTION
NUMBER/PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL CRASHES
NUMBER/PERCENTAGE OF SERIOUS INJURY CRASHES
NUMBER/PERCENTAGE OF FATAL CRASHES
Local 2,091 (59%)47 (57%)4 (40%)
County Road/State Road 1,470 (41%)36 (43%)6 (60%)
Total 3,561 (100%)83 (100%)10 (100%)
Table 6: Number Crashes on the HIN by Crash Severity (2018-2022)
HIN BY JURISDICTION NUMBER/PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL CRASHES
NUMBER/PERCENTAGE OF SERIOUS INJURY CRASHES
NUMBER/PERCENTAGE OF FATAL CRASHES
Local 1,030 (30%)21 (25%)4 (40%)
County Road/State Road 935 (26%)24 (29%)6 (60%)
Total 2,005 (56%)45 (54%)10 (100%)
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 33
Crown Point
Beulah
Beach
Summerport
Heights
Paradise
Fullers
Gotha
Lake Butler
Windermere
Clarcona
437
COUNTY
ORANGE
435
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGEMaguire RdMaguire RdN Kissimmee Ave408
TOLL
50
438
429
TOLL Lady AveSilver Star Rd
Orlando Ave
B
l
u
f
o
r
d
A
v
e
S
W Colonial Dr
Old Winter Garden Rd
Moore Rd
E Plant
S
t
Story Rd Clark Rd NOcoee Apopka RdClarcona O c o eeRdC la rc o n a O co ee Rd
N Apopka Vineland Ave0 0.5 1 Miles
LEGEND
Local Road High Injury Network
State and County Road
High Injury Network
Local Road High Crash Intersection
State and County Road
High Crash Intersection
West Orange Trail
Figure 10: High Injury Network
Legend
Local Road
High Crash Intersection
State and County
High Crash Intersection
Local Road
High Injury
Network
State and
County
High Injury
Network
West Orange
Trail
City of Ocoee 34
Crown Point
Beulah
Beach
Summerport
Heights
Paradise
Fullers
Gotha
Lake Butler
Windermere
Clarcona
437
COUNTY
ORANGE
435
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGEMaguire RdMaguire RdN Kissimmee Ave408
TOLL
50
438
429
TOLLLady AveSilver Star Rd
Orlando Ave
B
l
u
f
o
r
d
A
v
e
S
W Colonial Dr
Old Winter Garden Rd
Moore Rd
E Plant
S
t
Story RdClark Rd NOcoee Apopka RdClarconaOcoeeRdClarconaOcoeeRdN Apopka Vineland Ave00.5 1Miles
LEGEND
Local Road High Injury Network
State and County Road
High Injury Network
Local Road High Crash Intersection
State and County Road
High Crash Intersection
West Orange Trail
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 35
CHAPTER 5
Listening to the Community
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee 36
THIS CHAPTER
focuses on specific
engagement activities
that were conducted
and how those
activities informed the
Safety Action Plan.
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan 37
The City of Ocoee and MetroPlan Orlando reached out to
stakeholders, residents, and visitors to gain a practical, real-
life understanding of how the people who live, work, and visit
the region and the City of Ocoee experience its roadways.
Local and regional
stakeholder
engagement gathered
feedback from multiple
sources to inform the
development of the
local and regional
Safety Action Plans.
Public feedback was
collected using a range
of in-person and online
opportunities. This
section describes the
regional engagement
conducted by
MetroPlan Orlando
and the local
engagement
conducted by the
City of Ocoee.
5.1 MetroPlan Orlando’s Regional Engagement
The engagement strategies for the MetroPlan Orlando Regional Vision Zero Safety Action Plan complement strategies at the city level. Cumulatively, they spread awareness and engagement much more broadly than any single agency could. Further details on the regional engagement efforts are provided in Appendix D.
5.1.1 Regional Task Force
A Regional Vision Zero Task Force provided feedback and strategic guidance throughout the preparation of the Regional Safety Action Plan and included people representing local agencies, the Florida Department of Transportation, public health officials, medical professionals, bicycling and pedestrian advocacy groups, and members of the public. The task force provided key feedback on the technical analysis, public engagement strategies, policy benchmarking, Safety Action Plan elements, and project prioritization criteria.
5.1.2 Regional Hub Site
To supplement regional information provided on the MetroPlan Orlando website, a Hub Space was developed to provide one centralized location for sharing of safety information. The site provides an overview of the Safety Action Plan process and purpose, and an interactive safety data dashboard where people can view the High Injury Network (HIN) and crash data by jurisdiction. The Hub also allows visitors to provide comments, testimony and identify specific locations of concern.
A restricted access portion of the site was developed where project materials, including crash data, can be downloaded for use by the City of Ocoee for development and updates to the City’s Safety Action Plan. The site is intended to live on beyond the preparation of this Safety Action Plan and serve as a clearinghouse for information and Vision Zero updates.
The site can be accessed at VisionZeroCFL.gov or by using the QR code in Figure 11. The crash dashboard will be updated on an annual basis as part of regional progress monitoring.
Figure 11: Hub Site QR Code
City of Ocoee 38
There is a lack of road courtesy that contributes to the issue. With the wide center section, traffic from multiple directions frequently perform maneuvers to jump in front of vehicles or around vehicles that are having difficulty navigating the intersection.
– Orange County Resident
[Consider] adding speed bumps due to excessive traffic driving at high rates of speed.
– City of Ocoee Resident
5.1.3 Regional Public Feedback
Public feedback has been collected through
the Hub resulting in over 650 comments
from 350 people as of April 2024. Of the
feedback received, the majority were
from Orange County (84%), with Osceola
County (7%) and Seminole County (9%)
having lower response rates. Approximately
30 percent of the comments were made
about transportation facilities within
transportation underserved communities,
slightly higher than the regional percentage
of people who live in transportation
underserved communities (25%).
Common themes that emerged from the
feedback relate to a need for improved infrastructure, especially for people
walking, bicycling, and taking transit, as well
as, a need for more education directed
at all road users to provide safe walking,
bicycling and driving habits. In addition,
there is a need for more enforcement of egregious behaviors that are prevalent
throughout the region, including excessive
speeding, people driving golf carts on
sidewalks, and people using their phones.
Public engagement at Ocoee Jolly Jamboree
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 39
5.2 City of Ocoee Local Engagement
The City of Ocoee conducted targeted public engagement efforts in coordination with MetroPlan Orlando’s regional efforts to bring awareness to local roadway safety issues and to learn about challenges the community is facing. The local engagement plan is provided in Appendix E and community engagement materials are provided in Appendix F.
5.2.1 City of Ocoee Staff Working Group
The City of Ocoee developed a Working Group that led the planning effort for the City. It included representatives from Development Services, Public Works, Support Services, Fire, and Police departments. The Working Group met at key points in the development of the Ocoee Safety Action Plan to review the crash data analysis and identify safety projects. Meetings were held on the following dates.
October 30, 2023
Overview of the project approach
January 18, 2024
Development of the High Injury Network
March 26, 2024
Draft projects and programs
May 28, 2024
Finalize projects and prioritization
Working Group meeting notes are provided in Appendix G.
5.2.2 City of Ocoee Community Events
The City conducted outreach efforts at public events to inform the community about the planning process and solicit feedback about transportation safety concerns in each community. These were held on:
at the Jolly Jamboree
December 9, 2023
at the Ocoee Fire Department Open House
April 27, 2024
Public engagement at Ocoee
Fire Department Open House
Boards of information presented at community
engagement events are shown in Figure 12.
City of Ocoee 40
Figure 12: Community Engagement Boards
Zero deaths and serious injuries on our roads is our goal
Questions?
Contact information:
Sarah Larsen: sarah.larsen@metroplanorlando.gov
Ryan Mansfield: rmansfield@kittelson.com
What is Vision Zero?
Vision Zero is an approach to eliminate
traffic-related fatalities and serious
injuries:
• Reframes traffic deaths as preventable.
• Integrates human failings
into the approach.
• Focuses on preventing fatal
and severe crashes rather than
eliminating all crashes.
• Aims to establish safe systems rather
than relying on individual responsibility.
• Applies data-driven decision making.
• Establishes road safety as
a social equity issue.
What are we doing?
Developing a Comprehensive
Safety Action Plan to
eliminate traffic related
fatalities and serious injuries.
• Data-driven analysis
to identify the High
Injury Network, which is
where serious and fatal
crashes are occurring.
• Public outreach to identify
issues and possible solutions.
• Recommendations to
reduce serious and fatal
crashes, including:
—Systemic countermeasure
to reduce crashes
—Specific road projects to
reduce crashes
—Actionable, measurable
strategies and policy
changes
Visit our interactive
dashboard to observe
local crash trends
Visit the Vision Zero
Website to learn more
Help us develop a vision zero
plan so we can all travel safey!
Elements of a Vision Zero Plan
Speed Influences Drivers’ Cone of Vision
Pedestrian’s Risk of Death or Serious Injury
Higher Speed Risks and Countermeasures
Roundabouts DelineatorsSpeed enforcement
Flashing Yellow Arrow Traffic calmingProtected Intersection
Protected Only Left Turns
Vote for Intersection and Corridor
Potential Countermeasures
Vote for Pedestrian/Bicycle Potential Countermeasures
Separate Bicycle Lanes
Add/Widen Sidewalk
Pedestrian safety improvements
Midblock Pedestrian Crossing Shorter signal cycle lengths
Countermeasures you would like to see
Municipality
% of Severe Injury
Crashes Covered
by the High Injury
Network
% of Fatal Crashes Covered by the High
Injury Network
Town of Oakland 100%N/A*
City of Winter
Garden 59%86%
City of Ocoee 54%100%
*No fatal crashes occurred from 2018–2022 in Oakland
The High Injury Network is a
collection of roadways where
a disproportionate number
of fatal and severe injury
crashes occur.
Focusing efforts on these
roadways can have a large
impact on reducing severe
injuries and fatalities on our
roadway system.
High Injury Network
LEGEND
State and County Road
High Injury Network
Local Road High Injury Network
State and County Road
High Injury Network Intersection
Local Road
High Injury Network Intersection
Fatal Crash
Severe Injury Crash
City/Town Boundary
The public was encouraged to vote on
countermeasures they would like to see
more of. The result of interactions with
over 30 individuals led to the following
countermeasures receiving the most votes:
• Roundabouts (6 votes)
• Add/widen sidewalk (5 votes)
• Separated bicycle lanes (4 votes)
• Pedestrian safety improvements (4 votes)
• Speed enforcement (4 votes)
The results of the public voting on countermeasures was taken into consideration when selecting countermeasures for project locations.
5.2.3 City of Ocoee Community Redevelopment Agency Board and City Commission Presentations
The City of Ocoee presented the Safety Action Plan’s current progress to the Community
Redevelopment Agency Board on December 5, 2023 and the City Commission on June 18, 2024.
The City adopted a Vision Zero resolution on TBD, 2024. The resolution is included in Appendix A.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 41
CHAPTER 6
Recommended Programs and Policy Updates
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee 42
THIS CHAPTER
outlines the program
and policy review
and recommended
updates.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 43
This section of the Safety Action Plan addresses
non-engineering programs and policies geared
toward improving road user behavior.
These non-engineering countermeasures include efforts
like educational campaigns, high-visibility enforcement
of driving speeds, and publicized sobriety checkpoints.
6.1 Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
A Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit was developed by MetroPlan Orlando for the regional vision zero efforts to unify the region’s approach to safety by compiling non-engineering countermeasures tailored to the region’s safety needs. This toolkit organizes its countermeasures by the five SSA categories (Safe Road Users, Safe Speeds, Safe Roads, Post Crash Care, and Safe Vehicles). This is shown in Figure 13.
The Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit is provided in Appendix H.
Figure 13: Organization of Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Safe Road Users
• Public information
Campaigns/Social
Marketing Campaigns/
Educational Campaigns
• Enforcement
Safe Vehicles
• Emerging Technology
• Vehicle Maintenance
Post Crash Care
• Emergency Medical Services
• Trauma Care
• Fatal Crash Response Team
• Traffic Incident Management
• Post Crash Strategies
Safe Speeds
• Speed Limit
Setting
• High Visibility
Enforcement
• Automated
Enforcement
Safe Roads
• Improve and
Share Data
• Pilot/Demonstration
Projects
• Road Maintenance/
Maintenance of Traffic
• Policy/Standards
• Grant Opportunities
City of Ocoee 44
6.2 Potential City Programs
Ocoee conducted a benchmarking evaluation, provided in the Appendix I, and applied
the Non-Engineering Countermeasure Toolkit to identify the following programs that
could be pursued at the city level to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes:
give the public time to change
behavior), and ticketing (to
enforce the rules of the road
after an education campaign
has been introduced).
Develop a Quick-build Program. Quick builds are
flexible, temporary projects
that let people test drive
infrastructure changes
that could create safer,
more livable public spaces.
The City could develop a
program that outlines the
appropriate location for
quick builds, materials to use,
public engagement to use,
and before/after analysis to
conduct to learn from the quick
build and move towards a
permanent investment in safety.
Develop Target Speed Policy Based on Context and Crash History. Target speed is the
operating speed that designers
intend for drivers to use.
Target speeds based on the
setting of the street, such as
a neighborhood, commercial
area, or industrial area,
promote driving behavior that improves safety and comfort for all roadway users.
Develop and Fund a Traffic Calming Plan. A traffic calming plan consists of physical measures aimed at creating safe streets, by slowing drivers down, reducing frequency and severity of collisions, reducing the need for police enforcement, and increasing access to different modes of
transport. A traffic calming
plan may define the types
Expand Road Safety Education for Young Children and Teens. Work with schools
and parent organizations to
organize supervised walking
and cycling groups (walking
school bus and bicycle trains).
This introduces children to
the rules of the road in a safe
environment, provides an
opportunity for exercise and
community building, and builds
safety habits for walking and
cycling at an early age. Work
with high schools to promote
teen safety programs such
as the Teen Driver Challenge
(www.flsheriffs.org/law-
enforcement-programs/
teen-driverchallenge), free
and low cost behind the wheel
training provided by the
Florida Safety Council (https://
www.floridasafetycouncil.
org/categories), as well
as resources that provide
opportunities for local agencies
and law enforcement to
partner with schools to deliver
educational campaigns
to teach teens about the
dangers of alcohol and
driving, such as Every 15
Minutes, Sober Graduation,
and DUI mock trials.
Speed Enforcement in School Zones. The City is currently
increasing enforcement in
school zones, including the
addition of cameras in select
areas. Continue high visibility
enforcement in school zones.
Progressive Ticketing. This is a
method of introducing ticketing
in three stages: education (to
raise awareness), warning (to
of traffic calming measures,
such as design criteria and
materials and physical speed
tables, for specific road types.
The plan may also include the
process by which residents
or business owners request
traffic calming measures
along a specific roadway
and their funding strategies.
Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Plan. SRTS programs aim to
make it safer for students to
walk and bike to school and
encourage more walking and
biking by funding projects
that remove the barriers
currently preventing them
from doing so. Those barriers
include a lack of infrastructure,
unsafe infrastructure, a lack
of programs that promote
walking and bicycling, and lack
of education/encouragement
programs geared to children,
parents, and the community.
Projects can include hands-
on experiences or literature
on education, enforcement,
engineering encouragement,
and evaluation.
The City will consider
further non-engineering
countermeasures as part of its
Comprehensive Plan update, as
well as during annual updates
to this Safety Action Plan.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 45
6.3 Potential City Policies
The City conducted a Policy Benchmark Review
to identify potential issues and provide content
for current City policy updates. The policy
review included the following documents:
• Comprehensive Plan (2002),
Transportation Element
• Article 3, Design Standards, 3.02
Streets and Other Pavements
• City of Ocoee Trails Master Plan
• Healthy West Orange Trails Initiative
• SR 50/UCF Connector Alternatives Analysis
• Downtown Ocoee Master Plan (2016)
The policy review is timely as the City is beginning
efforts to update the City’s Comprehensive
Plan and the Land Development Code.
SR 50/UCF CONNECTOR ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
OCTOBER 2015
Downtown Ocoee Master Plan
City of Ocoee, Florida
2016
SR 50/UCF Connector Alternatives Analysis
Healthy West Orange Trails Initiative
Downtown Ocoee Master Plan (2016)
City of Ocoee 46
The Policy Benchmark Review led to the identification of a number of a policy recommendations
that could be incorporated into the upcoming regulatory updates or adopted as a
separate effort to reduce fatal and severe injury crashes. Recommendations include:
• Consider policy supporting
the adoption of a
complete streets policy
and Vision Zero policy.
• Consider adding a
Complete Streets goal of
serving all users to the
goals and objectives of the
Transportation Element.
• Consider incorporating the
local roadways identified
in the High Injury Network
under safety enhancements.
• Consider adopting a
policy to monitor vehicular
crashes in the City.
• Consider including bicycle
parking standards or
recommendations.
• In addition to Policy 3.1.2,
consider monitoring
speeding on local and
collector roadways.
• Consider updating Policy
3.2.3 to require sidewalks on
both sides of the road on all
roadways, with sidewalks
meeting PROWAG standards.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 47
Engineering Design Standards Updates
• Consider including other best practices
including: PROWAG, ADA, AASHTO Roadside
Design Guides, NACTO Urban Street Design
Guide, NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide,
NACTO Don’t Give Up at the Intersections.
• Consider aligning horizontal alignments
minimum design with context classification.
• Consider a minimum design speed of 25 mph
or 30 mph in the Downtown Code Overlay
• Consider reducing minimum radii
at intersections based on NACTO
guidance or the draft 2015 FDOT Freight
Roadway Design Considerations.
• Consider including speed management
tools appropriate by context classification.
• Consider including streetscape criteria.
Land Development Codes
• Consider reducing pavement
widths in section 6-3.C.
• Consider increasing sidewalk
widths in section 6-3.H to align
with PROWAG standards.
• Consider including criteria for
landscape/streetscape space
between curb and sidewalk.
• Consider including criteria
or recommendations for
on-street parking.
Updates to the 2002 Comprehensive Plan
• Consider including other
best practice elements such
as the Public Right-of-Way
Accessibility Guidelines
(PROWAG), Americans with
Disability Act (ADA), AASHTO
Roadside Design Guides,
NACTO Urban Street Design
Guide, NACTO Urban Bikeway
Design Guide, NACTO Don’t
Give Up at the Intersections.
• Consider adopting specific
language for multimodal
performance measure
targets such as Quality
of Service standards or
Level of Traffic Stress.
• Consider including a policy
to implement a traffic
calming plan on local
and collector streets.
• Consider adopting
context classification
system for local roads.
CHAPTER 7
Recommended Safety Projects
Crosswalk at Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee 48
THIS CHAPTER
describes the
engineering projects
identified for
implementation.
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan 49
7.1 MetroPlan Orlando’s Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
The purpose of MetroPlan Orlando’s Engineering Countermeasure Toolkit is to establish a shared understanding of key strategies available to address roadway safety issues that align with the SS4A strategy. The Toolkit is provided in Appendix J. The key objectives of the Engineering Countermeasure Toolkit are to:
1. Inform partner jurisdictions about safety treatment
options and their appropriate uses and contexts,
2. Communicate safety tools using easy-to-
understand language and graphics,
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.
Lakeshore Drive and Oakland Avenue intersection
City of Ocoee 50
7.2 MetroPlan Orlando’s Project Development Process
Following MetroPlan Orlando’s project development process, the City Working Group used
the Engineering Countermeasure Toolkit to identify specific countermeasures for high crash
segments and intersections within the City of Ocoee. To summarize, the Working Group:
Analyzed HIN Segments/Intersections: A detailed analysis was conducted, including crash summaries, and other contextual information. Prevailing crash types were summarized, and crash locations were mapped. Additional contextual information was gathered, such as the number of travel lanes, location of signalized intersections, locations of bus stops, posted speeds, and the context classification or functional classification.
Identified Planned Improvements:
For each roadway segment/
intersection included in the
countermeasure selection process,
planned projects (if any) along
the segment were identified.
Identified Potential Countermeasures: For each segment
corridor, potential countermeasures were identified using input
from the City’s Working Group, the Engineering Countermeasures
Toolkit, FDOT, and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
guidelines, as well as professional judgment. An opinion
of probable cost was developed for each project.
Prioritized Projects: Based
on the prioritization criteria,
projects were prioritized
for implementation and
other purposes, such as
grant applications.
7.3 Projects
Ten (10) projects were developed as part of Ocoee’s Safety Action Plan. Figure 14 provides a map
of the segment and intersection projects. Project details are described in Figure 15 through Figure 24. Cost details are summarized in Table 7 and provided in Appendix K. For each project, the
following is provided:
• Focus crash type
• Map of corridor
• Identification of potential countermeasures
• Project prioritization score and ranking
• Opinion of probable cost
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 51
Crown Point
Beulah
Beach
Summerport
Heights
Paradise
Fullers
Gotha
Lake Butler
Windermere
Clarcona
437
COUNTY
ORANGE
435
COUNTY
ORANGE
439
COUNTY
ORANGEMaguire RdMaguire RdN Kissimmee Ave408
TOLL
50
438
429
TOLL Lady AveSilver Star Rd
Orlando Ave
W Colonial Dr
Old Winter Garden Rd
Moore Rd
E Plant
S
t
Story Rd Clark Rd NOcoee Apopka RdClarcona O c o eeRdC la r c o n a O co ee Rd
N Apopka Vineland Ave439
COUNTY
ORANGE
B
l
u
f
o
r
d
A
v
e
S
LEGEND
Local Corridor Projects
County and State Road
Intersection Projects
Local Intersection Projects
County and State Road
Corridor Projects
West Orange Trail
0 0.5 1 Miles
Legend
County and State
Road Intersection
Projects
Local Intersection
Projects
County and State
Road Corridor
Projects
Local Corridor
Projects
West Orange
Trail
Figure 14: Proposed Safety Projects
City of Ocoee 52
Figure 15: Silver Star and Clarke Road
Silver Star Road & Clarke Road
Total crashes: 203. Crash Focus: 59 left turn (2 Serious Injury) crashes,
2 bike/5 pedestrian (2 Serious Injury) crashes.
Protected Left Turns Retroflective Signal Backplates
Review Yellow Time Extend All Red Phase
Short-Term Countermeasures:
Mid-Term Countermeasures:
Project Prioritization Safety
Score
Underserved
Communities
Safety
Benfit HIN Implementation
Initial Score 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Weighted Score 0.50 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10
Total Score / Rank 1.00 / Tied for 1st
Opinion of
Probable Cost $1,745,000*
*Planning level estimate. Includes 20% CEI and 30% contingency. Does not include ROW, drainage, or utility impacts.
N
Leading Pedestrian Interval
High Visibility Crosswalk
Silver Star RoadClarke Road
Protected Intersection
Curb Extensions
Hardened Median Nose Extension
Centerline Hardening
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 53
Figure 16: SR 50 and Maguire Road
Striping Through Intersection
Hardened Median Nose Extension
Short-Term Countermeasures:
Project Prioritization Safety
Score
Underserved
Communities
Safety
Benfit HIN Implementation
Initial Score 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Weighted Score 0.50 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10
Total Score / Rank 1.00 / Tied for 1st
Opinion of
Probable Cost $64,000*
*Planning level estimate. Includes 20% CEI and 30% contingency. Does not include ROW, drainage, or utility impacts.
S.R. 50 & Maguire Road
Total crashes: 426 Crash Focus: 37 sideswipe crashes.
This project is within the Community Redevelopment Agency boundary.
N
Maguire Rd.
50
City of Ocoee 54
Figure 17: SR 50 and Blackwood Avenue
Short-Term Countermeasures:
Project Prioritization Safety
Score
Underserved
Communities
Safety
Benfit HIN Implementation
Initial Score 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Weighted Score 0.50 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10
Total Score / Rank 1.00 / Tied for 1st
Opinion of
Probable Cost $13,000*
*Planning level estimate. Includes 20% CEI and 30% contingency. Does not include ROW, drainage, or utility impacts.
S.R. 50 & Blackwood Avenue
Total crashes: 231. Crash Focus: 1 Fatal/8 Serious Injury crashes.
This project is within the Community Redevelopment Agency boundary
N
Blackwood Ave.
50
Rest on Walk/ Pedestrian Recall
Shorter Cycle Length
Leading Pedestran Interval
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 55
Figure 18: SR 50 and Clarke Road
Short-Term Countermeasures:
Project Prioritization Safety
Score
Underserved
Communities
Safety
Benfit HIN Implementation
Initial Score 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Weighted Score 0.50 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10
Total Score / Rank 1.00 / Tied for 1st
Opinion of
Probable Cost $13,000*
*Planning level estimate. Includes 20% CEI and 30% contingency. Does not include ROW, drainage, or utility impacts.
S.R. 50 & Clark Road
Total crashes: 174. Crash Focus: 3 Fatal/5 Serious Injury crashes.
This project is within the Community Redevelopment Agency boundary
N
Clarke Rd.
50
Rest on Walk/ Pedestrian Recall
Shorter Cycle Length
Leading Pedestrian Interval
City of Ocoee 56
Figure 19: Maguire Road and Old Winter Garden Road
Short-Term Countermeasures:
Project Prioritization Safety
Score
Underserved
Communities
Safety
Benfit HIN Implementation
Initial Score 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
Weighted Score 0.50 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.10
Total Score / Rank 0.95 / 5th
Opinion of
Probable Cost $16,000*
*Planning level estimate. Includes 20% CEI and 30% contingency. Does not include ROW, drainage, or utility impacts.
Maguire Road & Old Winter Garden Road
Total crashes: 85. Crash Focus: 1 Fatal/3 Serious Injury crashes.
City Project
N
Maguire Road
Upgrade to Larger Warning Sign
Retroflective Signal Backplates
High Visibility Crosswalk
Old Winter Garden Road
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 57
Figure 20: SR 50 from SR 429 to Good Homes Road
S.R. 50 from S.R. 429 to Good Homes Road (Short Term)
Total crashes: 1380. Crash Focus: 15 Serious Injury/Fatal crashes.
This project is within the Community Redevelopment Agency boundary
Rest on Walk/ Pedestrian Recall Shorter Cycle Length Leading Pedestrian Interval High Visibility Crosswalk
Short-Term Countermeasures:
Project Prioritization Safety
Score
Underserved
Communities
Safety
Benfit HIN Implementation
Initial Score 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Weighted Score 0.38 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10
Total Score / Rank 0.88 / 6th
Opinion of
Probable Cost $10,923,000*
*Planning level estimate. Includes 20% CEI and 30% contingency. Does not include ROW, drainage, or utility impacts.
Good Homes Rd.Maguire Rd.Bluford Ave.Blackwood Ave.
N
429 50
Project Corridor Clarke Rd.
City of Ocoee 58
S.R. 50 from S.R. 429 to Good Homes Road (Mid-Long Term)
Total crashes: 1380. Crash Focus: 15 Serious Injury/Fatal crashes.
This project is within the Community Redevelopment Agency boundary
Project Prioritization Safety
Score
Underserved
Communities
Safety
Benfit HIN Implementation
Initial Score 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Weighted Score 0.38 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10
Total Score / Rank 0.88 / 6th
Opinion of
Probable Cost $10,923,000*
*Planning level estimate. Includes 20% CEI and 30% contingency. Does not include ROW, drainage, or utility impacts.
Good Homes Rd.Maguire Rd.
N
429
Two-Stage Turn Queue Bicycle Boxes Widen SidewalkIntersection Lighting Midblock Crossing Study
Mid-Term Countermeasures:
Long-Term Countermeasures:
Protected Intersection Seperated Bicycle Lanes
50
Corridor Wide Recommendation
Project Corridor
Blackwood Ave.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 59
Figure 21: Silver Star Road from Ocoee Apopka Road to Coventry Lane
Silver Star Road
from Ocoee Apopka Road to Coventry Lane
Total crashes: 556. Crash Focus: 21 Serious Injury/Fatal crashes.
Short-Term Countermeasures:
Mid-Term Countermeasures:
Long-Term Countermeasures:
Project Prioritization Safety
Score
Underserved
Communities
Safety
Benfit HIN Implementation
Initial Score 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Weighted Score 0.25 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10
Total Score / Rank 0.75 / 7th
Opinion of
Probable Cost $5,305,000*
*Planning level estimate. Includes 20% CEI and 30% contingency. Does not include ROW, drainage, or utility impacts.
Chevron Signs
High Friction Surface Treatment
Raised Intersection
Speed Feedback Sign
Two-Stage Turn Qeue Bicycle Box
Shared Use Path
Leading Pedestrian Interval
Add Sidewalk
High Visibility Crosswalk
N
Clarke Rd.Ocoee Hills Road.Ocoee Apopka Rd.
Corridor Wide Recommendation Project CorridorBluford Ave.
City of Ocoee 60
Figure 22: Lady Avenue/Maureen Avenue from Wurst Road/Perce Street to Nicole Boulevard/Mona Avenue
Lady Avenue/Maureen Avenue
from Wurst Road/Perce Street to Nicole Boulevard/
Mona Avenue
Total crashes: 19. Crash Focus: 1 Serious Injury/Fatal crash.
City project
Short-Term Countermeasures:
Project Prioritization Safety
Score
Underserved
Communities
Safety
Benfit HIN Implementation
Initial Score 0.25 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
Weighted Score 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.10
Total Score / Rank 0.58 / Tied for 8th
Opinion of
Probable Cost $122,000*
*Planning level estimate. Includes 20% CEI and 30% contingency. Does not include ROW, drainage, or utility impacts.
Nicole Blvd.LED-Enhanced sign
Upgrade to Larger Warning Signs
N
Wurst Rd.
Project Corridor
Maureen Ave.
Lady Ave.Perce St.Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 61
Figure 23: Bluford Avenue from Old Winter Garden Road to SR 50
Bluford Avenue
from Old Winter Garden Road to S.R. 50
Total crashes: 154. Crash Focus: 2 Serious Injury/Fatal crashes.
City Project
Short-Term Countermeasures:
Project Prioritization Safety
Score
Underserved
Communities
Safety
Benfit HIN Implementation
Initial Score 0.25 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
Weighted Score 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.10
Total Score / Rank 0.58 / Tied for 8th
Opinion of
Probable Cost $20,000*
*Planning level estimate. Includes 20% CEI and 30% contingency. Does not include ROW, drainage, or utility impacts.
Old Winter Garden Rd.
50
Chevron Signs on Horizontal Curves Retroreflective Signal Backplates Protected Left Turns
N
Project Corridor
City of Ocoee 62
Ocoee Apopka Road
from Silver Star Rd. to N. of Bridlewood Dr.
Total crashes: 356. Crash Focus: 9 Serious Injury/Fatal crash.
Short-Term Countermeasures:
Long-Term Countermeasures:
Project Prioritization Safety
Score
Underserved
Communities
Safety
Benfit HIN Implementation
Initial Score 0.25 0.00 1.00 0.50 1.00
Weighted Score 0.13 0.00 0.15 0.05 0.10
Total Score / Rank 0.43 / 10th
Opinion of
Probable Cost $4,775,000*
*Planning level estimate. Includes 20% CEI and 30% contingency. Does not include ROW, drainage, or utility impacts.
McCormick Rd.
N
Silver Star Rd.
Leading Pedestrian Interval
Chevron Signs
High Visibility Crosswalk
Speed Feedback Sign
Widen Sidewalk
Lighting
Corridor Wide Recommendation
Clarcona Ocoee Rd.Fullers Cross Rd.Project Corridor
Figure 24: Ocoee Apopka Road from Silver Star Road to north of Bridlewood Drive
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 63
7.4 Project Prioritization Process
Project prioritization criteria were developed based on the goals identified by MetroPlan Orlando and in this Safety Action Plan. For details on how these criteria were developed, see Appendix L .
The criteria help identify projects that could be included in a regional or local SS4A grant application or another safety-focused grant program. High-priority safety
improvements identified through this process may also be added to the 2050 Metropolitan
Transportation Plan (MTP) or incorporated into an already planned project in the
Prioritized Project List (PPL) or Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). The City of Ocoee
can use these criteria or a modified version for its own project prioritization process.
Key prioritization criteria include:
Safety History (50%) –
Based on the safety score
calculated for each corridor
and intersection, this
criterion prioritizes projects
where the most fatal and
severe injury crashes occur.
Regional Benefit (10%) – If a project is on multiple high injury networks, it is likely to have a regional benefit.
Implementation Timeline (10%) – Projects start saving lives when they are implemented, so projects that can be implemented quickly are prioritized.
Safety Benefit (15%) –
This considers the
potential safety benefit of
identified improvements.
Transportation Underserved (15%) –
This criterion considers
where people might
be disproportionately
affected by traffic crashes
and benefit the most
from transportation
safety improvements.
50%
Safety History
15%
Transportation
Underserved
15%
Safety Benefit
10%
Regional
Benefit
10%
Timeline
City of Ocoee64
Table 7 ranks the identified projects using the developed project prioritization criteria. Table 7
also includes an opinion on probable cost. Cost details are provided in Appendix K.
Table 7: Proposed Safety Projects
RANK PROJECT SCORE OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
1 Silver Star Road & Clarke Rd. (Left Turn, Ped/Bike)1.00 $1,745,000
1 SR 50 & Maguire Rd.1.00 $80,000
1 SR 50 & Blackwood Ave.1.00 $15,000
1 SR 50 & Clarke Rd.1.00 $15,000
5 Maguire Rd. & Old Winter Garden Rd.0.95 $16,000
6 SR 50 from SR 429 to Good Homes Rd.0.88 $10,920,000
7 Silver Star Road from Ocoee Apopka Rd. to Coventry Ln*0.75 $3,030,000
8 Lady Avenue/Maureen Avenue from Wurst Rd./Perce St. to Nicole Blvd./Mona Ave.0.58 $120,000
8 Bluford Avenue from Old Winter Garden Rd. to SR 50 0.58 $20,000
10 Ocoee Apopka Rd. from Silver Star Rd. to N. of Bridlewood Dr.0.43 $4,780,000
Bold: Project is on a city-maintained roadway.
Underline: Project is within the CRA boundary.
*Silver Star Road Complete Streets project planned on west side of corridor.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 65
CHAPTER 8
Monitoring and Implementation
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee 66
THIS CHAPTER
outlines a process
for tracking progress
toward Vision Zero
on an annual basis.
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan 67
The recommendations offered in this Safety Action
Plan can only make area roadways safer if they are
implemented. For that reason, both MetroPlan Orlando
and the City of Ocoee have created groups dedicated to
tracking the progress of regional and local safety efforts.
8.1 MetroPlan Orlando’s Safety Action Committee
Upon the adoption of the City’s Safety Action Plan, the City of Ocoee’s Working Group can continue to meet to review progress towards zero fatalities and serious injuries and reassess project and policy priorities over time. The City’s Working Group will be responsible for updating and maintaining the City’s Safety Action Plan.
With adoption of the regional Safety Action Plan, the MetroPlan Orlando’s Vision Zero Task Force will continue their work as the newly formed Safety Action Committee that will help with the implementation of the various action items of the regional Safety Action Plan, by providing feedback, identifying resources, and holding other jurisdictions accountable for their role in reaching zero. The Safety Action Committee will be involved in overseeing the regional annual safety progress report.
Additionally, MetroPlan Orlando hosts a Vulnerable Users Safety Working Group, which focuses on decreasing corridor driving speeds and on decreasing fatal and serious injuries involving pedestrians and bicyclists.
8.2 City of Ocoee Progress Monitoring
Annually monitoring progress made toward achieving zero traffic fatalities and severe injuries will help the City evaluate the success of current action items and adopt new strategies as needed. Performance metrics will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the Safety Action Plan.
It is expected that MetroPlan Orlando will update the regional crash dashboard and provide regional and jurisdictional summaries of key information and that the City can use the data prepared at the regional level to help support its progress monitoring. In July of each year, the annual monitoring process should begin with Signal 4 data for the most recent full year and the most current data obtained from other sources. This data can be accessed through a free Signal 4 account, hosted by FDOT. Using the data, a variety of metrics should be calculated, as presented in Table 8 . In addition to the crash data, a list of safety improvements implemented in the prior calendar year should be prepared.
The safety dashboard hosted at VisionZeroCFL.gov will be updated on an annual basis to reflect new data as well as highlight key findings from the crash analysis. A data management plan that details the process to obtain, review and upload data to MetroPlan Orlando’s crash dashboard is provided in Appendix M and includes documentation for calculating the VMT in Ocoee for the metrics shown in Table 8 .
As safety projects are implemented and before and after studies are completed, these results shall also be shared as part of the annual progress reporting.
City of Ocoee 68
Table 8: Annual Progress Monitoring Metric
PERFORMANCE METRIC DATA SOURCE 2021 2022 2022-2021 CHANGE
Total fatalities Signal 4 4 3 -1
Fatality rate (Per
100M VMT)
Signal 4,
Census
0.82 0.57 -0.25
Total serious injuries Signal 4 13 15 2
Serious injury rate
(Per 100M VMT)
Signal 4,
Census
2.68 2.85 0.17
Non-motorized fatalities
and serious injuries
Signal 4 1/1 1/5 0/4
Percentage change in KSI crash types (2021-2022)Signal 4 Rear End: 1
Left Turn: 1
Right Turn: 2
Pedestrian: 1
Bicycle: 1
Run off
Road: 5
Angle: 4
Sideswipe: 1
Other: 1
Rear End: 1
Left Turn: 3
Right Turn: 0
Pedestrian: 4
Bicycle: 1
Run off
Road: 6
Angle: 2
Sideswipe: 0
Other: 0
Rear End: 0%
Left Turn: 200%
Right Turn: -100%
Pedestrian: 300%
Bicycle: 0%
Run off
Road: 20%
Angle: -50%
Sideswipe: -100%
Other: -100%
Impaired Driving
Assessment (percent of
people killed or severely
injured in a DUI crash as
compared to prior year)
Signal 4 0%*0%*0%*
Citations for Key
Behaviors
Signal 4,
Florida
Highway
Patrol,
Local Law
Enforcement
N/A N/A N/A
Implemented safety
improvements in
prior calendar year
City N/A N/A N/A
Before/After Study
Completion
Various
studies N/A N/A N/A
Number and outcome of Non-Engineering Countermeasures
FDOT, Best Foot Forward, and local jurisdictions
N/A N/A N/A
*No severe or fatal impaired driving crashes occurred in the City in 2021 or 2022
Source: MetroPlan Orlando, 2024
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 69
8.3 Federal Funding Opportunities
No one funding source will be able to pay for all the safety improvements identified in Ocoee’s
Safety Action Plan. In addition to the traditional Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP),
the MetroPlan Orlando funding progress, and other local funding sources, such as developer
fees, Table 9 summarizes potential federal funding sources related to transportation safety.
MetroPlan Orlando will also continue to look for opportunities to layer safety-related projects onto other capital improvement projects, as well as maintenance projects and through review and approval of projects in the PPL and TIP. The City can directly pursue funding from the sources in bold below. Funding from other sources listed is available through FDOT and MetroPlan Orlando.
Table 9: Potential Federal Funding Sources
POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A)The SS4A program funds regional, local, and Tribal initiatives
through grants to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries.
The Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)
for the SS4A grants offers funding for two distinct types of grants:
1. Planning and Demonstration Grants: These grants allocate federal
funds to develop, complete, or enhance a Safety Action Plan.
Demonstration activities are temporary safety improvements
that inform comprehensive safety action plans (referred to
as “Action Plans”) by testing proposed project and strategy
approaches to determine future benefits and future scope.
2. Implementation Grants: These grants provide federal funds
to execute projects and strategies outlined in an Action
Plan, specifically aimed at addressing roadway safety
issues. Eligible projects and strategies may encompass
infrastructure, behavioral, and operational activities.
Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability & Equity (RAISE) Discretionary Grant Program
The program funds multimodal, multi-jurisdiction projects
that have significant local or regional impact but are more
difficult to support through traditional DOT programs.
Transportation
Alternatives
Program (TAP)
The TAP provides funding for programs and projects defined as
transportation alternatives, including on- and off-road pedestrian
and bicycle facilities, infrastructure projects for improving non-
driver access to public transportation and enhanced mobility,
community improvement activities, and environmental mitigation;
recreational trail program projects; safe routes to school
projects; and projects for planning, designing, or constructing
boulevards and other roadways largely in the right-of-way of
former Interstate System routes or other divided highways.
Carbon Reduction
Program (CRP)
Provides funds for projects designed to reduce
transportation emissions, defined as carbon dioxide
(CO2) emissions from on-road highway sources.
City of Ocoee 70
POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Infrastructure for Rebuilding America Discretionary Grant Program (INFRA)
Funds available for multimodal freight and highway
projects of national or regional significance to improve the
safety, efficiency, and reliability of the movement of freight
and people in and across rural and urban areas.
Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program (RCP)
Planning grants and capital construction grants, as well as technical assistance, to restore community connectivity through the removal, retrofit, mitigation, or replacement of eligible transportation infrastructure facilities.
Federal Transit
Administration
Capital Funds (FTA)
Funds transit capital investments, including heavy rail,
commuter rail, light rail, streetcars, and bus rapid transit.
Areas of Persistent Poverty Program (AoPP)Funds projects that provide access to transit in disadvantaged
communities, including safety improvements.
Congestion Mitigation
and Air Quality
Improvement
Program (CMAQ)
Provides funds to States for transportation projects designed to
reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality, particularly in
areas of the country that do not attain national air quality standards.
Highway Safety
Improvement
Program (HSIP)
HSIP is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose
to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and
serious injuries on all public roads, including non-State-
owned roads and roads on tribal land. The HSIP requires
a data-driven, strategic approach to improving highway
safety on all public roads with a focus on performance.
Railway-Highway Crossings (Section 130) Program (RHCP)
The Railway-Highway Crossings (Section 130) Program provides funds for the elimination of hazards at railway-highway crossings.
National Highway
Performance
Program (NHPP)
Provides support for the condition and performance of the
National Highway System (NHS), for the construction of new
facilities on the NHS, and to ensure that investments of Federal-
aid funds in highway construction are directed to support
progress toward the achievement of performance targets
established in a state’s asset management plan for the NHS.
Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost Saving Transportation (PROTECT)
Used to help make surface transportation more resilient to natural
hazards, including climate change, sea level rise, flooding, extreme
weather events, and other natural disasters through support of
planning activities, resilience improvements, community resilience
and evacuation routes, and at-risk coastal infrastructure.
Surface Transportation
Block Grant
Program (STBG)
Provides flexible funding that may be used by States and
localities for projects to preserve and improve the conditions and
performance on any Federal-aid highway, bridge and tunnel
projects on any public road, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure,
and transit capital projects, including intercity bus terminals.
Safe Routes to School Program (SRTS)Projects that improve safety for students going to school.
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 71
Source: MetroPlan Orlando, 2024
8.4 Vision Zero Safety Action Plan Updates
From adoption, the City of Ocoee
Safety Action Plan will be refreshed
or fully updated every five years
8.5 Implementation
Implementing Vision Zero will require broad
collaboration across many partners and
disciplines. Transportation safety projects will
get implemented in many ways, including
through local funding, the traditional MetroPlan
Orlando funding, as well as grant programs. As
projects move forward from the Metropolitan
Transportation Plan to construction, there are
opportunities to prioritize the funding projects that will be able to improve transportation safety outcomes along high-crash corridors.
City of Ocoee 72
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan 73
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee 74
A-Vision Zero Resolution
B-2024 SS4A Safety Action
Plan Component Checklist
C-MetroPlan Orlando’s High
Injury Network Development
D-Regional
Engagement Efforts
E-Local Engagement Plan
F-Local Engagement Materials
G-Working Group
Meeting Notes
H-Non-Engineering
Countermeasure Toolkit
I-Benchmarking Evaluation
J-Engineering
Countermeasure Toolkit
K-Project Details
L-Prioritization Criteria
M-Data Management Plan
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan 75
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
A- Vision Zero Resolution
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
A- Vision Zero Resolution
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
OCOEE, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE VISION ZERO
PHILOSOPHY AND ACTION PLAN; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the State of Florida is one of the most dangerous states for pedestrians, consistently
ranking high on the Pedestrian Danger Index by Smart Growth America, with the metro area of Orlando-
Kissimmee-Sanford, Florida ranking as one of the most dangerous metropolitan areas for pedestrians in
the country; and
WHEREAS, fatal and severe crashes are preventable, and death and severe injury are not an
acceptable cost for using our public roadway system; and
WHEREAS, The Ocoee City Commission recognizes the need to ensure pedestrian and bicycle
safety and provide facilities to meet the travel needs of all mode users within the City, regardless of age
or ability; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ocoee is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the continuing
transportation planning systems and adoption of transportation plans and programs; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ocoee will hereby commit to decreasing these crash statistics by endorsing
Vision Zero which is a data-driven strategy focused on eliminating traffic fatalities and severe injuries,
while increasing safe, healthy, and equitable mobility for all; and
WHEREAS, Vision Zero is founded on a Safe System approach that recognizes that people will
make mistakes and roadway systems and policies should be designed to protect them through human-
centered safety redundancies and shared responsibilities; and
WHEREAS, key elements of the Vision Zero strategy include: reframing traffic fatalities as
preventable, focusing on system failures, reducing the impact of collisions, adopting a safe system
approach for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians, making data-driven decisions, prioritizing safety
improvements in areas that have historically been underserved, and building robust engagement strategies
to reach those who are most vulnerable on the roadways; and
WHEREAS, the United States Department of Transportation has adopted the Safe System
approach; and
WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Transportation has adopted a Target Zero Initiative; and
WHEREAS, there are over 50 Vision Zero jurisdictions in the United States, including Orange
County, and this is expected to increase significantly in the coming years; and
WHEREAS, it is anticipated that implementation of Vision Zero methodologies will make City of
Ocoee streets safer for all road users, particularly those who are most physically vulnerable, such as
seniors, youth, and people with disabilities, and will further encourage people of all ages and abilities to
walk, bike and take transit;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF OCOEE, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1. The City Commission hereby establishes the elimination of traffic fatality and severe
injury due to traffic crashes as a goal of the City of Ocoee.
SECTION 2. The City of Ocoee hereby adopts the Vision Zero philosophy and commits to
working towards a goal of zero traffic deaths and severe injuries on City streets by the year 2045.
SECTION 3. The City of Ocoee hereby adopts the City of Ocoee Vision Zero Action Plan,
attached hereto as Exhibit A, as a key strategy for achieving this goal.
SECTION 4. RATIFICATION. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective
date of this Resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed.
SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY. If any clause, section, or other part of this Resolution shall be
held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, such unconstitutional or
invalid part shall be considered as eliminated and in no way affecting the validity o f other provisions of
this Resolution.
SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its
passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ____________, 2024.
ATTEST:
______________________________
Melanie Sibbitt, City Clerk
(SEAL)
APPROVED:
CITY OF OCOEE, FLORIDA
_______________________________
Rusty Johnson, Mayor
FOR USE AND RELIANCE ONLY BY THE
CITY OF OCOEE FLORIDA; APPROVED
AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY THIS____
DAY OF ________________, 2024.
FISHBACK DOMINICK LLP
By: __________________________
City Attorney
APPROVED BY THE OCOEE CITY
COMMISSION AT A MEETING HELD ON
______________________________, 2024,
UNDER AGENDA ITEM NO. _____
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
B- 2024 SS4A Safety Action Plan Component Checklist
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
B- 2024 SS4A Safety Action Plan Component Checklist
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
SS4A 2024 Action Plan Component Checklist
Description How Plan Achieves Component
1
Governing body in the jurisdiction publicly committed to an eventual
goal of zero roadway fatalities and serious injuries.
Resolution adopted on TBD and
included in appendix.
Set targets to achieve significant declines in roadway fatalities and
serious injuries.
Target set for 2045, as noted in the
resolution in appendix.
2
To develop the Action Plan, a committee, task force, implementation
group, or similar body established and charged with the plan’s
development, implementation, and monitoring.
See Listening to the Community
for overview of engagement
activities and Monitoring and
Implementation for
Implementation and monitoring
actions.
3
Analysis of existing conditions and historical trends to baseline the
level of crashes involving fatalities and serious injuries across a
jurisdiction, locality, Tribe, or region.
See Crash Analysis and Trends
and technical appendix.
Analysis of systemic and specific safety needs is performed as
needed (e.g., high risk)
See Crash Analysis and Trends
and technical appendix.
Analysis of the location where there are crashes, the severity, as well
as contributing factors and crash types.
See Crash Analysis and Trends
and technical appendix.
A geospatial identification (geographic or locational data using
maps) of higher risk locations.
See Crash Analysis and Trends
and technical appendix.
4
Engagement with the public and relevant stakeholders, including the
private sector and community groups.
See Listening to the Community
for overview of engagement
activities.
Incorporation of information received from the engagement and
collaboration into the plan.
See Listening to the Community
for overview of engagement
activities and how feedback was
incorporated into the Safety
Action Plan.
Coordination that included inter- and intragovernmental
cooperation and collaboration, as appropriate.
See Listening to the Community
for overview of level of
intergovernmental collaboration.
5
Considerations of equity using inclusive and representative processes. See Crash Analysis and Trends,
Recommended Safety Projects,
and Monitoring and
Implementation for descriptions of
how equity was incorporated into
analysis and process.
Identified underserved communities through data. See Crash Analysis and Trends for
description of how transportation
underserved data was
incorporated into analysis.
Equity analysis in collaboration with appropriate partners, focused on
initial equity impact.
See Crash Analysis and Trends
and Listening to the Community
for equity analysis and
collaboration.
6
The plan development included an assessment of current policies,
plans, guidelines, and/or standards to identify opportunities to
improve how processes prioritize safety.
See Recommended Programs
and Policy Updates and technical
analysis for policy benchmarking
and Action Plan Elements.
City of Winter Garden
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan
DRAFT
Page 2 of 2
Description How Plan Achieves Component
The plan discusses implementation through the adoption of revised or
new policies, guidelines, and/or standards.
See Recommended Programs
and Policy Updates and technical
analysis for policy benchmarking
and Action Plan Elements.
7
The plan identifies a comprehensive set of projects and strategies to
address the safety problems in the Action Plan, time ranges when
projects and strategies will be deployed, and explain project
prioritization criteria.
See Recommended Safety
Projects.
8
A description of how progress will be measured over time that
includes, at a minimum, outcome data.
See Monitoring and
Implementation.
The plan is posted publicly online. Plan will be available here:
VisionZeroCFL.gov
9 The plan was finalized and/or last updated between 2018 and 2024. Plan was finalized in 2024.
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
C- MetroPlan Orlando’s High Injury Network Development
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
C- MetroPlan Orlando’s High Injury Network Development
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
Draft Memorandum
Introduction
The MetroPlan Orlando metropolitan area has the unfortunate distinction of having the one of the
highest pedestrian fatality rates in the country, with transportation safety affecting all roadway users
as the region has an overall fatal crash rate 15 percent higher than the national average and 10
percent higher than the statewide average. To understand where and why crashes that result in
fatalities and serious injuries are most likely to occur and how to reduce the severity and frequency of
these crashes, MetroPlan Orlando is preparing a Regional Vision Zero Action Plan, rooted in the core
elements of Vision Zero and the Safe System approach. The overall purpose of the Action Plan is to
identify projects, programs and strategies that will eliminate fatalities and serious injuries on the
regions roadways by taking advantage of implementation funding through the Safe Streets for All
(SS4A) grant program. The SS4A program is also funding the preparation of County and Local Vision
Zero action plans in the region.
This memo summarizes the methodology to analyze collision trends and develop a high-injury
network (HIN) for the MetroPlan Orlando region, with a focus on the non-access-controlled Federal
Aid (MPO) network. The HIN is a collection of streets where a disproportionate number of collisions
that result in someone being killed or severely injured (KSI) occur. Together, these collision types are
referred to as KSI collisions throughout this memo. In addition to identifying corridors where a
disproportionate number of KSI crashes occur, top KSI crash intersections are also identified.
This work will culminate in the preparation of a Safety Action Plan for the region. Additionally,
separate HINs will be prepared for each County and each local jurisdiction that reflects:
1. All roadways within the jurisdiction regardless of ownership
2. All roadways maintained by the jurisdiction
Based on the preliminary data analysis, about 47 percent of KSI crashes occur on about 4 percent of
centerline miles of non-access-controlled roadways in Orange, Osceola, and Seminole County, and
about 13 percent of the Federal Aid System centerline miles.
The following describes the data sources that were used and explains the methodology employed
by Fehr & Peers to develop the HIN.
Date: September 12, 2023
To: Vision Zero Central Florida Partners
From: Mighk Wilson, MetroPlan Orlando
Kathrin Tellez, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Vision Zero Central Florida – Regional High Injury Network
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Regional HIN, September 12, 2023
Page 2 of 8
Data Inputs
Roadway Network
The roadway network that served as the basis for this analysis was obtained from the xGeographic
Wave database, which is a land use, transportation, environmental and demographic mapping
database, usable across GIS mapping platforms, that has been built for the Orlando Metropolitan
Area. For the purposes of developing the high injury network, limited access, and toll facilities (e.g., I-4
and the Turnpike) and their corresponding on/off ramps were removed from the network prior to the
HIN analysis. Ramp terminal intersections were included in the analysis, including the ramp influence
area of 100 feet. Preparation of the initial HIN included all non-limited access facilities in the network
with non-Federal Aid roadways removed from the final HIN for the regional HIN. This process identified
the primary roadways where a disproportionate number of crashes that result in a KSI occur in the
region on roadways where MetroPlan Orlando can provide funding for safety improvements through
the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) process as well as support regional grant applications for
implementation funding through future SS4A applications.
Collision Severity Weighting
The goal of Vision Zero within the Safe System approach is to eliminate all serious and fatal injury
crashes on roadways within the MetroPlan Orlando region, recognizing that while it is not feasible to
prevent all crashes, implementation of safe system strategies can reduce the severity of crashes. To
prioritize efforts at locations where crashes result in a fatality or severe injury, KSI crashes where
assigned a weight factor. As presented in Table 1, collision weights are derived from comprehensive
crash costs from the 2023 FDOT Design Manual, with the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) Equivalent
Property Damage Only (EPDO) weighting applied.
Comprehensive crash costs include both economic costs and monetized pain and suffering costs.
Economic costs are monetary costs associated with emergency services deployment, medical
services, productivity loss due to victim injury, insurance, and legal costs, cost associated congestion
impacts because of the collision, and property damage costs. Monetized pain and suffering costs
are an assumption of the costs associated with lost quality-of-life (or Quality-Adjusted Life Years),
accounting for reductions in life expectancy and quality of life changes because of a crash.
Application of the EPDO weighting (dividing the cost of each crash type by the cost of a property
damage only crash) approach results in different crash types receiving a different weight factor. As
shown in Table 1, application of the EPDO weight results in fatal crashes receiving a significantly
higher weight which could skew the HIN. In many instances, a crash that results in a severe injury
could have been a fatality under slightly different circumstances, such as a victim with underlying
health issues. Conversely, a fatal crash involving someone not wearing a seatbelt could have been
injury only if the victim was wearing a seatbelt. Additionally, only fatalities that occur within 30 days
are reported in the crash dataset. If a serious injury crash resulted in a fatality more than 30 days after
the crash, it would not be reflected in this analysis as a fatality. Consequently, a modified EPDO
method was used that groups fatal and serious injury crashes together and groups non-
incapacitating injuries together. This approach has been used by agencies across the county. The
approach to develop the regional HIN also includes all crashes – given the low weight applied to
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Regional HIN, September 12, 2023
Page 3 of 8
property damage only crashes, only locations where there is high frequency of crashes would affect
the HIN.
Table 1: Crash Costs1 and EPDO Weight Factors
Severity Crash Cost EPDO Weight Modified EPDO Weight2
Fatal (K) $10,890,000 1,414
317
Incapacitating Injury (A) $888,030 115
Non-Incapacitating Injury (B) $180,180 23
17
Possibly Injury (C) $103,950 14
No Injury (0) $7,700 1 1
1. Source: FDOT Design Manual, Table 122.6.2 FDOT KABCO Crash Costs
2. Based on an average weighted KA crash cost in Orange, Osceola and Seminole Counties of $2,438,850 for 2018 – 2022 and an
average weighted BC crash cost in Orange, Osceola and Seminole Counties of $129,725.
Collision Mode Weighting
In addition to applying a weight factor based on the severity of a crash, a weight factor was
developed and applied based on the travel mode of crash victims. Review of the data indicates
that people walking, bicycling, and riding motorcycles are disproportionately represented in crashes
that result in a KSI. People outside of vehicles are involved in about 3.7 percent of all reported
crashes but represent 54 percent of all fatalities, 31 percent of all KSI crashes and 10 percent of all
injury crashes. For the region, the resulting weight factor, based on the proportion of overall crashes
involving someone outside a vehicle to crashes that resulted in an injury, is 3. All crashes involving a
person walking, bicycling, or riding a motorcycle were weighed by a factor of 3 in the development
of the Regional HIN for the MetroPlan Orlando region. The factor, while based on local data, is in-line
with weight factors used by other jurisdictions in the development of their HINs.
HIN Development
Sliding Window Approach
The HIN analysis was conducted using a sliding window approach, which uses overlapping windows
to account for errors in collision location reporting. For a specific window length, performance
measures are calculated for that window along a corridor (e.g., the number of fatal or serious injury
collisions). The window is shifted along the corridor for a given offset distance and the analysis is
repeated for the shifted window. Using this approach, a single location would be evaluated in
several different windows, so any inaccuracies inherent within collision location reporting can be
accounted for. Windows with the highest values for the segment or facility are identified as
candidate HIN locations.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Regional HIN, September 12, 2023
Page 4 of 8
Sliding Window Parameters
A 1-mile window length with a 0.2-mile offset distance was chosen for the regional HIN analysis.
Analyses prepared for a smaller geography should consider a smaller scale, such as a 0.5-mile
window and 0.1-mile offset for a city boundary. Any segment less than 1-mile in length was treated as
a single segment without any offset shifting.
Collision Summary for Each Window
Collisions were summarized for each window using a 100-ft search radius. This radius was chosen by
inspecting collision locations relative to the centerline network at various locations throughout the
network. The collision summary for each window consisted of summing all weighted collision values
within the search radius. For example, a window with 15 property-damage only, 10 minor injury
collisions and 5 KSI collisions within 100 feet would receive a weighted score of 1,770 (15*1+10*17+
5*317), presuming no pedestrians, bicyclists or motorcyclists were involved. For that same window, if a
pedestrian, bicyclist, or motorcyclist was involved in 1 of the 15 property-damage only crashes, 3 of
the 10 minor injury collisions and 3 of the 5 KSI collisions, that window would receive a weighted score
of 3,776 (14*1+1*3*1+7*17+ 3*3*17+2*317+3*3*317).
HIN Development
After summarizing collisions all windows throughout the network, the HIN draft was built using the
weighted score of each window. By visualizing the weighted score throughout the network, potential
HIN corridors could be identified, as shown on Figure 1.
Figure 1: Initial visualization of Collision Weight Summaries Throughout
Network
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Regional HIN, September 12, 2023
Page 5 of 8
The HIN draft was built by using the following iterative process, with the goal of achieving a network
that accounted for approximately 50 percent of the KSI collisions in the region:
1. Select/flag window segments throughout the network with collision weight values above a
certain threshold.
2. Adjacent high-scoring windows (flagged in the previous step) are aggregated into longer
corridor segments (greater than 1 mile in length) when appropriate.
3. Cleaning/reasonableness check:
a. Some high scoring windows on local roads which intersect with major ones were
removed from consideration if it was discovered that the collision score was being
skewed by the number of collisions on the major leg of the intersection.
b. Any small gaps (<1/2 mile) in between the aggregated corridor segments in step 2 were
added to the draft HIN for continuity.
HIN and HIN Statistics
The resulting HIN can be viewed through this weblink. The MetroPlan Orlando Regional HIN contains
about 260 centerline miles and includes roadway segments in all three counties, with a
disproportionate number of roadways in Orange County. Crashes that occur on the HIN segments
account for 47 percent of all KSI crashes in the region. 61 percent of pedestrian KSI, 50 percent of
bicyclist KSI, and 44 percent of motorcyclist KSI crashes also occur on these roadways, as summarized
in Table 2.
Table 2: MPO Network HIN Statistics
All Roadways* All Federal Aid
Roadway*
Draft Regional
HIN
HIN % All
Roadways
HIN % of Federal
Aid Roadways
Centerline miles 7,461 1,966 258 4% 13%
All collisions 272,500 229,280 98,987 36% 43%
KSI (All modes) 7,146 6,398 3,3378 47% 53%
Ped KSI 949 854 576 61% 67%
Bike KSI 327 285 164 50% 58%
Motorcycle KSI 953 864 416 44% 48%
Source: Signal 4 Analytics, Fehr & Peers.
Notes: * Excluding Toll facilities and access-controlled facilities
The 10 corridors on the HIN that received the highest weighted score on a per mile basis is
summarized in Table 3, with the full list provided as an attachment.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Regional HIN, September 12, 2023
Page 6 of 8
Table 3: Top 10 HIN Corridors
Roadway Name From To Location Total Weighted Score
per Mile
1. John Young Parkway SR 50 Orange Center Blvd. Orlando 17,478
2. Sand Lake Road/
McCoy Road
Turkey Lake
Rd. Universal Blvd. Orlando 17,104
3. Chickasaw Trail Frontage Rd. Lake Underhill Rd. Orange County 14,589
4. Hiawassee Road SR 438/Silver
Star Rd. SR 50 Orange County 14,547
5. Oakridge Road Millenia Blvd. S. Orange Blossom
Trail Orlando 14,296
6. SR 435 SR 50 Raleigh St. Orange County 14,130
7. SR 551 SR 50 Lake Underhill Rd. Orange County 14,129
8. SR 436 Lee Vista Rd. TG Lee Blvd. Orlando 14,088
9. Pine Hills Road SR 50 Old Winter Garden
Rd. Orange County 13,941
10. Alafaya Trail SR 50 Lake Underhill Rd. Orange County 13,564
Source: Signal 4 Analytics, Fehr & Peers.
Notes: * Excluding Toll facilities and access-controlled facilities
Top Intersections
In addition to developing a HIN, the intersections with the highest weighted crash were also identified
based on a similar process as the HIN development. For this analysis, any crash that was within 250
feet of an intersection was considered as attributed to that intersection, except for crashes in
downtown areas where short blocks reduce the intersection influence area. For crashes in those
contexts, crashes within 50 feet of an intersection were considered. The top 30 intersections are also
shown on the HIN network, with a summary in Table 4. Of the top 30 intersections, none are off the
HIN. Intersections where a disproportionate share of the KSI crashes involved a person outside a
vehicle are noted in bold italics.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Regional HIN, September 12, 2023
Page 7 of 8
Table 4: Top 30 HIN Intersections1
Intersection Total
Weight Intersection Total
Weight
1. John Young Parkway at Sand Lake
Road2 10,140 16. Colonial Drive at Econlockhatchee
Trail 6,480
2. Alfaya Trail at Colonial Drive 10,103 17. Powers Drive at Silver Star Road 6,415
3. Orange Blossom Trail at Holden
Avenue 10,055 18. Orange Blossom Trail at Conroy
Road/Americana Boulevard 6,401
4. Hiawassee Road at Silver Star Road 9,630 19. Old Cheney Highway/Tucker
Avenue at Colonial Drive 6,386
5. N Poinciana Boulevard at Irlo
Bronson Memorial Highway 9,399 20. Goldenrod Road at University
Boulevard 6,224
6. Pine Hills Road at Silver Star Road 8,673 21. Alfaya Trail at Lokanotosa Trail 5,905
7. Semoran Boulevard at Old Cheney
Hwy 8,509 22. Semoran Boulevard at Curry Ford
Road 5,504
8. W Colonial Drive at N Kirkman Road 7,097 23. S French Street at W 25th Street 5,459
9. Goldenrod Road at Colonial Drive 7,040 24. Hastings Street at Silver Star Road 5,368
10. Simpson Road at Irlo Bronson
Memorial Highway 6,946 25. Orange Blossom Trail at Orlando
Central Parkway 5,160
11. Orange Blossom Trail at Gore Street 6,769 26. Orange Blossom Trail at Michigan
Street 4,924
12. N Kirkman Road at Old Winter
Garden Road 6,724 27. Irlo Bronson Memorial Highway at
Club Sevilla 4,812
13. Goldenrod Road at Curry Ford
Road 6,715 28. Forsyth Road at University Boulevard 4,722
14. John Young Parkway at Conroy
Road 6,699 29. N French Avenue at W 1st Street (US
17/92) 4,294
15. Pine Hills Road at North Lane 6,651 30. Orange Blossom Trail at Premier
Row 3,919
Source: Signal 4 Analytics, Fehr & Peers.
Note: 1. Intersections where a disproportionate share of the KSI crashes involved a person outside a vehicle are noted in
bold italics.
2. At the intersection of John Young Parkway at Sand Lake Road, improvements were completed in late 2019/early 2020 to
convert an at-grade intersection to a single-point urban interchange (SPUI). The number of KSI crashes per year has
reduced from approximately 9 per year (2018/2019) to an average of 3 per year (2020-2022). This intersection could be a
candidate for more detailed analysis as part of the County plan to document the safety benefit associated with the SPUI
and potentially identify additional countermeasures that could be implemented at the intersection.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Regional HIN, September 12, 2023
Page 8 of 8
Next Steps
Using the same process that was used to identify the Regional HIN, County and Local HINs will be
developed, which will include:
• County (all roadways included in the analysis) – this will identify the roadways in each county
where a disproportionate number of fatal and serve injury crashes are reported. This will likely
overlap with the regional HIN, but this map will provide focus locations for each county and
the respective local jurisdiction(s). A secondary HIN of only roadways within the County
jurisdiction will also be prepared.
• Jurisdictional – this will identify the roadways in each jurisdiction regardless of ownership where
a disproportionate number of fatal and serve injury crashes are reported. For example, for the
City of Kissimmee, an initial HIN may include roadways such as John Young Parkway and Vine
Street which are maintained by the County. A secondary HIN of only roadways within the city
jurisdiction will be prepared.
• Top Intersections – this will identify the intersections in each jurisdiction where a
disproportionate number of fatal and serve injury crashes are reported.
If you have questions, please contact Mighk Wilson at mighk.wilson@metroplanorlando.gov.
Attachments: Roadways in HIN
Central Florida Vision Zero
Regional HIN Segments
September 2023
Corridor
Number Road Name Location
Total Weighted
Score per Mile From To
1 John Young Parkway Orlando 17,478 SR 50 Orange Center Blvd.
2 Sand Lake Road/McCoy Road Orlando 17,104 Turkey Lake Rd.University Blvd.
3 Chickasaw Trail Orange County 14,589 Frontage Rd.Lake Underhill Rd.
4 Hiawassee Road Orange County 14,547 SR 438/Silver Star Rd.SR 50
5 Oakridge Road Orlando 14,296 Millenia Blvd.S. Orange Blossom Trail
6 SR 435 Orange County 14,130 SR 50 Raleigh St.
7 SR 551 Orange County 14,129 SR 50 Lake Underhill Rd.
8 SR 436 Orlando 14,088 Lee Vista Rd.TG Lee Blvd.
9 Pine Hills Road Orange County 13,941 SR 50 Old Winter Garden Rd.
10 Alafaya Trail Orange County 13,564 SR 50 Lake Underhill Rd.
11 SR 435 Orlando 13,466 LB Mcleod Rd.Major Blvd.
12 Colonial Drive Orlando 13,415 Orange Blossom Trail N.N Bumby Ave.
13 North Lane Orange County 12,946 Westgate Rd.N Pine Hills Rd.
14 Hiawassee Rd Orange County 12,344 SR 50 Old Winter Garden Rd.
15 SR 434 Orange County 12,284 McCulloch Rd.SR 50
16 CR 506 Orange County 12,054 S. Orange Blossom Trail Orange Ave S.
17 SR 423 Orange County 11,972 N. Orange Blossom Trail N. Wymore Rd.
18 University Blvd.Orange County 11,938 SR 436 Lake Mirage Blvd.
19 Rosalind Ave Orlando 11,526 E. Livingston St.S. Lucerne Cir.
20 Semoran Boulevard Orlando 11,419 Lake Underhill Rd.Lake Margaret Dr.
21 US 192/Vine St Osceola County 11,347 Celebration Ave.Four Winds Blvd.
22 Goldenroad Road Orange County 11,182 Lake Underhill Rd.Beatty Dr.
23 N Ronald Regan Blvd Seminole County 10,951 Eldersprings Cir.Jones Ave.
24 W First Street (US 17/92)Sanford 10,856 N. Persimmon Ave.N. Frence Ave.
25 Edgewater Dr/Highland Ave Orange County 10,652 Clarcona Ocoee Rd.Lee Rd.
26 Conway Road Orlando 10,570 Curry Ford Rd.E. Michigan St.
27 Pershing Ave.Orlando 10,554 Woodgate Blvd.Goldenrod Rd. S.
28 John Young Pkwy Orange County 10,510 SR 528 Ramps Lazio Ln.
29 East Lake Mary Blvd Seminole County 10,477 North of Celery Ave.SR 46
30 Poinciana Blvd Osceola County 10,431 US 192 Siesta Lago Dr.
31 Holden Ave Orange County 10,402 Rio Grande Ave. S.Lake Holden Hills Dr.
32 S Orange Blossom Trail Kissimmee 10,376 E. Osceola Pkwy.Ridgewood Ave.
33 US-192/Vine St Kissimmee 10,356 South of Four Winds Blvd.N. John Young Pkwy.
34 CR 435/Apopka Vineland Rd Orange County 10,310 Balboa Dr.SR 50
35 Texas Ave Orange County 10,255 Americana Blvd.W. Oak Ridge Rd.
36 Vineland Road Orange County 10,156 I-4 South of LBV Factory Shores Dr.
37 Orange Avenue Orlando 10,131 S. Lucerne Cir.Gatlin Ave.
38 Orange Blossom Trail Orange County 9,988 Overland Rd.Rosamond Dr.
39 Ivey Ln Orlando 9,944 Edgemoor St.Raleigh St.
40 Orange Blossom Trail Apopka 9,928 Drage Dr.S. McGee Ave.
41 Orange Blossom Trail Orlando 9,902 Lee Rd.Shader Rd.
42 Lancaster Road Orange County 9,900 S. Orange Blossom Trail Orange Ave. S.
43 Goldenroad Road Orange County 9,875 North of Dwell Well Way SR 50
44 John Young Pkwy.Orlando 9,873 LB McLeod Rd.W. Sand Lake Rd.
45 US-17/92/Orlando Ave Seminole County 9,853 South St.Spartan Dr.
46 S Orange Blossom Trail Kissimmee 9,546 Ridgewood Ave.Neptune Rd.
47 Conroy Rd/Americana Orlando 9,495 West of President Barack
Obama Pkwy.S. Orange Blossom Trail
48 John Young Pkwy Orange County 9,488 Deerfield Blvd.South of Town Loop Blvd.
49 University Blvd.Orange County 9,410 Bibb Ln.Rouse Rd.
Page 1 of 3
Central Florida Vision Zero
Regional HIN Segments
September 2023
Corridor
Number Road Name Location
Total Weighted
Score per Mile From To
50 W Colonial Dr/Martin Luther
King B Orange County 9,406 Economic Ct.Good Homes Rd.
51 Westmoreland Drive Orlando 9,377 SR 526/Washington Street W. Gore St.
52 West 25th Street Sanford 9,328 Club Rd.S. Mellonville Ave.
53 Osceola Pkwy Kissimmee 9,281 N. Orange Blossom Trail Florida's Turnpike
54 US-17/92/Orlando Ave/French
Ave Seminole County 9,122 North of Longdale Ave.SR 434
55 E Bronson Hwy/13 St/Vine St Osceola County 9,118 Neocity Way Pecan St.
56 Semoran Boulevard Altamonte Springs 9,083 Montgomery Rd.Palm Springs Dr.
57 Silver Star Road Orange County 9,070 Mercy Dr.East of N. John Young Pkwy.
58 Orange Avenue Orange County 9,055 Prince St.Spruce Ave.
59 Orange Blossom Trail Orange County 9,038 Consulate Dr.Town Center Blvd.
60 Old Winter Garden Rd Orange County 8,868 N. Hiawassee Rd.Takoma St.
61 SR 434 Seminole County 8,843 West of E. Lake Brantley Dr.Oak St.
62 Fairbanks Avenue Winter Park 8,816 Clay St.Pennsylvania Ave. S.
63 Old Winter Garden Rd Orlando 8,698 SR 408 Exit Ramp Orange Blossom Trail N.
64 Aloma Avenue Orange County 8,691 West of St. Andrews Blvd.West of Tangerine Ave.
65 SR 434 Orange County 8,672 Pembrook Dr.Edgewater Dr.
66 Michigan Ave.Kissimmee 8,545 E. Donegan Dr.E. Vine St.
67 Powers Drive Orange County 8,540 Indian Hill Rd.SR 438
68 Semoran Boulevard Casselberry 8,485 US 17-92 Kewannee Trl.
69 John Young Pkwy.Orange County 8,451 Sand Lake Rd.South of SR 528 Ramps
70 Rio Grande Avenue Orange County 8,446 W. Gore St.Holden Ave.
71 US-17/92/French Ave Sanford 8,421 W. 20th St.W. 27th St.
72 Chickasaw Trl Orange County 8,374 SR 50 Valencia College Ln.
73 Curry Ford Rd Orange County 8,218 West of Frederica Dr.East of Excalibur Dr.
74 Orlando Avenue Winter Park 8,217 Lake Ave.W. Fairbanks Ave.
75 Buenaventura Blvd.Osceola County 8,171 County Boundary Simpson Rd.
76 Simpson Rd Osceola County 8,139 Harbor Town Dr.US 192
77 Wetherbee Rd Orange County 8,093 Orange Blossom Trail S.Orange Ave. S.
78 Clark Road Ocoee 8,093 Sparrow Song Ln.White Rd.
79 Hoffner Avenue (SR 15)Orange County 8,083 Conway Rd.Goldenrod Rd. S.
80 SR 434 Longwood 8,076 S. Ronald Reagan Blvd.US 17-92
81 Semoran Boulevard Orlando 8,053 Lake Margaret Dr.Hoffner Ave.
82 Lake Underhill Rd Orange County 7,611 S. Oxalis Ave.Econlockhatchee Trl. N.
83 Conway Road Orange County 7,501 Caitlin Ave.Hoffner Ave.
84 Hiawassee Rd.Orange County 7,437 Beggs Rd.SR 438/Silver Star Rd.
85 Semoran Boulevard Casselberry 7,388 Lake Howell Ln.County Boundary
86 Colonial Drive Orange County 7,358 N. Avalon Park Blvd.SR 520
87 Robinson Street Orlando 7,204 N. Rosalind Ave.N. Primrose Rd.
88 John Young Pkwy Kissimmee 7,052 West of Ham Brown Rd.Palmetto Ave.
89 Turkey Lake Rd Orange County 6,854 Toscana Blvd.South of Hillenmeyer Way
90 Clarcona-Ocoee Rd.Orange County 6,815 Apopka Vineland Rd. N.Powers Dr. N.
91 Landstar/Fairway Wds Orange County 6,702 Fairway Woods Blvd.County Boundary
92 Sand Lake Rd.Orange County 6,682 Dr. Phillips Blvd.Turkey Lane Rd.
93 Irlo Bronson Memorial Highway Orange County 6,653 Westside Blvd.East of Inspiration Dr.
94 Colonial Drive Orange County 6,645 Econlockhatchee Trl. N.N. Avalon Park Blvd.
95 International Drive Orange County 6,622 West of Universal Blvd.Destination Pkwy.
96 Rock Springs Rd N Orange County 6,606 Faye St.Welch Rd. E.
97 Semoran Boulevard Orange County 6,531 Sheeler Ave. S.Bear Lake Rd.
Page 2 of 3
Central Florida Vision Zero
Regional HIN Segments
September 2023
Corridor
Number Road Name Location
Total Weighted
Score per Mile From To
98 Boggy Creek Rd Orlando 5,949 Tradeport Dr.E. Wetherbee Rd.
99 Narcoossee Road Orange County 5,777 Tavistock Lake Blvd.County Boundary
100 Colonial Drive Orange County 5,662 N. Bumby Ave.Econlockhatchee Trl. N.
101 Avalon Park Blvd Orange County 5,630 SR 50 South of Timber Springs Blvd.
102 US-17/92/Orlando Ave/French
Ave Sanford 5,568 W. 27th St.W. Lake Mary Blvd.
103 SR 531 Osceola County 5,405 Marsh Rd.South of Granada Blvd.
104 E Bronson Hwy/13 St/Vine St St. Cloud 5,168 West of Florida's Turnpike Eastern Ave.
105 Winter Garden Vineland Road Orange County 5,147 Fiquette Rd.Overstreet Rd.
106 Winter Garden Vineland Road Orange County 4,590 E. Buena Vista Dr.S. Apopka Vineland Rd.
107 Boggy Creek Rd Osceola County 4,451 E. Osceola Parkway Buenaventura Blvd.
108 W Colonial Drive Orange County 4,233 Apopka Vineland Rd. N.Orange Blossom Trail N.
109 Apopka Vineland Road Orange County 4,003 North of Buena Vista Woods
Blvd.North of Vineland Ave.
110 Apopka Vineland Road Orange County 3,983 Windy Ridge Rd.Sandberry Blvd.
111 Alafaya Trail Orange County 3,161 Golfway Blvd.Innovation Way
112 SR 438 Orange County 3,031 Apopka Vineland Rd. N.Chantelle Ave.
113 Sand Lake Road Orange County 2,646 Mandarin Dr.Jetport Dr.
114 Orange Blossom Trail Orlando 2,530 SR 50 Holden Ave.
115 Semoran Boulevard Orange County 2,417 County Boundary SR 408
116 Orange Blossom Trail Orange County 2,315 Holden Ave.Florida's Turnpike
117 SR 50 Orange County 1,667 Fort Christmas Rd S.County Boundary
118 Pine Hills Road Orange County 1,410 Pinto Way SR 50
Page 3 of 3
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
D- Regional Engagement Efforts
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
D- Regional Engagement Efforts
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
Regional Engagement Efforts
The engagement strategies for the MetroPlan Orlando Regional
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan were designed to complement
strategies at the county and local plan levels, such that
collectively there was a much broader reach and impact than
could be realized by any one agency.
Task Force, Steering Committees and Working Groups
A regional Vision Zero Task Force provided feedback and
strategic guidance throughout the preparation of the plan and
included people representing local agencies, the Florida
Department of Transportation, public health officials, the medical
professionals, bicycling and pedestrian advocacy groups, and
members of the public. Throughout the course of the project, the
regional Task Force met 5 times around the following topics:
August 2023: Introduction to Vision Zero and the Safe System
Approach, Project Overview, and High-Level Crash Trends.
September 2023: High Injury Network, Crash Trends, Public
Engagement, and Hub Site Overview.
November 2023: Public Engagement Update, Countermeasures,
Policy Benchmarking, Reduction Goals.
February 2024: Public Engagement Update, Policy Benchmarking
Outcomes, Preliminary Prioritization Process, and Project
Development Process.
April 2024: Public Engagement Update, Project Prioritization,
Project Development, and Action Plan Development.
Each task force meeting was recorded, and summaries are
available on the hub site
(https://www.visionzerocfl.gov/pages/project-resources).
The Task Force provided key feedback on the technical analysis,
public engagement strategies, policy benchmarking, action plan
elements, and project prioritization criteria. Several smaller focused
discussions were conducted with key stakeholders to review the
policy benchmarking and prioritization criteria and feedback from
the Task Force was incorporated into the final set of actions and
prioritization criteria.
Vision Zero
Central Florida by
the Numbers
22 Vision Zero Action Plans
1 Regional Task Force
3 County Steering
Committees
18 Local Working Groups
40+ community events with
1,000+ of interactions with
the public
400+ views of Call-to-Action
video
150+ local government
meetings
15+ updates to MetroPlan
Orlando Board and
committees
Over 10,000 views by over
2,700 unique users of
VisionZeroCFL.gov
345+ survey responses
1 Regional Press Conference
4 Safety Champion Speaker
Series Events
30+ mentions on local media
outlets
Speaker Series
MetroPlan Orlando facilitated a Safety Champion Speaker Series, a series of webinars and events
with safety experts from the region and country presenting topics centered around the Safe System
Approach. As of June 2024, the following speaker series events have occurred or have been
scheduled.
- World Day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims, November 15, 2023
- Moving the Needle on Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety, Rebecca Sanders, PhD, April 4, 2024
- Centering Safety and Equity, Charles Brown, May 23, 2024
- From the Perspective of those Left Behind, Melissa Wandall, June 4
- A Plan for Action for Walking & Cycling, Dan Burden, June 13
- Stories of Speed Management, Loreen Bobo, Whit Blanton, Makenzi Rasey (LADOT), August/
September 2024
This series is intended to continue beyond plan adoption with a quarterly speaker series event and an
annual safety summit for all jurisdictions in the region to share their progress, successes and failures so
we can learn as a region. Recordings of the sessions are available on the MetroPlan Orlando
YouTube Channel.
Media Briefing
In December 2023, MetroPlan Orlando hosted a Media Briefing to introduce the plan to the local
media and generate interest from across the region. The MetroPlan Orlando Board and staff, as well
as Florida Department of Transportation staff were present at the event, which also included:
• 5 English and 1 Spanish-language broadcast outlet
• 25+ minutes of on-air coverage following event
• Fact sheets in English, Spanish and Haitian Creole
After the media briefing, there continue to be additional inquiries from print and broadcast journalists,
with at least 30 additional segments in local media about the Vision Zero efforts occurring throughout
the region, including announcements of local community workshops.
Regional Fact Sheet
FACT SHEET
High Injury Network (HIN)
10 Miles
Regional High Injury Network
Map and Top Crash Intersections
FIGURE 16
441
192
4
46
15
50
429
Orlando
Kissimmee Osceola County
Orange County
Seminole County
Sanford
Lake MaryLongwoodWinter Springs
Casselberry
OviedoAltamonte SpringsApopka
Ocoee
Winter Garden
Windermere
EatonvilleMaitland
Winter Park
Edgewood
Belle Isle
St. Cloud
Top 21-30
Top 11-20
Top 10
High Injury Network
ALL ROADS*HIN % HIN FEDERAL AID
(FA) NETWORK % HIN OF FA
CENTERLINE MILES 10,728 258 2% 1,965 13%
All Crashes 272,523 98,975 36% 229,278 43%
DEATHS 1,143 638 56%1,071 60%
KSI 7,146 3,378 47% 6,398 53%
PEDESTRIAN KSI 949 576 61% 854 67%
BICYCLIST KSI 327 164 50% 285 58%
MOTORCYCLIST KSI 956 416 44% 864 48%
* All roads excluding limited access (interstate, toll roads, parking lots, etc.)
* All roads in HIN are on FA network
HIN NETWORK OVERALL STATISTICS
WORST ROADS & INTERSECTIONS FOR CRASH DEATHS AND SERIOUS INJURIES
▶ 41% of traffic
deaths occur on 2% of
Central Florida Road
WHAT IS A HIGH INJURY
NETWORK (HIN)?
A HIN is a collection of streets
where a disproportionate
number of crashes that
result in someone being
killed or severely injured
(KSI) occur. This allows us
to focus our efforts on the
places where crashes are
more likely to result in a KSI.
1 Disadvantaged Communities experience greater transportation inequities to access jobs, housing, food, health care,
education and other destinations. More information can be found on the website:
https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/equity/justice40/etc-explorer
HOW IS IT CALCULATED?
The HIN calculations weight
crashes differently depending
on the mode of travel involved
and the severity of the crash.
Crash summaries for each half
mile roadway segment were
calculated with the segments
that receive the highest
score comprising the HIN.
High injury intersections
are identified using a similar
process as the HIN, considering
all crashes within 250 feet
of each intersection.
HIN FACTS
• Average Posted
Speed 43mph
• Average Prevailing
Speed 53mph
• 53% of HIN in Disavantaged
Community 1 (25% of
the region is classified
as disadvantaged)
• HIN includes:
60% State Roads
30% County Roads
10% Local roads
This planning initiative encourages
participation from people of all ages across
our region, including community leaders,
residents, and visitors. Join us in this quest
to eliminate deaths and serious injuries on
Central Florida’s roads. We can save lives
when each of us does our part and we all
work together.
Visit our website to
review crash data,
learn more about safety,
provide feedback and get
details for upcoming events:
VisionZeroCFL.gov
HOW CAN YOU GET INVOLVED
Regional Fact Sheet
FACT SHEET
#Intersection Location Safety Score 2
1.John Young Parkway at Sand Lake Road Orange County 10,140
2.Alafaya Trail at Colonial Drive Orange County 10,103
3.Orange Blossom Trail at Holden Avenue Orange County 10,055
4.Hiawassee Road at Silver Star Road Orange County 9,630
5.N Poinciana Boulevard at Irlo Bronson Memorial Highway Osceola County 9,399
6.Pine Hills Road at Silver Star Road Orange County 8,673
7.Semoran Boulevard at Old Cheney Hwy Orange County 8,509
8.W Colonial Drive at N Kirkman Road Orange County 7,097
9.Goldenrod Road at Colonial Drive Orange County 7,040
10.Simpson Road at Irlo Bronson Memorial Highway Osceola County 6,946
11.Orange Blossom Trail at Gore Street Orlando 6,769
12.N Kirkman Road at Old Winter Garden Road Orange County 6,724
13.Goldenrod Road at Curry Ford Road Orange County 6,715
14.John Young Parkway at Conroy Road Orange County 6,699
15.Pine Hills Road at North Lane Orange County 6,651
16.Colonial Drive at Econlockhatchee Trail Orange County 6,480
17.Powers Drive at Silver Star Road Orange County 6,415
18.Orange Blossom Trail at Conroy Road/Americana Boulevard Orange County 6,401
19.Old Cheney Highway/Tucker Avenue at Colonial Drive Orange County 6,386
20.Goldenrod Road at University Boulevard Orange County 6,224
21.Alafaya Trail at Lokanotosa Trail Orange County 5,905
22.Semoran Boulevard at Curry Ford Road Orlando 5,504
23.S French Street at W 25th Street Sanford 5,459
24.Hastings Street at Silver Star Road Orange County 5,368
25.Orange Blossom Trail at Orlando Central Parkway Orange County 5,160
26.Orange Blossom Trail at Michigan Street Orange County 4,924
27.Irlo Bronson Memorial Highway at Club Sevilla Osceola County 4,812
28.Forsyth Road at University Boulevard Orange County 4,722
29.N French Avenue at W 1st Street (US 17/92)Sanford 4,294
30.Orange Blossom Trail at Premier Row Orange County 3,919
#Road Name From To Location
Safety
Score 1
1.John Young Parkway SR 50 Orange Center Blvd.Orlando 17,478
2.Sand Lake Road/McCoy Road Turkey Lake Rd.Universal Blvd.Orlando 17,104
3.Chickasaw Trail Frontage Rd.Lake Underhill Rd.Orange County 14,589
4.Hiawassee Road SR 438/Silver Star Rd.SR 50 Orange County 14,547
5.Oakridge Road Millenia Blvd.S. Orange Blossom Trail Orlando 14,296
6.Kirkman Road (SR 435)SR 50 Raleigh St.Orange County 14,130
7.Goldenrod Road (SR 551)SR 50 Lake Underhill Rd.Orange County 14,129
8.Semoran Boulevard (SR 436)Lee Vista Rd.TG Lee Blvd.Orlando 14,088
9.Pine Hills Road SR 50 Old Winter Garden Rd.Orange County 13,941
10.Alafaya Trail SR 50 Lake Underhill Rd.Orange County 13,564
11.Kirkman Road (SR 435)LB Mcleod Rd.Major Blvd.Orlando 13,466
12.Colonial Drive Orange Blossom Trail N.N Bumby Ave.Orlando 13,415
13.North Lane Westgate Rd.N Pine Hills Rd.Orange County 12,946
14.Hiawassee Rd.SR 50 Old Winter Garden Rd.Orange County 12,344
15.SR 434 McCulloch Rd.SR 50 Orange County 12,284
16.Oak Ridge Road (CR 506)S. Orange Blossom Trail Orange Ave S.Orange County 12,054
17.Lee Road N. Orange Blossom Trail N. Wymore Rd.Orange County 11,972
18.University Blvd.Semoran Blvd. (SR 436)Lake Mirage Blvd.Orange County 11,938
19.Rosalind Ave.E. Livingston St.S. Lucerne Cir.Orlando 11,526
20.Semoran Boulevard Lake Underhill Rd.Lake Margaret Dr.Orlando 11,419
21.US 192/Vine St.Celebration Ave.Four Winds Blvd.Osceola County 11,347
22.Goldenrod Road Lake Underhill Rd.Beatty Dr.Orange County 11,182
23.N Ronald Reagan Blvd.Elder Springs Cir. Jones Ave.Seminole County 10,951
24.W First Street (US 17/92)N. Persimmon Ave.N French Ave.Sanford 10,856
25.Edgewater Dr./Highland Ave.Clarcona Ocoee Rd.Lee Rd.Orange County 10,652
26.Conway Road Curry Ford Rd.E. Michigan St.Orlando 10,570
27.Pershing Ave.Woodgate Blvd.Goldenrod Rd.Orlando 10,554
28.John Young Pkwy.SR 528 Ramps Lazio Ln.Orange County 10,510
29.East Lake Mary Blvd.North of Celery Ave.SR 46 Seminole County 10,477
30.Poinciana Blvd.US 192 Siesta Lago Dr.Osceola County 10,431
TOP 30 HIGH INJURY NETWORK INTERSECTION LOCATIONS TOP 30 HIGH INJURY NETWORK CORRIDORS
1.The Safety Score is calculated based on the total number of crashes, the highest level of injury sustained in each crash,
and the travel mode of victims. Crashes that result in death or severe injury, or include a person outside a vehicle have
different factors applied. With the Safety Score, a higher score indicates the location experiences a high crash rate and a
lower score indicates as lower crash rate. A Safety Score of zero indicates no history of crashes at the location.
1.The Safety Score is calculated based on the total number of crashes, the highest level of injury sustained in each crash,
and the travel mode of victims. Crashes that result in death or severe injury, or include a person outside a vehicle have
different factors applied. The roadway segment score was normalized on a per mile basis. With the Safety Score, a higher
score indicates the location experiences a high crash rate and a lower score indicates as lower crash rate. A Safety Score
of zero indicates no history of crashes at the location.
Memorandum
Introduction
The MetroPlan Orlando metropolitan area has the unfortunate distinction of having one of the
highest pedestrian fatality rates in the country, and the region's overall fatal crash rate (for all road
users) is 15% higher than the national average and 10% higher than the statewide average. To
understand where and why crashes that result in fatalities and serious injuries are most likely to occur
and how to reduce the severity and frequency of these crashes, MetroPlan Orlando is preparing a
Regional Vision Zero Action Plan, rooted in the core elements of Vision Zero and the Safe System
approach. The overall purpose of the Action Plan is to identify projects, programs and strategies that
will eliminate fatalities and serious injuries on the region’s roads by taking advantage of the next
round of implementation funding through the Safe Streets for All (SS4A) grant program. The SS4A
program is also funding the preparation of County and Local Vision Zero action plans in the region.
This memo summarizes the methodology used to analyze the crash data, identify trends in the data
and complete a contextual analysis to understand the characteristics of roads throughout the
MetroPlan Orlando region where fatal and severe injury crashes are more likely to occur. This analysis
is presented in a series of high-level descriptive summary tables to capture relationships between crash
data, infrastructure data, and contextual variables. These tables explore overall crash trends and
patterns that can be used to guide the selection of other variables warranting deeper analysis, new
driver behavior programs, policy changes, or the selection of safety countermeasures for project
development. Detailed crash matrices for the region and each county are provided as attachments
at the end of this memorandum. The memorandum is organized as follows:
1. Key Findings
2. Methodology and Data Sources
3. Crash Trends
4. Contextual Analysis
a. Behavioral Factors
b. Road Factors
c. Environmental Factors
5. Systemic Matrices
Date: January 17, 2024
To: Vision Zero Central Florida Partners
From: Mighk Wilson, MetroPlan Orlando
Kathrin Tellez, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Vision Zero Central Florida – Crash Analysis and Profiles
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 2 of 47
Key Findings
Key findings from the crash analysis are summarized below. The crash analysis considered all reported
vehicular crashes in the MetroPlan Orlando Region between January 1, 2018 and December 31,
2022, as well as supplemental information from the Florida Injury Surveillance System (FISS), and the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Modal Office. Crash data was downloaded from Signal
4 Analytics in July 2023; data downloaded before or after this date may reflect different information,
especially for the latter years of analysis as the datasets are continually being reviewed and
updated. Throughout the report, crashes that result in someone being killed or severely injured (KSI)
are referred to as KSI crashes.
Overall
• During a typical week in the MetroPlan Orlando Region, which includes Orange, Osceola, and
Seminole Counties, 5 people are killed and 35 people are seriously injured in traffic crashes on
our roads.
• Although only 25% of the regional population lives in a designated transportation
disadvantaged community almost 50% of all crashes and 52% of fatal crashes occur within or
adjacent to transportation disadvantaged communities. The designation of transportation
disadvantage considers many factors, including poverty rates, motor vehicle ownership, and
access to destinations. Additional information is provided in the next section.
• Crashes involving people outside a vehicle – pedestrians, bicyclists and motorcyclists –
accounted for about 3% of overall crashes, 25% of serious injury crashes and 48% of fatal
crashes in the region.
• Distraction was a factor in 25% of overall crashes, 31% of serious injury crashes and 18% of fatal
crashes.
Car and Truck Involved Crashes
• 61% of left-turn KSI crashes are due to a failure to yield the right of way, with 15% related to
disobeying the traffic control device (running red light or stop sign). Left-turn related crashes
are more likely to result in a KSI as the total number of travel lanes and the posted speed limit
increases.
• Off-road crashes are more prevalent on 2-lane, 40+ mile per hour speed limit roads without a
raised median or shoulders,
• Rollover crashes are most prevalent on high-speed principal arterial roads, with operating the
motor vehicle in a careless or negligent manner a contributing factor in over 40% of KSI
crashes, driving too fast for conditions a contributing factor in 7% of KSI crashes, and swerving
to avoid a hazard a contributing factor in 3% of KSI crashes.
• Alcohol and/or drugs are a factor in about 10% of KSI crashes, with alcohol/drug related
crashes more likely to occur on a Friday or Saturday night/early morning.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 3 of 47
• Teens comprise about 6% of licensed drivers in the region and are involved in 11% of KSI
crashes. Aging drivers comprise about 15% of licensed drivers in the region and are involved in
about 14% of KSI crashes.
• Rear-end crashes are more likely to occur on high-speed, multilane roads, comprising 19% of
all KSI crashes.
• 38% of people who died in a car or truck crash in the region were not wearing their seatbelt.
Pedestrian and Bicyclist
• 65% of pedestrian and 65% of bicyclist fatalities occur in transportation disadvantaged
communities.
• Almost 20% of pedestrian KSI and 19% of bicyclist KSI crashes were hit and run, as compared to
9% of all crashes.
• Fatal and serious injury crashes involving a person walking or bicycling are more likely to occur
at night, under dark and dark-lighted conditions.
• The percent of KSI pedestrian and bicyclist crashes increases as the number of lanes, the
volume of motor vehicles, and the posted speed limit increase, with 71% of pedestrian KSIs
occurring on roads with a posted speed limit higher than 40 miles per hour, 74% occurring on
roads with 4 or more lanes, and 82% occurring on roads with more than 15,000 motor vehicle
trips per day.
• Approximately 71% of KSI pedestrian crashes are not at an intersection.
• About 64% of bicyclist hospital admissions (over 100 per year) do not involve a motor vehicle.
• There are about 3 bicyclist fatalities per year that do not involve a motor vehicle.
• Non-motor-vehicle pedestrian hospital admissions have nearly doubled over the past decade
from about 15 to 30 per year, with the increase corresponding to an increase in e-scooter use
(and similar devices).
Motorcyclist Crashes
• 43% of motorcyclists who died in a crash were not wearing a helmet.
• Crashes involving a motorcyclist are more likely to lead to a severe or fatal injury as posted
speed limit increases.
• 30% of motorcyclist KSI crashes involve left-turn movements and 16% involve rear-end crashes.
• Motorcyclist crashes are more likely to result in a fatality under dark-not lighted conditions.
• About 10% of motorcyclist KSI are single-motor vehicle crashes.
Railroad Crossings
• Of the 19 pedestrian fatalities along railroad tracks or at railroad crossings, 58% were
determined to be suicides.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 4 of 47
Methodology and Data Sources
Several datasets were used to aid in the understanding of crash trends within the region, including
data from Signal 4 Analytics (Signal 4)1, the Florida Injury Surveillance System (FISS), and the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) Modal Office. Data from Signal 4 reflects all crashes in the
region that were reported to law enforcement and that involve a motor vehicle. From the FISS
dataset, deaths, emergency room visits and hospitalizations for people who were injured while
walking and biking are provided, including information for people who were injured or killed while
walking or bicycling when a motor vehicle was not involved. The FDOT Modal Office provided
information related to trespassing incidents near train tracks in the region as incidents between
people walking or bicycling and trains do not typically show up in crash reports that would be
included in the Signal 4 dataset unless a motor vehicle was involved. Data reflective of 2018 to 2022
from Signal 4 downloaded in June 2023, data from October 2018 to March 2023 from the modal
office, and data from 2011 to 2021 from FISS was considered in this analysis.
Spatial Data
The road network that served as the basis for this analysis was obtained from the xGeographic Wave
database, which is a land use, transportation, environmental and demographic mapping database,
usable across Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping platforms, that has been built for the
MetroPlan Orlando region. Information within the database that was considered in the analysis
includes:
• Number of through lanes
• Number of turn lanes
• Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT)
• Posted Speed
• Median Presence
• Presence of walking and biking facilities
• Functional Classification
• Context Classification
• Proximity to key destinations, such as public schools and transit stops
1 The Signal 4 dashboard and analytics system receives data from Florida’s statutory custodian of records, the Florida
Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (FLHSMV); all data is considered preliminary until the year is reconciled
and closed out by the FLHSMV, and thus certain adjustments may be made to verify the data where clerical errors are
noted. As such, data downloaded before or after the data download for this project (July 2023) may slightly differ from
the data used in this analysis.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 5 of 47
Signal 4 Crash Dataset
All data from Signal 4 was mapped based on the geolocation associated with each crash record,
which revealed some crashes with incomplete or incorrect information, such as crashes that did not
actually occur in any of the three counties. After removing incorrectly geolocated crashes (i.e., those
not actually located within the region), a total of 327,306 crashes, including 1,366 that resulted in a
fatality, 7,484 that resulted in a serious injury, 89,957 that resulted in some injury, and 228,499 that
resulted in no injury are considered in the analysis. Of the total reported crashes, approximately 3,950
occurred in parking lots, including 9 fatal crashes and 119 serious injury crashes. Of the total crashes,
50,850 reported crashes occurred on limited access facilities, including 214 fatal crashes and 1,363
serious injury crashes.
For some analyses presented in the subsequent sections, crashes that occurred on limited access
facilities, like Interstate 4, and in parking lots, were not considered. Some high-level analyses
incorporate all crashes, while most only consider crashes where someone was severely injured or
killed. Additionally, total crashes are used as the unit of measurement (as opposed to total number of
people involved), unless otherwise stated.
US DOT Transportation Disadvantage
The US Department of Transportation's (DOT) has developed a metric to identify communities that
experience transportation insecurity through transportation disadvantage. Transportation
disadvantage occurs when people are unable to access the needs of their daily life regularly,
reliably, and safely. There are five main components of transportation disadvantage with the
indicators used to identity transportation disadvantaged communities summarized below:
1. Transportation Insecurity occurs when people are unable to get to where they need to go to
meet the needs of their daily life regularly, reliably, and safely. Nationally, there are well-
established policies and programs that aim to address food insecurity and housing insecurity,
but not transportation insecurity. A growing body of research indicates that transportation
insecurity is a significant factor in persistent poverty.
2. The Environmental Burden component of the index includes variables measuring factors such
as pollution, hazardous facility exposure, and the built environment. These environmental
burdens can have far-reaching consequences such as health disparities, negative
educational outcomes, and economic hardship.
3. Social Vulnerability is a measure of socioeconomic indicators that have a direct impact on
quality of life. This set of indicators measure lack of employment, educational attainment,
poverty, housing tenure, access to broadband, and housing cost burden as well as identifying
household characteristics such as age, disability status and English proficiency.
4. The Health Vulnerability category assesses the increased frequency of health conditions that
may result from exposure to air, noise, and water pollution, as well as lifestyle factors such as
poor walkability, car dependency, and long commute times.
5. Climate and Disaster Risk Burden reflects sea level rise, changes in precipitation, extreme
weather, and heat which pose risks to the transportation system. These hazards may affect
system performance, safety, and reliability. As a result, people may have trouble getting to
their homes, schools, stores, and medical appointments.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 6 of 47
Each indicator is comprised of multiple factors. Additional information can be found on the US DOT
website for Equitable Transportation Community (ETC):
https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/equity/justice40/etc-explorer.
For each indicator, a score was developed by normalizing and then summing indicators within each
component. Census Tracts/projects areas at “0%” are considered the least disadvantaged and
“100%” are the most. US DOT considers a census tract to be experiencing disadvantage if the overall
index score places it in the 65 percentile (or higher) of all census tracts in the United States. The
ranked Component Scores are then summed across all components to generate an Overall Score.
The Transportation Insecurity component was double weighted in generating the final score. Census
tracts that have an overall weighted score of 65% or higher are considered Transportation
Disadvantaged.
As part of the preparation of a Regional Equity Profile, MetroPlan Orlando reviewed the US DOT data
and made minor adjustments based on local data to remove a large census tract in southeast
Osceola County that was skewing the results. A summary of the total transportation disadvantaged
population in the MetroPlan Orlando region is provided in Table 1, which shows that about 25% of the
regional population lives in a community considered to be transportation disadvantaged. For some
crash statistics throughout the region presented in this memorandum, crash frequency and outcomes
for crashes that occurred within transportation disadvantaged communities were compared to the
overall regional data.
Table 1: Transportation Disadvantaged Summary Statistics – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Criteria Total Disadvantaged
Population
Total Disadvantaged
Census Tracts
Total Disadvantaged
area (in Acres)
MetroPlan Orlando Equitable
Transportation Community (ETC) Final
Rank Score
0.57M (25.2%) 103 (24.9%) 0.16M (9.6%)
Transportation Insecurity 0.78M (34.7%) 131 (31.6%) 1.27M (78%)
Source: Transportation for All; Overcoming Obstacles, Regional Equity Profile, MetroPlan Orlando; November 2023 and
EquityIndex_V2 | Tableau Public
Statistical Test Methodology
To test if a certain category of crashes had a significantly higher crash rate, the crashes were
normalized based on available data, such as traffic volume or centerline miles in that specific
category. For example, crashes that result in someone being killed or severely injured, referred to as
KSI crashes, are over-represented for roads with 6+ lanes based on the number of crashes that
occurred on roads with 6+ lanes and the proportion of centerline miles for roads with 6+ lanes in the
data set. Throughout the report, results that were found to be higher or lower than regional averages
or disproportionately represented are highlighted in blue. Where applicable, a comparative analysis
was made between modes (i.e., all modes versus pedestrians and bicyclists), by severity (i.e., all
crashes versus KSI crashes only), or transportation disadvantaged status.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 7 of 47
Limitations of the Data and Analysis
There are known limitations of the various datasets that are used for this analysis and the extent to
which these limitations affect the overall dataset and subsequent analysis is not quantified. Some
limitations include:
• Only reported crashes are included in the Signal 4 dataset. Some crash types may be
underreported due to a variety of reasons, such as no apparent injuries, law enforcement
response time, fear of law enforcement, lack of knowledge about the reporting process, lack
of insurance or desire to not involve insurance, or legal status of people involved in crash.
• Potential for incomplete or inaccurate data within crash reports. While there are many layers of
review that occur for crash reports, some information may not be correct. For example, in
some instances, the reporting officer may use the GPS coordinates of where they completed
the crash report, which could be a parking lot near the crash site, instead of the location of
the first harmful event. Additionally, crashes involving a person in a wheelchair, or
micromobility device, like an e-scooter, may be classified as pedestrian or bicyclist related,
and a golf cart crash may be characterized as a motor vehicle crash as there are not fields
within the crash report to denote the wide range of road users. While the details are often in
the crash report, they are not available at this scale of analysis.
• Only crashes involving a motor vehicle are reported in the Signal 4 dataset. A crash between
a bicyclist and a pedestrian or a bicyclist and a train would not be reflected in the Signal 4
dataset. As noted previously, other data sources were considered to better incorporate those
crash types, but it may be difficult to compare trends with a variety of data resources that
need to be compiled.
• Results are based on crash data and current attribute data from 2018-2022 and do not
account for road improvements made during the study period. Locations where major safety
improvements were made during that time frame may be candidates for before-and-after
analysis to determine if the road improvements had any effect on crash severity, crash
frequency, crash causes, and/or crash types. This type of analysis would also inform the
effectiveness of road safety improvements within the study area.
• Some of the crash analyses are based on exposure by using the average annual daily traffic
(AADT) volumes for motor vehicles, where available. However, pedestrian and bicyclist
volumes are not readily available to adjust for exposure. Therefore, analyses reported here do
not adjust for exposure rates based on volumes by modes, and results show crash density but
not frequency of crashes based on how many people are walking, i.e., exposure. For
example, in many communities, pedestrian crashes are more common during daylight
conditions than dark conditions. This does not mean that daylight conditions are more
dangerous than dark conditions. Rather, it reflects the fact that people are more likely to
travel, and especially more likely to travel by walking, in light conditions than in dark
conditions. Having volume by mode would provide some insight into exposure and frequency
for non-motorized modes.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 8 of 47
Crash Trends
The following sections summarize crash data from 2018 through 2022 to provide statistical trends by
year, by mode and by severity. While the data presented in this memorandum is at the regional
scale, there are similarities between roads in the region, such that the takeaways from the regional
crash analysis can be used by local jurisdictions to help identify common crash trends.
Crashes by Year
The number of crashes by year by severity are is summarized in Table 2 for reported crashes from 2018
through 2022 in the MetroPlan Orlando region. The severity level reflects the maximum injury severity
of any crash participant and is reflected as:
• No Injury – crashes where no persons were reported to be injured. Also known as property
damage only crashes.
• Injury – crashes where there is a possible injury or a non-incapacitated injury which may or may
not require hospitalization.
• Serious Injury – crashes where there is an incapacitating injury, such as burns, lacerations, or
broken bones that require hospitalization.
• Fatality – crash results in one or more fatalities within 30 days.
In 2018 and 2019, the total number of reported crashes was around 75,000 per year. In 2020, the
number of reported crashes decreased by about 33%. This reduction in total crashes, with an
increase in the percent of crashes that resulted in a fatality or sever injury was likely influenced by the
COVID-19 pandemic, which led to a significant reduction in overall travel for a portion of 2020, an
increase in severity for crashes that did occur as people tended to be driving faster, and an overall
decrease in reporting for non-injury crashes related to social distancing.
Table 2: Crash Summary by Year – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Year No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
2018 53,529 (71.7%) 19,252 (25.8%) 1,651 (2.2%) 262 (0.4%) 74,694
2019 53,141 (71%) 20,008 (26.7%) 1,465 (2%) 267 (0.4%) 74,881
2020 35,972 (68.1%) 15,217 (28.8%) 1,399 (2.6%) 249 (0.5%) 52,837
2021 42,539 (67.8%) 18,314 (29.2%) 1,648 (2.6%) 280 (0.4%) 62,781
2022 43,318 (69.7%) 17,166 (27.6%) 1,321 (2.1%) 308 (0.5%) 62,113
Total 228,499 (69.8%) 89,957 (27.5%) 7,484 (2.3%) 1,366 (0.4%) 327,306
Source: Signal 4 Analytics; Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Crash summaries by facility type were also developed, as presented in Table 3 for non-limited access
facilities and in Table 4 for limited access facilities. Limited access facilities include freeways and toll
roads while non-limited access roads include surface streets that typically accommodate non-auto
travel as well as transit. National data shows that the overall crash rate per million miles of vehicle
travel is lower on limited access roads than on non-limited access roads because there are fewer
conflicts on limited access roads, including driveways, and bicyclists and pedestrians are not allowed
on limited access roads. Therefore, some data is presented for only non-limited access roads.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 9 of 47
Table 3: Crash Summary by Year Non-Limited Access Facilities – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Year No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
2018 44,585 (71.4%) 16,225 (26%) 1,382 (2.2%) 215 (0.3%) 62,407
2019 44,509 (70.7%) 16,937 (26.9%) 1,244 (2%) 226 (0.4%) 62,916
2020 30,986 (68.3%) 13,001 (28.7%) 1,141 (2.5%) 211 (0.5%) 45,339
2021 36,259 (67.7%) 15,766 (29.4%) 1,318 (2.5%) 245 (0.5%) 53,588
2022 36,192 (69.3%) 14,725 (28.2%) 1,036 (2%) 255 (0.5%) 52,208
Total 192,531 (69.6%) 76,654 (27.7%) 6,121 (2.2%) 1,152 (0.4%) 276,458
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities
Table 4: Crash Summary by Year Limited Access Facilities Only – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Year No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
2018 8,944 (72.8%) 3,027 (24.6%) 269 (2.2%) 47 (0.4%) 12,287
2019 8,632 (72.1%) 3,071 (25.7%) 221 (1.8%) 41 (0.3%) 11,965
2020 4,986 (66.5%) 2,216 (29.6%) 258 (3.4%) 38 (0.5%) 7,498
2021 6,280 (68.3%) 2,548 (27.7%) 330 (3.6%) 35 (0.4%) 9,193
2022 7,126 (71.9%) 2,441 (24.6%) 285 (2.9%) 53 (0.5%) 9,905
Total 35,968 (70.7%) 13,303 (26.2%) 1,363 (2.7%) 214 (0.4%) 50,848
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Only limited access facilities
For crashes that occurred on non-limited access roads, the number of reported crashes within or 250
feet from of the boundary of a census tract that is identified as transportation disadvantaged was
summarized, as presented in Table 5, which shows that while only 25% of people live in transportation
disadvantaged Census Tracts, almost 50% of all crashes and 54% of fatal crashes occur within or
adjacent to transportation disadvantaged communities.
Table 5: Crash Summary by Year on Non-Limited Access Roads in MetroPlan Orlando
Transportation Disadvantaged Areas
Year No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
2018 21,904 (70.9%) 8,194 (26.5%) 677 (2.2%) 123 (0.4%) 30,898
2019 21,405 (69.2%) 8,773 (28.4%) 629 (2%) 124 (0.4%) 30,931
2020 15,432 (66.7%) 6,997 (30.2%) 603 (2.6%) 113 (0.5%) 23,145
2021 17,306 (65.7%) 8,148 (30.9%) 740 (2.8%) 146 (0.6%) 26,340
2022 16,728 (67.1%) 7,507 (30.1%) 585 (2.3%) 120 (0.5%) 24,940
Total 92,775 (68.1%) 39,619 (29.1%) 3,234 (2.4%) 626 (0.5%) 136,254
Percent of
Regional Tootal 48% 52% 53% 54% 49%
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 10 of 47
Crashes by Mode
Table 6 through Table 9 summarize crashes by injury severity and mode for all roads, limited access
roads, non-limited access roads, and roads within and adjacent to transportation disadvantaged
communities. Overall, motor vehicle crashes accounted for most of the crashes with almost 97% of
total crashes. This is expected as most trips in the region are typically made by motor vehicles.
Motorcyclists, pedestrians, and bicyclists together account for about 3.3% of total crashes. On limited
access facilities, like freeways and toll roads, people in cars and trucks were involved in 98.8% of all
crashes, with pedestrians involved in 0.1% of crashes and motorcyclists involved in 1.1% of all crashes.
There were no bicyclist involved crashes on limited access facilities reported during the analysis time
frame.
While motor vehicle crashes accounted for the largest share of both overall crashes and KSI crashes,
when vulnerable road users were involved in a crash (defined for the purposes of this memorandum
as someone outside a motor vehicle, including a pedestrian, bicyclist, or motorcyclist) the risk of
death or serious injury increased disproportionately. Crashes involving vulnerable road users
accounted for about 3% of overall crashes, 25% of serious injury crashes and 48% of fatal crashes
(see Table 6). In transportation disadvantaged communities, crashes involving pedestrians and
bicyclists were even higher (Table 9) than for roads that are not in disadvantaged communities.
• Pedestrians: Pedestrians were involved in 1% of all crashes, 9% of crashes that resulted in a serious
injury and 26% of crashes that resulted in a fatality (crashes involving a pedestrian where the
pedestrian was unharmed or experienced minor injuries are underreported). In transportation
disadvantaged communities, pedestrians were involved in 35% of fatal crashes. Pedestrians were
also involved in 18 fatal crashes on limited access facilities. Most of these people were hit while on
the side of the road with a disabled vehicle. Pedestrian coded crashes typically include
skateboard, scooter and other micro-mobility devices, and the hospital injury data has shown a
significant increase in "pedestrian" injuries that did not involve a motor vehicle (see Table 14).
These are most likely injuries involving solo micro-mobility users.
• Bicyclists: People bicycling were involved in about 0.7% of all crashes, 4% of crashes that resulted
in a serious injury and 4% of crashes that resulted in a fatality (crashes involving a bicyclist where
the person bicycling was unharmed or experienced minor injuries are underreported). In
transportation disadvantaged communities, bicyclists were involved in 5% of fatal crashes.
Hospital injury data shows that an average of 64% of bicyclist hospitalizations do not invoive a
motor vehicle (Table 13).
• Motorcyclist: Motorcycle crashes comprised 1.4% of all crashes, 12% of crashes that resulted in a
serious injury and 18% of crashes that resulted in a fatality. Approximately 12% of motorcyclist KSI
crashes are single vehicle crashes.
• Cars and Trucks: Crashes involving cars and trucks comprised 97% of all crashes, 75% of crashes
that resulted in a serious injury and 53% of crashes that resulted in a fatality.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 11 of 47
Table 6: Crash Summary by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region (2018-2022)
Mode No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Bicycle 380 (0.2%) 1,706 (1.9%) 289 (3.9%) 52 (3.8%) 2,427 (0.7%)
Pedestrian 409 (0.2%) 2,600 (2.9%) 702 (9.4%) 352 (25.8%) 4,063 (1.2%)
Motorcycle 992 (0.4%) 2,437 (2.7%) 871 (11.6%) 245 (17.9%) 4,545 (1.4%)
Motor vehicles
(including trucks) 226,718 (99.2%) 83,214 (92.5%) 5,622 (75.1%) 717 (52.5%) 316,271 (96.6%)
Total 228,499 89,957 7,484 1,366 327,306
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities; Blue/Bold indicates that crash type disproportionately results in a KSI.
Table 7: Crash Summary by Mode on Limited Access Roads in MetroPlan Orlando Region
(2018-2022)
Mode No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Bicycle 1 (0%) 13 (0.1%) 2 (0.1%) 0 (0%) 16 (0%)
Pedestrian 10 (0%) 27 (0.2%) 18 (1.3%) 18 (8.4%) 73 (0.1%)
Motorcycle 93 (0.3%) 290 (2.2%) 137 (10.1%) 21 (9.8%) 541 (1.1%)
Motor vehicles
(including trucks) 35,864 (99.7%) 12,973 (97.5%) 1,206 (88.5%) 175 (81.8%) 50,218 (98.8%)
Total 35,968 13,303 1,363 214 50,848
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Table 8: Crash Summary by Mode on Non-Limited Access Roads in MetroPlan Orlando
Region (2018-2022)
Mode No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Bicycle 379 (0.2%) 1,693 (2.2%) 287 (4.7%) 52 (4.5%) 2,411 (0.9%)
Pedestrian 399 (0.2%) 2,573 (3.4%) 684 (11.2%) 334 (29%) 3,990 (1.4%)
Motorcycle 899 (0.5%) 2,147 (2.8%) 734 (12%) 224 (19.4%) 4,004 (1.4%)
Motor vehicles
(including trucks) 190,854 (99.1%) 70,241 (91.6%) 4,416 (72.1%) 542 (47%) 266,053 (96.2%)
Total 192,531 76,654 6,121 1,152 276,458
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 12 of 47
Table 9: Crash Summary by Mode on Non-Limited Access Roads in Transportation
Disadvantaged Areas in MetroPlan Orlando Region (2018-2022)
Mode No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Bicycle 197 (0.2%) 853 (2.2%) 161 (5%) 34 (5.4%) 1,245 (0.9%)
Pedestrian 216 (0.2%) 1,359 (3.4%) 433 (13.4%) 219 (35%) 2,227 (1.6%)
Motorcycle 461 (0.5%) 1,094 (2.8%) 365 (11.3%) 120 (19.2%) 2,040 (1.5%)
Motor vehicles
(including trucks) 91,901 (99.1%) 36,313 (91.7%) 2,275 (70.3%) 253 (40.4%) 130,742 (96%)
Total 92,775 39,619 3,234 626 136,254
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Blue/Bold indicates that crash type disproportionately results in a KSI as
compared to non-limited access roads not in transportation disadvantaged communities.
Crashes by People Involved
The data in the prior section reflects crashes, which may involve multiple motor vehicles, people
traveling by other modes, and result in numerous people in each crash being hurt, severely injured or
killed. Table 10 summaries the number of people involved crashes by injury severity by year, with
Table 11 summarizing total injuries by mode of travel. The trend shows that the number of people
killed in the MetroPlan Orlando region is trending higher, with 1,465 people killed in crashes between
2018 and 2022, 9,500 people seriously injured and almost 150,000 people sustaining a moderate or
minor injury. Of people who were hurt or killed on non-limited access facilities, crashes that resulted in
in 52% of injuries or fatalities occurred within or adjacent to a transportation disadvantaged
community. Although only 25% of the regional population lives in a transportation disadvantaged
community, 65% of bicyclist fatalities and 65% of pedestrian fatalities occur in transportation
disadvantaged communities (Table 12).
Table 10: Injury Summary by Year – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Year Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
2018 31,407 (93%) 2,084 (6.2%) 278 (0.8%) 33,769
2019 32,878 (93.8%) 1,877 (5.4%) 288 (0.8%) 35,043
2020 25,068 (92.5%) 1,769 (6.5%) 271 (1%) 27,108
2021 31,099 (92.8%) 2,106 (6.3%) 309 (0.9%) 33,514
2022 28,469 (93.5%) 1,662 (5.5%) 319 (1%) 30,450
Total 148,921 (93.1%) 9,498 (5.9%) 1,465 (0.9%) 159,884
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 13 of 47
Table 11: Total Injuries by Mode of Travel – MetroPlan Orlando Region (2018-2022)
Mode Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Bicycle 1,788 (1.2%) 293 (3.1%) 52 (3.5%) 2,133 (1.3%)
Pedestrian 2,874 (1.9%) 723 (7.6%) 359 (24.5%) 3,956 (2.5%)
Motorcycle 3,119 (2.1%) 945 (9.9%) 252 (17.2%) 4,316 (2.7%)
Motor vehicles
(including trucks) 141,140 (94.8%) 7,537 (79.4%) 802 (54.7%) 149,479 (93.5%)
Total 148,921 9,498 1,465 159,884
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities; Blue/Bold indicates that crash type disproportionately results in a KSI.
Table 12: Percent of Total Injuries by Mode of Travel in Transportation Disadvantaged
Communities – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Mode Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Bicycle 51% 56% 65% 52%
Pedestrian 54% 63% 65% 57%
Motorcycle 51% 51% 53% 51%
Motor vehicles
(including trucks) 52% 51% 47% 52%
Total 52% 52% 54% 52%
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; when limited access facilities are included, the percent of vehicle
occupants who are injured or killed decreases from 52% to 51%, and the percent of pedestrians who are injured or killed
decreases from 57% to 56% largely due to the amount of through travel on limited access facilities. Approximately 25% of
the region’s population lives in a transportation disadvantaged community.
Railroad Incidents (not involving a motor vehicle)
Data related to trespasser incidents between trains and bicyclists or pedestrians was obtained from
the FDOT modal office for the period between October 2018 and March 2023. The data includes
incidents that resulted in a fatality or severe injury, as well as near-misses. As mentioned previously,
crash data at railroad crossings involving motor vehicles is included in the Signal 4 crash database,
but incidents that do not involve motor vehicles are not reported to Signal 4. A full summary of the
incidents by location is provided as Attachment A, with a summary of key findings presented below
reflective of incidents between people walking or biking and trains operated by SunRail, CSX or
Amtrak.
• 27 incidents that resulted in a serious injury or death and 55 near-misses that did not result in an
injury were reported between October 2018 and March 2023, including:
◦ 8 Injuries, with 2 suicide attempts
◦ 19 fatalities, with 11 confirmed or apparent suicides
◦ 55 near-misses that did not result in an injury
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 14 of 47
• Of the 27 KSI incidents, 9 (33%) occurred at a grade crossing and 18 (67%) occurred outside of
a crossing area; of the near-miss incidents, 21 (38%) occurred at a crossing and 34 (62%)
occurred outside of a crossing.
• Of the KSI incidents, 18 (67%) people were standing, sitting, kneeling, or lying on the railroad
tracks, 4 (15%) were walking along the railroad tracks, 2 (7%) were walking across the railroad
tracks, and the action was unknown in 3 (11%) of the incidents. Of the near-miss incidents, 22
(40%) people were standing, sitting, kneeling, or lying on the railroad tracks, 14 (25%) were
walking along the railroad tracks, 14 (25%) were walking across the railroad tracks, and the
action was unknown in 3 (9%) of the incidents.
• Frequency and type of railroad incidents by community:
◦ 11 KSI and 22 near-misses in Orlando
◦ 3 KSI and 8 near-misses in Winter Park
◦ 3 KSI and 5 near-misses in unincorporated Osceola County
◦ 3 KSI and 8 near-misses in Kissimmee
◦ 2 KSI in Edgewood
◦ 2 KSI and 2 near-misses in Longwood
◦ 1 KSI and 4 near-misses in unincorporated Orange County
◦ 1 KSI in Altamonte Springs
◦ 1 KSI and 1 near-miss in Maitland
◦ 5 near-misses in Sanford
◦ 2 near-misses in Lake Mary
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 15 of 47
Bicycle and Pedestrian Emergency Room Admission
Data from the Florida Injury Surveillance System (FISS) includes deaths, emergency room visits and
hospitalizations for people who were injured while walking and biking, as well as information for
people who were injured or killed while walking or bicycling when a motor vehicle was not involved,
as summarized in Table 13 for bicyclist and Table 14 for pedestrians. These tables show hospital data
for Emergency Room (ER) visits, hospitalizations, and fatalities. Data from Law Enforcement (LE) is also
shown for comparison purposes. Pedestrian hospitalization data may also include people using
electric-scooters (e-scooter) and other mobility devices.
Table 13: Bicyclists Hospitalizations 2011 – 2021 – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Year
LE Fatal
Bike
Crash
Hospital
Reported
Fatalities -
Motor
Vehicle
Involved
Hospital
Reported
Fatalities -
Non-Motor
Vehicle
Involved
LE
Incapacitat
ing Bike
Crashes
Hospitalizat
ions: Motor
Vehicle
Hospitalizat
ions: Non-
Motor
Vehicle
ER: Motor
Vehicle
ER: Non-
Motor
Vehicle
2011 12 11 3 53 57 140 376 1,736
2012 11 20 0 70 63 156 393 1,692
2013 15 13 3 91 54 151 458 1,636
2014 13 12 2 127 48 141 379 1729
2015 18 14 4 160 56 137 535 1,533
2016 11 5 0 118 70 102 777 1,042
2017 13 10 5 83 72 82 791 1,323
2018 14 13 3 91 96 100 652 1,354
2019 12 13 3 66 78 125 430 1,040
2020 10 14 1 78 85 144 332 934
2021 17 12 5 75 98 125 - -
% Change
2011-13
to…
To 2014-16 11% -30% 0% 89% 0% -15% 38% -15%
To 2017-20 -3% -15% 50% 11% 43% -24% 35% -31%
Source: FISS and MetroPlan Orlando
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 16 of 47
Table 14: Pedestrian Hospitalizations 2011 – 2021 – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Year
LE Fatal
Ped
Crash
Hospital
Reported
Fatalities -
Motor
Vehicle
Involved
Hospital
Reported
Fatalities -
Non-Motor
Vehicle
Involved
LE
Incapacitat
ing Bike
Ped
Crashes
Hospitalizat
ions: Motor
Vehicle
Hospitalizat
ions: Non-
Motor
Vehicle
ER: Motor
Vehicle
ER: Non-
Motor
Vehicle
2011 62 46 4 125 141 15 606 84
2012 45 39 2 126 178 19 641 89
2013 55 37 7 160 146 18 684 73
2014 65 48 6 226 153 18 697 123
2015 64 41 4 234 121 22 640 202
2016 77 61 7 207 89 27 542 380
2017 88 70 6 156 108 30 523 434
2018 73 59 4 165 114 32 550 316
2019 89 68 8 171 136 30 429 218
2020 63 57 2 145 127 21 257 133
2021 81 85 6 176 178 29 - -
% Change
2011-13
to…
To 2014-16 27% 23% 31% 62% -22% 29% -3% 187%
to 2017-20 45% 56% 15% 16% -22% 63% -32% 236%
Source: FISS and MetroPlan Orlando
Some key findings include:
• About 64%of bicyclist hospital admissions (over 100 per year) do not involve a motor vehicle.
• There are about 3 bicyclist fatalities per year that do not involve a motor vehicle.
• Non-motor-vehicle pedestrian admissions have nearly doubled over the past decade from
about 15 to 30 per year, with the increase corresponding to the increase in e-scooter use (and
similar devices). The biggest increases in both admissions and ER visits for pedestrians without
motor vehicles are in Orange County, which has the most e-scooter use, especially in
Downtown Orlando and near UCF. ER visits in Orange County increased by 370% from 2011-13
to 2017-19.
• A drop in the percent of non-motor vehicle bicyclist admissions and ER visits during the same
time periods could indicate a shift from bicycling to scootering.
Additional details related to bicycling and pedestrian hospital visits have been requested from local
hospitals, but at the time this report was prepared, the data was not provided.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 17 of 47
Crashes by Type
Table 15 summarizes the crashes based on the recorded crash type for all crashes where a crash
type is known and Table 16 summarizes the contributing action of the first driver for the crash
categories that disproportionately result in KSIs. Following the table, a definition of each crash type is
provided with a summary of key takeaways. This information can be used to identify appropriate
strategies to implement at high crash locations that reduce the frequency and severity of crashes.
Table 15: Crash Summary by Type – MetroPlan Orlando Region (2018-2022)
Crash Type No Injury Injury Serious
Injury Fatality Total
Percent of
Total
Crashes
Percent of
KSI
Angle 10,754 7,173 549 67 18,543 5.7% 7.0%
Animal 610 118 9 0 737 0.2% 0.1%
Backed Into 9,267 699 21 2 9,989 3.1% 0.3%
Bicycle 380 1706 289 52 2427 0.7% 3.9%
Head On 1,746 1,244 211 93 3,294 1.0% 3.4%
Left Entering 9,715 8,632 853 129 19,329 5.9% 11.1%
Left Leaving 4,460 3,138 292 48 7,938 2.4% 3.8%
Left Rear 4,517 2,460 171 23 7,171 2.2% 2.2%
Off Road 17,268 6,934 1,010 227 25,439 7.8% 14.0%
Opposing
Sideswipe 1,737 462 33 2 2,234 0.7% 0.4%
Other 8,266 2,874 260 47 11,447 3.5% 3.5%
Parked
vehicle 16,288 1,382 130 26 17,826 5.4% 1.8%
Pedestrian 409 2,600 702 352 4,063 1.2% 11.9%
Rear End 89,393 38,494 1,802 121 129,810 39.7% 21.7%
Right/Left 694 99 3 0 796 0.2% 0.0%
Right/
Through 3,556 1,190 85 4 4,835 1.5% 1.0%
Right/U-Turn 139 28 0 0 167 0.1% 0.0%
Rollover 942 973 171 40 2,126 0.6% 2.4%
Same
Direction
Sideswipe
37,221 5,281 324 19 42,845 13.1% 3.9%
Solo vehicle–
Cars/Trucks 5,355 2420 347 73 8,195 2.5% 4.7%
Solo vehicle–
Motorcycle 38 372 121 14 545 0.2% 1.5%
Unknown 5,744 1,678 101 27 7,550 2.3% 1.4%
Grand Total 228,499 89,957 7,484 1,366 327,306 100% 100%
Source: Signal 4 Analytics; Notes: Includes limited access facilities; Blue/Bold indicates that crash type disproportionately
results in a KSI or has a high share of KSI.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 18 of 47
Table 16: KSI Crash Summary by Contributing Action of First Driver – MetroPlan Orlando
Region1&2
Crash Type Angle Bicycle Head On Left Turn Off Road Pedestrian Rear End Right Turn
Disregarded Other
Road Markings 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Disregarded Other
Traffic Sign 0.5% 0.3% 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0%
Drove Too Fast for
Conditions 0.7% 0.0% 2.0% 0.0% 5.5% 0.2% 0.9% 0.0%
Exceeded Posted
Speed 0.5% 0.0% 1.0% 1.0% 2.1% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0%
Failed to Keep in
Proper Lane 1.0% 1.7% 23.8% 0.5% 13.8% 1.5% 1.5% 0.0%
Failed to Yield Right-
of-Way 28.4% 24.4% 3.0% 61.0% 0.3% 11.8% 1.4% 62.2%
Followed Too Closely 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.3% 0.0%
Improper Backing 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0%
Improper Passing 0.2% 1.4% 6.4% 0.5% 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 1.1%
Improper Turn 1.9% 0.7% 0.7% 3.0% 0.6% 0.2% 0.3% 8.9%
No Contributing
Action2 7.6% 52.6% 4.4% 6.0% 8.6% 65.6% 3.3% 4.4%
Operated MV in
Careless or Negligent
Manner
9.5% 8.6% 21.8% 5.9% 42.2% 9.4% 77.7% 1.1%
Operated MV in
Erratic, Reckless or
Aggressive Manner
1.7% 0.0% 1.0% 0.3% 1.9% 0.8% 1.0% 1.1%
Other Contributing
Action 6.1% 6.9% 5.0% 7.1% 13.7% 6.0% 6.6% 5.6%
Over-Correcting/
Over-Steering 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%
Ran Off Road 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 7.7% 0.4% 0.1% 0.0%
Ran Red Light 23.5% 0.0% 1.3% 9.7% 0.1% 0.0% 0.3% 5.6%
Ran Stop Sign 17.6% 2.1% 0.7% 4.6% 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% 10.0%
Swerved or Avoided 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 1.2% 0.6% 0.3% 0.0%
Wrong Side or Wrong
Way 0.7% 0.7% 27.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: 1. Includes limited access facilities; Blue/Bold indicates that contributing action is involved in a disproportionate
number of KSI crashes.
2. The data in this table reflects the contributing action of Driver 1. Typically, Driver #1 is the at-fault party, but not always. In
some instances where a person driving hits a pedestrian or cyclist, and the reporting officer determined the pedestrian or
bicyclist was at-fault, the crash report will note "No Contributing Action” for Driver 1.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 19 of 47
Angle crashes are when two motor vehicles traveling perpendicularly collide, such as a person
driving across an intersection colliding with a motor vehicle traveling on the intersecting street. Some
angle crashes may be referred to as a T-bone crash. This crash type reflects 5.7% of all crashes and
7% of KSI crashes – crashes where someone is seriously injured or killed. The top contributing factors in
KSI angle on crashes are failure to yield the right-of-way (28%), running a red light (24%), running a
stop sign (18%) and operating the motor vehicle in a careless or negligent manner (10%). 7% of
motorcyclist KSIs and 11% of motorist KSIs are angle-crash related.
Animal involves an animal, which could range from a small animal such as a cat or dog, that would
be unlikely to cause significant injury to heavier animals, such as deer or bears. Overall, animals are
involved in 0.2% of all crashes and 0.1% of KSI crashes.
Backed into involves a driver backing into another road user. This crash type reflects 3.1% of all
crashes and 0.3% of KSI crashes. The low proportion of these crashes resulting in KSI is likely due to the
slow speed at which most people back-up.
Bicycle crashes involve someone bicycling and another motorized road user, typically someone in a
motor vehicle, but sometimes a motorcycle. Crashes between two people bicycling are not included
in the dataset. This crash type reflects 0.7% of all crashes and 3.9% of KSI crashes. When people
bicycling are involved in a crash, they are more likely to be seriously injured or killed. The top motorist
contributing factors in KSI bicycle involved crashes are failure to yield right-of-way (24%) and
operating the motor vehicle in a careless or negligent manner (9%). For 53% of bicyclist involved KSI
crashes, no contributing action is noted for the motor vehicle driver, indicating that the person
bicycling likely failed to yield the right-of-way in those crashes.
Head-on crashes occur when two motor vehicles traveling in the opposite direction collide head-on.
This crash type reflects 1.0% of all crashes and 3.4% of KSI crashes. The top contributing factors in KSI
head on crashes are wrong-way driving (27%), failure to keep in proper lane (24%) and operating the
motor vehicle in a careless or negligent manner (21%). Head-on crashes account for about 5% of
motor vehicle KSI crashes.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 20 of 47
Left-turn crashes are categorized as left entering
(Figure 1), which are crashes that occur when a motor
vehicle turning left collides with a through motor vehicle
in the opposite direction of travel with both motor
vehicles traveling on the same road in opposite
directions prior to the crash, left leaving (Figure 2), which
are crashes that occur when a motor vehicle turning left
collides with a through motor vehicle on the other road,
and left rear (Figure 3), which are crashes that occur
when one motor vehicle is making a left turn onto the
same street as an approaching through motor vehicle.
Overall, left-turn related crashes comprise about 11% of
all crashes and 17% of KSI crashes, with the left-entering
crash type being the most prevalent. The top contributing
factors in KSI left turn related crashes are failure to yield the
right-of-way (61%) and running the red light or stop sign
(15%). 30% of motorcyclist KSIs and 25% of motorist KSIs are
left-turn related.
Off-road crashes, also known as road departures, occur
when the motor vehicle leaves the roadway. This crash
type reflects 7.8% of all crashes and 14% of KSI crashes. The
top contributing factors in KSI off-road crashes are
operating the motor vehicle in a careless or negligent
manner (42%) and failure to keep in proper lane (14%).
Sideswipe crashes can occur between motor vehicles
traveling in the same or opposite direction and involve an
impact between the sides of the motor vehicles with no
significant involvement of the front or rear of the motor
vehicle. The impact then swipes along the surface of the
motor vehicle parallel to the direction of travel.
Opposite direction sideswipe crashes represent about
0.7% of total crashes, and 0.4% of KSI crashes. Same
direction sideswipe crashes represent about 13.1% of
total crashes, and 3.9% of KSI crashes. About 4% of
motor vehicle KSI and 5% of motorcyclist KSIs are related
to sideswipes. The top contributing factors in KSI
sideswipe crashes are failure to keep in proper lane
(25%) and operating the motor vehicle in a careless or
negligent manner (22%).
Parked motor vehicle crashes occur when a motor
vehicle collides with a parked motor vehicle. These
accounted for 5.4% of total crashes and 1.8% of KSI
crashes.
Figure 2: Left Leaving Crash Type
Figure 3: Left-Rear Crash Type
Figure 1: Left Entering Crash Type
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 21 of 47
Pedestrian related crashes occur between a person walking and a motor vehicle driver, including
motorcyclists. This crash type reflects 1.2% of all crashes and 11.9% of KSI crashes. No contributing
action by a driver is noted in 66% of KSI pedestrian crashes (likely meaning that the pedestrian failed
to yield the right-of-way to the person driving), with a person driving failing to yield the right-of-way a
contributing factor in 11.8% of KSI crashes. Operating a motor vehicle in a careless or negligent
manner is a contributing factor in 9.4% of pedestrian KSI crashes. 71% of pedestrian KSI crashes are
not at an intersection (Table 52).
Rear-end crashes occur when a motor vehicle crashes into the motor vehicle in front of it. This crash
type reflects 39.6% of all crashes and 21.7% of KSI crashes. Rear-end crashes are the most common
crash type in the region. 78% of rear-end KSI crashes are caused by people operating the motor
vehicle in a careless or negligent manner, including driver inattention or distraction. Following too
closely was a contributing action in 5.3% of rear-end KSI crashes. 16% of motorcyclist KSIs and 24% of
motorist KSIs are rear-end related which could involve a motorcyclist running into the back of a
motor vehicle or a motor vehicle running into the back of a motorcyclist.
Right-turn crashes include right/left crashes where a right-turning and left-turning motor vehicle were
entering the same road in the same direction; right/through when a right-turning motor vehicle turns
in front of a motor vehicle traveling through, with both motor vehicles traveling in the same direction
after then respective maneuvers; right/U-turn, when a motor vehicle is turning right at the same time
a motor vehicle is making a U-turn into the same lane. Overall, right-turn related crashes comprise
about 1.8% of all crashes and 1% of KSI crashes, with the right-through crash type being the most
prevalent. The top contributing factors in KSI right-turn related crashes are failure to yield the right-of-
way (62%), running a red light or stop sign (15%), or improper turning (6%).
Rollover crashes occur when a motor vehicle tips on its side or roof during a crash. Depending on the
force of the crash, a motor vehicle may roll just once, or it may roll multiple times before coming to a
stop. Rollover crashes represent about 0.6% of total crashes, and 2.4% of KSI crashes. The top
contributing factor in KSI rollover crashes is operating the motor vehicle in a careless or negligent
manner (41%).
Single-motor vehicle crashes involve only one motor vehicle. Single-car and truck vehicle crashes
account for about 2.5% of total crashes and 4.7% of KSI crashes. Single-motorcyclist crashes account
for about 0.2% of total crashes and 1.5% of KSI crashes, 10% of motorcyclist KSI are single-vehicle
crashes.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 22 of 47
Time of Day
Crashes by time of day are summarized as percentages by the travel mode in Table 17 for all crashes
and Table 18 for KSI crashes. Overall, crashes are most likely to occur between 3 and 6 PM, as that
period typically reflects the busiest time on our roads. While crashes involving vulnerable road users
are also high during this time, crashes involving people walking and motorcycling are also prevalent
from 6 to 9 PM. Crashes involving bicyclists tend to occur throughout much of the day.
Table 17: All Crash Summary by Time of Day by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Time of Day All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
12-3 AM 4% 4% 6% 6% 1%
3-6 AM 3% 3% 3% 4% 3%
6-9 AM 12% 12% 9% 14% 16%
9-Noon 14% 14% 10% 10% 16%
Noon-3 PM 19% 19% 16% 12% 19%
3-6 PM 24% 24% 21% 18% 23%
6-9 PM 16% 16% 20% 23% 14%
9-Midnight 8% 8% 14% 13% 6%
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Bold/Blue indicates a disproportionate number of crashes occurs for this
mode during the timeframe indicated.
KSI crashes are more likely to occur between 3 PM and midnight, with the percentage/number of KSI
crashes involving vulnerable road users higher than for people in cars or trucks. Approximately 25% of
pedestrian KSI crashes occur between 6 and 9 PM with another 22% occurring between 9 PM and
midnight. Overall KSI crashes occur more frequently between 6 PM and 6 AM, indicating that
darkness can be a contributing factor, in addition to other contributing factors, including less overall
travel during that time period leading to faster speeds for people driving, and less light, which can
make it difficult to see hazards in and along the roadway, including disabled vehicles or pedestrians.
Table 18: KSI Crash Summary by Time of Day by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Time of Day All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
12-3 AM 9% 9% 8% 10% 4%
3-6 AM 6% 7% 3% 7% 5%
6-9 AM 12% 14% 9% 10% 15%
9-Noon 11% 13% 9% 6% 14%
Noon-3 PM 13% 14% 14% 7% 14%
3-6 PM 16% 16% 19% 10% 15%
6-9 PM 17% 15% 19% 26% 19%
9-Midnight 15% 13% 19% 22% 12%
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Bold/Blue indicates a disproportionate number of KSI crashes occurs for this
mode during the timeframe indicated.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 23 of 47
Day of Week
Crashes by day of week are summarized as percentages by travel mode in Table 19 for all crashes
and Table 20 for KSI crashes. During a typical week, there are a similar number of crashes observed to
occur Monday through Thursday, with Friday being slightly higher than other days. The overall number
of crashes is lower on Saturday and Sunday. While crashes involving vulnerable road users are also
the highest on Friday, crashes involving bicyclists tend to be higher on weekdays and lower on
weekends.
Table 19: All Crash Summary by Day of Week by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Day of Week All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Monday 15% 15% 12% 15% 16%
Tuesday 15% 15% 12% 15% 16%
Wednesday 15% 15% 14% 15% 16%
Thursday 15% 15% 15% 15% 17%
Friday 17% 17% 17% 17% 16%
Saturday 12% 12% 16% 12% 11%
Sunday 10% 10% 14% 11% 8%
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities
Crashes that result in a severe injury or fatality are slightly more likely to occur on Friday and Saturday,
except for bicyclists, which see the highest KSI crash rates on Thursdays and Saturdays. For bicyclist-
involved crashes, the overall number of reported crashes involving a bicyclist is low compared to
other modes so caution should be used when using this data. Alcohol may be a contributing factor in
the slightly higher KSI crashes on Friday and Saturday as alcohol involved crashes are more likely to
occur on a Friday or Saturday (see Table 25).
Table 20: KSI Crash Summary by Day of Week by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Day of Week All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Monday 14% 14% 12% 12% 16%
Tuesday 14% 14% 12% 15% 14%
Wednesday 14% 14% 13% 15% 13%
Thursday 14% 14% 15% 15% 17%
Friday 15% 15% 16% 16% 13%
Saturday 16% 15% 17% 15% 17%
Sunday 13% 13% 15% 12% 10%
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 24 of 47
Contextual Analysis
This section provides additional information related to road user behavior, the environmental
conditions and the roadway conditions to provide additional context about why crashes are
occuring.
Behavioral Factors
This section provides an overview of behavioral factors that contribute to crashes, including alcohol
and drug impairment, aggressive aggressively, speeding, and occupant protection.
Alcohol Impairment
Table 21 summarizes crashes caused by alcohol impairment. These crashes include both when the
alcohol level was reported as over the legal limit as well as when alcohol use was listed as a
contributing crash factor in the crash report. Most crashes (98.5%) did not include an alcohol
impaired driver. Although only 1.5% of crashes involved alcohol impairment, alcohol involved
crashes account for 3% of crashes where someone was seriously injured and 21% of fatal crashes in
the region.
Table 21: Crash Summary by Alcohol Impairment – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Alcohol Involved No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Yes 2,569 (1.1%) 1,741 (1.9%) 229 (3.1%) 282 (20.6%) 4,821 (1.5%)
No 225,930 (98.9%) 88,216 (98.1%) 7,255 (96.9%) 1,084 (79.4%) 322,485 (98.5%)
Total 228,499 89,957 7,484 1,366 327,306
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities, Blue/Bold indicates that behavioral factor disproportionately results in a KSI.
While the percent of crashes involving alcohol is slightly more likely to occur on non-limited access
roads than on the road network overall, the percent of those crashes resulting in a fatality is slightly
less than on the overall network, likely due to a slightly lower speed (Table 22). Alcohol is a factor in
about 1.4% of all crashes and 15.7% of fatal crashes in transportation disadvantaged communities, a
slightly lower rate than the regional average (Table 23). Of crashes on non-limited access roads, 51%
of serious injury (95 of 187) and 44% of fatal crashes (98 of 224) involving alcohol occur in
transportation disadvantaged communities.
Table 22: Crash Summary by Alcohol Impairment on Non-Limited Access Facilities –
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Alcohol Involved No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Yes 2,338 (1.2%) 1,541 (2%) 187 (3.1%) 224 (19.4%) 4,290 (1.6%)
No 190,193 (98.8%) 75,113 (98%) 5,934 (96.9%) 928 (80.6%) 272,168 (98.4%)
Total 192,531 76,654 6,121 1,152 276,458
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 25 of 47
Table 23: Crash Summary by Alcohol Impairment on Non-Limited Access Facilities in
Transportation Disadvantaged Communities – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Alcohol Involved No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Yes 1,064 (1.1%) 703 (1.8%) 95 (2.9%) 98 (15.7%) 1,960 (1.4%)
No 91,711 (98.9%) 38,916 (98.2%) 3,139 (97.1%) 528 (84.3%) 134,294 (98.6%)
Total 92,775 39,619 3,234 626 136,254
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities.
Crashes that involve alcohol are significantly more likely to result in a serious injury or fatality, as shown
in Table 24, which shows that about 6% of alcohol involved crashes resulted in a fatality, as
compared to 0.4% of all crashes (see Table 2).
Table 24: Alcohol Involved Crashes by Severity by Year – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Year No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
2018 606 (55.6%) 365 (33.5%) 60 (5.5%) 58 (5.3%) 1,089
2019 582 (53.3%) 407 (37.3%) 46 (4.2%) 57 (5.2%) 1,092
2020 401 (49.6%) 324 (40.1%) 30 (3.7%) 53 (6.6%) 808
2021 507 (54.3%) 320 (34.3%) 49 (5.3%) 57 (6.1%) 933
2022 473 (52.6%) 325 (36.2%) 44 (4.9%) 57 (6.3%) 899
Total 2,569 (53.3%) 1,741 (36.1%) 229 (4.8%) 282 (5.8%) 4,821
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
As shown in Table 25, alcohol involved crashes are more likely to occur on a Friday or Saturday, and
as shown in Table 26, are more likely to occur late in the evening or early morning hours.
Table 25: Alcohol Involved Crashes by Day of Week– MetroPlan Orlando Region
Day of Week All Crashes All KSI Crashes All Crashes –
Involving Alcohol
KSI Crashes Involving
Alcohol
Monday 15% 14% 11% 13%
Tuesday 15% 14% 8% 6%
Wednesday 15% 14% 10% 10%
Thursday 15% 14% 11% 10%
Friday 17% 15% 16% 17%
Saturday 12% 16% 21% 23%
Sunday 10% 13% 22% 21%
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities or parking lots, Blue/Bold indicates that behavioral factor disproportionately
results in crashes and KSI crashes during these days of week.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 26 of 47
Table 26: Alcohol Involved Crashes by Time of Day – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Day of Week All Crashes All Crashes KSI
Crashes
All Crashes Involving
Alcohol
All KSI Crashes
Involving Alcohol
12-3 AM 9% 4% 26% 29%
3-6 AM 6% 3% 11% 16%
6-9 AM 12% 12% 4% 4%
9-Noon 11% 14% 2% 5%
Noon-3 PM 13% 19% 6% 8%
3-6 PM 16% 24% 10% 16%
6-9 PM 17% 16% 19% 16%
9-Midnight 15% 8% 23% 19%
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities or parking lots, Blue/Bold indicates that behavioral factor disproportionately
results in crashes and KSI crashes during these time periods.
Drug Impairment
Table 21 summarizes crashes caused by drug impairment. Drugs can include illegal drugs, as well as
prescription drugs. This finding is made when a drug test of a driver is positive, or a driver refused a
test after being suspected of a drug impairment. Most crashes (99.5%) did not include a drug
impaired driver. Despite about 0.5% of crashes involving drug impairment, drug impaired crashes
account for 16% of crashes where someone was killed in the region.
Table 27: Crash Summary by Drug Impairment – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Drug Impaired
Driver? No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Yes 690 (0.3%) 506 (0.6%) 86 (1.1%) 212 (15.5%) 1,494 (0.5%)
No 227,809 (99.7%) 89,451 (99.4%) 7,398 (98.9%) 1,154 (84.5%) 325,812 (99.5%)
Total 228,499 89,957 7,484 1,366 327,306
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
The percent of crashes involving drugs on non-limited access roads is similar to the regional average,
the percent of those crashes resulting in a fatality is slightly less than on the overall network, likely due
to a slightly lower speed (Table 28). Drugs are a factor in about 0.4% of all crashes and 14.4% of fatal
crashes in transportation disadvantaged communities, a slightly lower rate than the regional average
(Table 23). Of crashes on non-limited access roads, 43% of serious injury (30 of 70) and 53% of fatal
crashes (90 of 169) involving drugs occur in transportation disadvantaged communities.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 27 of 47
Table 28: Crash Summary by Drug Impairment on Non-Limited Access Facilities – MetroPlan
Orlando Region
Drug Impaired
Driver? No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Yes 610 (0.3%) 435 (0.6%) 70 (1.1%) 169 (14.7%) 1,284 (0.5%)
No 191,921 (99.7%) 76,219 (99.4%) 6051 (98.9%) 983 (85.3%) 275,174 (99.5%)
Total 192,531 76,654 6,121 1,152 276,458
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities.
Table 29: Crash Summary by Drug Impairment on Non-Limited Access Facilities in
Transportation Disadvantaged Communities – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Drug Impaired
Driver? No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Yes 281 (0.3%) 179 (0.5%) 30 (0.9%) 90 (14.4%) 580 (0.4%)
No 92,494 (99.7%) 39,440 (99.5%) 3,204 (99.1%) 536 (85.6%) 135,674 (99.6%)
Total 92,775 39,619 3,234 626 136,254
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities.
Crashes that involve drug impairment are significantly more likely to result in a serious injury or fatality,
as shown in Table 30, which shows that about 14% of drug involved crashes results in a fatality, as
compared to 0.4% of all crashes (see Table 2).
Table 30: Drug Impaired Driver Involved Crashes by Severity by Year – MetroPlan Orlando
Region
Year No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
2018 179 (50.6%) 114 (32.2%) 17 (4.8%) 44 (12.4%) 354
2019 172 (49%) 104 (29.6%) 17 (4.8%) 58 (16.5%) 351
2020 109 (41.8%) 103 (39.5%) 16 (6.1%) 33 (12.6%) 261
2021 138 (45.7%) 108 (35.8%) 14 (4.6%) 42 (13.9%) 302
2022 92 (40.7%) 77 (34.1%) 22 (9.7%) 35 (15.5%) 226
Total 690 (46.2%) 506 (33.9%) 86 (5.8%) 212 (14.2%) 1,494
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 28 of 47
When both drugs and alcohol are factors in a crash, a serious injury or fatality is more likely to occur,
as shown in Table 31.
Table 31: Alcohol and Drug Involved Crashes by Severity by Year – MetroPlan Orlando
Region
Year No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
2018 75 (41.7%) 64 (35.6%) 12 (6.7%) 29 (16.1%) 180
2019 70 (41.9%) 56 (33.5%) 7 (4.2%) 34 (20.4%) 167
2020 41 (35%) 51 (43.6%) 8 (6.8%) 17 (14.5%) 117
2021 54 (40.3%) 51 (38.1%) 9 (6.7%) 20 (14.9%) 134
2022 38 (36.2%) 38 (36.2%) 12 (11.4%) 17 (16.2%) 105
Total 278 (39.5%) 260 (37%) 48 (6.8%) 117 (16.6%) 703
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
A comparison of crash outcomes when alcohol or drugs, or when both alcohol and drugs are
involved is presented in Figure 4, which shows when alcohol or drugs are involved, a crash is more
likely to result in an injury or fatality. When someone is under the influence of drugs or alcohol, their
reaction time is slower than when not under the influence, contributing to worsening crash outcomes
with drug and alcohol use.
Figure 4: Drug and Alcohol Crash Severity Comparison
Speeding
Table 32 summarizes crashes where either exceeding the speed limit or driving too fast for the
conditions was noted in the crash report. The approximately 6,000 crashes where speeding was
noted as a factor made up about 1.8% of all crashes; however, 3.1% of the crashes listed as
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality
All Crashes Alcohol Involved Drug Involved Drug & Alcohol Involved
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 29 of 47
speeding-related resulted in a serious injury and 8% resulted in a fatality. As it can be difficult to
prove speeding, the number of KSI crashes attributed to speeding is likely an undercount.
Table 32: Crash Summary by Reported Speeding – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Speeding? No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Yes 3,616 (1.6%) 2,100 (2.3%) 230 (3.1%) 109 (8%) 6,055 (1.8%)
No 224,883 (98.4%) 87,857 (97.7%) 7,254 (96.9%) 1,257 (92%) 321,251 (98.2%)
Total 228,499 89,957 7,484 1,366 327,306
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Of crashes that involve speeding, they tend to be more fatal for people outside of vehicles. Of
speeding crashes, 15% result in the fatality of a pedestrian and 25% result in the fatality of a
motorcyclist, as presented in Table 33.
Table 33: Crash by Mode with Reported Speeding Non-Limited Access Roads – MetroPlan
Orlando Region
Mode No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Bicycle 0 (0%) 4 (0.3%) 0 (0%) 2 (2.1%) 6 (0.1%)
Pedestrian 17 (0.7%) 12 (0.8%) 7 (4.5%) 14 (14.9%) 50 (1.2%)
Motorcycle 14 (0.6%) 75 (5.3%) 43 (27.7%) 23 (24.5%) 155 (3.9%)
Motor Vehicles
(including trucks) 2,321 (98.7%) 1,333 (93.6%) 105 (67.7%) 55 (58.5%) 3,814 (94.8%)
Total 2,352 1,424 155 94 4,025
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities
Crashes by Age
A crash analysis of speeding and impaired drivers by age was conducted, with the results presented
in Figure 5 and Figure 6. Consistent with statewide and national data, younger drivers are more likely
to be involved in speeding related and impaired crashes.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 30 of 47
Figure 5: Speeding Related KSI Crashes by Age
Figure 6: Impaired KSI Crashes by Age
Crashes that involve an aging driver (defined as a driver 65 or older) or teen driver are summarized in
Table 34 through Table 37. Aging drivers comprise about 15.2% of licensed drivers (from Florida
Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Licensed Drivers by County, January 1, 2022).
in the region and are involved in about 14.4% of all crashes and 13.9% of KSI crashes. Aging drivers
are less likely to be involved in a crash involving a vulnerable road user. Although the aging driver
crash rates are proportional to the percentage of licensed drivers, it is likely that some people in the
aging driver cohort maintain a license but do not drive frequently.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Teen 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-64 65+
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Teen 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-64 65+
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 31 of 47
Table 34: All Crash Summary Aging Drivers by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Aging Driver? All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Yes 47,023 (14.4%) 45,767 (14.5%) 531 (11.7%) 447 (11%) 278 (11.5%)
No 280,283 (85.6%) 270,504 (85.5%) 4014 (88.3%) 3,616 (89%) 2,149 (88.5%)
Total 327,306 316,271 4,545 4,063 2,427
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Table 35: KSI Crash Summary Aging Drivers by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Aging Driver? All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Yes 1,233 (13.9%) 987 (15.6%) 128 (11.5%) 84 (8%) 34 (10%)
No 7,617 (86.1%) 5352 (84.4%) 988 (88.5%) 970 (92%) 307 (90%)
Total 8,850 6,339 1,116 1,054 341
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Teens comprise about 5.5% of licensed drivers in the region and are involved in 12.5% of all crashes
and 10.8% of KSI crashes. Like aging drivers, they are more likely to be involved in a motor vehicle-to-
motor vehicle crash than one with vulnerable road users. The inexperience of teen drivers is a large
factor in their disproportionate representation in crashes.
Table 36: All Crash Summary Teen Drivers by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Teen Driver? All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Yes 40,931 (12.5%) 40,219 (12.7%) 411 (9%) 182 (4.5%) 119 (4.9%)
No 286,375 (87.5%) 276,052 (87.3%) 4,134 (91%) 3,881 (95.5%) 2,308 (95.1%)
Total 327,306 316,271 4,545 4,063 2,427
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Table 37: KSI Crash Summary Teen Drivers by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Teen Driver? All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Yes 953 (10.8%) 799 (12.6%) 85 (7.6%) 46 (4.4%) 23 (6.7%)
No 7,897 (89.2%) 5,540 (87.4%) 1,031 (92.4%) 1,008 (95.6%) 318 (93.3%)
Total 8,850 6,339 1,116 1,054 341
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Teen drivers and aging drivers were also less likely to be involved in crashes and KSI crashes on limited
access facilities, potentially indicating a preference for travel on lower speed roadways.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 32 of 47
Aggressive Driving
Table 38 summarizes crashes where aggressive driving was noted in the crash report. The
approximately 8,700 crashes that involved aggressive driving comprise about 3% of all crashes;
however, 5% of the crashes listed as aggressive driving related resulted in a serious injury and 10%
resulted in a fatality.
Table 38: Crash Summary by Reported Aggressive Driving – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Aggressive
Driving? No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Yes 5,243 (2.3%) 3,026 (3.4%) 342 (4.6%) 139 (10.2%) 8,750 (2.7%)
No 223,256 (98.2%) 86,931 (97%) 7,142 (95.5%) 1,227 (89.8%) 318,556 (97.3%)
Total 228,499 89,957 7,484 1,366 327,306
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Distracted Driving
Table 39 summarizes crashes where distracted driving was noted in the crash report. The
approximately 83,000 crashes that involved distracted driving comprise about 25 % of all crashes;
however, 30% of the crashes listed as distracted-driving related resulted in a serious injury and 18%
resulted in a fatality.
Table 39: Crash Summary by Reported Distracted Driving – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Distracted
Driving ? No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Yes 51,924 (22.7%) 28,514 (31.7%) 2,295 (30.7%) 243 (17.8%) 82,976 (25.4%)
No 176,575 (77.3%) 61,443 (68.3%) 5,189 (69.3%) 1,123 (82.2%) 244,330 (74.6%)
Total 228,499 89,957 7,484 1,366 327,306
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
It should also be noted that multiple behavioral factors can collectively contribute to the occurrence
of crashes. For example, a person driving under the influence of drugs may also be distracted and/or
driving aggressively.
Occupant Protection: Seatbelts & Helmets
A crash summary by use of occupant protection is provided in Table 40 for people in motor vehicles
(seatbelts) and in Table 41 for motorcyclists (helmet use). In all motor vehicle crashes, 98.3% of
occupants were wearing a seatbelt. As seatbelt usage declines, more injuries occur, with 38% of
motor vehicle occupants who died in the MetroPlan Orlando region not wearing a seatbelt. 49% of
motorcyclist who died were wearing a FDOT compliant helmet; 43% of motorcyclists who died where
not wearing a helmet.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 33 of 47
Table 40: Motor vehicle Crash Summary by Reported Occupant Seatbelt Use– MetroPlan
Orlando Region
Occupant
Protection Used No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Yes 641,445 (98.7%) 136,840 (97.3%) 6,729 (89.3%) 438 (54.6%) 785,452 (98.3%)
No 4,368 (0.7%) 2,161 (1.5%) 521 (6.9%) 307 (38.3%) 7,357 (0.9%)
Unknown 4,175 (0.6%) 1,622 (1.2%) 289 (3.8%) 57 (7.1%) 6,143 (0.8%)
Total 649,988 (100%) 140,623 (100%) 7,539 (100%) 802 (100%) 798,952
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Table 41: Motorcycle Crash Summary by Helmet Use – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Occupant
Protection Used No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
FDOT Compliant
Helmet 460 (9.8%) 1,500 (48.6%) 455 (48.3%) 124 (49%) 2,539 (28.2%)
Other Helmet 17 (0.4%) 56 (1.8%) 21 (2.2%) 11 (4.3%) 105 (1.2%)
No Helmet 1,140 (24.2%) 826 (26.8%) 324 (34.4%) 109 (43.1%) 2,399 (26.7%)
Unknown 3,093 (65.7%) 705 (22.8%) 143 (15.2%) 9 (3.6%) 3,950 (43.9%)
Total 4,710 (100%) 3,087 (100%) 943 (100%) 253 (100%) 8,993 (100%)
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
For crashes that resulted in a fatality or serious injury, the responding officer likely made the
determination of seatbelt and helmet use. For crashes with lower levels of severity, people involved in
crashes may have self-reported wearing a seatbelt or helmet when they were not. For motorcyclist
involved crashes, reporting of helmet use appears to decline with no injury or minor injury crashes.
Hit and Run
A hit and run crash is defined as the act of causing a traffic crash and failing to remain at the scene
of the crash afterwards. Of all the reported crashes in the region, about 14% are classified as a hit
and run, with that percentage increasing for crashes involving pedestrians and bicyclists, as shown in
Table 42. Approximately 20% of pedestrian KSI and 19% of bicyclist KSIs are classified as a hit and run,
as shown in Table 43. Hit and run crashes that occur in transportation disadvantaged communities
are shown in Table 44. Pedestrian and bicyclists hit and run crashes are more likely to occur in a
disadvantaged community than in other places, with approximately 72% of pedestrian hit and run
KSIs and 70% of bicyclist hit and run KSIs occurring in transportation disadvantaged communities;
only 25% of the population lives in a transportation disadvantaged community.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 34 of 47
Table 42: All Crash Summary Hit and Run by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Hit & Run? All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Yes 45,394 (13.9%) 43,588 (13.8%) 488 (10.7%) 896 (22.1%) 422 (17.4%)
No 281,912 (86.1%) 272,683 (86.2%) 4,057 (89.3%) 3,167 (77.9%) 2,005 (82.6%)
Total 327,306 316,271 4,545 4,063 2,427
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Table 43: KSI Crash Summary Hit and Run by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Hit & Run? All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Yes 783 (8.8%) 454 (7.2%) 59 (5.3%) 206 (19.5%) 64 (18.8%)
No 8,067 (91.2%) 5,885 (92.8%) 1,057 (94.7%) 848 (80.5%) 277 (81.2%)
Total 8,850 6339 1116 1054 341
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Table 44: KSI Crash Summary Hit and Run by Mode in Transportation Disadvantaged
Communities – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Hit & Run? All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Yes 448 (11.6%) 228 (9%) 27 (5.6%) 148 (22.7%) 45 (23.1%)
No 3,412 (88.4%) 2,300 (91%) 458 (94.4%) 504 (77.3%) 150 (76.9%)
Total 3,860 2,528 485 652 195
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities
Commercial Motor Vehicle
Commercial motor vehicles include those with a gross motor vehicle weight greater than 26,001
pounds or that have three or more axles regardless of weight. Of all the reported crashes in the
region, about 6% involve a commercial motor vehicle (Table 45), with about 6% of KSI crashes
involving a commercial motor vehicle. People in motor vehicles were more likely to be involved in
fatal and severe injury crashes that involve a commercial motor vehicle, as shown in Table 46. KSI
crashes involving commercial vehicles are less likely to occur in transportation disadvantaged
communities, although motorcycle and bicycle involved KSI crashes with commercial vehicles are
slightly overrepresented in transportation disadvantaged communities, as shown in Table 47.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 35 of 47
Table 45: All Crash Summary Commercial Motor Vehicle by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando
Region
Commercial
Motor vehicle
Involved?
All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Yes 20,377 (6.2%) 20,151 (6.4%) 95 (2.1%) 91 (2.2%) 40 (1.6%)
No 306,929 (93.8%) 296,120 (93.6%) 4,450 (97.9%) 3,972 (97.8%) 2,387 (98.4%)
Total 327,306 316,271 4,545 4,063 2,427
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Table 46: KSI Crash Summary Commercial Motor Vehicle by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando
Region
Commercial
Motor vehicle
Involved?
All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Yes 530 (6%) 456 (7.2%) 28 (2.5%) 34 (3.2%) 12 (3.5%)
No 8,320 (94%) 5883 (92.8%) 1088 (97.5%) 1020 (96.8%) 329 (96.5%)
Total 8,850 6,339 1,116 1,054 341
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Table 47: KSI Crash Summary Commercial Motor Vehicle by Mode in Transportation
Disadvantaged Communities – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Commercial
Motor vehicle
Involved?
All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Yes 184 (4.8%) 145 (5.7%) 16 (3.3%) 13 (2%) 10 (5.1%)
No 3676 (95.2%) 2383 (94.3%) 469 (96.7%) 639 (98%) 185 (94.9%)
Total 3,860 2,528 485 652 195
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities
Environmental Factors
Crash outcomes were also evaluated based on environmental factors, such as road conditions and
lighting conditions.
Road Surface Condition
Table 48 summarizes crash outcomes by road surface conditions. Overall, all crashes, including KSI
crashes, were more likely to occur on dry roads than other road conditions. This finding is similar for
disadvantaged communities.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 36 of 47
Table 48: Crash Summary by Road Surface Condition – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Road Surface
Condition No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Dry 198,872 (87%) 78,102 (86.8%) 6,580 (87.9%) 1,212 (88.7%) 284,766 (87%)
Ice/Frost 7 (0%) 3 (0%) (0%) (0%) 10 (0%)
Mud, Dirt, Gravel 102 (0%) 19 (0%) 2 (0%) 2 (0.1%) 125 (0%)
Oil 9 (0%) 10 (0%) (0%) (0%) 19 (0%)
Other 67 (0%) 19 (0%) 5 (0.1%) 5 (0.4%) 96 (0%)
Sand 15 (0%) 4 (0%) (0%) (0%) 19 (0%)
Unknown 589 (0.3%) 48 (0.1%) 11 (0.1%) 1 (0.1%) 649 (0.2%)
Water (standing/
moving) 44 (0%) 19 (0%) (0%) 1 (0.1%) 64 (0%)
Wet 28,794 (12.6%) 11,733 (13%) 886 (11.8%) 145 (10.6%) 41,558 (12.7%)
Total 228,499 89,957 7,484 1,366 327,306
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Lighting Condition
Table 49 summarizes crashes by reported lighting condition for all modes of travel. While most crashes
occur during daylight hours, crashes that occur under dark conditions, either lighted or unlighted, are
more likely to result in a serious injury or a fatality. As shown in Table 50, crashes involving a person
walking, bicycling, or motorcycling are more likely to occur at night than crashes involving only
people in motor vehicles. Crashes in transportation disadvantaged communities are also more likely
to occur at night than in non-transportation disadvantaged communities, as shown in Table 51.
Table 49: Crash Summary by Lighting Conditions – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Lighting
Condition No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Dark - Lighted 42,745 (18.7%) 19,665 (21.9%) 2,151 (28.7%) 556 (40.7%) 65,117 (19.9%)
Dark - Not
Lighted 8,173 (3.6%) 4,179 (4.6%) 647 (8.6%) 267 (19.5%) 13,266 (4.1%)
Dark - Unknown
Lighting 585 (0.3%) 206 (0.2%) 6 (0.1%) 2 (0.1%) 799 (0.2%)
Dawn 3,861 (1.7%) 1602 (1.8%) 148 (2%) 44 (3.2%) 5,655 (1.7%)
Daylight 164,995 (72.2%) 60,996 (67.8%) 4,272 (57.1%) 455 (33.3%) 230,718 (70.5%)
Dusk 7,315 (3.2%) 3,258 (3.6%) 250 (3.3%) 37 (2.7%) 10,860 (3.3%)
Other 115 (0.1%) 17 (0%) 4 (0.1%) 5 (0.4%) 141 (0%)
Unknown 710 (0.3%) 34 (0%) 6 (0.1%) (0%) 750 (0.2%)
Total 228,499 (69.8%) 89,957 (27.5%) 7,484 (2.3%) 1,366 (0.4%) 327,306
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 37 of 47
Table 50: Crash Summary by Lighting Conditions – Pedestrians, Bicyclists and Motorcyclists –
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Lighting
Condition No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Dark – Lighted 381 (21.4%) 1,413 (21%) 598 (32.1%) 292 (45%) 2,684 (24.3%)
Dark – Not
Lighted 78 (4.4%) 403 (6%) 194 (10.4%) 146 (22.5%) 821 (7.4%)
Dark – Unknown
Lighting 3 (0.2%) 18 (0.3%) 3 (0.2%) 1 (0.2%) 25 (0.2%)
Dawn 29 (1.6%) 146 (2.2%) 30 (1.6%) 27 (4.2%) 232 (2.1%)
Daylight 1,223 (68.7%) 4,495 (66.7%) 963 (51.7%) 160 (24.7%) 6,841 (62%)
Dusk 62 (3.5%) 260 (3.9%) 70 (3.8%) 20 (3.1%) 412 (3.7%)
Other 1 (0.1%) 3 (0%) 1 (0.1%) 3 (0.5%) 8 (0.1%)
Unknown 4 (0.2%) 5 (0.1%) 3 (0.2%) 0 (0%) 12 (0.1%)
Total 1,781 (16.1%) 6,743 (61.1%) 1,862 (16.9%) 649 (5.9%) 11,035
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Table 51: Crash Summary by Lighting Conditions in Transportation Disadvantaged
Communities – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Lighting
Condition No Injury Injury Serious Injury Fatality Total
Dark – Lighted 18,516 (20%) 8,864 (22.4%) 1,021 (31.6%) 293 (46.8%) 28,694 (21.1%)
Dark – Not
Lighted 2,683 (2.9%) 1,443 (3.6%) 233 (7.2%) 106 (16.9%) 4,465 (3.3%)
Dark – Unknown
Lighting 255 (0.3%) 95 (0.2%) 4 (0.1%) 1 (0.2%) 355 (0.3%)
Dawn 1,493 (1.6%) 644 (1.6%) 49 (1.5%) 16 (2.6%) 2,202 (1.6%)
Daylight 66,622 (71.8%) 27,126 (68.5%) 1,821 (56.3%) 197 (31.5%) 95,766 (70.3%)
Dusk 2,920 (3.1%) 1,424 (3.6%) 103 (3.2%) 11 (1.8%) 4,458 (3.3%)
Other 42 (0%) 7 (0%) 1 (0%) 2 (0.3%) 52 (0%)
Unknown 244 (0.3%) 16 (0%) 2 (0.1%) (0%) 262 (0.2%)
Total 92,775 (68.1%) 39,619 (29.1%) 3,234 (2.4%) 626 (0.5%) 136,254
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 38 of 47
Road Factors
This section of the report provides crash information by characteristics of the road, such as the crash
location (intersection or segment), number of lanes, speed limit, and type of road. This section
focuses on crashes that occurred on the surface road system, and as such, limited access and toll
facilities are excluded from this analysis.
Crash Location (Intersection vs Segment)
At a high-level, a crash location can either be at an intersection (or within the intersection influence
area) or along a road segment. As summarized in Table 52, about 25% of all crashes occurred at an
intersection, with crashes occurring at intersections disproportionately resulting in a serious injury or
fatality, as shown in Table 53. About 70% of pedestrian involved crashes occur at non-intersection
locations, with 73% of pedestrian crashes that result in serious injury or fatality occurring at a non-
intersection location. The percent of pedestrian KSI crashes at non-intersection locations is slightly
higher in transportation disadvantaged communities (Table 55).
Table 52: All Crash Summary by Location by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Location All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Intersection 82,062 (25.1%) 78,455 (24.8%) 1,292 (28.4%) 1,211 (29.8%) 1,104 (45.5%)
Segment 245,244 (74.9%) 237,816 (75.2%) 3,253 (71.6%) 2,852 (70.2%) 1,323 (54.5%)
Total 327,306 316,271 4,545 4,063 2,427
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Includes limited access facilities
Table 53: KSI Crash Summary by Location by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Location All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Intersection 2,860 (39.3%) 2,059 (41.5%) 391 (40.8%) 272 (26.7%) 138 (40.7%)
Segment 4,413 (60.7%) 2,899 (58.5%) 567 (59.2%) 746 (73.3%) 201 (59.3%)
Total 7,273 4,958 958 1,018 339
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities
Table 54: KSI Crash Summary by Location by Mode in Transportation Disadvantaged
Communities – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Location All Crashes Motor vehicles Motorcyclist Pedestrians Bicyclists
Intersection 1,537 (39.8%) 1,108 (43.8%) 188 (38.8%) 158 (24.2%) 83 (42.6%)
Segment 2,323 (60.2%) 1,420 (56.2%) 297 (61.2%) 494 (75.8%) 112 (57.4%)
Total 3,860 2,528 485 652 195
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 39 of 47
Posted Speed Limit
The number of reported crashes by the speed limit of the road where the crash occurred is
summarized in Table 55, and compared to the miles of road in the analysis area with that posted
speed limit. Crashes disproportionately occur on roads with higher speeds – roads with a posted
speed limit 40 miles per hour or greater represent about 13% of the total centerline miles in the region,
and account for 63% of all crashes and 72.4% of KSI crashes, as shown in Table 56.
Table 55: All Crash Summary by Posted Speed Limit by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Mode 25 or less 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+ Total
% of
Centerline
miles with
Posted Speed
Limit
79.4% 7.2% 8.8% 3.0% 1.5% 100%
Motor vehicles 408 (8.5%) 861 (17.9%) 2,788 (58%) 654 (13.6%) 99 (2.1%) 250,381
Motorcyclist 93 (9.9%) 185 (19.6%) 527 (55.8%) 127 (13.5%) 12 (1.3%) 3,893
Pedestrian 97 (10.4%) 174 (18.6%) 555 (59.3%) 109 (11.6%) 1 (0.1%) 3,385
Bicyclist 43 (13.2%) 71 (21.8%) 178 (54.8%) 31 (9.5%) 2 (0.6%) 2,302
All modes
combined 34,262 (13.2%) 63,078 (24.3%) 137,537
(52.9%) 24,131 (9.3%) 953 (0.4%) 259,961
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Total crashes does not sum to total non-limited access crashes as presented
in Table 3 as posted speed limit data is not readily available for all roadways.
Table 56: KSI Crash Summary by Posted Speed Limit by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Mode 25 or less 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+ Total
% of
Centerline
miles with
Posted Speed
Limit
79.4% 7.2% 8.8% 3.0% 1.5% 100%
Motor vehicles 32,797 (13.1%) 60,872 (24.3%) 132,490
(52.9%) 23,310 (9.3%) 912 (0.4%) 4,810
Motorcyclist 479 (12.3%) 847 (21.8%) 2,116 (54.4%) 417 (10.7%) 34 (0.9%) 944
Pedestrian 610 (18%) 808 (23.9%) 1713 (50.6%) 252 (7.4%) 2 (0.1%) 936
Bicyclist 376 (16.3%) 551 (23.9%) 1,218 (52.9%) 152 (6.6%) 5 (0.2%) 325
All modes
combined 641 (9.1%) 1,291 (18.4%) 4,048 (57.7%) 921 (13.1%) 114 (1.6%) 7,015
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Total KSI crashes does not sum to total non-limited access crashes as
presented in Table 3 as posted speed limit data is not readily available for all roadways.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 40 of 47
Number of Travel Lanes
The number of reported crashes by the number of travel lanes on the road where the crash occurred
is summarized in Table 57, and compared to the centerline miles of road in the analysis area with that
number of lanes. KSI Crashes disproportionately occur on roads with more lanes, as shown in Table 58.
For example, 4 lane roadways are about 6.5% of all roadways and where 39% of all crashes and 41%
of KSI crashes occur. Crash outcomes by number of lanes are closely correlated with crashes by
speed as multilane roads tend to have higher speed limits and higher operating speeds than 2-lane
roads.
Table 57: All Crash Summary by Number of Travel Lanes by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando
Region
Mode 2 4 6+ Total
% of Centerline miles
with number of lanes 91.8% 6.5% 1.7% 100%
Motor vehicles 87213 (34.8%) 96,320 (38.5%) 66,848 (26.7%) 250,381
Motorcyclist 1401 (36%) 1,565 (40.2%) 927 (23.8%) 3,893
Pedestrian 1239 (36.6%) 1,225 (36.2%) 921 (27.2%) 3,385
Bicyclist 842 (36.6%) 910 (39.5%) 550 (23.9%) 2,302
All modes combined 90695 (34.9%) 100,020 (38.5%) 69,246 (26.6%) 259,961
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Total crashes does not sum to total non-limited access crashes as presented
in Table 3 as number of travel lane data is not readily available for all roadways.
Table 58: KSI Crash Summary by Number of Travel Lanes by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando
Region
Mode 2 4 6+ Total
% of Centerline miles
with number of lanes 91.8% 6.5% 1.7% 100%
Motor vehicles 1,528 (31.8%) 1,985 (41.3%) 1,297 (27%) 4,810
Motorcyclist 330 (35%) 391 (41.4%) 223 (23.6%) 944
Pedestrian 244 (26.1%) 347 (37.1%) 345 (36.9%) 936
Bicyclist 115 (35.4%) 133 (40.9%) 77 (23.7%) 325
All modes combined 2,217 (31.6%) 2,856 (40.7%) 1,942 (27.7%) 7,015
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Total KSI crashes does not sum to total non-limited access crashes as
presented in Table 3 as number of travel lane data is not readily available for all roadways.
Median Type
The number of reported crashes by the median type of the road where the crash occurred is
summarized in Table 57 for all crashes and Table 58 for KSI crashes, and compared to the centerline
miles of road in the analysis with that type of median. For roadways with no median, they are more
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 41 of 47
likely to be 2-lane, low speed roadways, where roadways with paved or grass medians are more
likely to have multiple lane and posted speed limits.
Table 59: All Crash Summary by Median Type by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region1
Mode None Grass Multiple2 Paved3 Other4 Total
% of
Centerline
miles
88.1% 8.3% 0.3% 3.2% 0.1% 100%
Motor vehicles 92,114 (36.8%) 77,706 (31%) 7,547 (3%) 69,936 (27.9%) 3,024 (1.2%) 250,327
Motorcyclist 1497 (38.5%) 1239 (31.8%) 109 (2.8%) 1,009 (25.9%) 39 (1%) 3,893
Pedestrian 1504 (44.4%) 910 (26.9%) 67 (2%) 869 (25.7%) 35 (1%) 3,385
Bicyclist 964 (41.9%) 692 (30.1%) 47 (2%) 563 (24.5%) 36 (1.6%) 2,302
All modes
combined 96,079 (37%) 80,547 (31%) 7,770 (3%) 72,377 (27.8%) 3,134 (1.2%) 259,907
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: 1. Does not include limited access facilities; Total crashes does not sum to total non-limited access crashes as
presented in Table 3 as median type data is not readily available for all roadways. 2. One some roadway segments,
multiple median types are present along the length of a roadway, such as grass median on segments, transitioning to a
paved median at an intersection. 3. A paved median could either concrete or asphalt and includes 1) a raised paved
median, or 2) non-raised medians where road markings do not allow for automobile travel. 4. Other medians could include
brick, gravel or a bridge structure.
Table 60: KSI Crash Summary by Median Type by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Mode None Grass Multiple Paved Other Total
% of
Centerline
miles
88.1% 8.3% 0.3% 3.2% 0.1% 100%
Motor vehicles 1,668 (34.7%) 1,750 (36.4%) 123 (2.6%) 1,246 (25.9%) 23 (0.5%) 4,810
Motorcyclist 356 (37.7%) 309 (32.7%) 25 (2.6%) 247 (26.2%) 7 (0.7%) 944
Pedestrian 345 (36.9%) 288 (30.8%) 28 (3%) 268 (28.6%) 7 (0.7%) 936
Bicyclist 134 (41.2%) 100 (30.8%) 3 (0.9%) 84 (25.8%) 4 (1.2%) 325
All modes
combined 2,503 (35.7%) 2,447 (34.9%) 179 (2.6%) 1,845 (26.3%) 41 (0.6%) 7,015
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Total KSI crashes does not sum to total non-limited access crashes as
presented in Table 3 as median type data is not readily available for all roadways.
Functional Classification
The number of reported crashes by the functional classification of the road where the crash occurred
is summarized in Table 61, and compared to the miles of road in the analysis with that functional
classification. Crashes disproportionately occur on arterial and major collector-roads with the
proportion of all crashes and KSI crashes increasing as the functional classification becomes a higher
level, as shown in Table 62. This finding is consistent with the finding that crashes disproportionately
occur on roads with a higher posted speed limit and more travel lanes.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 42 of 47
Table 61: All Crash Summary by Functional Classification by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando
Region
Mode Principal
Arterial Minor Arterial Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local/Other Total
% of
Centerline
miles with
Functional
Classification
4.1% 4.0% 7.2% 1.9% 82.8% 100%
Motor vehicles 91,625 (35.1%) 65,443 (25%) 50,840 (19.4%) 6,135 (2.3%) 47,366 (18.1%) 261,409
Motorcyclist 1,456 (36.7%) 996 (25.1%) 796 (20.1%) 98 (2.5%) 617 (15.6%) 3,963
Pedestrian 1,225 (35.5%) 800 (23.2%) 674 (19.5%) 89 (2.6%) 667 (19.3%) 3,455
Bicyclist 753 (32.5%) 583 (25.2%) 501 (21.6%) 98 (4.2%) 382 (16.5%) 2,317
All modes
combined 95,059 (35.1%) 67,822 (25%) 52,811 (19.5%) 6,420 (2.4%) 49,032 (18.1%) 271,144
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Total crashes does not sum to total non-limited access crashes as presented
in Table 3 as functional classification data is not readily available for all roadways.
Table 62: KSI Crash Summary by Functional Classification by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando
Region
Mode Principal
Arterial Minor Arterial Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local/Other Total
% of
Centerline
miles with
Functional
Classification
4.1% 4.0% 7.2% 1.9% 82.8% 100%
Motor vehicles 1,688 (34.5%) 1,439 (29.4%) 1018 (20.8%) 117 (2.4%) 631 (12.9%) 4,893
Motorcyclist 349 (36.7%) 255 (26.8%) 198 (20.8%) 30 (3.2%) 118 (12.4%) 950
Pedestrian 428 (45.2%) 234 (24.7%) 152 (16.1%) 22 (2.3%) 111 (11.7%) 947
Bicyclist 112 (34.3%) 74 (22.6%) 75 (22.9%) 12 (3.7%) 54 (16.5%) 327
All modes
combined 2,577 (36.2%) 2,002 (28.1%) 1,443 (20.3%) 181 (2.5%) 914 (12.8%) 7,117
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Total KSI crashes does not sum to total non-limited access crashes as
presented in Table 3 as functional classification data is not readily available for all roadways.
Context Classification
All roads maintained by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) have also been assigned a
context classification to reflect the land use and transportation context through which the road
traverses. The respective context classification is based on the roadway function as well as the
surrounding land uses. A brief description of each context classification is provided below. For more
information, please refer to the FDOT Context Classification Guide at
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 43 of 47
https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/default-
source/roadway/completestreets/files/fdot-context-classification.pdf.
• C1 – Natural: Lands preserved in a natural or wilderness condition, including lands unsuitable for
settlement due to natural conditions. Design speed ranges from 55-70 mph.
• C2 – Rural: Sparsely settled lands; may include agricultural land, grassland, woodland, and
wetlands. Design speed ranges from 55-70 mph.
• C2T – Rural Town: Small concentrations of developed areas immediately surrounded by rural and
natural areas; includes many historic towns. Design speed ranges from 25-45 mph.
• C3R – Suburban Residential: Mostly residential uses within large blocks and a disconnected or
sparse roadway network. Design speed ranges from 35-55 mph.
• C3C – Suburban Commercial: Mostly non-residential uses with large building footprints and large
parking lots within large blocks and a disconnected or sparse roadway network. Design speed
ranges from 35-55 mph.
• C4 – Urban General: Mix of uses set within small blocks with a well-connected roadway network.
May extend long distances. The roadway network usually connects to residential neighborhoods
immediately along the corridor or behind the uses fronting the roadway. Design speed ranges
from 30-45 mph.
• C5 – Urban Center: Mix of uses set within small blocks with a well-connected roadway network.
Typically concentrated around a few blocks and identified as part of a civic or economic center
of a community, town, or city. Design speed ranges from 25-35 mph.
• C6 – Urban Core: Areas with the highest densities and building heights, and within FDOT classified
Large Urbanized Areas (population >1,000,000). Many are regional centers and destinations.
Buildings have mixed uses, are built up to the roadway, and are within a well-connected roadway
network. Design speed ranges from 25-30 mph.
For FDOT roads where a context classification has been assigned, the number of reported crashes by
context classification is summarized in Table 63. Crashes disproportionately occur on Suburban
Commercial Corridors (C3C) as these are roads that typically carry large volumes of motor vehicle
traffic, provide direct access to land uses, serve transit, and accommodate people walking and
bicycling. The percent of KSI crashes for people walking, bicycling, and motorcycling is also
disproportionally higher on C3C roads, as shown in Table 64.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 44 of 47
Table 63: All Crash Summary by Functional Classification by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando
Region
Mode C1 C2 C2T C3C C3R C4 C5 C6 Total
% of
Centerline
miles with
Context Class
1.0% 20.9% 0.2% 48.3% 16.7% 10.6% 1.0% 0.5% 100%
Motor vehicles 206
(0.2%)
2,659
(2%)
86
(0.1%)
91804
(68.6%)
11,416
(8.5%)
23,715
(17.7%)
2372
(1.8%)
1487
(1.1%) 133,745
Motorcyclist 8
(0.4%)
55
(2.7%)
3
(0.1%)
1363
(65.8%)
224
(10.8%)
354
(17.1%)
44
(2.1%)
19
(0.9%) 2,070
Pedestrian 0
(0%)
10
(0.6%)
4
(0.2%)
1224
(68.3%)
118
(6.6%)
375
(20.9%)
30
(1.7%)
32
(1.8%) 1,793
Bicyclist
0
(0%)
8
(0.7%)
2
(0.2%)
803
(69.8%)
112
(9.7%)
195
(16.9%)
12
(1%)
19
(1.7%) 1,151
All modes
combined
214
(0.2%)
2,732
(2%)
95
(0.1%)
95194
(68.6%)
11,870
(8.6%)
24,639
(17.8%)
2,458
(1.8%)
1,557
(1.1%) 138,759
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Only includes FDOT non-limited access roads that have been assigned a context classification.
Table 64: KSI Crash Summary by Functional Classification by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando
Region
Mode C1 C2 C2T C3C C3R C4 C5 C6 Total
% of
Centerline
miles with
Context Class
1.0% 20.9% 0.2% 48.3% 16.7% 10.6% 1.0% 0.5% 100%
Motor
vehicles
2
(0.4%)
19
(3.9%)
1
(0.2%)
315
(63.9%)
70
(14.2%)
71
(14.4%)
12
(2.4%)
3
(0.6%) 493
Motorcyclist 0
(0%)
5
(0.9%)
0
(0%)
419
(71.7%)
37
(6.3%)
107
(18.3%)
9
(1.5%)
7
(1.2%) 584
Pedestrian 0
(0%)
1
(0.6%)
1
(0.6%)
121
(75.2%)
18
(11.2%)
20
(12.4%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%) 161
Bicyclist 17
(0.5%)
193
(5.2%)
6
(0.2%)
2,510
(68.1%)
445
(12.1%)
457
(12.4%)
39
(1.1%)
19
(0.5%) 3,686
All modes
combined
15
(0.6%)
168
(6.9%)
4
(0.2%)
1,655
(67.6%)
320
(13.1%)
259
(10.6%)
18
(0.7%)
9
(0.4%) 2,448
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Only includes FDOT non-limited access roads that have been assigned a context classification.
Traffic Volumes
The number of reported crashes by the volume of traffic on the road where the crash occurred is
summarized in Table 65 for roads where traffic volume data is available. Crashes disproportionately
occur on roads with higher traffic volumes, with the proportion of KSI crashes increasing as the traffic
volumes increase, as shown in Table 66.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 45 of 47
Table 65: All Crash Summary by Traffic Volumes by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Mode Less than 15,000 15,000-30,000 More than 30,000 Total
Motor vehicles 50,384 (23.5%) 70,400 (32.8%) 94,045 (43.8%) 214,829
Motorcyclist 855 (25.5%) 1,145 (34.1%) 1,354 (40.4%) 3,354
Pedestrian 683 (24.5%) 857 (30.7%) 1,251 (44.8%) 2,791
Bicyclist 534 (27.5%) 609 (31.4%) 798 (41.1%) 1,941
All modes combined 52,456 (23.5%) 73,011 (32.8%) 97,448 (43.7%) 222,915
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Total crashes does not sum to total non-limited access crashes as presented
in Table 3 as traffic count data is not readily available for all roadways.
Table 66: KSI Crash Summary by Traffic Volume by Mode – MetroPlan Orlando Region
Mode Less than 15,000 15,000-30,000 More than 30,000 Total
Motor vehicles 1,055 (24.7%) 1,477 (34.5%) 1,746 (40.8%) 4,278
Motorcyclist 229 (27.3%) 298 (35.5%) 312 (37.2%) 839
Pedestrian 149 (17.8%) 260 (31.1%) 427 (51.1%) 836
Bicyclist 72 (26.2%) 85 (30.9%) 118 (42.9%) 275
All modes combined 1,505 (24.2%) 2,120 (34%) 2,603 (41.8%) 6,228
Source: Signal 4 Analytics
Notes: Does not include limited access facilities; Total KSI crashes does not sum to total non-limited access crashes as
presented in Table 3 as functional classification data is not readily available for all roadways.
Systemic Matrices
Based on the crash type, behavior, environmental and road factors, the travel modes, and factors
involved in a disproportionate number of fatal and severe injury crashes was identified, as presented
in Attachment B for the MetroPlan Orlando region, Attachment C for Orange County, Attachment D
for Osceola County and Attachment E for Seminole County. While similar analyses were prepared for
each individual jurisdiction, the small relative sample size in many local communities can skew some
of the analysis results.
For this analysis, only crashes on non-limited access facilities and where sufficient roadway
information was available were included in the analysis. Parking lot crashes were also excluded, with
the resulting regional analysis reflecting 260,000 crashes (94% of the total non-limited access crashes)
and 7,015 KSI crashes (98% of all non-limited access KSI crashes). Therefore, some of the information
presented in these tables may be slightly different than the information presented in the tables in this
report due to this difference in data sets, although the overall conclusions remain the same.
Data is presented in the following tables:
• All Crash Matrix – Raw number of total crashes by each factor
• All KSI Crash Matrix – Raw number of KSI crashes by each factor
• % of All Crashes that Resulted in a KSI – Shows the percentage of overall crashes that resulted
in a KSI.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 46 of 47
• % of KSI – Shows of only KSI, what percentage of total KSIs each factor represents.
• % of Car and Truck KSI – Of KSI crashes involving only people in cars and trucks, the most
prevalent factors.
• % of Motorcycle KSI – Of KSI crashes involving motorcyclists, the most prevalent factors.
• % of Pedestrian KSI – Of KSI crashes involving pedestrians, the most prevalent factors.
• % of Bicyclist KSI – Of KSI crashes involving bicyclists, the most prevalent factors.
The information is cross tabulated by the following factors:
• Crash Type
• Alcohol Related
• Hit and Run
• Aggressive Driving
• Distracted Driving
• Intersection Related
• Drug Related
• Aging Driver
• Teen Driver
• Day of Week
• Time of Day
• Lighting Condition
• Number of Lanes
• Number of Turn Lanes
• Posted Speed Limit
• Roadway Classification
• Average Annual Daily Traffic
• Context Classification
• Presence of Bike Lane or Pave Shoulder
• Presence of Sidewalks
• Median Presence
Some key findings that build on the findings presented previously include:
• Crashes involving a variety of behavioral and contextual factors are more likely to be fatal on
non-limited access roadways with a posted speed limit of 40 MPH or greater, including hit and
run, alcohol and drug related crashes, aging and teen drivers, and bicycle and pedestrian
involved crashes. KSI crashes occur more frequently on high-speed roadways.
• The FDOT Context Classification C3C – Commercial Corridor is associated with a
disproportionate number of KSI crashes for all travel modes as these roadways tend to have a
high-level of multimodal activity as well as high-speeds. Left-turn, rear-end and pedestrian KSI
crashes are most prevalent on this roadway type.
• While overall crash trends are similar across each of the three counties that comprise the
MetroPlan Orlando region, there are some subtle differences:
o Hit and Run KSI crashes as a percent of overall KSI crashes are more prevalent in Orange
County (10.3%), as compared to the regional average (9.2%), Osceola County (6.2%)
and Seminole County (5.8%)
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Crash Analysis and Profiles, January 17, 2024
Page 47 of 47
o Alcohol Related KSI crashes as a percent of overall KSI crashes occur more frequently in
Osceola (7.5%) and Seminole Counties (6.6%), than Orange County (5.2%) with a
regional average of 5.7%.
o Teen Driver KSI crashes as a percent of overall KSI crashes occur at a similar rate in all
counties: Orange County is 11.6%, Osceola County is 12.4% and Seminole County is
10.2%. The regional average is 11.6%.
o Aging Driver KSI crashes occur more frequently as a percent of overall KSI crashes in
Seminole County (18.7%) with Osceola County a close second (16.4%), as compared to
the regional average (14.9%) and Orange County (14.0%).
o Pedestrian involved KSI crashes occur more frequently as a percent of overall KSI
crashes in Seminole County (17.1%), as compared to Orange County (13.4%), the
regional average (13.3%), and Osceola County (10.8%).
Attachments:
Attachment A: FDOT Modal Office Crash Data
Attachment A-1: Trespasser Near Misses
Attachment A-2: Trespasser Incidents (Results in a KSI)
Attachment B: MetroPlan Orlando Regional Systemic Crash Matrix
1. All Crash Matrix
2. All KSI Crash Matrix
3. Percent of All Crashes that Resulted in a KSI
4. Percent of KSI for All Crashes
5. Percent of Car and Truck KSI
6. Percent of Motorcycle KSI
7. Percent of Pedestrian KSI
8. Percent of Bicyclist KSI
Attachment C: Orange County Systemic Crash Matrix
• Same List as Regional
Attachment D: Osceola County Systemic Crash Matrix
• Same List as Regional
Attachment E: Seminole County Systemic Crash Matrix
• Same List as Regional
Attachment A-1
Railroad Near Misses
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Time
Day M D Y Hr &
Min Milepost Description Jurisdiction At
crossing?
Fri 4 28 2023 06:32 805.09 Near Garden St.Osceola
County N SunRail Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser loitering in the area south of Garden St. in Osceola County. Walking
around and standing on tracks.
Thu 4 27 2023 17:06 767.80 Between CR 46A
and Airport Blvd. Sanford N SunRail Y Walking
Along
Homeless pedestrian trespasser walking along tracks pulling wagon just north of Airport Blvd.
Stepped off tracks at last second as SunRail train approached.
Mon 4 24 2023 18:18 798.50
Between Fourth St.
and Taft Vineland
Rd.
Orange County N SunRail Y Walking
Along
Pedestrian trespasser walking in the gauge of the tracks. Stepped off tracks at last second as
SunRail train approached.
Tue 2 28 2023 20:12 800.83
Between S.
Orange Ave.
Overpass and E.
Wetherbee Rd.
Orange County N SunRail Y Sitting Pedestrian trespasser sitting on rail just south of the Orange Ave. overpass. Trespasser got up
and walked off the tracks at the last second as SunRail train approached.
Thu 2 23 2023 16:59 788.97 Near Magnolia
Ave.Orlando N SunRail Y Walking
Across
Homeless pedestrian trespasser crossing the tracks to reach a homeless encampment
between Magnolia Ave. and Orange Ave. Cleared tracks before SunRail train passed.
Wed 1 11 2023 20:05 789.62 Near Concord St.Orlando N SunRail Y Sitting
Pedestrian trespasser sitting on rail just north of Concord St. in Orlando. Trespasser got up and
walked off the tracks at the last second as SunRail train approached. Trespasser said to be
possibly intoxicated.
Mon 12 26 2022 16:25 809.30
Between S. Clyde
Ave. and Jack
Calhoun Dr.
Kissimmee N SunRail Y Walking
Across
Homeless pedestrian trespasser crossing the tracks to reach a homeless encampment south
of the John Young Pkwy. Overpass. Cleared tracks before SunRail train passed.
Fri 12 2 2022 08:54 791.20 Columbia St. Orlando N SunRail Y Walking
Across
Pedestrian trespasser crossing the tracks just north of the Columbia St. crossing in Orlando.
Cleared tracks before SunRail train passed.
Wed 11 30 2022 07:55 777.68 E. Church Ave. Longwood Y SunRail Y Walking
Across
Pedestrian trespasser crossing the tracks on the south edge of the Church Ave. crossing in
Longwood. Trespasser ignored warning lights, bells, and gates.
Fri 9 23 2022 15:39 798.50
Between Fourth St.
and Taft Vineland
Rd.
Orange County N SunRail Y Walking
Along
Pedestrian trespasser walking in the gauge of the tracks. Stepped off tracks at last second as
SunRail train approached.
Wed 8 31 2022 07:40 786.60 Near S. Denning
Dr. Winter Park N SunRail Y Standing
Pedestrian trespasser loitering in the area S. Denning Dr., Minnesota Ave., and Holt Ave. in
Winter Park. Mental health issues. SunRail train applied emergency braking to avoid hitting
trespasser.
Wed 6 15 2022 08:21 790.40 Near Church St.Orlando N SunRail Y Walking
Along
Pedestrian trespasser walking along tracks between the Church St. station NB platform and
the South St. crossing.
Fri 6 3 2022 16:00 804.70 Near Osceola
Pkwy.
Osceola
County N SunRail Y Unknown Pedestrian trespasser on tracks near the Osceola Pkwy. Overpass.
Fri 3 25 2022 12:30 791.77 Near Kaley St.Orlando N SunRail Y Sitting Pedestrian trespasser sitting against rail just south of the Kaley St. crossing. Trespasser scooted
out of the foul at the last second.
Fri 3 18 2022 15:45 786.06 Near Fairbanks
Ave. Winter Park N SunRail Y Walking
Along
Pedestrian Trespasser walking in the gauge of the tracks from Lyman Ave. towards Fairbanks
Ave. in Winter Park. Trespasser stepped of tracks at the last second.
Fri 3 11 2022 20:13 786.42 Near Minnesota
Ave.Winter Park N SunRail Y Sitting
Pedestrian trespasser sitting in the gauge of the tracks just south of the Minnesota Ave.
crossing. Trespasser got up and cleared the tracks before the train passed and appeared
intoxicated.
Tue 12 21 2021 20:39 773.09 Lake Mary Station Lake Mary N SunRail Y Walking
Along Pedestrian trespassers walking down the tracks towards the Lake Mary Station.
Mon 11 29 2021 15:58 788.97 Magnolia Ave. Orlando Y SunRail Y Walking
Across
Pedestrian Trespasser walking across the tracks at the Magnolia Ave. crossing in Orlando.
Trespasser walked around warning gate and ignored lights and bells.
Description of Incident / Employee or Subcontractor
CFRC Trespasser Near Misses 2018 - 2023 YTD
Rev.?Operator
Date Location Trespasser
Action
Railroad Near Misses Page 1 of 3
Attachment A-1
Railroad Near Misses
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Time
Day M D Y Hr &
Min Milepost Description Jurisdiction At
crossing?
Description of Incident / Employee or Subcontractor
CFRC Trespasser Near Misses 2018 - 2023 YTD
Rev.?Operator
Date Location Trespasser
Action
Thu 11 4 2021 07:26 789.99 Robinson St. Orlando Y SunRail Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser stood in front of train at the Robinson St. grade crossing in Orlando. Train
stopped short of trespasser.
Tue 11 2 2021 17:27 789.81 LYNX Central
Station Orlando Y SunRail Y Walking
Across
Pedestrian trespasser walked out in front of train at the LYNX Central Station north pedestrian
crossing as the train was departing the station.
Thu 10 28 2021 16:46 784.70 Near N Denning
Dr. Winter Park Y SunRail Y Walking
Along
Homeless pedestrian trespasser walking in the gauge of the tracks. Trespasser steeped away
from tracks before train passed.
Mon 10 11 2021 18:17 789.50 Colonial Dr. Orlando Y SunRail Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser walked out in front of train at the Colonial Dr. crossing and then
stopped and stood in front of train. Trespasser moved on at last second.
Fri 10 8 2021 08:41 766.00
Between SR 46
Overpass and
McCracken Rd.
Sanford Y SunRail Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser standing on the tracks refusing to move. Possible attempted suicide.
Same individual and location from 9/21/21.
Tue 9 21 2021 07:11 766.00
Between SR 46
Overpass and
McCracken Rd.
Sanford Y SunRail Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser standing on the tracks refusing to move. Possible attempted suicide.
Tue 9 7 2021 16:38 773.09 Lake Mary Station Lake Mary Y SunRail Y Walking
Across
Pedestrian trespasser walked out in front of SunRail train entering the Lake Mary Station at the
south station pedestrian crossing. Trespasser was on the phone and distracted. Upon noticing
the train, the trespasser jumped backwards out of the way.
Mon 8 30 2021 19:35 807.49
Between
Magnolia St. and
East Oak St.
Kissimmee N SunRail Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser attempted to lay down in front of train. Attempted suicide.
Fri 8 20 2021 18:30 790.49 Near South St.Orlando N SunRail Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser standing on tracks.
Tue 8 17 2021 14:27 804.60 Near Tupperware
Station
Osceola
County N SunRail Y Walking
Along Pedestrian trespasser walking down tracks towards the Tupperware Station.
Thu 7 29 2021 14:22 808.17 Near Monument
Ave. Kissimmee Y SunRail Y Walking
Across
Pedestrian trespasser crossing at the Monument Ave. crossing in Kissimmee. Trespasser was
elderly and walking at slow rate.
Thu 7 15 2021 19:48 787.99 Princeton St.Orlando Y SunRail Y Walking
Across
Pedestrian trespasser walked out in front of train at the Princeton St. crossing in Orlando.
Trespasser ignored warning gate, lights, and bells.
Tue 7 13 2021 19:48 789.40 Between Marks St.
and Colonial Dr. Orlando N SunRail Y Walking
Along
Homeless pedestrian trespasser walking within the foul of the tracks between Marks St. and
Colonial Dr. in Orlando. Train was able to stop before contacting individual.
Tue 7 6 2021 05:45 766.00
Between SR 46
Overpass and
McCracken Rd.
Sanford N SunRail Y Walking
Along
Pedestrian trespasser walking down tracks near the SR 46 overpass and Amtrak auto train
facility.
Wed 6 30 2021 06:35 784.10 Near Orlando Ave.
Overpass Orlando N SunRail Y Unknown Two pedestrian trespassers fouling the tracks near the Orlando Ave. overpass.
Mon 3 22 2021 15:38 786.06 Fairbanks Ave.Winter Park Y SunRail Y Standing Two pedestrian trespassers reported playing chicken with a SunRail train at the Fairbanks Ave.
crossing in Winter Park.
Wed 2 3 2021 18:12 786.06 Fairbanks Ave.Winter Park Y SunRail Y Walking
Along
Pedestrian trespasser jaywalking across Fairbanks Ave. at the grade crossing in front of
approaching SunRail train.
Wed 11 18 2020 22:34 789.81 Near Livingston St.Orlando N SunRail Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser standing between the LYNX Central Station platforms on the tracks.
Stood by intertrack fence as train passed.
Wed 11 11 2020 08:31 787.79 Rollins St.Orlando Y SunRail Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser stood in front of train at the Rollins St. grade crossing in Orlando.
Trespasser moved at last second. Possible attempted suicide.
Railroad Near Misses Page 2 of 3
Attachment A-1
Railroad Near Misses
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Time
Day M D Y Hr &
Min Milepost Description Jurisdiction At
crossing?
Description of Incident / Employee or Subcontractor
CFRC Trespasser Near Misses 2018 - 2023 YTD
Rev.?Operator
Date Location Trespasser
Action
Thu 10 8 2020 21:36 809.36
Between Clyde
Ave. and Pleasant
Hill Rd.
Kissimmee N SunRail Y Unknown Pedestrian trespasser reported on tracks.
Mon 5 18 2020 18:29 793.20
Between Drennen
St. and Holden
Ave.
Orlando N SunRail Y Sitting Pedestrian trespasser sitting in the gauge of the tracks. SunRail train stopped and the visually
intoxicated trespasser attempted to board the train.
Wed 4 22 2020 08:12 767.41 Near Country Club
Rd.Sanford N SunRail Y Walking
Along
Pedestrian trespasser walking down the tracks near the Country Club Rd. grade crossing in
Sanford. Train stopped and trespasser ran off.
Tue 3 10 2020 14:57 790.29 Pine St.Orlando Y SunRail Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser running around in circles over the Pine St. crossing in Orlando. The
trespasser momentarily stopped and stood in from of the train and then ran off.
Fri 2 14 2020 17:05 787.73 Rollins St.Orlando Y SunRail Y Walking
Across
Pedestrian trespasser walked in front of train at the Rollins St. crossing in Orlando. Elderly
person. Froze when observing train and backed up.
Thu 2 13 2020 17:07 800.75 Wetherbee Rd.Orange County Y SunRail Y Riding
Across
Pedestrian trespassers (Kids on bikes) rode around the warning gates and in front of a SunRail
train at the Wetherbee Rd. crossing.
Wed 1 15 2020 19:35 806.50 Between Donegan
Ave. and Vine St.
Osceola
County N SunRail Y Sitting Pedestrian trespassers (teenagers) sitting on tracks. Moved forward just enough to not get hit
by train.
Wed 1 15 2020 16:50 792.03 Grant St.Orlando N SunRail Y Walking
Along
Pedestrian trespasser walking down tracks towards the Grant St. crossing in Orlando. Upon
seeing train, the trespasser ran off the tracks towards the Target store.
Tue 1 14 2020 06:55 790.20 Near Central Blvd.Orlando N SunRail Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser standing in the gauge of the tracks.
Wed 1 8 2020 16:29 789.16 Near Orange Ave.Orlando N SunRail Y Walking
Along
Pedestrian trespasser walking down the tracks between the Magnolia Ave. and Orange Ave.
crossings.
Sun 2 10 2019 14:24 789.48 Colonial Dr. Orlando Y Amtrak Y Standing Pedestrian trespasser standing in the middle of the tracks at Colonial Dr. Amtrak train was
able to stop and the trespasser was very hostile towards the train crew.
Tue 1 22 2019 12:53 808.22 Near Ruby Ave.Kissimmee N SunRail Y Laying Pedestrian trespasser laying on tracks just north of Ruby Avenue in Kissimmee. Train was able
to stop just short of trespasser.
Thu 1 10 2019 19:08 805.70 Garden St. Osceola
County Y SunRail Y Walking
Across
Pedestrian trespasser walked out in front of train at the Garden St. crossing in Osceola
County. Trespasser ignored warning gate, lights, and bells.
Fri 12 21 2018 13:19 782.84 Lake Ave.Maitland Y SunRail Y Walking
Across
Mobility scooter stalled or got stuck over the tracks at the Lake Ave. grade crossing. Rider got
off scooter and pulled it out of the path of the train.
Thu 11 1 2018 14:50 807.80 Near Park St.Kissimmee N SunRail Y Standing Homeless pedestrian trespasser stood in the middle of the tracks in front of train. Camp set up
beside tracks.
Wed 10 31 2018 16:20 809.00
Between Clyde
Ave. and Pleasant
Hill Rd.
Kissimmee N SunRail Y Walking
Across Pedestrian trespasser crossed the tracks in front of train.
Tue 10 23 2018 12:52 776.12 CR 427 Longwood Y SunRail Y Unknown Pedestrian trespasser fouling tracks at the CR-427 grade crossing in Longwood.
Fri 10 5 2018 09:23 809.80
Between Clyde
Ave. and Pleasant
Hill Rd.
Kissimmee N SunRail Y Unknown Pedestrian trespasser fouling tracks.
Railroad Near Misses Page 3 of 3
Attachment A-2
Railroad Incidents
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Time
Day M D Y Hr &
Min Milepost Description Jurisdiction At
crossing?
Thu 4 13 2023 05:45 789.10 Near Orange
Ave.Orlando No SunRail Y Fatality 1 Kneeling Apparent SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser kneeling in the gauge of
the track just north of the Orange Ave. grade crossing in Orlando.
Sun 7 24 2022 03:05 805.90 Near Carroll St. Osceola
County No CSX Y Fatality 1 Lying Apparent CSX train struck pedestrian trespasser lying on the tracks just south
of Carrol St. in Osceola County.
Mon 6 6 2022 18:52 794.50 Near Mary
Jess Rd.Edgewood No SunRail Y Injury 1 Sitting No
SunRail train struck a pedestrian trespasser sitting on the tracks just
south of Mary Jess Rd. in Edgewood. Trespasser noticed train at
last second and attempted to get up and move out of the way.
Sun 6 5 2022 00:23 807.23 Near Vine St.Kissimmee No CSX Y Fatality 1 Sitting Apparent CSX train struck pedestrian trespasser sitting on the tracks near the
Vine St. grade crossing in Kissimmee.
Sun 1 30 2022 13:08 789.77
LYNX Central
Station North
Ped Crossing
Orlando Yes Amtrak Y Injury 1 Walking
Across No
Amtrak train struck pedestrian trespasser walking across the LYNX
Central Station north pedestrian crossing. The individual ignored
warning lights and bells and walked out Infront of the
approaching Amtrak train. The individual appeared distracted
and did not appear to be trying to beat the train.
Thu 12 30 2021 16:19 790.05 Jefferson St.Orlando Yes SunRail Y Fatality 1 Standing Yes
SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser standing at the Jefferson
St. grade crossing in Orlando. The trespasser ran out Infront of the
train at the last second.
Mon 9 13 2021 02:00 807.40 Near
Magnolia St.Kissimmee No CSX Y Fatality 1 Unknown Unknown CSX train struck pedestrian trespasser near the Magnolia St. grade
crossing in Kissimmee.
Wed 7 14 2021 15:55 790.24 Near Central
Blvd.Orlando No SunRail Y Fatality 1 Standing Yes
SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser standing in the gauge of
the track near the Central Blvd. grade crossing in Orlando. The
trespasser walked out Infront of the train at the last second.
Tue 7 6 2021 08:31 776.30
Between CR
427 and
Georgia Ave.
Longwood No None N Fatality 1 Hanging Yes Trespasser found hanging from signal mast.
Tue 3 30 2021 15:48 791.60
Between
Columbia St.
and Kaley St.
Orlando No SunRail Y Fatality 1 Sitting No
SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser sitting outside the gauge
of the rail but fouling the tracks. After investigation, the trespasser
was found to be under the influence of drugs.
Wed 2 24 2021 21:45 786.17 Holt Ave.Winter Park Yes CSX Y Fatality 1 Walking
Across No
CSX train struck pedestrian trespasser at the S Pennsylvania Ave
and Holt Ave. grade crossing in Winter Park. Trespasser was elderly
and assumed to be attempting to cross the tracks.
Description of Incident / Employee or Subcontractor
CFRC Trespasser Incidents 2018 - 2023 YTD
Rev.?Operator
Date Fatality or
Injury/Illness Suicide?
Location Trespasser
Action
Railorad Incidents 1 of 3
Attachment A-2
Railroad Incidents
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Time
Day M D Y Hr &
Min Milepost Description Jurisdiction At
crossing?
Description of Incident / Employee or Subcontractor
CFRC Trespasser Incidents 2018 - 2023 YTD
Rev.?Operator
Date Fatality or
Injury/Illness Suicide?
Location Trespasser
Action
Wed 1 6 2021 06:55 810.80
Between Jack
Calhoun Dr.
and
Crestridge Dr.
Osceola
County No Unknown Unknown Fatality 1 Unknown Unknown
Deceased body found in the gauge of the tracks at milepost
810.8 near the Hoagland Ave. overpass. No report from trains of a
trespasser. Cause of death unknown.
Mon 8 10 2020 05:58 781.15 Near Ballard
St.
Altamonte
Springs No SunRail Y Fatality 1 Sitting Apparent
SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser sitting in the gauge of the
tracks just north of the Ballard St. grade crossing in Altamonte
Springs.
Fri 12 13 2019 22:52 791.40
Between
Columbia St.
and Kaley St.
Orlando No SunRail Y Fatality 1 Walking
Along No
SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser walking down the gauge
of the tracks. Trespasser was walking the same direction as the
train.
Fri 11 22 2019 20:57 777.68 Church Ave.Longwood Yes Amtrak Y Fatality 1 Unknown Yes Amtrak train struck a pedestrian trespasser at the Church Ave.
grade crossing in Longwood.
Mon 10 28 2019 06:22 808.15 Monument
Ave.Kissimmee Yes SunRail Y Fatality 1 Standing Yes
SunRail train struck a pedestrian trespasser standing on the
Monument Ave. grade crossing in Kissimmee. Trespasser ran out in
front of train at the last second and stood over the tracks.
Tue 9 17 2019 08:48 791.50
Between
Columbia St.
and Kaley St.
Orlando No SunRail Y Injury 1 Standing No SunRail train struck a pedestrian trespasser standing next to the
tracks, just within the foul.
Tue 6 4 2019 08:17 792.30 Near Michigan
St.Orlando No SunRail Y Fatality 1 Sitting Yes
SunRail train struck a pedestrian trespasser just south of the
Michigan St. grade crossing in Orlando. The trespasser walked out
Infront of the train at the last second and sat in the gauge of the
tracks.
Fri 5 10 2019 09:41 783.66 Palmetto Ave.Maitland Yes SunRail Y Fatality 1 Standing Yes
SunRail train struck a pedestrian trespasser at the Palmetto Ave.
grade crossing (Lake Lilly Park) in Maitland. The trespasser ran out
Infront of the train at the last second and stood over the tracks.
Thu 2 28 2019 17:52 795.57 Lancaster Ave.Orange County Yes SunRail Y Fatality 1 Standing Apparent
SunRail train struck a pedestrian trespasser standing with a bicycle
at the Lancaster Rd. grade crossing. Trespasser rode bike into
crossing Infront of train and stood up over the tracks.
Mon 2 18 2019 10:04 794.87
Between Mary
Jess Rd. and
Oakridge Rd.
Edgewood No SunRail Y Fatality 1 Walking
Along No
SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser walking down the gauge
of the tracks. Trespasser was walking the same direction as the
train.
Tue 1 29 2019 15:12 784.50
Between Lake
Ave. and N.
Denning Dr.
Winter Park No SunRail Y Injury 1 Walking
Along No SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser walking along side the
tracks, just within the foul.
Wed 1 2 2019 16:58 792.10 Near Grant St.Orlando No SunRail Y Injury 1 Standing No
SunRail train struck a shopping cart just south of the Grant St.
grade crossing in Orlando. Homeless trespasser handling cart was
hit by the cart and injured.
Railorad Incidents 2 of 3
Attachment A-2
Railroad Incidents
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Time
Day M D Y Hr &
Min Milepost Description Jurisdiction At
crossing?
Description of Incident / Employee or Subcontractor
CFRC Trespasser Incidents 2018 - 2023 YTD
Rev.?Operator
Date Fatality or
Injury/Illness Suicide?
Location Trespasser
Action
Fri 12 7 2018 06:20 790.30 Near Pine St.Orlando No SunRail Y Fatality 1 Standing No
SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser just north of Pine St.
Trespasser was standing between the wall/fence for the Orlando
Urban Trail and the tracks.
Wed 12 5 2018 19:04 791.02 Gore St.Orlando Yes SunRail Y Injury 1 Standing No
SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser at the Gore St. grade
crossing. Trespasser was standing on a bicycle and appeared to
be slumped over and passed out.
Wed 11 14 2018 18:25 810.75
Between
Pleasant Hill
Rd. and
Crestridge Dr.
Osceola
County No SunRail Y Fatality 1 Standing No
SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser south of Pleasant Hill
Road (now Jack Calhoun Dr). Trespasser was standing just within
the foul of the tracks.
Fri 10 12 2018 15:37 786.06 Fairbanks Ave.Winter Park Yes SunRail Y Injury 1 Riding
Along Apparent
SunRail train struck pedestrian trespasser riding a bicycle at the
Fairbanks Ave. grade crossing in Winter Park. Trespasser rode out in
front of train from the west side of the crossing then turned and
rode down the tracks in the same direction of travel as the train.
Railorad Incidents 3 of 3
Attachment B-1
MetroPlan Orlando Region
All Crashes 2018 -2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 8995 6029 2486 7111 9387 1547 3909 6302 6517 757 25 3953 3757 4974 689 379 4293 5558 4282 3668 3 122 10 4116
Animal 334 225 43 371 212 22 60 81 252 128 81 197 120 167 34 3 84 287 161 70 0 84 0 72
Bicycle 842 910 550 723 1394 200 376 551 1218 152 5 753 583 501 98 17 365 534 609 798 0 8 2 803
Head On 1482 1009 464 1361 1478 245 540 814 1296 267 38 863 643 779 96 18 685 851 840 702 7 66 1 760
Left Turn 12807 14946 5871 7712 23368 2900 3544 10072 17915 2066 27 8189 10098 9185 1278 341 4889 8749 10800 9353 15 344 9 9912
Off Road 8805 5086 2118 9692 6604 755 4748 3539 6318 1212 192 3638 3185 3477 710 202 5839 4046 3759 3263 34 292 10 3319
Other 18417 9857 5457 23922 14649 2651 12499 7861 11521 1715 135 8284 6260 5979 932 377 19390 6760 7076 7712 12 294 6 7812
Pedestrian 1239 1225 921 1151 1976 328 610 808 1713 252 2 1225 800 674 89 24 643 683 857 1251 0 10 4 1224
Rear End 25714 41535 36007 19858 66388 17788 4306 21791 63746 13238 175 47641 29481 18790 1667 519 5936 16921 31039 49829 106 1013 46 47737
Right Turn 1718 2316 1588 1136 3622 963 529 1323 3319 440 11 1836 1760 1189 157 46 733 1107 1636 2231 1 34 0 2287
Rollover 618 517 265 655 659 105 162 299 572 233 134 573 283 304 43 17 199 458 371 381 3 136 0 356
Sideswipe 7937 13939 11675 7312 20827 5883 2340 7840 20073 3188 110 15429 9275 5610 526 185 2997 5300 9865 15757 32 284 7 14659
Unknown 1787 2426 1801 1633 3623 933 639 1797 3077 483 18 2478 1577 1182 101 50 801 1202 1716 2433 1 45 0 2137
Y 1663 1418 1006 1646 2082 497 801 940 1947 371 28 1474 898 821 145 38 849 950 999 1399 6 65 1 1436
N 89032 98602 68240 80991 152105 33823 33461 62138 135590 23760 925 93585 66924 51990 6275 2140 46005 51506 72012 96049 208 2667 94 93758
Y 13415 12211 9436 13932 19236 4489 6799 8193 17025 2969 76 12426 8583 6553 757 300 9038 6702 8870 12838 17 225 6 12143
N 77280 87809 59810 68705 134951 29831 27463 54885 120512 21162 877 82633 59239 46258 5663 1878 37816 45754 64141 84610 197 2507 89 83051
Y 2337 2415 1411 2232 3466 633 958 1705 2959 518 23 2225 1434 1322 186 58 1106 1376 1770 2044 7 89 0 2002
N 88358 97605 67835 80405 150721 33687 33304 61373 134578 23613 930 92834 66388 51489 6234 2120 45748 51080 71241 95404 207 2643 95 93192
Y 22744 27095 18675 20043 41233 9075 7593 14944 38621 7079 277 24925 18922 13914 1615 644 10331 12808 20286 26512 69 875 31 25871
N 67951 72925 50571 62594 112954 25245 26669 48134 98916 17052 676 70134 48900 38897 4805 1534 36523 39648 52725 70936 145 1857 64 69323
Y 30778 32147 17298 18896 50727 10988 9683 23147 41324 5976 93 25055 20988 19588 2849 923 11208 19914 23770 25136 47 806 26 28670
N 59917 67873 51948 63741 103460 23332 24579 39931 96213 18155 860 70004 46834 33223 3571 1255 35646 32542 49241 72312 167 1926 69 66524
Y 465 428 333 447 681 143 195 247 638 134 12 460 277 245 44 14 231 283 289 458 2 20 0 448
N 90230 99592 68913 82190 153506 34177 34067 62831 136899 23997 941 94599 67545 52566 6376 2164 46623 52173 72722 96990 212 2712 95 94746
Y 13225 15957 10450 11770 24315 5451 4758 9877 21553 3331 113 15322 10254 7933 1002 354 6671 8142 11084 15428 36 432 12 15321
N 77470 84063 58796 70867 129872 28869 29504 53201 115984 20800 840 79737 57568 44878 5418 1824 40183 44314 61927 82020 178 2300 83 79873
Y 11864 13397 8871 10306 20922 4227 4106 7768 18884 3278 96 11886 8992 7312 1118 303 5844 7092 9686 12679 28 394 18 12332
N 78831 86623 60375 72331 133265 30093 30156 55310 118653 20853 857 83173 58830 45499 5302 1875 41010 45364 63325 84769 186 2338 77 82862
Monday 13490 15051 10363 12151 23299 5107 4966 9286 20907 3601 144 14461 10134 7854 965 305 6838 7936 10866 14738 34 410 17 14530
Tuesday 13742 15484 10590 12355 23788 5319 5038 9547 21382 3709 140 14691 10537 8018 1003 296 6917 8000 11153 15210 34 393 17 14750
Wednesday 13701 15447 10343 12510 23539 5186 5065 9630 21148 3531 117 14488 10342 8160 989 317 6939 8052 11144 14890 28 408 10 14573
Thursday 13789 15613 10732 12478 24100 5223 5057 9821 21408 3726 122 14789 10482 8192 1059 355 6924 8252 11169 15222 39 389 15 14683
Friday 15115 17168 11727 13688 26470 5780 5532 10680 23568 4090 140 16375 11426 8983 1040 366 7748 8809 12452 16713 43 451 21 16334
Saturday 11187 11780 8724 10436 18366 4303 4581 7763 16275 2923 149 11360 8181 6314 716 295 6239 6111 8966 11609 22 349 5 11317
Sunday 9671 9477 6767 9019 14625 3402 4023 6351 12849 2551 141 8895 6720 5290 648 244 5249 5296 7261 9066 14 332 10 9007
12-3 AM 4517 3721 2770 4437 5524 1395 2090 2782 4966 1085 85 3662 2700 2299 270 88 2337 2384 2930 3620 10 134 4 3523
3-6 AM 2930 2560 1808 2774 3766 939 1193 1608 3572 822 103 2575 1794 1395 207 64 1444 1543 1953 2491 8 159 1 2482
6-9 AM 11784 12666 7982 9735 19431 4054 4070 7243 17600 3349 170 11590 8710 6691 904 260 5065 6923 9258 11808 26 462 13 11856
9-Noon 12229 13507 9574 11638 20814 4934 4885 8714 18517 3100 94 13177 9119 6801 816 288 7185 6887 9537 13602 32 327 13 13198
Noon-3 PM 16959 19265 13772 16269 30025 6853 6673 12482 26574 4153 114 19166 12679 9576 1216 445 10065 9714 13503 19593 43 452 16 18541
3-6 PM 20898 24366 16527 18959 37669 7745 7346 15300 33419 5574 152 23159 16211 12885 1560 525 10033 12734 17649 23628 54 581 26 23000
6-9 PM 13964 15956 10924 12138 24718 5414 5032 9799 22040 3855 118 14438 10917 8735 957 339 6884 8136 11984 15071 34 391 18 14868
9-Midnight 7414 7979 5889 6687 12240 2986 2973 5150 10849 2193 117 7292 5692 4429 490 169 3841 4135 6197 7635 7 226 4 7726
Dark - Lighted 16830 19615 14967 15208 30337 7539 6841 13235 26653 4631 52 18631 13624 10483 1110 397 8839 9559 14803 19611 17 247 9 19053
Dark - Not Lighted 5335 3513 1553 4887 4868 823 1767 1785 4751 1761 337 3232 2353 2388 378 108 2119 2985 2843 2561 30 521 8 3065
Dark - Unknown Lighting 349 165 99 331 275 40 194 178 214 27 0 147 126 142 21 3 207 156 133 149 0 6 0 142
Dawn 1595 1704 1024 1341 2523 579 502 966 2321 491 43 1529 1113 964 132 35 670 1008 1299 1445 7 76 1 1609
Daylight 63241 71516 49295 57751 110912 24190 23569 44871 98690 16427 495 68583 48096 36853 4551 1560 33210 36909 51307 70468 153 1803 72 68140
Dusk 2859 3376 2246 2561 5066 1128 1009 1917 4762 771 22 2828 2416 1874 214 68 1355 1696 2537 3121 7 75 5 3089
Other 48 33 25 63 49 8 28 21 48 9 0 38 22 22 1 0 37 25 21 36 0 0 0 38
Unknown 431 97 36 488 153 13 349 101 96 14 4 70 70 83 13 7 411 115 67 56 0 4 0 56
Number of Lanes Posted Speed Roadway ClassificationTurn Lanes
40-45 50-55 60+
Principal
Arterial1 to 2 3+
AADT (2022)
Minor
Arterial
Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None C3C< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1
Context Classification
C2 C2T
25 or less 30-35
Hit and Run
Type
Lighting
Conditions
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
None
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes
Aggressive Driving
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Day of the Week
Time of Day
Alcohol Related
Attachment B-1
Limited access facilites, parking lots and roadways for which contextual data was not available were not included in this analysis. 1 of 16
Attachment B-1
MetroPlan Orlando Region
All Crashes 2018 -2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Hit and Run
Type
Lighting
Conditions
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Aggressive Driving
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Day of the Week
Time of Day
Alcohol Related
481 2070 250 156 10837 13282 1697 2531 16217 1210 83 1687 2995 12828 9709 3961 293 3427 118
57 6 1 1 384 309 50 243 578 22 2 271 106 225 304 221 10 64 3
112 195 12 19 1166 1562 221 519 2119 165 18 132 260 1910 964 692 47 563 36
148 298 23 23 1758 2093 284 578 2755 178 22 387 482 2086 1633 590 38 669 23
1924 2895 228 103 18550 23612 3711 6301 30876 2565 183 2953 4721 25950 14146 10113 864 8239 258
751 749 77 58 11761 11722 1122 3165 15238 696 75 2902 3114 9993 8273 4643 324 2634 130
983 2979 354 336 28446 25742 2853 5136 31607 1930 194 3914 5000 24817 19150 7226 613 6415 318
118 375 30 32 1662 2288 396 701 3057 296 32 248 387 2750 1504 910 67 869 35
5475 9853 861 358 38585 60257 17926 25073 87815 13882 1559 7775 12789 82692 26600 37103 3840 34158 1532
280 401 32 13 2673 3794 797 1031 4925 644 53 348 672 4602 1772 1628 203 1975 44
77 118 13 8 708 852 160 388 1294 102 4 395 217 788 615 484 32 263 6
1284 3767 481 359 13149 21087 5124 7340 29296 3844 411 2656 4034 26861 9212 11227 1269 11275 559
180 933 96 91 2706 3934 891 1189 5291 655 68 413 706 4895 2197 1749 170 1826 72
197 359 39 35 2087 2714 534 839 3640 396 51 463 600 3024 1715 1216 114 993 49
11673 24280 2419 1522 130298 167820 34698 53356 227428 25793 2653 23618 34883 197373 94364 79331 7656 71384 3085
1242 3630 375 308 19711 24278 6224 6224 31248 3459 355 2997 4681 27384 14855 9317 920 9569 394
10628 21009 2083 1249 112674 146256 47971 47971 199820 22730 2349 21084 30802 173013 81224 71230 6850 62808 2740
278 620 65 30 3240 3914 1476 1476 5530 569 64 636 983 4544 2462 1971 140 1494 95
11592 24019 2393 1527 129145 166620 52719 52719 225538 25620 2640 23445 34500 195853 93617 78576 7630 70883 3039
3544 5330 481 174 33976 44613 14530 14530 60853 7069 592 6718 9378 52418 24123 22424 2183 19156 615
8326 19309 1977 1383 98409 125921 39665 39665 170215 19120 2112 17363 26105 147979 71956 58123 5587 53221 2519
4408 7631 782 512 37729 54069 15141 15141 71364 8187 672 6813 11628 61782 30930 23483 2329 22410 1061
7462 17008 1676 1045 94656 116465 39054 39054 159704 18002 2032 17268 23855 138615 65149 57064 5441 49967 2073
71 80 7 5 638 784 278 278 1084 129 13 153 179 894 455 403 41 315 12
11799 24559 2451 1552 131747 169750 53917 53917 229984 26060 2691 23928 35304 199503 95624 80144 7729 72062 3122
1887 4195 445 164 19044 26012 8274 8274 35183 3986 463 3137 5213 31282 14339 12184 1101 11429 569
9983 20444 2013 1393 113341 144522 45921 45921 195885 22203 2241 20944 30270 169115 81740 68363 6669 60948 2565
1941 2464 213 87 17978 21572 7981 7981 30248 3535 349 2828 4880 26424 12012 11213 954 9520 427
9929 22175 2245 1470 114407 148962 46214 46214 200820 22654 2355 21253 30603 173973 84067 69334 6816 62857 2707
1779 3696 368 231 19492 25504 8208 8208 34643 3846 415 3575 5336 29993 14360 12033 1164 10874 469
1803 3888 391 197 19989 26043 8316 8316 35295 4094 427 3658 5421 30737 14513 12230 1193 11369 502
1863 3833 369 225 19926 25977 8360 8360 35257 3816 418 3424 5394 30673 14713 12141 1130 11021 476
1832 3947 403 229 20264 26270 8420 8420 35702 4047 385 3599 5358 31177 14763 12402 1220 11252 494
2020 4149 403 235 22282 28725 9299 9299 39103 4461 446 4032 5932 34046 16176 13699 1247 12306 568
1373 2918 294 236 16591 20879 6411 6411 28050 3299 342 3113 4329 24249 11667 9919 1019 8720 358
1200 2208 230 204 13841 17136 5181 5181 23018 2626 271 2680 3713 19522 9887 8123 797 6835 267
458 1077 130 205 5815 7473 2025 2025 9880 1032 96 1289 1692 8027 4659 3177 404 2657 108
333 606 85 92 3713 4824 1442 1442 6476 761 61 1023 1077 5198 2894 2248 243 1842 68
1744 2708 285 155 15971 21267 6918 6918 28996 3092 344 3337 4759 24336 12110 10090 979 8816 430
1518 3730 357 207 18004 23472 7082 7082 31400 3555 355 3151 4723 27436 12999 10712 1017 10138 439
2162 5450 515 257 25711 33026 10237 10237 44403 5052 541 4153 6530 39313 18358 15103 1322 14579 623
2748 6039 596 281 31048 40214 13420 13420 55092 6083 616 5201 8149 48441 22810 19312 1764 17127 769
1927 3327 314 176 21215 26456 8751 8751 36131 4261 452 3613 5552 31679 14654 13029 1255 11428 470
980 1702 176 184 10908 13802 4320 4320 18690 2353 239 2314 3001 15967 7595 6876 786 5790 227
2108 4970 553 557 25570 33806 10036 10036 45071 5738 603 3778 6663 40971 17907 16266 1833 14785 608
738 307 25 13 5871 6302 2777 2777 9496 839 66 2794 2104 5503 4942 3328 336 1739 54
29 63 4 5 397 434 109 109 557 52 4 72 110 431 354 122 19 110 8
248 313 41 13 2135 2745 971 971 3829 443 51 529 678 3116 1609 1369 134 1152 56
8329 18364 1781 935 93276 121089 38474 38474 163904 18250 1898 16061 24628 143363 67792 56590 5182 52151 2301
393 589 50 29 4518 5594 1745 1745 7556 845 80 742 1178 6561 3000 2754 259 2365 103
7 5 0 0 70 73 19 19 93 12 1 10 20 76 47 32 3 22 2
18 28 4 5 539 484 62 62 553 10 1 92 101 371 420 85 4 53 2
Context Classification Bike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft
C3R None None
Bike Slots
None One Side Both
Sides NoneOne SideNone Both
Sides
Sidewalks Median Presence
OtherGrassMultiplePavedBoth
SidesOne SideC4C5C6
Attachment B-1
Limited access facilites, parking lots and roadways for which contextual data was not available were not included in this analysis. 2 of 16
Attachment B-2
MetroPlan Orlando Region
All KSI Crashes 2018 -2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 272 208 114 208 344 54 104 170 267 48 5 159 134 154 24 16 119 171 150 153 0 13 1 180 26 41 2 5
Animal 4 3 0 4 3 0 2 0 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 0 2 3 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0
Bicycle 115 133 77 102 195 30 43 71 178 31 2 112 74 75 12 3 51 72 85 118 0 1 1 121 18 20 0 0
Head On 147 82 33 152 103 8 14 43 121 64 20 100 59 69 11 2 22 104 76 60 3 29 0 60 24 17 0 0
Left Turn 451 696 349 281 1100 120 85 298 940 169 4 428 522 372 34 15 130 348 530 484 4 38 1 508 110 80 8 0
Off Road 316 355 126 437 354 37 128 156 408 91 14 213 225 179 21 12 178 189 253 199 4 19 0 180 56 22 5 1
Other 284 271 198 309 405 67 118 149 375 90 21 273 180 150 26 6 146 181 202 250 2 22 1 227 43 68 7 5
Pedestrian 244 347 345 267 580 100 97 174 555 109 1 428 234 152 22 1 110 149 260 427 0 5 0 419 37 107 9 7
Rear End 234 540 542 282 832 210 19 137 923 221 16 636 429 193 14 11 41 159 412 705 2 31 2 612 98 77 4 0
Right Turn 19 40 31 16 63 12 5 17 53 14 1 31 30 21 2 1 6 17 30 38 1 1 0 37 3 4 0 0
Rollover 57 42 18 74 40 5 12 22 44 21 18 45 18 28 5 1 22 49 23 25 1 17 0 23 11 3 1 0
Sideswipe 55 93 85 67 143 24 10 37 132 46 8 114 68 30 7 2 13 42 68 109 0 10 0 109 11 12 2 1
Unknown 19 46 24 23 63 3 4 17 51 14 3 36 28 19 2 0 4 21 29 35 0 5 0 33 8 6 1 0
Y 134 171 95 173 204 26 39 79 211 54 17 158 92 89 16 4 44 116 105 136 3 22 0 130 29 26 3 1
N 2083 2685 1847 2049 4021 644 602 1212 3837 867 97 2419 1910 1354 165 66 800 1389 2015 2467 14 171 6 2380 416 431 36 18
Y 194 240 213 182 409 62 67 119 381 76 4 260 174 124 12 8 75 113 187 273 0 6 0 248 26 58 3 3
N 2023 2616 1729 2040 3816 608 574 1172 3667 845 110 2317 1828 1319 169 62 769 1392 1933 2330 17 187 6 2262 419 399 36 16
Y 148 147 69 136 213 19 46 102 177 34 5 125 75 101 12 3 52 104 106 105 2 6 0 96 25 34 4 3
N 2069 2709 1873 2086 4012 651 595 1189 3871 887 109 2452 1927 1342 169 67 792 1401 2014 2498 15 187 6 2414 420 423 35 16
Y 614 832 526 582 1208 210 146 317 1183 287 39 698 620 402 41 23 216 408 636 726 6 73 3 677 150 96 7 1
N 1603 2024 1416 1640 3017 460 495 974 2865 634 75 1879 1382 1041 140 47 628 1097 1484 1877 11 120 3 1833 295 361 32 18
Y 945 1152 748 646 1914 291 254 617 1631 326 17 936 836 655 81 30 313 673 862 980 5 65 3 1020 202 179 19 14
N 1272 1704 1194 1576 2311 379 387 674 2417 595 97 1641 1166 788 100 40 531 832 1258 1623 12 128 3 1490 243 278 20 5
Y 77 98 61 88 129 21 19 33 139 35 10 97 62 45 6 4 24 58 63 91 2 12 0 76 21 16 1 0
N 2140 2758 1881 2134 4096 649 622 1258 3909 886 104 2480 1940 1398 175 66 820 1447 2057 2512 15 181 6 2434 424 441 38 19
Y 340 441 263 302 650 114 84 194 597 151 18 396 303 211 28 7 121 246 308 386 4 42 1 383 73 65 5 3
N 1877 2415 1679 1920 3575 556 557 1097 3451 770 96 2181 1699 1232 153 63 723 1259 1812 2217 13 151 5 2127 372 392 34 16
Y 258 345 212 235 515 74 76 142 482 111 4 254 250 172 27 10 111 177 232 298 1 14 3 284 58 28 3 2
N 1959 2511 1730 1987 3710 596 565 1149 3566 810 110 2323 1752 1271 154 60 733 1328 1888 2305 16 179 3 2226 387 429 36 17
Monday 350 362 244 319 560 90 91 174 553 119 19 334 267 215 24 9 120 228 277 335 3 27 1 341 68 50 5 3
Tuesday 290 406 286 306 608 84 89 172 570 132 19 355 290 196 27 7 123 194 312 365 3 24 2 363 53 53 2 2
Wednesday 305 400 288 304 622 83 90 198 571 120 14 377 260 208 28 12 124 218 276 384 1 31 1 348 64 73 7 1
Thursday 311 422 275 311 616 97 90 179 602 124 13 367 300 209 19 13 116 209 300 390 2 27 0 365 56 78 7 2
Friday 353 427 306 348 645 112 108 198 624 141 15 402 318 211 30 13 131 245 333 390 5 29 1 379 70 77 5 2
Saturday 309 468 305 322 657 115 92 198 631 142 19 411 308 222 26 10 117 213 339 416 0 29 0 391 73 77 7 5
Sunday 299 371 238 312 517 89 81 172 497 143 15 331 259 182 27 6 113 198 283 323 3 26 1 323 61 49 6 4
12-3 AM 176 247 178 212 322 70 49 111 331 94 16 254 171 113 11 2 53 129 182 237 1 18 0 232 43 58 4 5
3-6 AM 138 159 132 170 215 48 34 83 231 67 14 178 118 66 14 5 52 87 127 165 2 21 0 148 29 26 8 1
6-9 AM 287 365 231 247 565 80 71 161 511 117 23 282 270 199 27 7 107 193 264 323 4 37 1 303 52 52 5 0
9-Noon 247 333 227 253 476 90 88 146 456 104 13 295 234 153 22 6 109 168 224 314 4 29 1 284 48 47 5 3
Noon-3 PM 300 374 231 283 574 74 94 187 519 100 5 307 268 191 25 12 128 199 284 311 1 18 0 312 52 62 2 3
3-6 PM 375 440 284 373 670 75 119 198 651 116 15 385 295 250 32 12 144 257 349 362 2 23 1 373 77 75 6 2
6-9 PM 371 508 344 368 748 124 103 212 735 162 11 454 344 254 31 15 142 243 390 454 3 24 1 430 66 70 3 3
9-Midnight 323 430 315 316 655 109 83 193 614 161 17 422 302 217 19 11 109 229 300 437 0 23 2 428 78 67 6 2
Dark - Lighted 527 884 748 587 1352 244 164 431 1295 260 9 890 618 406 41 23 205 366 633 967 1 19 2 860 122 189 21 11
Dark - Not Lighted 345 304 119 345 377 51 52 113 371 183 49 309 176 170 27 5 86 255 235 192 4 69 1 247 73 19 0 0
Dark - Unknown Lighting 2 2 2 3 3 0 2 0 4 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0
Dawn 51 56 29 42 82 13 12 25 76 18 5 41 36 39 5 1 15 37 41 43 1 9 0 46 7 5 2 0
Daylight 1213 1519 982 1166 2278 335 388 686 2151 440 49 1259 1101 776 103 39 501 802 1132 1320 10 91 3 1273 235 230 15 8
Dusk 72 89 58 74 126 26 22 32 145 19 1 69 69 47 5 2 34 39 77 73 1 4 0 77 8 12 1 0
Other 2 1 4 2 4 1 0 2 4 1 0 4 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0
Unknown 5 1 0 3 3 0 1 2 2 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 2 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes
None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)Context Classification Context Classification
50-55 60+
C4 C5 C6Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Time of Day
Lighting Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R3+
25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachmennd B-2
Limited access facilites, parking lots and roadways for which contextual data was not available were not included in this analysis. 1 of 16 3 of 16
Attachment B-2
MetroPlan Orlando Region
All KSI Crashes 2018 -2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Time of Day
Lighting Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
338 406 82 106 529 62 3 85 96 413 288 169 10 123 4
4 3 1 3 7 0 0 5 1 1 4 3 0 0 0
166 210 37 78 293 26 6 33 30 262 134 100 3 84 4
130 159 13 90 257 4 1 84 50 128 155 58 5 44 0
752 983 216 297 1323 164 9 162 215 1119 530 522 31 408 5
541 532 54 211 759 35 3 153 123 521 313 321 21 138 4
406 487 85 181 691 59 3 117 108 528 308 249 21 169 6
363 601 121 214 825 98 13 65 99 772 345 288 28 268 7
498 718 258 340 1097 202 17 144 154 1018 270 522 46 471 7
45 51 9 30 82 8 0 9 10 71 15 37 1 37 0
63 69 5 43 113 3 1 46 15 56 49 46 3 18 1
89 125 42 66 196 34 3 26 23 184 68 98 6 58 3
36 50 13 26 79 10 0 14 8 67 24 34 4 27 0
189 239 48 113 364 34 2 88 50 262 161 143 15 79 2
3242 4155 888 1572 5887 671 57 855 882 4878 2342 2304 164 1766 39
309 439 132 132 592 54 1 56 72 519 270 173 13 185 6
3122 3955 1553 1553 5659 651 58 887 860 4621 2233 2274 166 1660 35
198 219 91 91 324 39 1 54 68 242 159 126 5 72 2
3233 4175 1594 1594 5927 666 58 889 864 4898 2344 2321 174 1773 39
987 1235 455 455 1744 211 17 306 261 1405 668 726 64 504 10
2444 3159 1230 1230 4507 494 42 637 671 3735 1835 1721 115 1341 31
1344 1796 606 606 2489 335 21 318 375 2152 1032 953 60 785 15
2087 2598 1079 1079 3762 370 38 625 557 2988 1471 1494 119 1060 26
110 144 63 63 213 21 2 48 36 152 92 90 5 49 0
3321 4250 1622 1622 6038 684 57 895 896 4988 2411 2357 174 1796 41
490 632 263 263 918 114 12 161 137 746 376 351 25 284 8
2941 3762 1422 1422 5333 591 47 782 795 4394 2127 2096 154 1561 33
431 497 207 207 718 92 5 79 129 607 262 292 19 234 8
3000 3897 1478 1478 5533 613 54 864 803 4533 2241 2155 160 1611 33
471 593 237 237 861 86 9 130 132 694 358 317 30 243 8
496 601 263 263 891 86 5 135 125 722 351 340 16 270 5
483 642 207 207 873 109 11 132 140 721 356 352 20 258 7
487 628 254 254 900 98 10 128 130 750 360 335 25 284 4
537 674 254 254 948 129 9 140 141 805 392 373 26 289 6
512 675 260 260 961 112 9 139 145 798 365 388 37 289 3
445 581 210 210 817 85 6 139 119 650 321 342 25 212 8
243 353 159 159 530 66 5 94 80 427 192 216 19 168 6
198 263 105 105 380 46 3 79 61 289 145 174 13 94 3
438 548 214 214 778 97 8 125 103 655 305 309 23 241 5
398 526 178 178 722 80 5 110 102 595 262 283 18 241 3
481 599 195 195 817 80 8 111 130 664 342 297 18 247 1
559 709 260 260 995 95 9 126 140 833 427 380 28 258 6
640 758 303 303 1096 118 9 144 162 917 447 408 34 326 8
474 638 271 271 933 123 12 154 154 760 383 380 26 270 9
958 1360 476 476 1880 256 23 166 249 1744 685 771 67 612 24
360 382 284 284 698 64 6 249 153 366 330 277 21 138 2
3 5 1 1 6 0 0 0 0 6 1 2 0 1 2
67 84 32 32 118 18 0 27 16 93 52 43 1 40 0
1914 2420 833 833 3342 344 28 469 480 2765 1350 1287 80 985 12
123 136 55 55 196 21 2 27 32 160 78 64 8 68 1
2 4 1 1 5 2 0 1 2 4 1 3 2 1 0
4 3 3 3 6 0 0 4 0 2 6 0 0 0 0
Median Presence Bike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNone
Attachmennd B-2
Limited access facilites, parking lots and roadways for which contextual data was not available were not included in this analysis. 1 of 16 4 of 16
Attachment B-3
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All Crashes that Result in a KSI 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 3.0%3.4%4.6%2.9%3.7%3.5%2.7%2.7%4.1%6.3%20.0%4.0%3.6%3.1%3.5%4.2%2.8%3.1%3.5%4.2%0.0%10.7%10.0%4.4%5.4%
Animal 1.2%1.3%0.0%1.1%1.4%0.0%3.3%0.0%0.4%2.3%1.2%1.0%0.8%0.6%2.9%0.0%2.4%1.0%1.2%0.0%-2.4%-1.4%0.0%
Bicycle 13.7%14.6%14.0%14.1%14.0%15.0%11.4%12.9%14.6%20.4%40.0%14.9%12.7%15.0%12.2%17.6%14.0%13.5%14.0%14.8%-12.5%50.0%15.1%16.1%
Head On 9.9%8.1%7.1%11.2%7.0%3.3%2.6%5.3%9.3%24.0%52.6%11.6%9.2%8.9%11.5%11.1%3.2%12.2%9.0%8.5%42.9%43.9%0.0%7.9%16.2%
Left Turn 3.5%4.7%5.9%3.6%4.7%4.1%2.4%3.0%5.2%8.2%14.8%5.2%5.2%4.1%2.7%4.4%2.7%4.0%4.9%5.2%26.7%11.0%11.1%5.1%5.7%
Off Road 3.6%7.0%5.9%4.5%5.4%4.9%2.7%4.4%6.5%7.5%7.3%5.9%7.1%5.1%3.0%5.9%3.0%4.7%6.7%6.1%11.8%6.5%0.0%5.4%7.5%
Other 1.5%2.7%3.6%1.3%2.8%2.5%0.9%1.9%3.3%5.2%15.6%3.3%2.9%2.5%2.8%1.6%0.8%2.7%2.9%3.2%16.7%7.5%16.7%2.9%4.4%
Pedestrian 19.7%28.3%37.5%23.2%29.4%30.5%15.9%21.5%32.4%43.3%50.0%34.9%29.3%22.6%24.7%4.2%17.1%21.8%30.3%34.1%-50.0%0.0%34.2%31.4%
Rear End 0.9%1.3%1.5%1.4%1.3%1.2%0.4%0.6%1.4%1.7%9.1%1.3%1.5%1.0%0.8%2.1%0.7%0.9%1.3%1.4%1.9%3.1%4.3%1.3%1.8%
Right Turn 1.1%1.7%2.0%1.4%1.7%1.2%0.9%1.3%1.6%3.2%9.1%1.7%1.7%1.8%1.3%2.2%0.8%1.5%1.8%1.7%100.0%2.9%-1.6%1.1%
Rollover 9.2%8.1%6.8%11.3%6.1%4.8%7.4%7.4%7.7%9.0%13.4%7.9%6.4%9.2%11.6%5.9%11.1%10.7%6.2%6.6%33.3%12.5%-6.5%14.3%
Sideswipe 0.7%0.7%0.7%0.9%0.7%0.4%0.4%0.5%0.7%1.4%7.3%0.7%0.7%0.5%1.3%1.1%0.4%0.8%0.7%0.7%0.0%3.5%0.0%0.7%0.9%
Unknown 1.1%1.9%1.3%1.4%1.7%0.3%0.6%0.9%1.7%2.9%16.7%1.5%1.8%1.6%2.0%0.0%0.5%1.7%1.7%1.4%0.0%11.1%-1.5%4.4%
Y 8.1%12.1%9.4%10.5%9.8%5.2%4.9%8.4%10.8%14.6%60.7%10.7%10.2%10.8%11.0%10.5%5.2%12.2%10.5%9.7%50.0%33.8%0.0%9.1%14.7%
N 2.3%2.7%2.7%2.5%2.6%1.9%1.8%2.0%2.8%3.6%10.5%2.6%2.9%2.6%2.6%3.1%1.7%2.7%2.8%2.6%6.7%6.4%6.4%2.5%3.6%
Y 1.4%2.0%2.3%1.3%2.1%1.4%1.0%1.5%2.2%2.6%5.3%2.1%2.0%1.9%1.6%2.7%0.8%1.7%2.1%2.1%0.0%2.7%0.0%2.0%2.1%
N 2.6%3.0%2.9%3.0%2.8%2.0%2.1%2.1%3.0%4.0%12.5%2.8%3.1%2.9%3.0%3.3%2.0%3.0%3.0%2.8%8.6%7.5%6.7%2.7%3.9%
Y 6.3%6.1%4.9%6.1%6.1%3.0%4.8%6.0%6.0%6.6%21.7%5.6%5.2%7.6%6.5%5.2%4.7%7.6%6.0%5.1%28.6%6.7%-4.8%9.0%
N 2.3%2.8%2.8%2.6%2.7%1.9%1.8%1.9%2.9%3.8%11.7%2.6%2.9%2.6%2.7%3.2%1.7%2.7%2.8%2.6%7.2%7.1%6.3%2.6%3.6%
Y 2.7%3.1%2.8%2.9%2.9%2.3%1.9%2.1%3.1%4.1%14.1%2.8%3.3%2.9%2.5%3.6%2.1%3.2%3.1%2.7%8.7%8.3%9.7%2.6%4.2%
N 2.4%2.8%2.8%2.6%2.7%1.8%1.9%2.0%2.9%3.7%11.1%2.7%2.8%2.7%2.9%3.1%1.7%2.8%2.8%2.6%7.6%6.5%4.7%2.6%3.5%
Y 3.1%3.6%4.3%3.4%3.8%2.6%2.6%2.7%3.9%5.5%18.3%3.7%4.0%3.3%2.8%3.3%2.8%3.4%3.6%3.9%10.6%8.1%11.5%3.6%4.6%
N 2.1%2.5%2.3%2.5%2.2%1.6%1.6%1.7%2.5%3.3%11.3%2.3%2.5%2.4%2.8%3.2%1.5%2.6%2.6%2.2%7.2%6.6%4.3%2.2%3.3%
Y 16.6%22.9%18.3%19.7%18.9%14.7%9.7%13.4%21.8%26.1%83.3%21.1%22.4%18.4%13.6%28.6%10.4%20.5%21.8%19.9%100.0%60.0%-17.0%29.6%
N 2.4%2.8%2.7%2.6%2.7%1.9%1.8%2.0%2.9%3.7%11.1%2.6%2.9%2.7%2.7%3.0%1.8%2.8%2.8%2.6%7.1%6.7%6.3%2.6%3.6%
Y 2.6%2.8%2.5%2.6%2.7%2.1%1.8%2.0%2.8%4.5%15.9%2.6%3.0%2.7%2.8%2.0%1.8%3.0%2.8%2.5%11.1%9.7%8.3%2.5%3.9%
N 2.4%2.9%2.9%2.7%2.8%1.9%1.9%2.1%3.0%3.7%11.4%2.7%3.0%2.7%2.8%3.5%1.8%2.8%2.9%2.7%7.3%6.6%6.0%2.7%3.7%
Y 2.2%2.6%2.4%2.3%2.5%1.8%1.9%1.8%2.6%3.4%4.2%2.1%2.8%2.4%2.4%3.3%1.9%2.5%2.4%2.4%3.6%3.6%16.7%2.3%3.0%
N 2.5%2.9%2.9%2.7%2.8%2.0%1.9%2.1%3.0%3.9%12.8%2.8%3.0%2.8%2.9%3.2%1.8%2.9%3.0%2.7%8.6%7.7%3.9%2.7%3.9%
Monday 2.6%2.4%2.4%2.6%2.4%1.8%1.8%1.9%2.6%3.3%13.2%2.3%2.6%2.7%2.5%3.0%1.8%2.9%2.5%2.3%8.8%6.6%5.9%2.3%3.8%
Tuesday 2.1%2.6%2.7%2.5%2.6%1.6%1.8%1.8%2.7%3.6%13.6%2.4%2.8%2.4%2.7%2.4%1.8%2.4%2.8%2.4%8.8%6.1%11.8%2.5%2.9%
Wednesday 2.2%2.6%2.8%2.4%2.6%1.6%1.8%2.1%2.7%3.4%12.0%2.6%2.5%2.5%2.8%3.8%1.8%2.7%2.5%2.6%3.6%7.6%10.0%2.4%3.4%
Thursday 2.3%2.7%2.6%2.5%2.6%1.9%1.8%1.8%2.8%3.3%10.7%2.5%2.9%2.6%1.8%3.7%1.7%2.5%2.7%2.6%5.1%6.9%0.0%2.5%3.1%
Friday 2.3%2.5%2.6%2.5%2.4%1.9%2.0%1.9%2.6%3.4%10.7%2.5%2.8%2.3%2.9%3.6%1.7%2.8%2.7%2.3%11.6%6.4%4.8%2.3%3.5%
Saturday 2.8%4.0%3.5%3.1%3.6%2.7%2.0%2.6%3.9%4.9%12.8%3.6%3.8%3.5%3.6%3.4%1.9%3.5%3.8%3.6%0.0%8.3%0.0%3.5%5.3%
Sunday 3.1%3.9%3.5%3.5%3.5%2.6%2.0%2.7%3.9%5.6%10.6%3.7%3.9%3.4%4.2%2.5%2.2%3.7%3.9%3.6%21.4%7.8%10.0%3.6%5.1%
12-3 AM 3.9%6.6%6.4%4.8%5.8%5.0%2.3%4.0%6.7%8.7%18.8%6.9%6.3%4.9%4.1%2.3%2.3%5.4%6.2%6.5%10.0%13.4%0.0%6.6%9.4%
3-6 AM 4.7%6.2%7.3%6.1%5.7%5.1%2.8%5.2%6.5%8.2%13.6%6.9%6.6%4.7%6.8%7.8%3.6%5.6%6.5%6.6%25.0%13.2%0.0%6.0%8.7%
6-9 AM 2.4%2.9%2.9%2.5%2.9%2.0%1.7%2.2%2.9%3.5%13.5%2.4%3.1%3.0%3.0%2.7%2.1%2.8%2.9%2.7%15.4%8.0%7.7%2.6%3.0%
9-Noon 2.0%2.5%2.4%2.2%2.3%1.8%1.8%1.7%2.5%3.4%13.8%2.2%2.6%2.2%2.7%2.1%1.5%2.4%2.3%2.3%12.5%8.9%7.7%2.2%3.2%
Noon-3 PM 1.8%1.9%1.7%1.7%1.9%1.1%1.4%1.5%2.0%2.4%4.4%1.6%2.1%2.0%2.1%2.7%1.3%2.0%2.1%1.6%2.3%4.0%0.0%1.7%2.4%
3-6 PM 1.8%1.8%1.7%2.0%1.8%1.0%1.6%1.3%1.9%2.1%9.9%1.7%1.8%1.9%2.1%2.3%1.4%2.0%2.0%1.5%3.7%4.0%3.8%1.6%2.8%
6-9 PM 2.7%3.2%3.1%3.0%3.0%2.3%2.0%2.2%3.3%4.2%9.3%3.1%3.2%2.9%3.2%4.4%2.1%3.0%3.3%3.0%8.8%6.1%5.6%2.9%3.4%
9-Midnight 4.4%5.4%5.3%4.7%5.4%3.7%2.8%3.7%5.7%7.3%14.5%5.8%5.3%4.9%3.9%6.5%2.8%5.5%4.8%5.7%0.0%10.2%50.0%5.5%8.0%
Dark - Lighted 3.1%4.5%5.0%3.9%4.5%3.2%2.4%3.3%4.9%5.6%17.3%4.8%4.5%3.9%3.7%5.8%2.3%3.8%4.3%4.9%5.9%7.7%22.2%4.5%5.8%
Dark - Not Lighted 6.5%8.7%7.7%7.1%7.7%6.2%2.9%6.3%7.8%10.4%14.5%9.6%7.5%7.1%7.1%4.6%4.1%8.5%8.3%7.5%13.3%13.2%12.5%8.1%9.9%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.6%1.2%2.0%0.9%1.1%0.0%1.0%0.0%1.9%0.0%-2.0%0.8%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.6%1.5%1.3%-0.0%-0.7%0.0%
Dawn 3.2%3.3%2.8%3.1%3.3%2.2%2.4%2.6%3.3%3.7%11.6%2.7%3.2%4.0%3.8%2.9%2.2%3.7%3.2%3.0%14.3%11.8%0.0%2.9%2.8%
Daylight 1.9%2.1%2.0%2.0%2.1%1.4%1.6%1.5%2.2%2.7%9.9%1.8%2.3%2.1%2.3%2.5%1.5%2.2%2.2%1.9%6.5%5.0%4.2%1.9%2.8%
Dusk 2.5%2.6%2.6%2.9%2.5%2.3%2.2%1.7%3.0%2.5%4.5%2.4%2.9%2.5%2.3%2.9%2.5%2.3%3.0%2.3%14.3%5.3%0.0%2.5%2.0%
Other 4.2%3.0%16.0%3.2%8.2%12.5%0.0%9.5%8.3%11.1%-10.5%4.5%9.1%0.0%-0.0%8.0%0.0%13.9%--13.2%0.0%
Unknown 1.2%1.0%0.0%0.6%2.0%0.0%0.3%2.0%2.1%0.0%25.0%2.9%0.0%2.4%0.0%0.0%0.5%2.6%0.0%1.8%-25.0%-1.8%0.0%
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R
AADT (2022)
Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification
3+25 or less 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None
Context Classification
Attachment B-3 5 of 16
Attachment B-3
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All Crashes that Result in a KSI 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
2.0%0.8%3.2%3.1%3.1%4.8%4.2%3.3%5.1%3.6%5.0%3.2%3.2%3.0%4.3%3.4%3.6%3.4%
0.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.0%2.0%1.2%1.2%0.0%0.0%1.8%0.9%0.4%1.3%1.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%
10.3%0.0%0.0%14.2%13.4%16.7%15.0%13.8%15.8%33.3%25.0%11.5%13.7%13.9%14.5%6.4%14.9%11.1%
5.7%0.0%0.0%7.4%7.6%4.6%15.6%9.3%2.2%4.5%21.7%10.4%6.1%9.5%9.8%13.2%6.6%0.0%
2.8%3.5%0.0%4.1%4.2%5.8%4.7%4.3%6.4%4.9%5.5%4.6%4.3%3.7%5.2%3.6%5.0%1.9%
2.9%6.5%1.7%4.6%4.5%4.8%6.7%5.0%5.0%4.0%5.3%3.9%5.2%3.8%6.9%6.5%5.2%3.1%
2.3%2.0%1.5%1.4%1.9%3.0%3.5%2.2%3.1%1.5%3.0%2.2%2.1%1.6%3.4%3.4%2.6%1.9%
28.5%30.0%21.9%21.8%26.3%30.6%30.5%27.0%33.1%40.6%26.2%25.6%28.1%22.9%31.6%41.8%30.8%20.0%
0.8%0.5%0.0%1.3%1.2%1.4%1.4%1.2%1.5%1.1%1.9%1.2%1.2%1.0%1.4%1.2%1.4%0.5%
1.0%0.0%0.0%1.7%1.3%1.1%2.9%1.7%1.2%0.0%2.6%1.5%1.5%0.8%2.3%0.5%1.9%0.0%
2.5%7.7%0.0%8.9%8.1%3.1%11.1%8.7%2.9%25.0%11.6%6.9%7.1%8.0%9.5%9.4%6.8%16.7%
0.3%0.4%0.3%0.7%0.6%0.8%0.9%0.7%0.9%0.7%1.0%0.6%0.7%0.7%0.9%0.5%0.5%0.5%
0.6%1.0%0.0%1.3%1.3%1.5%2.2%1.5%1.5%0.0%3.4%1.1%1.4%1.1%1.9%2.4%1.5%0.0%
7.2%7.7%2.9%9.1%8.8%9.0%13.5%10.0%8.6%3.9%19.0%8.3%8.7%9.4%11.8%13.2%8.0%4.1%
1.8%1.5%1.2%2.5%2.5%2.6%2.9%2.6%2.6%2.1%3.6%2.5%2.5%2.5%2.9%2.1%2.5%1.3%
1.6%0.8%1.0%1.6%1.8%2.1%2.1%1.9%1.6%0.3%1.9%1.5%1.9%1.8%1.9%1.4%1.9%1.5%
1.9%1.7%1.3%2.8%2.7%3.2%3.2%2.8%2.9%2.5%4.2%2.8%2.7%2.7%3.2%2.4%2.6%1.3%
5.5%6.2%10.0%6.1%5.6%6.2%6.2%5.9%6.9%1.6%8.5%6.9%5.3%6.5%6.4%3.6%4.8%2.1%
1.8%1.5%1.0%2.5%2.5%3.0%3.0%2.6%2.6%2.2%3.8%2.5%2.5%2.5%3.0%2.3%2.5%1.3%
1.8%1.5%0.6%2.9%2.8%3.1%3.1%2.9%3.0%2.9%4.6%2.8%2.7%2.8%3.2%2.9%2.6%1.6%
1.9%1.6%1.3%2.5%2.5%3.1%3.1%2.6%2.6%2.0%3.7%2.6%2.5%2.6%3.0%2.1%2.5%1.2%
2.3%2.4%2.7%3.6%3.3%4.0%4.0%3.5%4.1%3.1%4.7%3.2%3.5%3.3%4.1%2.6%3.5%1.4%
1.6%1.2%0.5%2.2%2.2%2.8%2.8%2.4%2.1%1.9%3.6%2.3%2.2%2.3%2.6%2.2%2.1%1.3%
20.0%14.3%0.0%17.2%18.4%22.7%22.7%19.6%16.3%15.4%31.4%20.1%17.0%20.2%22.3%12.2%15.6%0.0%
1.8%1.6%1.2%2.5%2.5%3.0%3.0%2.6%2.6%2.1%3.7%2.5%2.5%2.5%2.9%2.3%2.5%1.3%
1.5%1.1%1.8%2.6%2.4%3.2%3.2%2.6%2.9%2.6%5.1%2.6%2.4%2.6%2.9%2.3%2.5%1.4%
1.9%1.7%1.1%2.6%2.6%3.1%3.1%2.7%2.7%2.1%3.7%2.6%2.6%2.6%3.1%2.3%2.6%1.3%
1.1%1.4%2.3%2.4%2.3%2.6%2.6%2.4%2.6%1.4%2.8%2.6%2.3%2.2%2.6%2.0%2.5%1.9%
1.9%1.6%1.2%2.6%2.6%3.2%3.2%2.8%2.7%2.3%4.1%2.6%2.6%2.7%3.1%2.3%2.6%1.2%
1.4%1.4%1.3%2.4%2.3%2.9%2.9%2.5%2.2%2.2%3.6%2.5%2.3%2.5%2.6%2.6%2.2%1.7%
1.4%0.5%1.0%2.5%2.3%3.2%3.2%2.5%2.1%1.2%3.7%2.3%2.3%2.4%2.8%1.3%2.4%1.0%
1.9%1.9%0.4%2.4%2.5%2.5%2.5%2.5%2.9%2.6%3.9%2.6%2.4%2.4%2.9%1.8%2.3%1.5%
2.0%1.7%0.9%2.4%2.4%3.0%3.0%2.5%2.4%2.6%3.6%2.4%2.4%2.4%2.7%2.0%2.5%0.8%
1.9%1.2%0.9%2.4%2.3%2.7%2.7%2.4%2.9%2.0%3.5%2.4%2.4%2.4%2.7%2.1%2.3%1.1%
2.6%2.4%2.1%3.1%3.2%4.1%4.1%3.4%3.4%2.6%4.5%3.3%3.3%3.1%3.9%3.6%3.3%0.8%
2.2%2.6%2.0%3.2%3.4%4.1%4.1%3.5%3.2%2.2%5.2%3.2%3.3%3.2%4.2%3.1%3.1%3.0%
5.4%3.1%2.4%4.2%4.7%7.9%7.9%5.4%6.4%5.2%7.3%4.7%5.3%4.1%6.8%4.7%6.3%5.6%
4.3%9.4%1.1%5.3%5.5%7.3%7.3%5.9%6.0%4.9%7.7%5.7%5.6%5.0%7.7%5.3%5.1%4.4%
1.9%1.8%0.0%2.7%2.6%3.1%3.1%2.7%3.1%2.3%3.7%2.2%2.7%2.5%3.1%2.3%2.7%1.2%
1.3%1.4%1.4%2.2%2.2%2.5%2.5%2.3%2.3%1.4%3.5%2.2%2.2%2.0%2.6%1.8%2.4%0.7%
1.1%0.4%1.2%1.9%1.8%1.9%1.9%1.8%1.6%1.5%2.7%2.0%1.7%1.9%2.0%1.4%1.7%0.2%
1.2%1.0%0.7%1.8%1.8%1.9%1.9%1.8%1.6%1.5%2.4%1.7%1.7%1.9%2.0%1.6%1.5%0.8%
2.1%1.0%1.7%3.0%2.9%3.5%3.5%3.0%2.8%2.0%4.0%2.9%2.9%3.1%3.1%2.7%2.9%1.7%
3.9%3.4%1.1%4.3%4.6%6.3%6.3%5.0%5.2%5.0%6.7%5.1%4.8%5.0%5.5%3.3%4.7%4.0%
3.8%3.8%2.0%3.7%4.0%4.7%4.7%4.2%4.5%3.8%4.4%3.7%4.3%3.8%4.7%3.7%4.1%3.9%
6.2%0.0%0.0%6.1%6.1%10.2%10.2%7.4%7.6%9.1%8.9%7.3%6.7%6.7%8.3%6.3%7.9%3.7%
3.2%0.0%0.0%0.8%1.2%0.9%0.9%1.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.4%0.3%1.6%0.0%0.9%25.0%
1.6%4.9%0.0%3.1%3.1%3.3%3.3%3.1%4.1%0.0%5.1%2.4%3.0%3.2%3.1%0.7%3.5%0.0%
1.3%0.8%0.9%2.1%2.0%2.2%2.2%2.0%1.9%1.5%2.9%1.9%1.9%2.0%2.3%1.5%1.9%0.5%
2.0%2.0%0.0%2.7%2.4%3.2%3.2%2.6%2.5%2.5%3.6%2.7%2.4%2.6%2.3%3.1%2.9%1.0%
0.0%--2.9%5.5%5.3%5.3%5.4%16.7%0.0%10.0%10.0%5.3%2.1%9.4%66.7%4.5%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.7%0.6%4.8%4.8%1.1%0.0%0.0%4.3%0.0%0.5%1.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Paved OtherGrassMultipleNoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
SidesC4C5C6
Bike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks Median Presence
Attachment B-3 6 of 16
Attachment B-4
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All KSI Crashes 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 3.9%3.0%1.6%2.9%4.8%0.8%1.5%2.4%3.8%0.7%0.1%2.2%1.9%2.2%0.3%0.2%1.7%2.7%2.4%2.5%0.0%0.2%0.0%2.5%0.4%
Animal 0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Bicycle 1.6%1.9%1.1%1.4%2.7%0.4%0.6%1.0%2.5%0.4%0.0%1.6%1.0%1.1%0.2%0.0%0.7%1.2%1.4%1.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.7%0.3%
Head On 2.1%1.2%0.5%2.1%1.4%0.1%0.2%0.6%1.7%0.9%0.3%1.4%0.8%1.0%0.2%0.0%0.3%1.7%1.2%1.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.8%0.3%
Left Turn 6.4%9.9%5.0%3.9%15.5%1.7%1.2%4.2%13.4%2.4%0.1%6.0%7.3%5.2%0.5%0.2%1.8%5.6%8.5%7.8%0.1%0.5%0.0%7.1%1.5%
Off Road 4.5%5.1%1.8%6.1%5.0%0.5%1.8%2.2%5.8%1.3%0.2%3.0%3.2%2.5%0.3%0.2%2.5%3.0%4.1%3.2%0.1%0.3%0.0%2.5%0.8%
Other 4.0%3.9%2.8%4.3%5.7%0.9%1.7%2.1%5.3%1.3%0.3%3.8%2.5%2.1%0.4%0.1%2.1%2.9%3.2%4.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%3.2%0.6%
Pedestrian 3.5%4.9%4.9%3.8%8.1%1.4%1.4%2.5%7.9%1.6%0.0%6.0%3.3%2.1%0.3%0.0%1.5%2.4%4.2%6.9%0.0%0.1%0.0%5.9%0.5%
Rear End 3.3%7.7%7.7%4.0%11.7%3.0%0.3%2.0%13.2%3.2%0.2%8.9%6.0%2.7%0.2%0.2%0.6%2.6%6.6%11.3%0.0%0.4%0.0%8.6%1.4%
Right Turn 0.3%0.6%0.4%0.2%0.9%0.2%0.1%0.2%0.8%0.2%0.0%0.4%0.4%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.3%0.5%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.0%
Rollover 0.8%0.6%0.3%1.0%0.6%0.1%0.2%0.3%0.6%0.3%0.3%0.6%0.3%0.4%0.1%0.0%0.3%0.8%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.3%0.2%
Sideswipe 0.8%1.3%1.2%0.9%2.0%0.3%0.1%0.5%1.9%0.7%0.1%1.6%1.0%0.4%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.7%1.1%1.8%0.0%0.1%0.0%1.5%0.2%
Unknown 0.3%0.7%0.3%0.3%0.9%0.0%0.1%0.2%0.7%0.2%0.0%0.5%0.4%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.3%0.5%0.6%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.5%0.1%
Y 1.9%2.4%1.4%2.4%2.9%0.4%0.6%1.1%3.0%0.8%0.2%2.2%1.3%1.3%0.2%0.1%0.6%1.9%1.7%2.2%0.0%0.3%0.0%1.8%0.4%
N 29.7%38.3%26.3%28.8%56.5%9.0%8.6%17.3%54.7%12.4%1.4%34.0%26.8%19.0%2.3%0.9%11.2%22.3%32.4%39.6%0.2%2.4%0.1%33.4%5.8%
Y 2.8%3.4%3.0%2.6%5.7%0.9%1.0%1.7%5.4%1.1%0.1%3.7%2.4%1.7%0.2%0.1%1.1%1.8%3.0%4.4%0.0%0.1%0.0%3.5%0.4%
N 28.8%37.3%24.6%28.7%53.6%8.5%8.2%16.7%52.3%12.0%1.6%32.6%25.7%18.5%2.4%0.9%10.8%22.4%31.0%37.4%0.2%2.6%0.1%31.8%5.9%
Y 2.1%2.1%1.0%1.9%3.0%0.3%0.7%1.5%2.5%0.5%0.1%1.8%1.1%1.4%0.2%0.0%0.7%1.7%1.7%1.7%0.0%0.1%0.0%1.3%0.4%
N 29.5%38.6%26.7%29.3%56.4%9.1%8.5%16.9%55.2%12.6%1.6%34.5%27.1%18.9%2.4%0.9%11.1%22.5%32.3%40.1%0.2%2.6%0.1%33.9%5.9%
Y 8.8%11.9%7.5%8.2%17.0%3.0%2.1%4.5%16.9%4.1%0.6%9.8%8.7%5.6%0.6%0.3%3.0%6.6%10.2%11.7%0.1%1.0%0.0%9.5%2.1%
N 22.9%28.9%20.2%23.0%42.4%6.5%7.1%13.9%40.8%9.0%1.1%26.4%19.4%14.6%2.0%0.7%8.8%17.6%23.8%30.1%0.2%1.7%0.0%25.8%4.1%
Y 13.5%16.4%10.7%9.1%26.9%4.1%3.6%8.8%23.3%4.6%0.2%13.2%11.7%9.2%1.1%0.4%4.4%10.8%13.8%15.7%0.1%0.9%0.0%14.3%2.8%
N 18.1%24.3%17.0%22.1%32.5%5.3%5.5%9.6%34.5%8.5%1.4%23.1%16.4%11.1%1.4%0.6%7.5%13.4%20.2%26.1%0.2%1.8%0.0%20.9%3.4%
Y 1.1%1.4%0.9%1.2%1.8%0.3%0.3%0.5%2.0%0.5%0.1%1.4%0.9%0.6%0.1%0.1%0.3%0.9%1.0%1.5%0.0%0.2%0.0%1.1%0.3%
N 30.5%39.3%26.8%30.0%57.6%9.1%8.9%17.9%55.7%12.6%1.5%34.8%27.3%19.6%2.5%0.9%11.5%23.2%33.0%40.3%0.2%2.5%0.1%34.2%6.0%
Y 4.8%6.3%3.7%4.2%9.1%1.6%1.2%2.8%8.5%2.2%0.3%5.6%4.3%3.0%0.4%0.1%1.7%3.9%4.9%6.2%0.1%0.6%0.0%5.4%1.0%
N 26.8%34.4%23.9%27.0%50.2%7.8%7.9%15.6%49.2%11.0%1.4%30.6%23.9%17.3%2.1%0.9%10.2%20.2%29.1%35.6%0.2%2.1%0.1%29.9%5.2%
Y 3.7%4.9%3.0%3.3%7.2%1.0%1.1%2.0%6.9%1.6%0.1%3.6%3.5%2.4%0.4%0.1%1.6%2.8%3.7%4.8%0.0%0.2%0.0%4.0%0.8%
N 27.9%35.8%24.7%27.9%52.1%8.4%8.1%16.4%50.8%11.5%1.6%32.6%24.6%17.9%2.2%0.8%10.3%21.3%30.3%37.0%0.2%2.5%0.0%31.3%5.4%
Monday 5.0%5.2%3.5%4.5%7.9%1.3%1.3%2.5%7.9%1.7%0.3%4.7%3.8%3.0%0.3%0.1%1.7%3.7%4.4%5.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%4.8%1.0%
Tuesday 4.1%5.8%4.1%4.3%8.5%1.2%1.3%2.5%8.1%1.9%0.3%5.0%4.1%2.8%0.4%0.1%1.7%3.1%5.0%5.9%0.0%0.3%0.0%5.1%0.7%
Wednesday 4.3%5.7%4.1%4.3%8.7%1.2%1.3%2.8%8.1%1.7%0.2%5.3%3.7%2.9%0.4%0.2%1.7%3.5%4.4%6.2%0.0%0.4%0.0%4.9%0.9%
Thursday 4.4%6.0%3.9%4.4%8.7%1.4%1.3%2.6%8.6%1.8%0.2%5.2%4.2%2.9%0.3%0.2%1.6%3.4%4.8%6.3%0.0%0.4%0.0%5.1%0.8%
Friday 5.0%6.1%4.4%4.9%9.1%1.6%1.5%2.8%8.9%2.0%0.2%5.6%4.5%3.0%0.4%0.2%1.8%3.9%5.3%6.3%0.1%0.4%0.0%5.3%1.0%
Saturday 4.4%6.7%4.3%4.5%9.2%1.6%1.3%2.8%9.0%2.0%0.3%5.8%4.3%3.1%0.4%0.1%1.6%3.4%5.4%6.7%0.0%0.4%0.0%5.5%1.0%
Sunday 4.3%5.3%3.4%4.4%7.3%1.3%1.2%2.5%7.1%2.0%0.2%4.7%3.6%2.6%0.4%0.1%1.6%3.2%4.5%5.2%0.0%0.4%0.0%4.5%0.9%
12-3 AM 2.5%3.5%2.5%3.0%4.5%1.0%0.7%1.6%4.7%1.3%0.2%3.6%2.4%1.6%0.2%0.0%0.7%2.1%2.9%3.8%0.0%0.3%0.0%3.3%0.6%
3-6 AM 2.0%2.3%1.9%2.4%3.0%0.7%0.5%1.2%3.3%1.0%0.2%2.5%1.7%0.9%0.2%0.1%0.7%1.4%2.0%2.6%0.0%0.3%0.0%2.1%0.4%
6-9 AM 4.1%5.2%3.3%3.5%7.9%1.1%1.0%2.3%7.3%1.7%0.3%4.0%3.8%2.8%0.4%0.1%1.5%3.1%4.2%5.2%0.1%0.5%0.0%4.3%0.7%
9-Noon 3.5%4.7%3.2%3.6%6.7%1.3%1.3%2.1%6.5%1.5%0.2%4.1%3.3%2.1%0.3%0.1%1.5%2.7%3.6%5.0%0.1%0.4%0.0%4.0%0.7%
Noon-3 PM 4.3%5.3%3.3%4.0%8.1%1.0%1.3%2.7%7.4%1.4%0.1%4.3%3.8%2.7%0.4%0.2%1.8%3.2%4.6%5.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%4.4%0.7%
3-6 PM 5.3%6.3%4.0%5.2%9.4%1.1%1.7%2.8%9.3%1.7%0.2%5.4%4.1%3.5%0.4%0.2%2.0%4.1%5.6%5.8%0.0%0.3%0.0%5.2%1.1%
6-9 PM 5.3%7.2%4.9%5.2%10.5%1.7%1.5%3.0%10.5%2.3%0.2%6.4%4.8%3.6%0.4%0.2%2.0%3.9%6.3%7.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%6.0%0.9%
9-Midnight 4.6%6.1%4.5%4.4%9.2%1.5%1.2%2.8%8.8%2.3%0.2%5.9%4.2%3.0%0.3%0.2%1.5%3.7%4.8%7.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%6.0%1.1%
Dark - Lighted 7.5%12.6%10.7%8.2%19.0%3.4%2.3%6.1%18.5%3.7%0.1%12.5%8.7%5.7%0.6%0.3%2.9%5.9%10.2%15.5%0.0%0.3%0.0%12.1%1.7%
Dark - Not Lighted 4.9%4.3%1.7%4.8%5.3%0.7%0.7%1.6%5.3%2.6%0.7%4.3%2.5%2.4%0.4%0.1%1.2%4.1%3.8%3.1%0.1%1.0%0.0%3.5%1.0%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Dawn 0.7%0.8%0.4%0.6%1.2%0.2%0.2%0.4%1.1%0.3%0.1%0.6%0.5%0.5%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.6%0.7%0.7%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.6%0.1%
Daylight 17.3%21.7%14.0%16.4%32.0%4.7%5.5%9.8%30.7%6.3%0.7%17.7%15.5%10.9%1.4%0.5%7.0%12.9%18.2%21.2%0.1%1.3%0.0%17.9%3.3%
Dusk 1.0%1.3%0.8%1.0%1.8%0.4%0.3%0.5%2.1%0.3%0.0%1.0%1.0%0.7%0.1%0.0%0.5%0.6%1.2%1.2%0.0%0.1%0.0%1.1%0.1%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%
Unknown 0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R
AADT (2022)
Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification
3+25 or less 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None
Context Classification
Attachment B-4 7 of 16
Attachment B-4
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All KSI Crashes 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
0.6%0.0%0.1%4.7%5.8%1.2%1.5%7.5%0.9%0.0%1.2%1.4%5.9%4.1%2.4%0.1%1.8%0.1%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.3%0.0%0.0%2.3%3.0%0.5%1.1%4.2%0.4%0.1%0.5%0.4%3.7%1.9%1.4%0.0%1.2%0.1%
0.2%0.0%0.0%1.8%2.3%0.2%1.3%3.7%0.1%0.0%1.2%0.7%1.8%2.2%0.8%0.1%0.6%0.0%
1.1%0.1%0.0%10.6%14.0%3.1%4.2%18.9%2.3%0.1%2.3%3.1%16.0%7.6%7.4%0.4%5.8%0.1%
0.3%0.1%0.0%7.6%7.6%0.8%3.0%10.8%0.5%0.0%2.2%1.8%7.4%4.5%4.6%0.3%2.0%0.1%
1.0%0.1%0.1%5.7%6.9%1.2%2.6%9.9%0.8%0.0%1.7%1.5%7.5%4.4%3.5%0.3%2.4%0.1%
1.5%0.1%0.1%5.1%8.6%1.7%3.1%11.8%1.4%0.2%0.9%1.4%11.0%4.9%4.1%0.4%3.8%0.1%
1.1%0.1%0.0%7.0%10.2%3.7%4.8%15.6%2.9%0.2%2.1%2.2%14.5%3.8%7.4%0.7%6.7%0.1%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.7%0.1%0.4%1.2%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.1%1.0%0.2%0.5%0.0%0.5%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.9%1.0%0.1%0.6%1.6%0.0%0.0%0.7%0.2%0.8%0.7%0.7%0.0%0.3%0.0%
0.2%0.0%0.0%1.3%1.8%0.6%0.9%2.8%0.5%0.0%0.4%0.3%2.6%1.0%1.4%0.1%0.8%0.0%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.7%0.2%0.4%1.1%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.1%1.0%0.3%0.5%0.1%0.4%0.0%
0.4%0.0%0.0%2.7%3.4%0.7%1.6%5.2%0.5%0.0%1.3%0.7%3.7%2.3%2.0%0.2%1.1%0.0%
6.1%0.5%0.3%45.6%59.2%12.7%22.4%83.9%9.6%0.8%12.2%12.6%69.5%33.4%32.8%2.3%25.2%0.6%
0.8%0.0%0.0%4.3%6.3%1.9%1.9%8.4%0.8%0.0%0.8%1.0%7.4%3.8%2.5%0.2%2.6%0.1%
5.6%0.5%0.2%43.9%56.4%22.1%22.1%80.7%9.3%0.8%12.6%12.3%65.9%31.8%32.4%2.4%23.7%0.5%
0.5%0.1%0.0%2.8%3.1%1.3%1.3%4.6%0.6%0.0%0.8%1.0%3.4%2.3%1.8%0.1%1.0%0.0%
5.9%0.5%0.2%45.4%59.5%22.7%22.7%84.5%9.5%0.8%12.7%12.3%69.8%33.4%33.1%2.5%25.3%0.6%
1.3%0.1%0.0%13.9%17.6%6.5%6.5%24.9%3.0%0.2%4.4%3.7%20.0%9.5%10.3%0.9%7.2%0.1%
5.1%0.4%0.3%34.3%45.0%17.5%17.5%64.2%7.0%0.6%9.1%9.6%53.2%26.2%24.5%1.6%19.1%0.4%
2.5%0.3%0.2%18.9%25.6%8.6%8.6%35.5%4.8%0.3%4.5%5.3%30.7%14.7%13.6%0.9%11.2%0.2%
3.9%0.3%0.1%29.3%37.0%15.4%15.4%53.6%5.3%0.5%8.9%7.9%42.6%21.0%21.3%1.7%15.1%0.4%
0.2%0.0%0.0%1.5%2.1%0.9%0.9%3.0%0.3%0.0%0.7%0.5%2.2%1.3%1.3%0.1%0.7%0.0%
6.2%0.5%0.3%46.7%60.6%23.1%23.1%86.1%9.8%0.8%12.8%12.8%71.1%34.4%33.6%2.5%25.6%0.6%
0.9%0.1%0.0%6.9%9.0%3.7%3.7%13.1%1.6%0.2%2.3%2.0%10.6%5.4%5.0%0.4%4.0%0.1%
5.5%0.5%0.2%41.3%53.6%20.3%20.3%76.0%8.4%0.7%11.1%11.3%62.6%30.3%29.9%2.2%22.3%0.5%
0.4%0.0%0.0%6.1%7.1%3.0%3.0%10.2%1.3%0.1%1.1%1.8%8.7%3.7%4.2%0.3%3.3%0.1%
6.0%0.5%0.2%42.2%55.6%21.1%21.1%78.9%8.7%0.8%12.3%11.4%64.6%31.9%30.7%2.3%23.0%0.5%
0.7%0.1%0.0%6.6%7.6%3.1%3.1%12.3%1.2%0.1%1.9%1.9%9.9%5.1%4.5%0.4%3.5%0.1%
0.7%0.0%0.0%7.0%7.7%3.4%3.4%12.7%1.2%0.1%1.9%1.8%10.3%5.0%4.8%0.2%3.8%0.1%
1.0%0.1%0.0%6.8%8.3%2.7%2.7%12.4%1.6%0.2%1.9%2.0%10.3%5.1%5.0%0.3%3.7%0.1%
1.1%0.1%0.0%6.8%8.1%3.3%3.3%12.8%1.4%0.1%1.8%1.9%10.7%5.1%4.8%0.4%4.0%0.1%
1.1%0.1%0.0%7.5%8.7%3.3%3.3%13.5%1.8%0.1%2.0%2.0%11.5%5.6%5.3%0.4%4.1%0.1%
1.1%0.1%0.1%7.2%8.7%3.3%3.3%13.7%1.6%0.1%2.0%2.1%11.4%5.2%5.5%0.5%4.1%0.0%
0.7%0.1%0.1%6.3%7.5%2.7%2.7%11.6%1.2%0.1%2.0%1.7%9.3%4.6%4.9%0.4%3.0%0.1%
0.8%0.1%0.1%3.4%4.5%2.0%2.0%7.6%0.9%0.1%1.3%1.1%6.1%2.7%3.1%0.3%2.4%0.1%
0.4%0.1%0.0%2.8%3.4%1.4%1.4%5.4%0.7%0.0%1.1%0.9%4.1%2.1%2.5%0.2%1.3%0.0%
0.7%0.1%0.0%6.2%7.1%2.8%2.8%11.1%1.4%0.1%1.8%1.5%9.3%4.3%4.4%0.3%3.4%0.1%
0.7%0.1%0.0%5.6%6.8%2.3%2.3%10.3%1.1%0.1%1.6%1.5%8.5%3.7%4.0%0.3%3.4%0.0%
0.9%0.0%0.0%6.8%7.7%2.5%2.5%11.6%1.1%0.1%1.6%1.9%9.5%4.9%4.2%0.3%3.5%0.0%
1.1%0.1%0.0%7.9%9.1%3.3%3.3%14.2%1.4%0.1%1.8%2.0%11.9%6.1%5.4%0.4%3.7%0.1%
1.0%0.0%0.0%9.0%9.8%3.9%3.9%15.6%1.7%0.1%2.1%2.3%13.1%6.4%5.8%0.5%4.6%0.1%
0.9%0.1%0.0%6.7%8.2%3.5%3.5%13.3%1.8%0.2%2.2%2.2%10.8%5.5%5.4%0.4%3.8%0.1%
2.7%0.3%0.2%13.5%17.5%6.1%6.1%26.8%3.6%0.3%2.4%3.5%24.9%9.8%11.0%1.0%8.7%0.3%
0.3%0.0%0.0%5.1%4.9%3.7%3.7%10.0%0.9%0.1%3.5%2.2%5.2%4.7%3.9%0.3%2.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.9%1.1%0.4%0.4%1.7%0.3%0.0%0.4%0.2%1.3%0.7%0.6%0.0%0.6%0.0%
3.2%0.2%0.1%26.9%31.2%10.7%10.7%47.6%4.9%0.4%6.7%6.8%39.4%19.2%18.3%1.1%14.0%0.2%
0.2%0.0%0.0%1.7%1.8%0.7%0.7%2.8%0.3%0.0%0.4%0.5%2.3%1.1%0.9%0.1%1.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Paved OtherGrassMultipleNoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
SidesC4C5C6
Bike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks Median Presence
Attachment B-4 8 of 16
Attachment B-5
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving only Car Truck 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 5.0%3.8%2.2%3.7%6.3%1.0%1.8%3.2%4.9%0.9%0.1%2.8%2.5%2.8%0.4%0.3%2.2%3.6%3.0%3.2%0.0%0.2%0.0%3.4%0.5%
Animal 0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Bicycle 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Head On 2.8%1.6%0.7%2.8%2.0%0.2%0.2%0.8%2.4%1.2%0.4%1.9%1.1%1.3%0.2%0.0%0.4%2.3%1.6%1.4%0.1%0.6%0.0%1.2%0.4%
Left Turn 7.3%11.7%6.3%4.2%18.6%2.2%1.3%4.9%16.1%2.9%0.1%7.2%8.9%6.0%0.5%0.3%2.1%6.2%10.2%9.6%0.1%0.7%0.0%8.7%1.8%
Off Road 5.6%6.3%2.3%7.6%6.2%0.7%2.3%2.7%7.2%1.7%0.3%3.9%3.8%3.1%0.4%0.2%3.1%3.8%5.1%4.0%0.1%0.4%0.0%3.1%1.0%
Other 4.6%4.3%3.1%5.0%6.3%1.1%1.9%2.4%5.9%1.4%0.4%4.2%2.8%2.5%0.4%0.1%2.5%3.3%3.5%4.5%0.0%0.4%0.0%3.5%0.6%
Pedestrian 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Rear End 4.2%9.9%10.0%5.0%15.1%3.8%0.4%2.5%17.0%4.1%0.2%11.2%7.8%3.6%0.3%0.2%0.8%3.2%8.5%14.6%0.0%0.5%0.0%10.9%1.8%
Right Turn 0.4%0.8%0.5%0.3%1.2%0.2%0.1%0.4%1.0%0.2%0.0%0.5%0.6%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.4%0.6%0.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.0%
Rollover 0.6%0.6%0.1%1.0%0.3%0.0%0.2%0.2%0.4%0.2%0.4%0.6%0.2%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.6%0.3%0.2%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.2%0.1%
Sideswipe 0.9%1.6%1.3%1.1%2.3%0.4%0.2%0.7%2.1%0.7%0.1%1.7%1.2%0.5%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.8%1.2%2.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%1.6%0.2%
Unknown 0.4%0.8%0.4%0.4%1.0%0.0%0.1%0.3%0.9%0.2%0.1%0.5%0.5%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.4%0.6%0.6%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.5%0.2%
Y 2.2%2.6%1.6%2.8%3.1%0.4%0.6%1.3%3.3%0.9%0.3%2.5%1.5%1.3%0.2%0.1%0.7%2.1%1.7%2.5%0.1%0.3%0.0%2.0%0.4%
N 29.6%38.7%25.4%28.3%56.2%9.2%7.9%16.6%54.7%12.7%1.8%32.0%28.0%19.5%2.2%1.1%11.0%22.6%32.8%38.3%0.2%3.1%0.1%31.8%6.1%
Y 2.0%2.8%2.6%2.0%4.7%0.7%0.7%1.2%4.5%0.9%0.1%2.8%2.1%1.6%0.1%0.1%0.7%1.6%2.3%3.7%0.0%0.1%0.0%2.8%0.4%
N 29.7%38.4%24.4%29.1%54.6%8.9%7.8%16.7%53.5%12.7%2.0%31.7%27.3%19.3%2.3%1.0%11.0%23.1%32.2%37.1%0.3%3.4%0.1%31.0%6.2%
Y 2.3%2.3%1.0%2.1%3.2%0.3%0.7%1.6%2.6%0.6%0.1%1.7%1.2%1.5%0.2%0.1%0.9%1.9%1.8%1.6%0.0%0.1%0.0%1.4%0.4%
N 29.4%39.0%25.9%29.0%56.1%9.3%7.8%16.3%55.3%13.0%2.0%32.8%28.2%19.3%2.2%1.1%10.8%22.7%32.7%39.2%0.3%3.3%0.1%32.5%6.1%
Y 10.0%13.8%8.9%9.2%19.9%3.6%2.2%5.1%19.8%5.0%0.7%11.4%10.5%6.4%0.6%0.4%3.3%7.6%12.0%13.7%0.1%1.3%0.1%11.1%2.6%
N 21.7%27.4%18.0%21.9%39.4%6.0%6.3%12.8%38.2%8.6%1.3%23.1%18.9%14.4%1.8%0.8%8.4%17.1%22.5%27.1%0.2%2.1%0.0%22.8%3.9%
Y 13.6%17.5%11.6%8.9%28.6%4.5%3.5%9.0%24.9%5.0%0.3%13.7%12.9%9.3%1.1%0.5%4.4%11.0%14.9%16.5%0.1%1.2%0.0%15.3%3.1%
N 18.2%23.8%15.4%22.3%30.7%5.1%5.0%8.9%33.0%8.6%1.8%20.8%16.5%11.5%1.3%0.7%7.3%13.7%19.6%24.3%0.2%2.3%0.0%18.5%3.5%
Y 1.1%1.5%1.0%1.4%1.9%0.3%0.2%0.6%2.1%0.6%0.2%1.6%0.9%0.7%0.1%0.1%0.3%1.0%1.0%1.7%0.0%0.2%0.0%1.2%0.3%
N 30.6%39.8%25.9%29.7%57.4%9.2%8.3%17.3%55.8%13.0%1.9%32.9%28.5%20.2%2.3%1.1%11.4%23.6%33.5%39.1%0.3%3.2%0.1%32.6%6.2%
Y 5.6%7.2%4.2%4.9%10.3%2.0%1.3%3.3%9.7%2.4%0.4%6.2%4.9%3.5%0.5%0.1%2.0%4.7%5.6%7.0%0.1%0.8%0.0%5.9%1.1%
N 26.1%34.1%22.7%26.2%49.0%7.6%7.2%14.6%48.3%11.2%1.7%28.3%24.5%17.3%1.9%1.0%9.7%20.0%28.9%33.8%0.2%2.6%0.1%27.9%5.4%
Y 4.5%6.0%3.5%3.9%8.6%1.3%1.3%2.3%8.4%1.8%0.1%4.0%4.4%2.9%0.4%0.2%1.9%3.4%4.6%5.5%0.0%0.3%0.0%4.5%1.0%
N 27.3%35.3%23.5%27.2%50.7%8.3%7.2%15.6%49.5%11.8%2.0%30.5%25.0%17.9%2.0%1.0%9.8%21.3%29.9%35.3%0.3%3.2%0.0%29.3%5.5%
Monday 5.0%5.6%3.4%4.6%8.1%1.3%1.2%2.6%8.2%1.7%0.3%4.7%3.9%3.2%0.3%0.2%1.7%3.8%4.6%5.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%4.7%1.0%
Tuesday 4.2%6.0%3.8%4.3%8.5%1.2%1.2%2.4%8.2%1.8%0.3%4.5%4.5%2.9%0.3%0.1%1.7%3.2%5.3%5.5%0.1%0.4%0.0%4.6%0.8%
Wednesday 4.5%5.7%4.2%4.1%9.1%1.1%1.2%2.6%8.3%1.9%0.3%5.3%3.8%3.0%0.3%0.2%1.7%3.6%4.4%6.3%0.0%0.6%0.0%4.9%0.9%
Thursday 4.5%6.1%3.6%4.6%8.3%1.3%1.2%2.3%8.6%1.8%0.2%4.6%4.5%3.0%0.2%0.2%1.6%3.6%4.7%5.9%0.0%0.5%0.0%4.7%0.8%
Friday 4.9%6.0%4.4%4.7%9.1%1.6%1.5%2.6%8.9%2.1%0.3%5.5%4.5%2.9%0.4%0.2%1.9%3.6%5.6%6.1%0.1%0.5%0.0%5.4%1.0%
Saturday 4.4%6.6%4.3%4.3%9.2%1.7%1.1%3.0%8.7%2.1%0.4%5.5%4.4%3.3%0.3%0.2%1.5%3.6%5.4%6.6%0.0%0.6%0.0%5.3%1.1%
Sunday 4.3%5.3%3.2%4.6%7.0%1.3%1.1%2.4%7.0%2.1%0.2%4.4%3.8%2.5%0.4%0.1%1.6%3.3%4.5%5.0%0.1%0.4%0.0%4.2%0.9%
12-3 AM 2.6%3.7%2.5%3.0%4.6%1.0%0.7%1.6%4.7%1.4%0.3%3.5%2.5%1.7%0.2%0.0%0.7%2.3%2.8%3.8%0.0%0.3%0.0%3.2%0.7%
3-6 AM 2.1%2.5%1.9%2.8%3.1%0.6%0.5%1.2%3.5%1.0%0.3%2.5%1.8%1.0%0.2%0.1%0.8%1.5%2.2%2.7%0.0%0.4%0.0%2.1%0.5%
6-9 AM 4.4%5.7%3.4%3.8%8.3%1.3%1.1%2.2%7.9%1.9%0.4%4.0%4.3%3.0%0.3%0.1%1.6%3.4%4.6%5.4%0.1%0.7%0.0%4.4%0.8%
9-Noon 3.8%5.4%3.7%3.8%7.5%1.6%1.2%2.1%7.6%1.8%0.2%4.7%3.9%2.4%0.3%0.1%1.6%2.8%4.3%5.8%0.1%0.6%0.0%4.5%0.8%
Noon-3 PM 4.4%5.8%3.6%3.9%8.8%1.2%1.2%2.9%8.2%1.5%0.1%4.6%4.2%2.8%0.4%0.2%1.8%3.2%5.0%5.5%0.0%0.3%0.0%4.6%0.8%
3-6 PM 5.2%6.6%4.2%5.2%9.7%1.1%1.5%2.8%9.7%1.7%0.3%5.5%4.4%3.5%0.4%0.2%2.0%4.1%5.9%5.9%0.0%0.4%0.0%5.2%1.1%
6-9 PM 4.7%6.4%4.2%4.7%9.0%1.6%1.1%2.6%9.2%2.2%0.2%5.1%4.7%3.3%0.3%0.2%1.7%3.8%5.4%6.1%0.1%0.3%0.0%5.0%0.9%
9-Midnight 4.6%5.2%3.6%4.0%8.2%1.2%1.2%2.5%7.3%2.1%0.3%4.7%3.6%3.1%0.2%0.2%1.6%3.5%4.3%5.5%0.0%0.4%0.0%4.8%1.0%
Dark - Lighted 7.5%11.5%9.1%7.9%17.1%3.1%2.4%5.7%16.6%3.4%0.2%10.0%8.5%5.8%0.6%0.3%2.9%5.9%9.4%13.2%0.0%0.3%0.0%10.3%1.9%
Dark - Not Lighted 4.6%3.6%1.3%4.6%4.4%0.4%0.6%1.4%4.1%2.5%0.9%3.8%1.9%2.2%0.3%0.1%1.2%4.0%3.0%2.3%0.1%1.2%0.0%2.6%0.9%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Dawn 0.7%0.7%0.4%0.6%1.1%0.1%0.1%0.3%1.0%0.2%0.1%0.6%0.4%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.6%0.7%0.6%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.6%0.1%
Daylight 17.9%24.2%15.3%17.0%35.0%5.5%5.0%10.2%34.3%7.1%0.9%19.1%17.7%11.6%1.5%0.7%6.9%13.4%20.4%23.4%0.2%1.7%0.1%19.2%3.5%
Dusk 1.0%1.2%0.8%1.0%1.7%0.4%0.3%0.4%2.0%0.4%0.0%0.9%1.0%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.7%1.0%1.2%0.0%0.1%0.0%1.1%0.2%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Unknown 0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)
50-55 60+Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Context Classification
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R3+25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachment B-5 9 of 16
Attachment B-5
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving only Car Truck 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
0.7%0.0%0.1%6.1%7.5%1.5%1.9%9.8%1.1%0.1%1.6%1.8%7.6%5.2%3.2%0.2%2.3%0.1%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.3%0.0%0.0%2.4%3.0%0.3%1.7%4.9%0.1%0.0%1.6%0.9%2.6%2.9%1.1%0.1%0.9%0.0%
1.2%0.1%0.0%12.3%16.5%4.0%4.8%22.0%3.1%0.1%2.8%3.5%19.0%8.5%9.2%0.5%7.0%0.1%
0.3%0.1%0.0%9.6%9.3%1.0%3.9%13.5%0.7%0.0%2.8%2.2%9.2%5.8%5.7%0.4%2.3%0.0%
1.1%0.1%0.1%6.5%8.0%1.3%2.7%11.0%1.0%0.1%1.9%1.7%8.3%5.1%4.0%0.3%2.6%0.1%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
1.3%0.0%0.0%9.3%13.2%4.8%6.1%20.0%3.8%0.3%2.6%2.7%18.9%4.8%9.5%0.9%8.8%0.1%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.9%1.0%0.1%0.5%1.5%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.2%1.3%0.3%0.6%0.0%0.7%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.7%0.1%0.5%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.7%0.1%0.5%0.5%0.6%0.0%0.1%0.0%
0.2%0.0%0.0%1.6%2.0%0.7%1.1%3.2%0.5%0.1%0.4%0.4%3.0%1.2%1.7%0.1%0.8%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.7%0.8%0.2%0.4%1.3%0.2%0.0%0.2%0.2%1.1%0.4%0.7%0.0%0.4%0.0%
0.4%0.0%0.0%3.0%3.8%0.8%1.7%5.7%0.6%0.0%1.5%0.8%4.1%2.5%2.3%0.2%1.2%0.0%
4.9%0.3%0.2%47.0%58.5%13.1%22.0%83.0%10.0%0.7%13.3%12.9%67.4%32.2%34.0%2.3%24.7%0.5%
0.5%0.0%0.0%3.6%4.9%1.5%1.5%6.7%0.7%0.0%0.7%0.7%6.0%2.8%2.2%0.1%2.2%0.1%
4.8%0.3%0.2%46.3%57.4%22.3%22.3%82.0%9.9%0.7%14.1%13.0%65.5%31.9%34.2%2.5%23.7%0.4%
0.4%0.0%0.0%3.2%3.4%1.4%1.4%5.0%0.6%0.0%0.9%1.1%3.6%2.5%2.1%0.1%0.9%0.0%
4.9%0.3%0.2%46.7%58.9%22.4%22.4%83.7%10.0%0.6%13.8%12.6%67.9%32.2%34.3%2.5%25.0%0.5%
1.4%0.0%0.0%16.1%20.4%7.5%7.5%28.7%3.8%0.3%5.3%4.3%23.2%10.5%12.5%1.1%8.5%0.2%
3.9%0.3%0.2%33.9%41.9%16.3%16.3%60.0%6.8%0.4%9.5%9.4%48.3%24.1%23.9%1.5%17.4%0.3%
2.2%0.2%0.1%19.7%26.8%8.8%8.8%36.9%5.4%0.3%5.1%5.8%31.7%14.5%15.1%0.9%11.8%0.2%
3.0%0.2%0.1%30.3%35.4%15.0%15.0%51.8%5.3%0.4%9.7%8.0%39.8%20.2%21.3%1.6%14.1%0.2%
0.2%0.0%0.0%1.6%2.1%1.0%1.0%3.3%0.4%0.0%0.7%0.6%2.3%1.3%1.5%0.1%0.7%0.0%
5.0%0.4%0.2%48.4%60.2%22.7%22.7%85.4%10.3%0.6%14.0%13.2%69.2%33.3%34.9%2.5%25.2%0.5%
1.0%0.1%0.1%8.1%10.3%4.2%4.2%14.8%2.1%0.2%2.9%2.3%11.9%6.1%5.9%0.5%4.6%0.1%
4.3%0.3%0.1%41.9%52.0%19.6%19.6%73.9%8.6%0.5%11.9%11.4%59.7%28.6%30.5%2.1%21.3%0.4%
0.4%0.0%0.0%7.5%8.6%3.6%3.6%12.4%1.5%0.1%1.4%2.2%10.3%4.4%5.1%0.3%4.0%0.1%
4.9%0.3%0.1%42.5%53.7%20.2%20.2%76.3%9.2%0.6%13.4%11.5%61.2%30.3%31.2%2.3%21.9%0.4%
0.6%0.1%0.1%7.0%7.7%3.3%3.3%12.7%1.2%0.1%2.0%1.9%10.1%4.9%4.9%0.4%3.6%0.1%
0.7%0.0%0.0%7.4%8.0%3.1%3.1%12.6%1.3%0.0%2.2%1.9%9.9%4.8%4.9%0.2%4.0%0.0%
0.9%0.1%0.0%7.0%8.4%2.7%2.7%12.6%1.7%0.1%2.2%2.1%10.1%5.1%5.5%0.4%3.5%0.1%
0.9%0.0%0.0%7.2%8.4%3.1%3.1%12.8%1.2%0.1%2.0%1.9%10.4%5.0%4.8%0.2%4.1%0.1%
0.7%0.0%0.0%7.7%8.4%3.3%3.3%13.2%2.0%0.1%2.2%2.0%11.1%5.3%5.6%0.4%4.1%0.0%
0.8%0.1%0.0%7.3%8.4%3.3%3.3%13.3%1.8%0.1%2.2%2.0%11.0%4.9%5.9%0.6%3.8%0.0%
0.7%0.0%0.0%6.4%7.5%2.7%2.7%11.5%1.3%0.1%2.0%2.0%8.9%4.6%4.8%0.4%3.0%0.1%
0.7%0.0%0.0%3.6%4.5%2.2%2.2%7.6%1.0%0.1%1.5%1.2%6.0%2.6%3.4%0.3%2.3%0.1%
0.4%0.1%0.0%3.1%3.6%1.5%1.5%5.8%0.7%0.0%1.3%0.9%4.3%2.1%2.8%0.2%1.4%0.0%
0.7%0.0%0.0%6.9%7.6%2.9%2.9%11.9%1.6%0.1%2.1%1.4%10.0%4.7%4.7%0.4%3.7%0.1%
0.7%0.1%0.0%6.3%7.5%2.5%2.5%11.4%1.4%0.1%1.9%1.8%9.2%4.1%4.6%0.3%3.8%0.0%
0.9%0.0%0.0%7.3%8.3%2.6%2.6%12.3%1.4%0.1%1.7%2.0%10.1%5.1%4.6%0.3%3.8%0.0%
0.9%0.1%0.0%8.1%9.4%3.4%3.4%14.6%1.4%0.1%1.8%2.1%12.0%6.1%5.8%0.3%3.7%0.1%
0.5%0.0%0.0%8.3%8.6%3.4%3.4%13.6%1.6%0.1%2.0%2.2%11.0%5.2%5.6%0.5%3.8%0.1%
0.6%0.0%0.0%6.4%7.2%3.0%3.0%11.6%1.7%0.1%2.4%2.1%8.9%4.9%4.8%0.3%3.3%0.1%
1.8%0.1%0.1%13.4%16.2%5.5%5.5%24.3%3.7%0.2%2.6%3.8%21.8%8.7%10.7%0.9%7.6%0.3%
0.2%0.0%0.0%4.6%4.1%3.4%3.4%8.8%0.7%0.0%3.6%2.0%3.9%4.1%3.6%0.2%1.5%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.9%0.5%0.5%1.6%0.2%0.0%0.4%0.1%1.2%0.7%0.6%0.0%0.5%0.0%
3.1%0.2%0.1%29.4%33.8%11.5%11.5%51.3%5.7%0.4%7.6%7.5%42.3%20.1%20.4%1.2%15.4%0.2%
0.1%0.0%0.0%1.6%1.7%0.7%0.7%2.6%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.4%2.2%1.0%1.0%0.1%0.9%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Median PresenceBike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
C4 C5 C6 None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNone
Attachment B-5 10 of 16
Attachment B-6
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Motorcyclists 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 3.4%2.9%0.8%3.1%3.8%0.3%1.8%1.9%3.1%0.3%0.0%2.2%1.4%1.8%0.3%0.2%1.3%2.0%2.6%1.9%0.0%0.2%0.0%1.4%0.3%
Animal 0.2%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Bicycle 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Head On 1.5%0.5%0.0%1.6%0.4%0.0%0.2%0.3%0.7%0.6%0.1%0.6%0.3%0.5%0.1%0.0%0.4%0.8%0.8%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.1%0.3%
Left Turn 10.7%14.2%4.9%8.1%20.0%1.5%2.4%6.8%17.4%3.2%0.0%8.2%9.1%8.0%1.1%0.2%3.1%9.8%11.3%8.9%0.0%0.3%0.1%8.6%2.4%
Off Road 4.8%5.4%1.8%6.6%5.2%0.5%1.8%2.6%6.6%1.0%0.0%2.5%4.0%2.6%0.3%0.1%2.7%3.2%4.3%3.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.1%0.8%
Other 6.5%7.0%5.1%6.6%10.4%1.5%2.6%3.6%9.4%2.6%0.2%7.3%4.7%3.1%0.5%0.2%2.7%4.5%6.4%7.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%6.1%1.3%
Pedestrian 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Rear End 3.3%6.9%6.3%4.0%9.7%2.6%0.2%1.9%11.1%2.6%0.5%9.2%4.7%2.0%0.1%0.0%0.3%2.6%5.8%9.7%0.0%0.7%0.0%8.1%1.3%
Right Turn 0.2%0.3%0.5%0.2%0.6%0.2%0.1%0.0%0.5%0.3%0.1%0.7%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.4%0.6%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.6%0.1%
Rollover 3.2%1.5%1.2%2.7%2.7%0.3%0.3%1.5%2.8%1.2%0.1%1.7%1.1%1.8%0.5%0.1%0.6%2.7%1.3%1.8%0.1%0.2%0.0%1.2%0.6%
Sideswipe 1.1%1.8%2.4%1.5%3.4%0.4%0.2%0.5%3.3%1.1%0.2%3.1%1.2%0.7%0.1%0.0%0.2%1.1%2.0%2.6%0.0%0.1%0.0%3.1%0.2%
Unknown 0.2%1.0%0.6%0.1%1.5%0.2%0.0%0.4%1.0%0.4%0.0%1.3%0.3%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.5%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.9%0.0%
Y 2.3%3.2%1.5%2.5%4.0%0.4%0.6%1.2%3.9%1.0%0.3%2.6%1.3%1.9%0.3%0.1%0.7%2.4%2.3%2.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%2.2%0.6%
N 32.6%38.2%22.1%32.2%53.7%7.2%9.2%18.4%51.9%12.5%1.0%34.1%25.6%18.9%2.8%0.7%10.8%24.9%33.3%34.8%0.2%1.6%0.1%30.9%6.7%
Y 1.7%2.1%1.1%0.9%3.4%0.5%0.3%1.1%2.9%0.6%0.0%1.8%1.2%1.3%0.2%0.1%0.3%1.1%2.1%1.8%0.0%0.1%0.0%1.9%0.1%
N 33.3%39.3%22.6%33.8%54.3%7.1%9.5%18.5%53.0%12.8%1.3%34.9%25.7%19.6%2.9%0.7%11.3%26.2%33.4%35.4%0.2%1.9%0.1%31.3%7.3%
Y 3.1%3.3%1.4%2.6%4.6%0.4%0.7%2.3%4.3%0.3%0.0%3.2%1.5%2.4%0.1%0.0%0.5%2.4%2.6%3.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.3%0.5%
N 31.9%38.1%22.2%32.1%53.1%7.2%9.1%17.3%51.5%13.1%1.3%33.6%25.4%18.4%3.1%0.8%11.1%24.9%32.9%34.0%0.2%2.0%0.1%30.8%6.8%
Y 8.7%12.0%5.8%9.4%15.4%1.7%2.5%4.7%14.8%4.0%0.4%9.5%7.6%5.7%0.4%0.2%3.1%6.7%9.8%10.0%0.0%0.6%0.0%8.6%1.5%
N 26.3%29.4%17.8%25.4%42.3%5.9%7.3%14.9%41.0%9.4%0.8%27.3%19.3%15.2%2.7%0.6%8.5%20.6%25.7%27.2%0.2%1.4%0.1%24.5%5.9%
Y 16.5%17.8%7.0%12.4%26.0%2.6%4.4%8.8%23.0%4.7%0.4%12.7%11.1%11.1%1.6%0.3%4.3%13.6%15.3%12.8%0.0%0.7%0.1%11.8%3.5%
N 18.4%23.6%16.6%22.3%31.7%4.9%5.4%10.8%32.8%8.8%0.8%24.0%15.8%9.8%1.6%0.5%7.3%13.7%20.3%24.4%0.2%1.3%0.0%21.4%3.9%
Y 1.9%1.8%0.5%1.3%2.7%0.2%0.7%0.4%2.3%0.5%0.2%0.9%1.3%1.2%0.1%0.1%0.6%1.5%1.5%1.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.9%0.3%
N 33.1%39.6%23.1%33.5%54.9%7.4%9.1%19.2%53.5%12.9%1.1%35.8%25.6%19.7%3.1%0.7%10.9%25.7%34.0%36.2%0.2%1.8%0.1%32.2%7.1%
Y 3.8%5.8%2.8%3.2%8.0%1.2%0.8%1.5%7.6%2.4%0.0%5.1%3.4%2.3%0.4%0.0%1.2%3.1%4.5%5.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%4.9%1.3%
N 31.1%35.6%20.9%31.6%49.7%6.4%9.0%18.1%48.2%11.0%1.3%31.7%23.5%18.5%2.7%0.8%10.4%24.2%31.0%32.2%0.2%1.7%0.1%28.2%6.1%
Y 3.0%3.5%2.0%2.6%5.2%0.6%0.8%1.4%4.3%1.9%0.0%3.3%1.4%1.9%0.4%0.2%1.3%2.7%2.6%2.9%0.0%0.1%0.1%3.2%0.5%
N 32.0%37.9%21.6%32.1%52.5%6.9%9.0%18.2%51.5%11.5%1.3%33.5%25.5%18.9%2.7%0.6%10.3%24.6%32.9%34.3%0.2%1.9%0.0%30.0%6.8%
Monday 5.7%3.8%2.4%4.3%6.7%0.8%1.2%2.0%6.7%1.7%0.4%3.8%3.8%2.8%0.2%0.0%1.3%4.4%3.8%3.8%0.1%0.5%0.0%3.6%0.9%
Tuesday 3.0%5.6%3.8%3.4%8.0%0.9%0.8%1.9%6.9%2.5%0.2%5.7%3.1%1.8%0.5%0.2%1.1%2.4%5.0%5.2%0.0%0.4%0.1%4.6%1.1%
Wednesday 3.4%6.5%2.6%4.7%6.8%0.9%0.8%3.6%7.3%0.7%0.0%4.3%3.9%2.7%0.2%0.2%1.2%2.9%5.2%4.8%0.1%0.1%0.0%3.8%0.9%
Thursday 5.5%5.9%3.5%5.2%8.6%1.1%1.9%3.2%8.3%1.6%0.0%5.3%4.2%2.9%0.4%0.0%2.0%3.2%5.7%5.6%0.0%0.2%0.0%4.7%1.1%
Friday 6.5%6.4%3.4%6.3%8.6%1.3%2.1%3.2%8.9%1.8%0.2%5.4%4.1%4.0%0.4%0.4%1.9%5.8%4.4%5.8%0.0%0.2%0.0%4.6%1.4%
Saturday 5.6%7.4%4.2%5.6%10.2%1.6%1.7%2.9%10.0%2.6%0.1%6.8%4.1%3.5%0.9%0.0%2.0%4.8%5.6%7.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%6.6%1.1%
Sunday 5.3%5.8%3.6%5.3%8.6%0.9%1.3%2.9%7.8%2.4%0.3%5.5%3.7%3.1%0.4%0.0%2.2%3.8%5.7%4.9%0.0%0.3%0.0%5.2%0.9%
12-3 AM 2.2%3.7%1.7%2.9%4.2%0.4%0.4%1.3%4.7%1.2%0.1%3.2%2.7%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.4%1.4%3.7%3.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%2.5%0.8%
3-6 AM 1.0%1.3%0.8%0.8%1.9%0.3%0.1%0.7%1.6%0.5%0.1%1.3%1.1%0.4%0.1%0.1%0.1%1.1%1.2%1.1%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.7%0.4%
6-9 AM 3.0%3.4%2.3%2.5%5.7%0.4%0.4%2.2%4.9%1.0%0.2%3.4%2.1%1.7%0.3%0.0%1.2%2.1%2.9%3.5%0.1%0.3%0.0%3.3%0.5%
9-Noon 3.4%3.8%1.8%4.0%4.6%0.3%1.0%2.5%4.3%0.8%0.3%3.3%2.2%1.8%0.6%0.0%1.1%3.2%3.0%2.7%0.1%0.2%0.0%2.7%0.5%
Noon-3 PM 5.2%5.4%3.7%5.4%8.3%0.8%2.1%1.8%7.8%2.4%0.1%4.9%3.7%3.3%0.3%0.1%2.2%4.8%4.3%4.9%0.0%0.4%0.0%4.8%0.7%
3-6 PM 7.0%7.6%4.2%6.1%11.3%1.4%2.1%3.4%10.6%2.6%0.1%7.5%5.1%4.1%0.3%0.1%1.7%5.1%7.2%7.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%6.7%1.5%
6-9 PM 8.3%7.4%3.8%6.6%11.4%1.6%3.0%3.6%10.3%2.3%0.3%5.7%4.3%4.7%1.1%0.2%3.6%4.9%7.4%5.6%0.0%0.3%0.0%4.5%1.2%
9-Midnight 5.0%8.8%5.2%6.3%10.3%2.3%0.7%4.0%11.7%2.5%0.0%7.6%5.7%3.6%0.4%0.3%1.4%4.6%6.0%9.4%0.0%0.1%0.1%7.8%1.7%
Dark - Lighted 8.5%14.6%9.2%9.7%19.5%3.2%2.0%7.8%18.6%3.8%0.0%12.7%8.6%6.7%0.7%0.6%2.8%7.4%10.7%15.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%11.9%1.8%
Dark - Not Lighted 5.2%4.3%1.1%4.7%5.2%0.6%0.6%1.3%5.8%2.3%0.5%3.9%3.2%1.8%0.7%0.0%0.9%3.9%4.8%2.1%0.0%0.9%0.1%2.7%1.8%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Dawn 0.8%0.7%0.3%0.7%1.1%0.1%0.2%0.3%1.2%0.2%0.0%0.5%0.3%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.8%0.2%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.1%
Daylight 19.3%19.6%12.1%18.3%29.4%3.4%6.6%9.3%27.3%7.0%0.7%18.1%13.6%10.6%1.6%0.2%6.9%14.7%17.5%17.8%0.2%0.9%0.0%16.7%3.7%
Dusk 1.2%2.1%1.0%1.3%2.6%0.3%0.4%0.8%2.9%0.1%0.0%1.5%1.2%0.9%0.1%0.0%0.5%0.5%2.3%1.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.3%0.0%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Unknown 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)
50-55 60+Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Context Classification
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R3+25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachment B-6 11 of 16
Attachment B-6
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Motorcyclists 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
0.9%0.0%0.1%4.2%4.6%1.2%1.4%6.4%0.7%0.0%1.1%1.2%4.9%4.0%1.7%0.0%1.4%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.1%0.0%0.0%1.3%1.4%0.0%0.6%2.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.5%0.5%1.6%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%
2.1%0.3%0.0%15.7%20.0%2.6%7.1%27.9%1.6%0.3%3.1%5.0%21.7%12.9%8.5%0.5%7.7%0.1%
0.6%0.1%0.1%7.6%8.9%0.7%2.3%11.5%0.3%0.1%1.9%1.6%8.5%3.8%4.9%0.3%2.8%0.2%
1.4%0.4%0.1%9.1%10.8%2.4%5.3%17.2%1.4%0.0%2.5%2.5%13.5%6.8%6.0%0.8%4.9%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
1.3%0.2%0.0%4.7%8.6%2.9%5.0%14.2%1.9%0.3%2.2%2.5%11.7%4.1%6.8%0.3%5.1%0.1%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.3%0.2%0.5%1.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.2%0.7%0.0%0.7%0.0%0.3%0.0%
0.2%0.1%0.0%3.4%3.6%0.2%2.0%5.6%0.1%0.1%1.4%1.2%3.3%2.5%1.8%0.2%1.2%0.1%
0.4%0.1%0.0%1.4%2.9%1.0%1.5%4.3%1.0%0.0%0.6%0.3%4.3%1.3%1.7%0.2%1.9%0.2%
0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%1.1%0.2%0.5%1.6%0.2%0.0%0.3%0.0%1.5%0.4%0.2%0.2%1.0%0.0%
0.3%0.1%0.1%3.2%4.0%0.6%2.3%6.7%0.2%0.1%1.4%0.7%4.9%2.8%2.2%0.3%1.6%0.1%
7.2%1.2%0.2%44.9%58.2%10.8%24.0%85.2%7.1%0.7%13.0%14.3%65.7%35.0%30.5%2.3%24.6%0.6%
0.4%0.0%0.0%2.3%3.7%0.8%0.8%4.4%0.4%0.0%0.5%0.8%3.5%2.2%1.2%0.4%1.1%0.0%
7.1%1.3%0.3%45.8%58.5%25.5%25.5%87.4%6.9%0.8%13.9%14.2%67.1%35.5%31.6%2.2%25.1%0.7%
1.1%0.2%0.2%3.4%4.8%2.0%2.0%7.3%0.4%0.0%0.7%1.5%5.5%3.0%2.2%0.0%2.4%0.1%
6.4%1.1%0.1%44.7%57.4%24.4%24.4%84.5%6.9%0.8%13.7%13.6%65.0%34.7%30.5%2.6%23.7%0.6%
1.7%0.4%0.0%13.6%16.1%7.0%7.0%24.5%1.9%0.1%4.1%4.7%17.7%10.7%9.3%0.8%5.6%0.0%
5.8%0.8%0.3%34.5%46.1%19.4%19.4%67.4%5.4%0.7%10.3%10.4%52.9%27.0%23.4%1.8%20.6%0.7%
3.5%0.5%0.2%20.7%25.7%10.5%10.5%37.9%3.1%0.3%5.7%6.1%29.4%18.9%11.7%0.8%9.7%0.2%
4.0%0.7%0.1%27.4%36.4%15.9%15.9%53.9%4.2%0.5%8.7%8.9%41.1%18.9%21.1%1.8%16.4%0.5%
0.1%0.1%0.0%2.5%2.9%1.1%1.1%4.1%0.1%0.0%1.0%0.7%2.5%2.1%1.2%0.2%0.7%0.0%
7.4%1.2%0.3%45.6%59.3%25.3%25.3%87.7%7.2%0.8%13.5%14.3%68.0%35.6%31.6%2.4%25.4%0.7%
0.6%0.2%0.0%4.9%7.1%4.1%4.1%11.5%0.6%0.2%1.9%1.5%9.0%4.2%4.6%0.1%3.3%0.2%
6.8%1.1%0.3%43.2%55.1%22.2%22.2%80.3%6.7%0.6%12.5%13.6%61.5%33.5%28.2%2.5%22.9%0.5%
0.5%0.2%0.0%3.8%4.2%2.4%2.4%7.1%1.4%0.0%1.1%1.6%5.8%3.3%2.6%0.1%2.4%0.0%
6.9%1.1%0.3%44.3%57.9%23.9%23.9%84.7%5.9%0.8%13.3%13.5%64.7%34.4%30.1%2.5%23.7%0.7%
0.4%0.0%0.0%6.3%6.7%2.9%2.9%11.4%0.5%0.0%2.6%2.0%7.3%5.4%3.7%0.4%2.4%0.0%
0.7%0.1%0.0%5.3%5.7%3.6%3.6%10.9%1.2%0.3%1.5%1.3%9.6%4.1%4.4%0.3%3.4%0.1%
1.2%0.4%0.1%5.9%7.1%2.3%2.3%11.3%1.1%0.1%1.4%2.0%9.1%3.7%4.4%0.1%4.0%0.2%
1.2%0.1%0.1%7.5%8.4%2.7%2.7%13.5%1.5%0.0%1.9%1.9%11.1%6.3%4.7%0.5%3.5%0.0%
1.8%0.4%0.0%7.8%9.0%4.0%4.0%15.3%0.8%0.1%2.2%2.8%11.2%6.9%4.2%0.5%4.1%0.4%
1.7%0.1%0.0%7.7%9.5%4.1%4.1%15.9%1.2%0.2%1.7%3.6%12.0%6.1%5.1%0.4%5.6%0.0%
0.5%0.1%0.1%7.7%7.6%3.4%3.4%13.6%1.1%0.1%3.1%1.5%10.2%5.2%6.1%0.3%3.1%0.0%
1.1%0.1%0.2%2.7%3.5%2.6%2.6%7.2%0.4%0.0%1.1%1.3%5.3%2.5%2.0%0.5%2.4%0.1%
0.1%0.2%0.0%1.3%1.3%0.9%0.9%2.8%0.3%0.0%0.5%0.7%1.8%1.3%1.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%
0.7%0.0%0.0%3.7%4.5%2.5%2.5%7.8%0.6%0.2%1.3%1.1%6.4%3.1%3.1%0.2%2.2%0.1%
0.5%0.2%0.0%4.6%5.0%2.4%2.4%8.6%0.4%0.0%1.6%1.1%6.4%3.1%3.4%0.0%2.5%0.0%
0.7%0.1%0.0%7.7%8.2%3.2%3.2%13.7%0.6%0.0%2.4%2.2%9.6%5.3%5.0%0.4%3.6%0.0%
1.6%0.2%0.0%8.5%9.9%4.3%4.3%16.5%2.1%0.2%2.8%2.5%13.6%7.1%5.6%0.7%5.2%0.2%
1.4%0.0%0.1%12.1%11.5%3.2%3.2%18.5%0.8%0.1%3.3%3.4%12.8%9.0%5.5%0.3%4.6%0.1%
1.4%0.4%0.0%7.5%10.2%3.8%3.8%16.7%1.9%0.3%1.5%2.8%14.7%6.4%6.8%0.4%5.2%0.2%
3.3%0.7%0.3%14.2%17.8%6.5%6.5%29.3%2.8%0.2%1.9%3.9%26.5%10.9%11.3%0.7%8.8%0.5%
0.2%0.0%0.0%4.7%4.5%3.6%3.6%9.9%0.5%0.2%3.7%2.5%4.3%4.7%3.0%0.4%2.5%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.2%0.0%0.0%1.1%1.1%0.4%0.4%1.8%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.4%1.3%0.8%0.4%0.0%0.6%0.0%
3.4%0.4%0.0%25.7%28.3%11.6%11.6%46.9%3.7%0.3%7.8%7.5%35.6%19.4%17.1%1.2%13.1%0.2%
0.4%0.1%0.0%2.4%2.4%0.8%0.8%3.9%0.2%0.1%0.7%0.6%2.9%1.9%1.0%0.3%1.1%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Median PresenceBike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
C4 C5 C6 None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNone
Attachment B-6 12 of 16
Attachment B-7
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Bicyclist 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Animal 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Bicycle 35.4%40.9%23.7%31.2%59.6%9.2%13.2%21.8%54.8%9.5%0.6%34.3%22.6%22.9%3.7%0.9%15.6%26.2%30.9%42.9%0.0%0.3%0.3%37.0%5.5%
Head On 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Left Turn 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Off Road 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Pedestrian 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Rear End 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Right Turn 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Rollover 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Sideswipe 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Unknown 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Y 0.0%1.2%0.3%0.0%1.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.5%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.6%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.7%1.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.0%
N 35.4%39.7%23.4%31.2%58.1%9.2%13.2%21.8%53.2%9.5%0.6%33.6%22.0%22.6%3.7%0.9%15.6%26.2%30.2%41.8%0.0%0.3%0.3%36.4%5.5%
Y 7.1%7.1%4.6%5.5%11.0%2.1%2.2%4.6%9.8%2.2%0.0%7.6%3.1%4.6%0.6%0.0%2.8%4.4%5.8%8.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.0%0.6%
N 28.3%33.8%19.1%25.7%48.6%7.0%11.1%17.2%44.9%7.4%0.6%26.6%19.6%18.3%3.1%0.9%12.8%21.8%25.1%34.2%0.0%0.3%0.3%29.1%4.9%
Y 0.3%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
N 35.1%40.9%23.7%30.9%59.6%9.2%13.2%21.5%54.8%9.5%0.6%34.3%22.6%22.6%3.7%0.9%15.6%26.2%30.5%42.9%0.0%0.3%0.3%37.0%5.5%
Y 5.2%8.0%4.6%4.0%10.4%3.4%1.2%3.4%11.7%1.5%0.0%5.8%4.3%4.6%1.2%0.0%1.8%3.3%6.9%8.7%0.0%0.3%0.0%7.3%1.5%
N 30.2%32.9%19.1%27.2%49.2%5.8%12.0%18.5%43.1%8.0%0.6%28.4%18.3%18.3%2.4%0.9%13.8%22.9%24.0%34.2%0.0%0.0%0.3%29.7%4.0%
Y 17.8%15.4%9.2%12.8%26.0%3.4%5.8%12.9%19.7%4.0%0.0%11.6%8.6%12.8%1.8%0.3%7.0%13.8%12.0%15.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%15.3%1.5%
N 17.5%25.5%14.5%18.3%33.6%5.8%7.4%8.9%35.1%5.5%0.6%22.6%14.1%10.1%1.8%0.6%8.6%12.4%18.9%27.3%0.0%0.3%0.3%21.7%4.0%
Y 0.3%0.9%0.3%0.3%1.2%0.0%0.3%0.0%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.3%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.7%0.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.0%
N 35.1%40.0%23.4%30.9%58.4%9.2%12.9%21.8%53.5%9.5%0.6%33.6%22.3%22.6%3.7%0.9%15.3%26.2%30.2%42.2%0.0%0.3%0.3%36.4%5.5%
Y 3.7%3.4%2.8%3.1%6.7%0.3%1.5%2.8%4.6%0.9%0.0%3.7%2.1%2.8%0.0%0.0%1.5%2.5%3.3%4.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.8%0.9%
N 31.7%37.5%20.9%28.1%52.9%8.9%11.7%19.1%50.2%8.6%0.6%30.6%20.5%20.2%3.7%0.9%14.1%23.6%27.6%38.5%0.0%0.3%0.3%34.3%4.6%
Y 1.8%3.1%1.5%1.5%4.3%0.9%0.3%2.2%3.4%0.6%0.0%1.8%2.1%1.8%0.3%0.0%0.6%1.5%3.3%2.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.1%0.6%
N 33.5%37.8%22.2%29.7%55.4%8.3%12.9%19.7%51.4%8.9%0.6%32.4%20.5%21.1%3.4%0.9%15.0%24.7%27.6%40.4%0.0%0.3%0.3%33.9%4.9%
Monday 6.5%5.8%4.9%5.2%9.8%2.1%2.2%3.7%9.8%1.5%0.0%5.8%4.0%3.7%0.9%0.0%2.8%3.6%5.8%7.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%7.0%0.6%
Tuesday 6.2%5.2%4.0%5.5%8.9%0.9%3.1%2.5%8.0%1.5%0.3%5.2%3.1%3.1%0.3%0.3%3.4%3.3%4.7%6.2%0.0%0.3%0.0%6.1%0.0%
Wednesday 5.2%5.2%3.1%3.1%9.8%0.9%1.2%4.0%7.7%0.6%0.0%4.0%3.1%4.0%0.9%0.0%1.8%5.5%3.3%5.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.8%0.6%
Thursday 4.0%6.8%3.4%3.7%9.2%1.2%0.9%3.1%7.7%2.2%0.3%6.4%2.8%3.4%0.0%0.3%1.2%3.3%5.8%6.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.4%0.6%
Friday 6.2%5.2%3.1%5.8%6.4%2.1%2.2%4.3%6.5%1.5%0.0%4.6%2.8%3.7%0.9%0.0%2.4%5.1%4.4%4.7%0.0%0.0%0.3%4.3%0.9%
Saturday 3.4%7.7%3.4%4.6%8.6%1.5%1.2%2.2%10.2%0.9%0.0%5.5%4.6%2.1%0.0%0.3%2.1%2.2%4.7%7.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.9%1.5%
Sunday 4.0%4.9%1.8%3.4%7.0%0.3%2.5%2.2%4.9%1.2%0.0%2.8%2.4%3.1%0.6%0.0%1.8%3.3%2.2%5.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.4%1.2%
12-3 AM 1.2%1.8%0.9%1.2%2.4%0.3%0.3%0.9%1.5%1.2%0.0%1.5%1.2%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.7%1.5%1.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.9%0.0%
3-6 AM 1.8%0.9%2.2%2.1%2.1%0.6%0.6%0.9%2.8%0.6%0.0%2.4%0.6%0.6%0.3%0.0%0.9%1.1%0.7%2.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.8%0.0%
6-9 AM 6.5%6.8%3.4%4.3%10.7%1.5%1.8%4.0%9.2%1.2%0.3%4.6%4.0%4.6%0.9%0.0%2.4%4.7%5.8%6.2%0.0%0.3%0.0%6.1%0.9%
9-Noon 4.6%4.6%4.6%3.7%8.9%1.2%1.5%4.0%7.7%0.6%0.0%4.6%4.0%3.1%0.6%0.3%1.2%5.5%1.8%7.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.1%0.6%
Noon-3 PM 4.9%5.8%3.1%3.7%8.9%1.5%2.5%3.4%6.5%1.5%0.0%5.2%2.8%3.1%0.6%0.0%2.4%2.9%4.0%6.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.8%0.3%
3-6 PM 6.5%6.2%4.0%6.7%9.8%0.3%3.4%3.4%8.6%1.2%0.0%5.5%2.8%3.7%0.3%0.3%4.3%3.6%4.7%6.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.8%0.9%
6-9 PM 5.8%9.2%3.1%5.5%10.1%2.4%1.8%3.1%12.0%1.2%0.0%5.5%4.6%4.9%0.3%0.3%2.4%4.4%7.6%6.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.4%0.9%
9-Midnight 4.0%5.5%2.5%4.0%6.7%1.2%1.2%2.2%6.5%1.8%0.3%4.9%2.8%2.4%0.6%0.0%1.2%3.3%4.7%4.7%0.0%0.0%0.3%4.0%1.8%
Dark - Lighted 4.9%9.2%6.2%5.2%12.8%2.1%1.2%4.0%12.6%2.5%0.0%9.5%4.9%2.8%0.9%0.3%1.8%2.9%8.4%10.5%0.0%0.0%0.3%6.4%1.5%
Dark - Not Lighted 4.6%4.3%2.2%4.9%4.9%1.2%0.6%1.8%6.2%1.8%0.6%3.7%2.4%3.1%0.6%0.0%1.2%4.4%2.9%4.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.6%0.6%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.3%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Dawn 1.5%1.5%0.0%0.6%1.8%0.6%0.3%1.2%1.2%0.3%0.0%0.0%1.5%1.2%0.3%0.0%0.0%1.5%1.5%0.7%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.9%0.0%
Daylight 23.1%24.3%14.8%19.9%37.6%4.9%10.5%14.5%32.3%4.9%0.0%20.2%12.8%15.0%1.8%0.6%11.9%16.7%16.7%26.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%23.9%3.4%
Dusk 0.6%0.9%0.3%0.3%1.2%0.3%0.3%0.0%1.5%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.6%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.4%1.1%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.0%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%
Unknown 0.3%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)
50-55 60+Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Context Classification
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R3+25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachment B-7 13 of 16
Attachment B-7
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Bicyclist 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
6.1%0.0%0.0%50.8%64.6%11.4%24.0%90.2%8.0%1.8%10.2%9.2%80.6%41.2%30.8%0.9%25.8%1.2%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.9%0.9%0.3%0.3%1.2%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%1.2%0.9%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%
6.1%0.0%0.0%49.8%63.7%11.1%23.7%88.9%7.7%1.8%9.8%9.2%79.4%40.3%30.5%0.9%25.5%1.2%
1.2%0.0%0.0%8.9%12.0%4.9%4.9%17.5%0.9%0.3%2.5%2.2%14.2%8.3%5.2%0.0%4.9%0.3%
4.9%0.0%0.0%41.9%52.6%19.1%19.1%72.6%7.1%1.5%7.7%7.1%66.5%32.9%25.5%0.9%20.9%0.9%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
6.1%0.0%0.0%50.5%64.6%23.7%23.7%89.8%8.0%1.8%10.2%9.2%80.3%40.9%30.8%0.9%25.8%1.2%
0.6%0.0%0.0%8.0%12.0%4.0%4.0%15.7%1.5%0.6%1.5%0.6%15.7%6.8%4.0%0.3%6.5%0.3%
5.5%0.0%0.0%42.8%52.6%20.0%20.0%74.5%6.5%1.2%8.6%8.6%64.9%34.5%26.8%0.6%19.4%0.9%
2.4%0.0%0.0%22.9%26.8%10.5%10.5%37.5%4.3%0.6%3.4%3.4%35.7%19.4%12.0%0.9%9.8%0.3%
3.7%0.0%0.0%27.8%37.8%13.5%13.5%52.6%3.7%1.2%6.8%5.8%44.9%21.8%18.8%0.0%16.0%0.9%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.9%0.9%0.3%0.3%1.2%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%1.2%0.9%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%
6.1%0.0%0.0%49.8%63.7%23.7%23.7%88.9%7.7%1.8%9.8%9.2%79.4%40.3%30.5%0.9%25.5%1.2%
0.9%0.0%0.0%5.5%6.8%1.5%1.5%8.9%0.9%0.0%0.3%0.3%9.2%4.3%1.8%0.3%3.4%0.0%
5.2%0.0%0.0%45.3%57.8%22.5%22.5%81.2%7.1%1.8%9.8%8.9%71.4%36.9%28.9%0.6%22.5%1.2%
0.0%0.0%0.0%3.1%3.4%1.5%1.5%4.9%1.5%0.0%0.3%0.0%6.2%1.8%2.2%0.3%1.8%0.3%
6.1%0.0%0.0%47.7%61.2%22.5%22.5%85.2%6.5%1.8%9.8%9.2%74.5%39.4%28.6%0.6%24.0%0.9%
0.6%0.0%0.0%8.9%10.4%2.7%2.7%14.2%2.2%0.9%1.2%1.8%14.2%8.6%2.5%0.3%5.2%0.6%
0.9%0.0%0.0%8.0%7.9%4.9%4.9%15.1%0.3%0.0%1.5%2.2%11.7%5.8%6.2%0.0%3.1%0.3%
0.0%0.0%0.0%7.3%7.4%4.1%4.1%12.6%0.3%0.6%1.2%1.2%11.1%6.5%4.3%0.0%2.5%0.3%
0.9%0.0%0.0%6.1%6.0%4.6%4.6%12.3%1.5%0.3%2.5%1.8%9.8%4.0%6.5%0.3%3.4%0.0%
0.9%0.0%0.0%8.0%8.5%1.6%1.6%12.6%1.8%0.0%1.5%1.2%11.7%6.2%4.3%0.0%4.0%0.0%
1.8%0.0%0.0%6.4%9.6%2.2%2.2%13.2%1.2%0.0%1.5%0.9%12.0%5.8%3.1%0.3%5.2%0.0%
0.9%0.0%0.0%6.1%7.7%1.1%1.1%10.2%0.6%0.0%0.6%0.0%10.2%4.3%4.0%0.0%2.5%0.0%
0.6%0.0%0.0%2.4%2.5%0.3%0.3%3.7%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.3%3.4%1.5%1.2%0.0%1.2%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%3.1%2.5%1.4%1.4%4.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.9%3.7%1.8%1.5%0.6%0.3%0.6%
0.3%0.0%0.0%8.9%9.3%4.6%4.6%15.7%0.6%0.3%2.2%2.5%12.0%6.5%4.9%0.0%4.9%0.3%
0.6%0.0%0.0%6.4%8.5%2.5%2.5%12.0%1.5%0.3%0.3%0.6%12.9%4.9%4.3%0.0%4.3%0.3%
1.2%0.0%0.0%6.7%7.9%2.5%2.5%12.0%1.5%0.3%0.6%1.5%11.7%6.2%4.0%0.0%3.7%0.0%
0.6%0.0%0.0%9.5%9.3%3.6%3.6%15.1%1.2%0.3%1.5%1.8%13.2%6.8%7.7%0.3%1.8%0.0%
1.2%0.0%0.0%9.5%9.6%4.9%4.9%16.3%1.5%0.3%2.2%0.3%15.7%8.6%4.3%0.0%5.2%0.0%
1.5%0.0%0.0%4.3%7.9%1.6%1.6%11.1%0.9%0.0%2.8%1.2%8.0%4.9%2.8%0.0%4.3%0.0%
2.8%0.0%0.0%9.2%11.2%4.4%4.4%19.1%0.9%0.3%1.5%0.9%17.8%7.7%6.5%0.3%5.5%0.3%
0.3%0.0%0.0%5.5%6.8%1.6%1.6%9.5%1.2%0.3%2.8%1.8%6.5%4.6%2.8%0.3%3.1%0.3%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.3%
0.0%0.0%0.0%1.8%2.5%0.0%0.0%2.8%0.3%0.0%0.9%0.3%1.8%1.8%0.0%0.0%1.2%0.0%
3.1%0.0%0.0%32.1%35.0%14.2%14.2%55.4%5.5%1.2%4.3%6.2%51.7%25.8%20.9%0.3%14.8%0.3%
0.0%0.0%0.0%1.2%1.1%0.5%0.5%1.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.8%0.6%0.0%0.0%1.2%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.3%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Median PresenceBike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
C4 C5 C6 None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNone
Attachment B-7 14 of 16
Attachment B-8
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Pedestrians
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Animal 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Bicycle 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Head On 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Left Turn 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Off Road 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Pedestrian 26.1%37.1%36.9%28.2%61.2%10.6%10.4%18.6%59.3%11.6%0.1%45.2%24.7%16.1%2.3%0.1%11.6%17.8%31.1%51.1%0.0%0.5%0.0%44.2%3.9%
Rear End 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Right Turn 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Rollover 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Sideswipe 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Unknown 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Y 0.9%1.4%0.3%1.3%1.1%0.2%0.3%0.7%1.2%0.3%0.0%1.0%0.7%0.4%0.2%0.0%0.2%0.8%1.2%0.6%0.0%0.1%0.0%1.0%0.1%
N 25.2%35.7%36.5%26.9%60.2%10.3%10.0%17.8%58.1%11.3%0.1%44.2%24.0%15.6%2.1%0.1%11.4%17.0%29.9%50.5%0.0%0.4%0.0%43.3%3.8%
Y 6.1%6.5%6.8%6.0%11.6%1.7%2.6%3.6%11.2%2.0%0.0%8.3%5.4%2.2%0.3%0.0%3.1%3.0%6.3%9.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%7.2%0.5%
N 20.0%30.6%30.0%22.2%49.6%8.9%7.8%15.0%48.1%9.6%0.1%36.9%19.3%13.8%2.0%0.1%8.6%14.8%24.8%42.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%37.1%3.4%
Y 0.6%0.6%0.7%0.7%1.2%0.1%0.4%0.4%1.1%0.1%0.0%1.1%0.3%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.2%0.6%1.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.7%0.0%
N 25.4%36.4%36.1%27.5%60.1%10.5%9.9%18.2%58.2%11.5%0.1%44.1%24.4%15.8%2.3%0.1%11.2%17.6%30.5%50.1%0.0%0.5%0.0%43.5%3.9%
Y 3.5%3.0%2.8%3.0%5.8%0.7%1.3%1.8%5.9%0.3%0.0%3.3%2.0%1.9%0.3%0.0%2.0%2.2%2.5%3.8%0.0%0.1%0.0%3.2%0.3%
N 22.5%34.1%34.1%25.2%55.4%9.8%9.1%16.8%53.4%11.3%0.1%41.9%22.7%14.1%2.0%0.1%9.6%15.7%28.6%47.2%0.0%0.4%0.0%41.1%3.6%
Y 8.4%10.0%10.3%5.5%19.1%3.9%2.9%6.5%16.1%3.2%0.0%11.1%7.5%5.4%0.8%0.1%3.6%6.1%7.4%14.6%0.0%0.1%0.0%11.4%1.5%
N 17.6%27.0%26.6%22.7%42.1%6.7%7.5%12.1%43.2%8.4%0.1%34.1%17.2%10.7%1.5%0.0%8.0%11.7%23.7%36.5%0.0%0.4%0.0%32.8%2.4%
Y 0.3%0.9%0.5%0.6%0.8%0.2%0.1%0.2%1.2%0.2%0.0%0.6%0.6%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.1%0.7%0.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.1%
N 25.7%36.2%36.3%27.6%60.4%10.3%10.3%18.4%58.1%11.4%0.1%44.6%24.1%15.9%2.2%0.1%11.4%17.7%30.4%50.2%0.0%0.5%0.0%43.7%3.8%
Y 2.2%3.1%2.6%2.3%5.1%0.6%0.9%1.5%4.7%0.9%0.0%3.6%2.3%1.1%0.1%0.0%1.0%1.6%2.4%4.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.8%0.2%
N 23.8%34.0%34.3%25.9%56.2%9.9%9.5%17.1%54.6%10.8%0.1%41.6%22.4%15.0%2.2%0.1%10.7%16.3%28.7%47.0%0.0%0.5%0.0%40.4%3.7%
Y 1.0%1.4%2.4%1.4%3.1%0.2%0.5%1.0%2.6%0.6%0.0%2.0%1.6%0.4%0.1%0.0%0.5%0.6%0.5%3.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.3%0.0%
N 25.1%35.7%34.5%26.8%58.2%10.3%9.8%17.6%56.7%11.0%0.1%43.2%23.1%15.6%2.2%0.1%11.1%17.2%30.6%47.5%0.0%0.5%0.0%41.9%3.9%
Monday 3.8%4.3%4.3%4.0%7.2%1.2%1.7%1.9%6.9%1.8%0.0%5.4%3.0%2.0%0.2%0.0%1.8%2.2%3.7%6.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.7%0.6%
Tuesday 4.2%5.1%6.0%4.6%9.1%1.6%1.5%3.1%9.0%1.6%0.1%6.8%3.5%2.7%0.4%0.0%1.9%3.3%3.6%8.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%7.7%0.5%
Wednesday 4.4%4.9%5.4%4.9%8.2%1.8%2.1%2.6%8.1%1.9%0.0%6.7%2.6%2.5%0.7%0.0%2.3%3.1%3.9%7.2%0.0%0.1%0.0%5.7%1.0%
Thursday 3.2%5.4%6.2%2.7%10.3%1.8%1.1%3.2%8.9%1.7%0.0%7.6%3.2%2.3%0.3%0.1%1.4%2.2%4.3%8.7%0.0%0.1%0.0%7.2%0.4%
Friday 3.8%6.6%5.4%4.3%10.2%1.5%1.1%3.1%9.9%1.8%0.0%7.0%5.1%2.2%0.4%0.0%1.4%3.5%5.1%8.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%6.1%0.7%
Saturday 3.6%6.1%4.8%4.6%8.7%1.1%2.0%2.4%9.0%1.2%0.0%6.2%4.1%2.0%0.0%0.0%2.0%1.6%5.9%6.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.4%0.4%
Sunday 3.0%4.6%4.7%3.0%7.5%1.7%0.9%2.4%7.5%1.6%0.0%5.6%3.3%2.2%0.2%0.0%0.8%2.0%4.5%6.2%0.0%0.2%0.0%6.4%0.2%
12-3 AM 3.0%3.1%4.3%3.7%5.0%1.7%1.2%1.8%6.1%1.3%0.0%5.3%1.9%1.7%0.2%0.0%1.3%1.9%3.1%5.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.1%0.3%
3-6 AM 2.1%2.6%2.8%2.0%3.8%1.6%0.5%1.5%4.4%1.1%0.0%3.6%1.8%1.2%0.1%0.0%0.7%1.2%2.6%3.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.5%0.2%
6-9 AM 2.8%3.7%3.8%2.4%7.3%0.6%1.1%2.0%5.9%1.4%0.0%4.1%2.6%2.0%0.4%0.0%1.2%2.0%3.1%5.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.1%0.6%
9-Noon 2.0%2.1%1.9%1.8%3.8%0.4%1.7%1.1%2.7%0.6%0.0%2.2%1.1%1.1%0.0%0.1%1.6%1.0%1.4%2.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.9%0.3%
Noon-3 PM 2.6%2.7%1.5%3.0%3.6%0.3%1.1%2.2%3.3%0.1%0.0%1.9%2.0%1.6%0.0%0.0%1.4%1.4%2.8%2.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%2.4%0.4%
3-6 PM 4.0%3.3%3.1%4.0%6.0%0.6%1.6%2.2%6.1%0.4%0.0%3.0%2.5%2.7%0.6%0.0%1.8%3.6%2.6%3.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.7%0.4%
6-9 PM 5.0%10.9%10.5%6.2%17.4%2.6%1.5%4.6%16.9%3.4%0.0%14.1%5.9%3.5%0.7%0.0%2.0%3.1%9.0%15.3%0.0%0.4%0.0%12.6%0.6%
9-Midnight 4.6%8.7%9.0%5.1%14.4%2.6%1.7%3.1%14.0%3.3%0.1%11.0%6.9%2.3%0.2%0.0%1.7%3.6%6.5%13.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%11.0%1.0%
Dark - Lighted 7.3%17.4%21.6%9.7%30.5%6.0%2.8%7.7%30.0%5.8%0.0%26.3%11.2%5.0%0.4%0.0%3.4%5.0%14.2%29.3%0.0%0.1%0.0%23.4%0.8%
Dark - Not Lighted 6.4%7.9%4.4%6.1%10.3%2.0%1.4%2.9%10.8%3.5%0.1%7.7%4.6%3.9%0.5%0.0%1.7%4.7%6.8%7.5%0.0%0.3%0.0%8.6%1.2%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.1%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Dawn 0.4%1.0%1.0%0.5%1.4%0.4%0.2%0.4%1.4%0.3%0.0%0.8%1.0%0.1%0.2%0.0%0.2%0.2%0.8%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.2%
Daylight 10.3%9.9%8.8%10.1%17.3%1.7%5.4%6.6%15.0%1.9%0.0%9.1%6.9%6.2%1.0%0.1%5.9%6.9%7.9%11.5%0.0%0.1%0.0%10.0%1.7%
Dusk 1.4%0.7%1.0%1.5%1.4%0.3%0.4%0.7%1.8%0.1%0.0%1.1%1.0%0.5%0.2%0.0%0.4%0.6%1.3%1.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.1%0.0%
Other 0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%
Unknown 0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)
50-55 60+Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Context Classification
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R3+25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachment B-8 15 of 16
Attachment B-8
MetroPlan Orlando Region
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Pedestrians
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
11.3%1.0%0.7%38.3%64.2%12.9%22.9%88.1%10.5%1.4%6.9%10.6%82.5%36.9%30.8%3.0%28.6%0.7%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.2%0.0%0.0%1.2%1.7%0.2%0.6%2.2%0.2%0.1%0.4%0.4%1.7%1.4%0.9%0.0%0.3%0.0%
11.1%1.0%0.7%37.2%62.5%12.7%22.2%85.9%10.3%1.3%6.5%10.1%80.8%35.5%29.9%3.0%28.3%0.7%
2.5%0.2%0.3%8.4%13.7%4.1%4.1%18.3%1.2%0.0%1.1%2.5%15.9%9.2%4.1%0.4%5.6%0.2%
8.8%0.7%0.4%29.9%50.5%18.8%18.8%69.9%9.3%1.4%5.9%8.1%66.6%27.7%26.7%2.6%23.1%0.5%
0.4%0.1%0.0%0.7%1.0%0.6%0.6%1.6%0.4%0.0%0.2%0.1%1.7%1.1%0.5%0.0%0.4%0.0%
10.9%0.8%0.7%37.6%63.2%22.2%22.2%86.5%10.0%1.4%6.7%10.5%80.8%35.8%30.2%3.0%28.2%0.7%
1.1%0.1%0.0%4.8%6.8%1.8%1.8%8.9%0.4%0.0%1.0%0.9%7.5%4.1%2.6%0.2%2.4%0.1%
10.2%0.8%0.7%33.6%57.4%21.0%21.0%79.3%10.0%1.4%6.0%9.7%75.0%32.8%28.2%2.8%26.3%0.6%
3.0%0.4%0.6%11.5%18.7%5.3%5.3%24.9%3.5%0.3%1.1%3.0%24.7%9.9%8.3%0.5%9.8%0.1%
8.3%0.5%0.1%26.8%45.5%17.5%17.5%63.2%6.9%1.1%5.9%7.6%57.8%26.9%22.4%2.5%18.8%0.6%
0.3%0.0%0.0%0.7%1.3%0.2%0.2%1.4%0.2%0.1%0.2%0.2%1.3%0.5%0.5%0.0%0.6%0.0%
11.0%1.0%0.7%37.6%62.9%22.6%22.6%86.8%10.3%1.3%6.7%10.4%81.2%36.3%30.2%3.0%28.0%0.7%
1.0%0.0%0.0%3.1%4.9%2.0%2.0%7.2%0.5%0.2%0.3%1.1%6.5%3.1%2.1%0.1%2.4%0.2%
10.3%1.0%0.7%35.3%59.3%20.8%20.8%81.0%9.9%1.2%6.6%9.5%76.0%33.8%28.6%2.9%26.3%0.5%
0.3%0.0%0.0%2.0%3.3%0.9%0.9%4.2%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.7%3.7%1.5%1.4%0.3%1.4%0.1%
11.0%1.0%0.7%36.3%60.9%22.0%22.0%84.0%10.1%1.2%6.7%9.8%78.7%35.4%29.4%2.7%27.2%0.6%
1.7%0.0%0.0%4.3%7.3%2.0%2.0%10.5%1.7%0.2%0.6%1.9%9.8%4.4%4.3%0.4%3.3%0.0%
1.2%0.0%0.0%5.9%8.6%3.9%3.9%14.1%1.1%0.1%1.3%1.5%12.5%6.5%4.4%0.3%4.0%0.1%
1.9%0.0%0.0%6.2%9.3%2.1%2.1%12.8%1.7%0.2%1.2%1.6%12.0%6.1%3.4%0.2%4.9%0.1%
1.9%0.4%0.0%4.9%7.1%4.2%4.2%12.3%2.2%0.3%0.9%1.7%12.3%4.9%4.2%0.9%4.8%0.1%
2.5%0.1%0.1%6.3%9.9%2.7%2.7%13.9%1.8%0.2%0.7%1.5%13.7%5.7%5.6%0.2%4.5%0.0%
1.5%0.1%0.4%6.5%9.0%3.1%3.1%13.5%1.0%0.1%1.1%1.2%12.3%5.3%4.8%0.4%3.7%0.2%
0.6%0.3%0.2%4.1%7.2%2.7%2.7%11.1%1.0%0.2%1.2%1.2%9.9%4.0%4.2%0.5%3.4%0.2%
1.3%0.2%0.1%3.4%6.8%1.3%1.3%9.0%1.2%0.2%1.2%1.0%8.2%4.1%3.1%0.0%3.1%0.1%
0.7%0.1%0.1%2.7%4.7%1.2%1.2%6.3%1.1%0.1%1.0%0.6%5.9%2.9%2.0%0.0%2.6%0.0%
1.3%0.4%0.0%3.9%6.3%1.7%1.7%8.9%1.4%0.1%0.5%1.7%8.1%3.3%3.8%0.4%2.8%0.0%
0.8%0.0%0.1%2.9%4.2%1.1%1.1%5.8%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.3%5.4%2.1%1.5%0.3%2.1%0.0%
0.7%0.0%0.1%3.1%4.4%1.1%1.1%6.2%0.4%0.1%0.4%1.1%5.2%3.0%1.9%0.0%1.7%0.1%
1.3%0.0%0.0%5.3%7.0%1.7%1.7%9.6%0.6%0.1%0.7%0.7%8.9%4.9%2.5%0.5%2.5%0.0%
3.2%0.1%0.1%9.3%13.8%6.6%6.6%23.1%3.1%0.2%1.1%2.5%22.9%8.8%7.8%1.0%8.7%0.2%
2.0%0.1%0.2%7.8%11.3%6.2%6.2%19.3%2.4%0.5%1.7%2.7%17.8%7.8%8.1%0.7%5.2%0.3%
6.3%0.7%0.5%14.3%26.4%9.3%9.3%40.0%5.4%0.9%1.7%3.0%41.6%14.6%13.9%1.6%15.6%0.5%
0.8%0.0%0.0%7.6%9.0%5.5%5.5%16.1%2.2%0.3%3.2%3.1%12.4%7.7%7.1%0.5%3.3%0.1%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%
0.0%0.1%0.0%1.1%1.4%0.4%0.4%1.8%0.5%0.0%0.2%0.5%1.6%0.6%0.9%0.0%0.9%0.0%
3.6%0.1%0.2%13.4%19.4%4.7%4.7%26.9%1.8%0.2%1.7%3.1%24.1%12.3%8.0%0.9%7.7%0.1%
0.4%0.0%0.0%1.7%1.7%0.9%0.9%2.9%0.2%0.0%0.1%0.7%2.2%1.3%0.9%0.0%1.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Median PresenceBike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
C4 C5 C6 None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNone
Attachment B-8 16 of 16
Attachment C-1
Orange County
All Crashes 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 5948 4213 1713 4877 6310 988 2585 4580 4214 479 16 2536 2744 3589 388 265 2653 3797 2994 2537 0 76 0 2545
Animal 90 116 24 133 83 15 31 38 98 32 31 70 45 52 19 2 43 83 64 39 0 28 0 29
Bicycle 557 634 399 514 949 136 267 407 814 99 3 489 436 350 54 13 257 347 415 572 0 4 0 525
Head On 893 647 280 813 905 150 332 599 758 127 4 439 444 551 51 15 368 515 535 447 0 16 0 420
Left Turn 7965 11131 4149 5619 16034 1811 2364 7216 12460 1189 16 4956 7718 6593 739 255 3203 5565 7879 6668 2 208 0 6149
Off Road 5214 3187 1308 5740 4044 443 2784 2353 3943 550 79 1823 2182 2446 401 144 3231 2534 2323 2033 12 148 0 1803
Other 11167 6955 3602 13579 9770 1645 7354 6057 7250 999 64 5151 4734 4330 506 240 10033 4587 4930 5251 7 124 0 4698
Pedestrian 749 848 650 764 1321 209 405 570 1106 166 0 760 627 449 45 15 398 415 572 895 0 7 0 748
Rear End 14500 26230 22833 12708 40672 10580 2696 15467 37596 7739 65 26586 20193 12494 835 362 3490 9781 19201 31308 4 450 0 26436
Right Turn 1066 1716 1196 809 2572 657 335 943 2392 299 9 1204 1417 864 85 37 431 703 1212 1671 0 24 0 1614
Rollover 289 319 158 331 380 68 85 207 328 112 34 273 181 189 24 8 104 224 212 236 0 55 0 211
Sideswipe 4977 9135 7293 4898 13308 3449 1536 5944 11930 1971 24 8900 6643 3926 278 110 1798 3316 6599 9878 6 123 0 8151
Unknown 1183 1854 1242 1125 2580 634 388 1488 2072 324 7 1689 1229 902 49 39 431 844 1323 1712 0 23 0 1330
Y 1005 900 646 1027 1300 293 479 698 1142 218 14 851 626 579 70 30 464 621 630 885 3 27 0 823
N 53593 66085 44201 50883 97628 20492 20683 45171 83819 13868 338 54025 47967 36156 3404 1475 25976 32090 47629 62362 28 1259 0 53836
Y 9009 9150 6930 9334 14045 3132 4434 6567 12011 2051 26 8374 6896 5056 464 218 5503 4789 6631 9442 1 128 0 8094
N 45589 57835 37917 42576 84883 17653 16728 39302 72950 12035 326 46502 41697 31679 3010 1287 20937 27922 41628 53805 30 1158 0 46565
Y 1339 1493 851 1315 2091 355 512 1271 1599 284 17 1255 925 875 89 39 578 847 1070 1243 1 56 0 1003
N 53259 65492 43996 50595 96837 20430 20650 44598 83362 13802 335 53621 47668 35860 3385 1466 25862 31864 47189 62004 30 1230 0 53656
Y 14760 19573 13297 13969 28710 6079 5313 11074 27037 4103 103 15465 14527 10357 1070 509 6830 8336 14253 18991 9 494 0 16886
N 39838 47412 31550 37941 70218 14706 15849 34795 57924 9983 249 39411 34066 26378 2404 996 19610 24375 34006 44256 22 792 0 37773
Y 19307 21291 11628 13307 32737 6430 6429 16562 25743 3442 50 14706 14806 13865 1546 667 6884 13003 15464 16676 2 443 0 16476
N 35291 45694 33219 38603 66191 14355 14733 29307 59218 10644 302 40170 33787 22870 1928 838 19556 19708 32795 46571 29 843 0 38183
Y 257 293 211 249 443 92 107 169 406 76 3 261 199 173 22 9 120 171 189 299 1 4 0 259
N 54341 66692 44636 51661 98485 20693 21055 45700 84555 14010 349 54615 48394 36562 3452 1496 26320 32540 48070 62948 30 1282 0 54400
Y 7321 9762 5855 6705 14062 2836 2704 6664 11755 1776 39 8002 6775 4964 448 232 3182 4712 6678 8875 4 205 0 7840
N 47277 57223 38992 45205 84866 17949 18458 39205 73206 12310 313 46874 41818 31771 3026 1273 23258 27999 41581 54372 27 1081 0 46819
Y 6450 8248 5614 6147 12410 2389 2351 5107 11110 1718 26 6369 5870 4678 603 221 3205 4030 5793 7796 3 169 0 6692
N 48148 58737 39233 45763 86518 18396 18811 40762 73851 12368 326 48507 42723 32057 2871 1284 23235 28681 42466 55451 28 1117 0 47967
Monday 8060 9995 6634 7559 14869 3029 3078 6641 12824 2093 53 8294 7204 5346 535 219 3859 4862 7086 9522 10 209 0 8262
Tuesday 8205 10187 6770 7665 15073 3190 3077 6875 13059 2109 42 8396 7391 5507 530 200 3904 4909 7214 9774 2 176 0 8339
Wednesday 8168 10185 6626 7846 14908 3056 3073 6949 12868 2044 45 8339 7288 5550 537 230 3866 4952 7251 9592 4 179 0 8239
Thursday 8268 10467 6942 7863 15386 3210 3153 7166 13120 2187 51 8633 7435 5640 551 245 3955 5143 7338 9862 6 187 0 8382
Friday 9027 11324 7480 8515 16772 3448 3410 7634 14402 2336 49 9310 8094 6155 557 258 4361 5393 8111 10726 3 205 0 9256
Saturday 6841 8148 5791 6586 12114 2721 2812 5756 10380 1780 52 6606 6146 4605 388 187 3489 3968 6177 7658 3 174 0 6733
Sunday 6029 6679 4604 5876 9806 2131 2559 4848 8308 1537 60 5298 5035 3932 376 166 3006 3484 5082 6113 3 156 0 5448
12-3 AM 3021 2825 2104 3079 4058 1024 1354 2292 3565 695 44 2470 2185 1837 161 69 1439 1725 2192 2731 3 77 0 2386
3-6 AM 1887 1828 1313 1833 2664 628 798 1204 2481 505 40 1613 1368 1071 139 45 889 1046 1349 1807 5 76 0 1616
6-9 AM 6834 8111 5087 6024 12024 2371 2495 5050 10629 1794 64 6469 5884 4433 511 183 2939 4107 5699 7561 3 233 0 6654
9-Noon 7443 8969 6096 7174 13341 2949 2998 6301 11353 1824 32 7638 6536 4723 414 186 3967 4378 6239 8763 6 164 0 7556
Noon-3 PM 10000 12692 8728 9838 18890 3995 4013 8949 15991 2431 36 11173 8975 6357 630 308 5280 5914 8743 12574 4 210 0 10362
3-6 PM 12286 15896 10280 11641 23448 4561 4476 10929 19837 3169 51 12945 11312 8671 792 353 5577 7720 11377 14775 5 254 0 12624
6-9 PM 8460 10919 7118 7812 16041 3346 3184 7166 13832 2273 42 8201 7911 6258 550 244 4035 5115 8160 9749 3 180 0 8644
9-Midnight 4667 5745 4121 4509 8462 1911 1844 3978 7273 1395 43 4367 4422 3385 277 117 2314 2706 4500 5287 2 92 0 4817
Dark - Lighted 11165 14427 10326 10809 21151 4881 4458 10356 17925 3148 31 11664 10645 8135 657 291 5449 6673 10940 13567 2 139 0 11787
Dark - Not Lighted 2608 1772 988 2501 2484 470 963 1060 2481 739 125 1333 1351 1412 195 69 1095 1493 1370 1455 8 225 0 1645
Dark - Unknown Lighting 231 110 67 211 184 29 115 151 123 19 0 98 85 112 15 3 111 120 93 99 0 5 0 84
Dawn 883 1065 680 812 1535 336 315 630 1397 271 15 845 756 627 63 19 373 573 804 925 2 41 0 931
Daylight 37578 47129 31167 35527 69956 14289 14436 32149 59726 9392 171 39138 33869 24966 2401 1071 18327 22616 33182 44977 19 837 0 38183
Dusk 1836 2398 1578 1722 3481 765 659 1415 3219 509 10 1734 1823 1393 132 47 839 1125 1816 2158 0 38 0 1968
Other 28 17 17 40 24 5 17 17 23 5 0 24 10 15 1 0 19 16 8 26 0 0 0 24
Unknown 262 66 23 281 109 10 196 87 65 3 0 39 52 73 10 5 221 92 45 39 0 1 0 35
Number of Lanes Posted Speed Roadway ClassificationTurn Lanes
40-45 50-55 60+
Principal
Arterial1 to 2 3+
AADT (2022)
Minor
Arterial
Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None C3C< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1
Context Classification
C2 C2T
25 or less 30-35
Hit and Run
Type
Lighting
Conditions
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
None
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes
Aggressive Driving
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Day of the Week
Time of Day
Alcohol Related
Attachmebt C-1
Limited access facilites, parking lots and roadways for which contextual data was not available were not included in this analysis.1 of 16
Attachment C-1
Orange County
All Crashes 2018-2022
311 1740 154 156 0 9011 1228 1635 10981 843 50 966 1785 9123 6719 2607 162 2341 45
20 5 1 1 0 124 19 87 214 14 2 89 35 106 88 112 4 24 2
80 161 10 19 0 1089 164 337 1452 123 15 74 152 1364 670 469 19 406 26
71 230 21 23 0 1318 189 313 1689 120 11 163 280 1377 1040 338 18 413 11
1230 2398 179 103 0 16639 2493 4113 21309 1830 106 1749 2811 18685 9823 7087 476 5708 147
417 578 71 58 0 7335 710 1664 9224 451 34 1500 1762 6447 5098 2682 170 1686 69
629 2466 267 336 0 16488 2034 3202 20253 1351 120 2043 2887 16794 12199 4623 361 4367 172
86 297 25 32 0 1552 265 430 2021 207 19 130 198 1919 996 593 24 618 16
3081 7937 642 358 0 38255 11624 13684 53311 9345 907 4068 6912 52583 17383 21597 1979 21926 664
193 335 25 13 0 2706 591 681 3453 486 39 193 375 3410 1215 1125 96 1521 21
35 78 5 8 0 473 109 184 690 73 3 153 107 506 308 277 22 156 3
761 3229 385 359 0 13921 3483 4001 18631 2571 203 1499 2286 17620 6551 6583 745 7324 201
113 816 80 91 0 2759 703 817 3725 505 49 240 475 3564 1620 1198 110 1317 34
110 292 33 35 0 1754 345 452 2262 262 27 230 368 1953 1110 710 67 639 25
6917 19978 1832 1522 0 109916 23267 30696 144691 17657 1531 12637 19697 131545 62600 48581 4119 47168 1386
838 3116 284 308 0 17564 4059 4059 22146 2693 250 1741 2977 20371 10716 6412 561 7179 220
6189 17154 1581 1249 0 94106 27089 27089 124807 15226 1308 11126 17088 113127 52994 42879 3625 40628 1191
134 512 63 30 0 2376 771 771 3258 395 30 353 533 2797 1545 1093 74 911 59
6893 19758 1802 1527 0 109294 30377 30377 143695 17524 1528 12514 19532 130701 62165 48198 4112 46896 1352
2311 4535 352 174 0 32102 8958 8958 42100 5147 383 3734 5727 38169 17264 14875 1228 14002 252
4716 15735 1513 1383 0 79568 22190 22190 104853 12772 1175 9133 14338 95329 46446 34416 2958 33805 1159
2584 6364 661 512 0 35861 8932 8932 46155 5672 399 3891 6793 41542 21074 14600 1205 14921 420
4443 13906 1204 1045 0 75809 22216 22216 100798 12247 1159 8976 13272 91956 42636 34691 2981 32886 991
52 66 7 5 0 498 148 148 660 93 8 71 105 585 275 241 20 216 9
6975 20204 1858 1552 0 111172 31000 31000 146293 17826 1550 12796 19960 132913 63435 49050 4166 47591 1402
1036 3294 316 164 0 15378 4283 4283 20237 2472 229 1518 2655 18765 8906 6609 521 6671 227
5991 16976 1549 1393 0 96292 26865 26865 126716 15447 1329 11349 17410 114733 54804 42682 3665 41136 1184
1144 1884 146 87 0 13117 4350 4350 17814 2301 197 1378 2519 16415 7267 6494 432 5933 182
5883 18386 1719 1470 0 98553 26798 26798 129139 15618 1361 11489 17546 117083 56443 42797 3754 41874 1229
1026 3039 282 231 0 16553 4670 4670 21833 2630 226 1899 2992 19798 9422 7309 623 7114 220
1055 3191 287 197 0 16920 4642 4642 22147 2768 247 1968 3002 20192 9544 7317 608 7466 223
1083 3146 285 225 0 16764 4795 4795 22156 2588 235 1780 3057 20142 9702 7274 584 7203 210
1088 3289 308 229 0 17240 4774 4774 22680 2766 231 2002 2988 20687 9804 7571 648 7445 208
1193 3379 282 235 0 18537 5344 5344 24585 3006 240 2108 3290 22433 10655 8179 674 8054 262
860 2361 230 236 0 13944 3814 3814 18266 2302 212 1698 2478 16604 7839 6354 569 5861 155
722 1865 191 204 0 11712 3109 3109 15286 1859 167 1412 2258 13642 6744 5287 480 4664 133
297 971 111 205 0 5493 1293 1293 7055 831 64 751 1096 6103 3301 2226 269 2070 82
221 520 69 92 0 3411 858 858 4404 580 44 609 634 3785 2025 1472 154 1338 38
962 2237 232 155 0 13701 3608 3608 17811 2036 185 1755 2520 15757 7718 5872 498 5747 191
890 3022 274 207 0 15309 4020 4020 19895 2422 191 1665 2696 18147 8658 6438 533 6690 188
1261 4496 389 257 0 21061 5868 5868 27697 3415 308 2177 3581 25662 12200 8950 680 9307 281
1539 4900 429 281 0 25642 7540 7540 34078 4025 359 2628 4493 31341 14919 11450 870 10900 320
1206 2707 230 176 0 17490 5219 5219 23297 2928 272 1936 3168 21393 9746 8247 678 7611 211
651 1417 131 184 0 9563 2742 2742 12716 1682 135 1346 1877 11310 5143 4636 504 4144 100
1492 4192 424 557 0 23879 6524 6524 31338 4204 376 2455 4180 29283 12863 11025 1146 10550 324
315 245 17 13 0 3434 1231 1231 4838 496 34 1210 1049 3109 2515 1724 130 975 24
14 58 3 5 0 286 68 68 368 38 2 38 82 288 236 83 13 69 7
122 259 29 13 0 1741 507 507 2310 285 33 288 337 2003 1002 767 78 762 18
4806 15022 1354 935 0 78078 21668 21668 102543 12264 1067 8402 13607 93865 44716 33756 2664 33724 1000
266 467 34 29 0 3899 1106 1106 5154 614 44 427 740 4645 2081 1865 152 1676 38
1 5 0 0 0 44 9 9 53 8 1 5 13 44 31 17 2 12 0
11 22 4 5 0 302 33 33 340 10 1 39 56 256 258 53 1 39 0
Context Classification Bike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft
C3R None None
Bike Slots
None One Side Both
Sides NoneOne SideNone Both
Sides
Sidewalks Median Presence
OtherGrassMultiplePavedBoth
SidesOne SideC4C5C6
Attachmebt C-1
Limited access facilites, parking lots and roadways for which contextual data was not available were not included in this analysis.2 of 16
Attachment C-2
Orange County
All KSI Crashes 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 203 167 91 159 274 38 82 137 201 38 3 111 117 127 16 9 91 129 123 119 0 7 0 135
Animal 3 3 0 4 2 0 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 0 1 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 0
Bicycle 81 102 62 79 143 25 33 58 133 20 1 83 55 58 10 3 38 53 61 94 0 0 0 93
Head On 75 58 22 75 72 8 12 37 79 26 1 41 42 51 6 2 13 53 47 41 0 4 0 37
Left Turn 270 559 284 211 818 89 61 211 728 109 4 290 427 275 21 13 92 216 413 390 1 27 0 376
Off Road 211 231 89 289 241 23 83 112 276 50 10 122 157 135 15 8 116 132 160 139 3 14 0 116
Other 193 215 153 230 301 52 84 116 294 54 13 188 150 115 19 6 105 127 148 200 2 10 0 164
Pedestrian 160 262 270 195 433 73 69 139 414 70 0 301 199 110 12 1 78 95 192 335 0 3 0 294
Rear End 159 426 443 217 655 163 13 114 741 150 10 455 368 159 14 10 29 113 312 575 0 22 0 474
Right Turn 13 34 28 15 50 11 1 15 47 11 1 25 29 17 1 1 3 13 25 35 0 1 0 29
Rollover 28 26 13 41 23 4 7 14 25 11 10 29 8 17 2 0 12 23 13 20 0 10 0 16
Sideswipe 37 70 70 50 108 20 8 31 103 34 1 84 52 24 6 2 10 23 53 90 0 4 0 85
Unknown 12 36 20 16 50 2 3 14 41 9 1 24 23 16 2 0 3 15 23 27 0 3 0 26
Y 79 118 72 105 148 17 25 59 145 31 9 106 64 65 8 4 23 72 77 96 2 11 0 95
N 1366 2071 1473 1476 3022 491 433 939 2938 553 47 1649 1564 1039 117 51 569 922 1495 1969 4 96 0 1750
Y 158 197 181 144 343 52 58 105 319 52 2 193 160 110 10 7 59 93 154 229 0 3 0 196
N 1287 1992 1364 1437 2827 456 400 893 2764 532 54 1562 1468 994 115 48 533 901 1418 1836 6 104 0 1649
Y 91 105 51 78 156 15 24 77 128 15 3 81 56 80 8 1 23 68 79 79 0 4 0 58
N 1354 2084 1494 1503 3014 493 434 921 2955 569 53 1674 1572 1024 117 54 569 926 1493 1986 6 103 0 1787
Y 388 647 427 411 915 160 112 238 930 166 16 463 516 310 28 20 149 263 469 593 2 41 0 513
N 1057 1542 1118 1170 2255 348 346 760 2153 418 40 1292 1112 794 97 35 443 731 1103 1472 4 66 0 1332
Y 632 898 612 485 1445 217 190 476 1250 215 11 660 687 505 54 25 216 466 665 781 1 40 0 749
N 813 1291 933 1096 1725 291 268 522 1833 369 45 1095 941 599 71 30 376 528 907 1284 5 67 0 1096
Y 43 69 44 45 94 17 13 24 97 20 2 59 45 34 3 3 12 32 45 66 1 2 0 53
N 1402 2120 1501 1536 3076 491 445 974 2986 564 54 1696 1583 1070 122 52 580 962 1527 1999 5 105 0 1792
Y 213 319 194 205 457 81 58 149 430 84 5 244 233 153 22 6 85 151 231 272 0 23 0 270
N 1232 1870 1351 1376 2713 427 400 849 2653 500 51 1511 1395 951 103 49 507 843 1341 1793 6 84 0 1575
Y 160 264 179 166 389 56 49 100 387 66 1 180 200 134 17 7 73 122 162 250 0 9 0 218
N 1285 1925 1366 1415 2781 452 409 898 2696 518 55 1575 1428 970 108 48 519 872 1410 1815 6 98 0 1627
Monday 232 274 208 232 425 67 65 134 430 76 9 239 209 167 22 8 79 155 207 276 2 14 0 262
Tuesday 191 321 231 226 471 61 64 142 446 82 9 239 249 155 19 4 92 134 240 290 1 13 0 266
Wednesday 197 310 226 216 470 60 62 156 427 80 8 259 219 156 18 10 84 146 213 298 0 17 0 255
Thursday 205 327 209 216 463 73 64 140 449 81 7 248 240 161 12 11 80 135 224 305 1 16 0 268
Friday 233 338 249 249 497 87 78 157 485 94 6 286 264 154 20 10 99 158 252 318 1 17 0 289
Saturday 195 349 238 223 479 90 67 145 471 89 10 270 249 170 14 8 81 139 236 329 0 17 0 276
Sunday 192 270 184 219 365 70 58 124 375 82 7 214 198 141 20 4 77 127 200 249 1 13 0 229
12-3 AM 102 184 150 153 232 54 33 89 243 59 12 185 133 77 6 2 36 77 126 197 0 12 0 167
3-6 AM 92 118 101 109 166 37 22 67 171 47 4 114 98 56 11 4 29 59 92 130 2 8 0 108
6-9 AM 208 315 191 197 457 67 55 136 432 78 13 215 235 165 22 5 79 147 216 275 2 25 0 242
9-Noon 179 267 196 192 386 74 63 119 379 75 6 215 208 124 16 6 83 121 182 263 1 17 0 225
Noon-3 PM 200 289 184 210 421 62 66 143 398 63 3 211 219 142 20 8 93 135 217 242 0 10 0 237
3-6 PM 233 331 209 259 477 53 88 143 459 76 7 247 227 188 17 8 102 162 250 271 1 14 0 259
6-9 PM 230 381 267 248 556 88 71 157 553 91 6 296 273 193 20 14 96 148 288 350 0 11 0 308
9-Midnight 201 304 247 213 475 73 60 144 448 95 5 272 235 159 13 8 74 145 201 337 0 10 0 299
Dark - Lighted 374 714 602 466 1052 192 116 351 1030 187 6 658 526 328 30 20 148 265 495 790 1 10 0 641
Dark - Not Lighted 167 144 78 167 200 25 33 66 191 78 21 138 94 92 13 3 52 117 106 114 1 32 0 142
Dark - Unknown Lighting 1 1 2 1 3 0 1 0 3 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0
Dawn 39 48 24 35 69 8 11 21 63 13 3 31 30 33 4 1 13 31 29 38 1 5 0 36
Daylight 815 1213 784 856 1747 260 281 531 1683 291 26 871 924 611 73 29 355 554 885 1052 3 57 0 960
Dusk 44 68 51 53 93 22 16 25 108 14 0 51 52 36 5 2 22 23 56 64 0 3 0 61
Other 2 1 4 2 4 1 0 2 4 1 0 4 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 5 0 0 0 5
Unknown 3 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes
None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)Context Classification
50-55 60+
Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C3+
25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachmebt C-1
Limited access facilites, parking lots and roadways for which contextual data was not available were not included in this analysis.3 of 16
Attachment C-2
Orange County
All KSI Crashes 2018-2022
21 35 2 5 0 319 65 77 410 49 2 63 64 334 230 128 4 98 1
0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 6 0 0 5 0 1 3 3 0 0 0
14 15 0 0 0 160 27 58 222 19 4 22 17 206 95 79 1 66 4
8 16 0 0 0 109 9 37 150 4 1 29 26 100 88 34 2 31 0
75 55 7 0 0 743 172 198 967 142 4 98 139 876 376 404 13 317 3
37 18 4 1 0 374 40 117 506 23 2 90 76 365 217 199 8 103 4
34 56 5 5 0 375 66 120 509 49 3 82 66 413 222 186 14 133 6
27 88 8 7 0 460 90 142 603 81 8 41 56 595 257 211 11 210 3
66 65 3 0 0 581 205 242 843 173 12 87 94 847 203 403 31 388 3
2 4 0 0 0 44 8 23 67 8 0 7 5 63 13 29 0 33 0
6 3 1 0 0 43 4 20 64 3 0 21 7 39 24 29 3 10 1
5 11 2 1 0 100 34 43 149 26 2 12 18 147 50 74 4 49 0
6 6 0 0 0 37 11 20 60 8 0 7 4 57 17 27 1 23 0
18 23 3 1 0 171 34 64 241 27 1 47 24 198 106 93 8 61 1
283 349 29 18 0 3177 697 1036 4315 558 37 517 548 3845 1689 1713 84 1400 24
22 47 2 3 0 371 100 100 488 47 1 39 51 446 228 141 8 154 5
279 325 30 16 0 2977 1000 1000 4068 538 37 525 521 3597 1567 1665 84 1307 20
17 30 4 3 0 161 50 50 218 28 1 27 42 178 109 78 2 56 2
284 342 28 16 0 3187 1050 1050 4338 557 37 537 530 3865 1686 1728 90 1405 23
108 80 5 1 0 956 293 293 1280 171 11 170 158 1134 464 530 34 427 7
193 292 27 18 0 2392 807 807 3276 414 27 394 414 2909 1331 1276 58 1034 18
138 149 14 14 0 1385 403 403 1843 286 13 202 237 1703 754 722 31 627 8
163 223 18 5 0 1963 697 697 2713 299 25 362 335 2340 1041 1084 61 834 17
15 14 1 0 0 107 25 25 135 19 2 20 22 114 61 52 1 42 0
286 358 31 19 0 3241 1075 1075 4421 566 36 544 550 3929 1734 1754 91 1419 25
42 49 3 3 0 461 154 154 628 89 9 90 77 559 258 240 10 216 2
259 323 29 16 0 2887 946 946 3928 496 29 474 495 3484 1537 1566 82 1245 23
37 24 2 2 0 372 144 144 523 76 4 42 76 485 183 219 9 189 3
264 348 30 17 0 2976 956 956 4033 509 34 522 496 3558 1612 1587 83 1272 22
46 45 4 3 0 459 157 157 634 74 6 76 75 563 261 236 18 193 6
32 47 2 2 0 470 177 177 668 75 0 82 86 575 256 261 3 220 3
44 58 5 1 0 489 130 130 633 91 9 73 100 560 245 265 10 207 6
40 59 7 2 0 474 170 170 657 77 7 87 80 574 272 246 8 214 1
48 65 4 2 0 524 169 169 710 104 6 85 87 648 289 276 14 239 2
48 61 6 5 0 506 161 161 682 93 7 85 78 619 250 281 25 224 2
43 37 4 4 0 426 136 136 572 71 3 76 66 504 222 241 14 164 5
30 51 4 5 0 261 106 106 375 58 3 52 40 344 125 156 11 139 5
21 21 7 1 0 199 63 63 272 37 2 54 35 222 110 120 8 70 3
39 43 5 0 0 462 152 152 628 81 5 75 76 563 236 251 17 206 4
41 42 3 3 0 422 128 128 569 71 2 76 68 498 203 224 9 205 1
36 44 0 3 0 448 136 136 598 69 6 77 80 516 252 226 11 183 1
47 61 5 2 0 517 159 159 692 75 6 68 87 618 299 264 12 197 1
41 52 2 3 0 570 189 189 774 96 8 80 96 702 307 298 16 251 6
46 58 6 2 0 469 167 167 648 98 6 82 90 580 263 267 8 210 4
94 162 19 11 0 1087 344 344 1459 216 15 114 158 1418 533 585 38 516 18
29 13 0 0 0 208 125 125 341 45 3 121 71 197 167 149 4 68 1
0 2 0 0 0 3 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 1 2
6 5 2 0 0 72 23 23 98 13 0 17 13 81 44 35 0 32 0
167 185 11 8 0 1875 565 565 2505 289 18 294 307 2211 998 977 44 789 4
5 5 0 0 0 97 40 40 141 20 2 16 21 126 49 56 4 54 0
0 0 0 0 0 4 1 1 5 2 0 1 2 4 1 3 2 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 3 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0
Median PresenceContext Classification Bike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
C4 C5 C6 None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNoneC3R
Attachmebt C-1
Limited access facilites, parking lots and roadways for which contextual data was not available were not included in this analysis.4 of 16
Attachment C-3
Orange County
Percent of All Crashes that Result in a KSI - 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 3.4%4.0%5.3%3.3%4.3%3.8%3.2%3.0%4.8%7.9%18.8%4.4%4.3%3.5%4.1%3.4%3.4%3.4%4.1%4.7%-9.2%-5.3%6.8%
Animal 3.3%2.6%0.0%3.0%2.4%0.0%6.5%0.0%1.0%6.3%3.2%2.9%2.2%0.0%5.3%0.0%4.7%2.4%3.1%0.0%-7.1%-0.0%0.0%
Bicycle 14.5%16.1%15.5%15.4%15.1%18.4%12.4%14.3%16.3%20.2%33.3%17.0%12.6%16.6%18.5%23.1%14.8%15.3%14.7%16.4%-0.0%-17.7%17.5%
Head On 8.4%9.0%7.9%9.2%8.0%5.3%3.6%6.2%10.4%20.5%25.0%9.3%9.5%9.3%11.8%13.3%3.5%10.3%8.8%9.2%-25.0%-8.8%11.3%
Left Turn 3.4%5.0%6.8%3.8%5.1%4.9%2.6%2.9%5.8%9.2%25.0%5.9%5.5%4.2%2.8%5.1%2.9%3.9%5.2%5.8%50.0%13.0%-6.1%6.1%
Off Road 4.0%7.2%6.8%5.0%6.0%5.2%3.0%4.8%7.0%9.1%12.7%6.7%7.2%5.5%3.7%5.6%3.6%5.2%6.9%6.8%25.0%9.5%-6.4%8.9%
Other 1.7%3.1%4.2%1.7%3.1%3.2%1.1%1.9%4.1%5.4%20.3%3.6%3.2%2.7%3.8%2.5%1.0%2.8%3.0%3.8%28.6%8.1%-3.5%5.4%
Pedestrian 21.4%30.9%41.5%25.5%32.8%34.9%17.0%24.4%37.4%42.2%-39.6%31.7%24.5%26.7%6.7%19.6%22.9%33.6%37.4%-42.9%-39.3%31.4%
Rear End 1.1%1.6%1.9%1.7%1.6%1.5%0.5%0.7%2.0%1.9%15.4%1.7%1.8%1.3%1.7%2.8%0.8%1.2%1.6%1.8%0.0%4.9%-1.8%2.1%
Right Turn 1.2%2.0%2.3%1.9%1.9%1.7%0.3%1.6%2.0%3.7%11.1%2.1%2.0%2.0%1.2%2.7%0.7%1.8%2.1%2.1%-4.2%-1.8%1.0%
Rollover 9.7%8.2%8.2%12.4%6.1%5.9%8.2%6.8%7.6%9.8%29.4%10.6%4.4%9.0%8.3%0.0%11.5%10.3%6.1%8.5%-18.2%-7.6%17.1%
Sideswipe 0.7%0.8%1.0%1.0%0.8%0.6%0.5%0.5%0.9%1.7%4.2%0.9%0.8%0.6%2.2%1.8%0.6%0.7%0.8%0.9%0.0%3.3%-1.0%0.7%
Unknown 1.0%1.9%1.6%1.4%1.9%0.3%0.8%0.9%2.0%2.8%14.3%1.4%1.9%1.8%4.1%0.0%0.7%1.8%1.7%1.6%-13.0%-2.0%5.3%
Y 7.9%13.1%11.1%10.2%11.4%5.8%5.2%8.5%12.7%14.2%64.3%12.5%10.2%11.2%11.4%13.3%5.0%11.6%12.2%10.8%66.7%40.7%-11.5%16.4%
N 2.5%3.1%3.3%2.9%3.1%2.4%2.1%2.1%3.5%4.0%13.9%3.1%3.3%2.9%3.4%3.5%2.2%2.9%3.1%3.2%14.3%7.6%-3.3%4.1%
Y 1.8%2.2%2.6%1.5%2.4%1.7%1.3%1.6%2.7%2.5%7.7%2.3%2.3%2.2%2.2%3.2%1.1%1.9%2.3%2.4%0.0%2.3%-2.4%2.6%
N 2.8%3.4%3.6%3.4%3.3%2.6%2.4%2.3%3.8%4.4%16.6%3.4%3.5%3.1%3.8%3.7%2.5%3.2%3.4%3.4%20.0%9.0%-3.5%4.5%
Y 6.8%7.0%6.0%5.9%7.5%4.2%4.7%6.1%8.0%5.3%17.6%6.5%6.1%9.1%9.0%2.6%4.0%8.0%7.4%6.4%0.0%7.1%-5.8%12.7%
N 2.5%3.2%3.4%3.0%3.1%2.4%2.1%2.1%3.5%4.1%15.8%3.1%3.3%2.9%3.5%3.7%2.2%2.9%3.2%3.2%20.0%8.4%-3.3%4.1%
Y 2.6%3.3%3.2%2.9%3.2%2.6%2.1%2.1%3.4%4.0%15.5%3.0%3.6%3.0%2.6%3.9%2.2%3.2%3.3%3.1%22.2%8.3%-3.0%4.7%
N 2.7%3.3%3.5%3.1%3.2%2.4%2.2%2.2%3.7%4.2%16.1%3.3%3.3%3.0%4.0%3.5%2.3%3.0%3.2%3.3%18.2%8.3%-3.5%4.1%
Y 3.3%4.2%5.3%3.6%4.4%3.4%3.0%2.9%4.9%6.2%22.0%4.5%4.6%3.6%3.5%3.7%3.1%3.6%4.3%4.7%50.0%9.0%-4.5%5.3%
N 2.3%2.8%2.8%2.8%2.6%2.0%1.8%1.8%3.1%3.5%14.9%2.7%2.8%2.6%3.7%3.6%1.9%2.7%2.8%2.8%17.2%7.9%-2.9%3.7%
Y 16.7%23.5%20.9%18.1%21.2%18.5%12.1%14.2%23.9%26.3%66.7%22.6%22.6%19.7%13.6%33.3%10.0%18.7%23.8%22.1%100.0%50.0%-20.5%28.8%
N 2.6%3.2%3.4%3.0%3.1%2.4%2.1%2.1%3.5%4.0%15.5%3.1%3.3%2.9%3.5%3.5%2.2%3.0%3.2%3.2%16.7%8.2%-3.3%4.1%
Y 2.9%3.3%3.3%3.1%3.2%2.9%2.1%2.2%3.7%4.7%12.8%3.0%3.4%3.1%4.9%2.6%2.7%3.2%3.5%3.1%0.0%11.2%-3.4%4.1%
N 2.6%3.3%3.5%3.0%3.2%2.4%2.2%2.2%3.6%4.1%16.3%3.2%3.3%3.0%3.4%3.8%2.2%3.0%3.2%3.3%22.2%7.8%-3.4%4.3%
Y 2.5%3.2%3.2%2.7%3.1%2.3%2.1%2.0%3.5%3.8%3.8%2.8%3.4%2.9%2.8%3.2%2.3%3.0%2.8%3.2%0.0%5.3%-3.3%3.2%
N 2.7%3.3%3.5%3.1%3.2%2.5%2.2%2.2%3.7%4.2%16.9%3.2%3.3%3.0%3.8%3.7%2.2%3.0%3.3%3.3%21.4%8.8%-3.4%4.5%
Monday 2.9%2.7%3.1%3.1%2.9%2.2%2.1%2.0%3.4%3.6%17.0%2.9%2.9%3.1%4.1%3.7%2.0%3.2%2.9%2.9%20.0%6.7%-3.2%4.5%
Tuesday 2.3%3.2%3.4%2.9%3.1%1.9%2.1%2.1%3.4%3.9%21.4%2.8%3.4%2.8%3.6%2.0%2.4%2.7%3.3%3.0%50.0%7.4%-3.2%3.0%
Wednesday 2.4%3.0%3.4%2.8%3.2%2.0%2.0%2.2%3.3%3.9%17.8%3.1%3.0%2.8%3.4%4.3%2.2%2.9%2.9%3.1%0.0%9.5%-3.1%4.1%
Thursday 2.5%3.1%3.0%2.7%3.0%2.3%2.0%2.0%3.4%3.7%13.7%2.9%3.2%2.9%2.2%4.5%2.0%2.6%3.1%3.1%16.7%8.6%-3.2%3.7%
Friday 2.6%3.0%3.3%2.9%3.0%2.5%2.3%2.1%3.4%4.0%12.2%3.1%3.3%2.5%3.6%3.9%2.3%2.9%3.1%3.0%33.3%8.3%-3.1%4.0%
Saturday 2.9%4.3%4.1%3.4%4.0%3.3%2.4%2.5%4.5%5.0%19.2%4.1%4.1%3.7%3.6%4.3%2.3%3.5%3.8%4.3%0.0%9.8%-4.1%5.6%
Sunday 3.2%4.0%4.0%3.7%3.7%3.3%2.3%2.6%4.5%5.3%11.7%4.0%3.9%3.6%5.3%2.4%2.6%3.6%3.9%4.1%33.3%8.3%-4.2%6.0%
12-3 AM 3.4%6.5%7.1%5.0%5.7%5.3%2.4%3.9%6.8%8.5%27.3%7.5%6.1%4.2%3.7%2.9%2.5%4.5%5.7%7.2%0.0%15.6%-7.0%10.1%
3-6 AM 4.9%6.5%7.7%5.9%6.2%5.9%2.8%5.6%6.9%9.3%10.0%7.1%7.2%5.2%7.9%8.9%3.3%5.6%6.8%7.2%40.0%10.5%-6.7%9.5%
6-9 AM 3.0%3.9%3.8%3.3%3.8%2.8%2.2%2.7%4.1%4.3%20.3%3.3%4.0%3.7%4.3%2.7%2.7%3.6%3.8%3.6%66.7%10.7%-3.6%4.1%
9-Noon 2.4%3.0%3.2%2.7%2.9%2.5%2.1%1.9%3.3%4.1%18.8%2.8%3.2%2.6%3.9%3.2%2.1%2.8%2.9%3.0%16.7%10.4%-3.0%4.6%
Noon-3 PM 2.0%2.3%2.1%2.1%2.2%1.6%1.6%1.6%2.5%2.6%8.3%1.9%2.4%2.2%3.2%2.6%1.8%2.3%2.5%1.9%0.0%4.8%-2.3%2.9%
3-6 PM 1.9%2.1%2.0%2.2%2.0%1.2%2.0%1.3%2.3%2.4%13.7%1.9%2.0%2.2%2.1%2.3%1.8%2.1%2.2%1.8%20.0%5.5%-2.1%3.1%
6-9 PM 2.7%3.5%3.8%3.2%3.5%2.6%2.2%2.2%4.0%4.0%14.3%3.6%3.5%3.1%3.6%5.7%2.4%2.9%3.5%3.6%0.0%6.1%-3.6%3.4%
9-Midnight 4.3%5.3%6.0%4.7%5.6%3.8%3.3%3.6%6.2%6.8%11.6%6.2%5.3%4.7%4.7%6.8%3.2%5.4%4.5%6.4%0.0%10.9%-6.2%7.1%
Dark - Lighted 3.3%4.9%5.8%4.3%5.0%3.9%2.6%3.4%5.7%5.9%19.4%5.6%4.9%4.0%4.6%6.9%2.7%4.0%4.5%5.8%50.0%7.2%-5.4%6.3%
Dark - Not Lighted 6.4%8.1%7.9%6.7%8.1%5.3%3.4%6.2%7.7%10.6%16.8%10.4%7.0%6.5%6.7%4.3%4.7%7.8%7.7%7.8%12.5%14.2%-8.6%9.2%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.4%0.9%3.0%0.5%1.6%0.0%0.9%0.0%2.4%0.0%-2.0%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.9%0.0%1.1%2.0%-0.0%-0.0%0.0%
Dawn 4.4%4.5%3.5%4.3%4.5%2.4%3.5%3.3%4.5%4.8%20.0%3.7%4.0%5.3%6.3%5.3%3.5%5.4%3.6%4.1%50.0%12.2%-3.9%4.9%
Daylight 2.2%2.6%2.5%2.4%2.5%1.8%1.9%1.7%2.8%3.1%15.2%2.2%2.7%2.4%3.0%2.7%1.9%2.4%2.7%2.3%15.8%6.8%-2.5%3.5%
Dusk 2.4%2.8%3.2%3.1%2.7%2.9%2.4%1.8%3.4%2.8%0.0%2.9%2.9%2.6%3.8%4.3%2.6%2.0%3.1%3.0%-7.9%-3.1%1.9%
Other 7.1%5.9%23.5%5.0%16.7%20.0%0.0%11.8%17.4%20.0%-16.7%10.0%13.3%0.0%-0.0%12.5%0.0%19.2%---20.8%0.0%
Unknown 1.1%0.0%0.0%0.4%1.8%0.0%0.0%2.3%1.5%0.0%-0.0%0.0%2.7%0.0%0.0%0.5%2.2%0.0%0.0%-0.0%-0.0%0.0%
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)
50-55 60+Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Context Classification
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R3+25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachment C-3 5 of 16
Attachment C-3
Orange County
Percent of All Crashes that Result in a KSI - 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
2.0%1.3%3.2%-3.5%5.3%4.7%3.7%5.8%4.0%6.5%3.6%3.7%3.4%4.9%2.5%4.2%2.2%
0.0%0.0%0.0%-2.4%0.0%3.4%2.8%0.0%0.0%5.6%0.0%0.9%3.4%2.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%
9.3%0.0%0.0%-14.7%16.5%17.2%15.3%15.4%26.7%29.7%11.2%15.1%14.2%16.8%5.3%16.3%15.4%
7.0%0.0%0.0%-8.3%4.8%11.8%8.9%3.3%9.1%17.8%9.3%7.3%8.5%10.1%11.1%7.5%0.0%
2.3%3.9%0.0%-4.5%6.9%4.8%4.5%7.8%3.8%5.6%4.9%4.7%3.8%5.7%2.7%5.6%2.0%
3.1%5.6%1.7%-5.1%5.6%7.0%5.5%5.1%5.9%6.0%4.3%5.7%4.3%7.4%4.7%6.1%5.8%
2.3%1.9%1.5%-2.3%3.2%3.7%2.5%3.6%2.5%4.0%2.3%2.5%1.8%4.0%3.9%3.0%3.5%
29.6%32.0%21.9%-29.6%34.0%33.0%29.8%39.1%42.1%31.5%28.3%31.0%25.8%35.6%45.8%34.0%18.8%
0.8%0.5%0.0%-1.5%1.8%1.8%1.6%1.9%1.3%2.1%1.4%1.6%1.2%1.9%1.6%1.8%0.5%
1.2%0.0%0.0%-1.6%1.4%3.4%1.9%1.6%0.0%3.6%1.3%1.8%1.1%2.6%0.0%2.2%0.0%
3.8%20.0%0.0%-9.1%3.7%10.9%9.3%4.1%0.0%13.7%6.5%7.7%7.8%10.5%13.6%6.4%33.3%
0.3%0.5%0.3%-0.7%1.0%1.1%0.8%1.0%1.0%0.8%0.8%0.8%0.8%1.1%0.5%0.7%0.0%
0.7%0.0%0.0%-1.3%1.6%2.4%1.6%1.6%0.0%2.9%0.8%1.6%1.0%2.3%0.9%1.7%0.0%
7.9%9.1%2.9%-9.7%9.9%14.2%10.7%10.3%3.7%20.4%6.5%10.1%9.5%13.1%11.9%9.5%4.0%
1.7%1.6%1.2%-2.9%3.0%3.4%3.0%3.2%2.4%4.1%2.8%2.9%2.7%3.5%2.0%3.0%1.7%
1.5%0.7%1.0%-2.1%2.5%2.5%2.2%1.7%0.4%2.2%1.7%2.2%2.1%2.2%1.4%2.1%2.3%
1.9%1.9%1.3%-3.2%3.7%3.7%3.3%3.5%2.8%4.7%3.0%3.2%3.0%3.9%2.3%3.2%1.7%
5.9%6.3%10.0%-6.8%6.5%6.5%6.7%7.1%3.3%7.6%7.9%6.4%7.1%7.1%2.7%6.1%3.4%
1.7%1.6%1.0%-2.9%3.5%3.5%3.0%3.2%2.4%4.3%2.7%3.0%2.7%3.6%2.2%3.0%1.7%
1.8%1.4%0.6%-3.0%3.3%3.3%3.0%3.3%2.9%4.6%2.8%3.0%2.7%3.6%2.8%3.0%2.8%
1.9%1.8%1.3%-3.0%3.6%3.6%3.1%3.2%2.3%4.3%2.9%3.1%2.9%3.7%2.0%3.1%1.6%
2.3%2.1%2.7%-3.9%4.5%4.5%4.0%5.0%3.3%5.2%3.5%4.1%3.6%4.9%2.6%4.2%1.9%
1.6%1.5%0.5%-2.6%3.1%3.1%2.7%2.4%2.2%4.0%2.5%2.5%2.4%3.1%2.0%2.5%1.7%
21.2%14.3%0.0%-21.5%16.9%16.9%20.5%20.4%25.0%28.2%21.0%19.5%22.2%21.6%5.0%19.4%0.0%
1.8%1.7%1.2%-2.9%3.5%3.5%3.0%3.2%2.3%4.3%2.8%3.0%2.7%3.6%2.2%3.0%1.8%
1.5%0.9%1.8%-3.0%3.6%3.6%3.1%3.6%3.9%5.9%2.9%3.0%2.9%3.6%1.9%3.2%0.9%
1.9%1.9%1.1%-3.0%3.5%3.5%3.1%3.2%2.2%4.2%2.8%3.0%2.8%3.7%2.2%3.0%1.9%
1.3%1.4%2.3%-2.8%3.3%3.3%2.9%3.3%2.0%3.0%3.0%3.0%2.5%3.4%2.1%3.2%1.6%
1.9%1.7%1.2%-3.0%3.6%3.6%3.1%3.3%2.5%4.5%2.8%3.0%2.9%3.7%2.2%3.0%1.8%
1.5%1.4%1.3%-2.8%3.4%3.4%2.9%2.8%2.7%4.0%2.5%2.8%2.8%3.2%2.9%2.7%2.7%
1.5%0.7%1.0%-2.8%3.8%3.8%3.0%2.7%0.0%4.2%2.9%2.8%2.7%3.6%0.5%2.9%1.3%
1.8%1.8%0.4%-2.9%2.7%2.7%2.9%3.5%3.8%4.1%3.3%2.8%2.5%3.6%1.7%2.9%2.9%
1.8%2.3%0.9%-2.7%3.6%3.6%2.9%2.8%3.0%4.3%2.7%2.8%2.8%3.2%1.2%2.9%0.5%
1.9%1.4%0.9%-2.8%3.2%3.2%2.9%3.5%2.5%4.0%2.6%2.9%2.7%3.4%2.1%3.0%0.8%
2.6%2.6%2.1%-3.6%4.2%4.2%3.7%4.0%3.3%5.0%3.1%3.7%3.2%4.4%4.4%3.8%1.3%
2.0%2.1%2.0%-3.6%4.4%4.4%3.7%3.8%1.8%5.4%2.9%3.7%3.3%4.6%2.9%3.5%3.8%
5.3%3.6%2.4%-4.8%8.2%8.2%5.3%7.0%4.7%6.9%3.6%5.6%3.8%7.0%4.1%6.7%6.1%
4.0%10.1%1.1%-5.8%7.3%7.3%6.2%6.4%4.5%8.9%5.5%5.9%5.4%8.2%5.2%5.2%7.9%
1.9%2.2%0.0%-3.4%4.2%4.2%3.5%4.0%2.7%4.3%3.0%3.6%3.1%4.3%3.4%3.6%2.1%
1.4%1.1%1.4%-2.8%3.2%3.2%2.9%2.9%1.0%4.6%2.5%2.7%2.3%3.5%1.7%3.1%0.5%
1.0%0.0%1.2%-2.1%2.3%2.3%2.2%2.0%1.9%3.5%2.2%2.0%2.1%2.5%1.6%2.0%0.4%
1.2%1.2%0.7%-2.0%2.1%2.1%2.0%1.9%1.7%2.6%1.9%2.0%2.0%2.3%1.4%1.8%0.3%
1.9%0.9%1.7%-3.3%3.6%3.6%3.3%3.3%2.9%4.1%3.0%3.3%3.2%3.6%2.4%3.3%2.8%
4.1%4.6%1.1%-4.9%6.1%6.1%5.1%5.8%4.4%6.1%4.8%5.1%5.1%5.8%1.6%5.1%4.0%
3.9%4.5%2.0%-4.6%5.3%5.3%4.7%5.1%4.0%4.6%3.8%4.8%4.1%5.3%3.3%4.9%5.6%
5.3%0.0%0.0%-6.1%10.2%10.2%7.0%9.1%8.8%10.0%6.8%6.3%6.6%8.6%3.1%7.0%4.2%
3.4%0.0%0.0%-1.0%1.5%1.5%1.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.4%0.0%1.2%0.0%1.4%28.6%
1.9%6.9%0.0%-4.1%4.5%4.5%4.2%4.6%0.0%5.9%3.9%4.0%4.4%4.6%0.0%4.2%0.0%
1.2%0.8%0.9%-2.4%2.6%2.6%2.4%2.4%1.7%3.5%2.3%2.4%2.2%2.9%1.7%2.3%0.4%
1.1%0.0%0.0%-2.5%3.6%3.6%2.7%3.3%4.5%3.7%2.8%2.7%2.4%3.0%2.6%3.2%0.0%
0.0%---9.1%11.1%11.1%9.4%25.0%0.0%20.0%15.4%9.1%3.2%17.6%100.0%8.3%-
0.0%0.0%0.0%-0.7%3.0%3.0%0.9%0.0%0.0%2.6%0.0%0.8%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%-
Median PresenceBike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
C4 C5 C6 None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNone
Attachment C-3 6 of 16
Attachment C-4
Orange County
Percent of All KSI Crashes 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 3.9%3.2%1.8%3.0%5.2%0.7%1.6%2.6%3.9%0.7%0.1%2.1%2.2%2.4%0.3%0.2%1.7%2.8%2.7%2.6%0.0%0.3%0.0%5.0%0.8%
Animal 0.1%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Bicycle 1.6%2.0%1.2%1.5%2.7%0.5%0.6%1.1%2.6%0.4%0.0%1.6%1.0%1.1%0.2%0.1%0.7%1.1%1.3%2.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.5%0.5%
Head On 1.4%1.1%0.4%1.4%1.4%0.2%0.2%0.7%1.5%0.5%0.0%0.8%0.8%1.0%0.1%0.0%0.2%1.1%1.0%0.9%0.0%0.1%0.0%1.4%0.3%
Left Turn 5.2%10.8%5.5%4.0%15.6%1.7%1.2%4.1%14.1%2.1%0.1%5.5%8.1%5.2%0.4%0.2%1.7%4.7%8.9%8.4%0.0%1.0%0.0%14.0%2.8%
Off Road 4.1%4.5%1.7%5.5%4.6%0.4%1.6%2.2%5.3%1.0%0.2%2.3%3.0%2.6%0.3%0.2%2.2%2.9%3.5%3.0%0.1%0.5%0.0%4.3%1.4%
Other 3.7%4.2%3.0%4.4%5.7%1.0%1.6%2.2%5.7%1.0%0.3%3.6%2.9%2.2%0.4%0.1%2.0%2.7%3.2%4.3%0.1%0.4%0.0%6.1%1.3%
Pedestrian 3.1%5.1%5.2%3.7%8.2%1.4%1.3%2.7%8.0%1.4%0.0%5.7%3.8%2.1%0.2%0.0%1.5%2.1%4.1%7.2%0.0%0.1%0.0%11.0%1.0%
Rear End 3.1%8.2%8.6%4.1%12.5%3.1%0.3%2.2%14.3%2.9%0.2%8.7%7.0%3.0%0.3%0.2%0.6%2.4%6.7%12.4%0.0%0.8%0.0%17.7%2.5%
Right Turn 0.3%0.7%0.5%0.3%1.0%0.2%0.0%0.3%0.9%0.2%0.0%0.5%0.6%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.3%0.5%0.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.1%0.1%
Rollover 0.5%0.5%0.3%0.8%0.4%0.1%0.1%0.3%0.5%0.2%0.2%0.6%0.2%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.5%0.3%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.6%0.2%
Sideswipe 0.7%1.4%1.4%1.0%2.1%0.4%0.2%0.6%2.0%0.7%0.0%1.6%1.0%0.5%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.5%1.1%1.9%0.0%0.1%0.0%3.2%0.2%
Unknown 0.2%0.7%0.4%0.3%1.0%0.0%0.1%0.3%0.8%0.2%0.0%0.5%0.4%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.3%0.5%0.6%0.0%0.1%0.0%1.0%0.2%
Y 1.5%2.3%1.4%2.0%2.8%0.3%0.5%1.1%2.8%0.6%0.2%2.0%1.2%1.2%0.2%0.1%0.4%1.6%1.7%2.1%0.1%0.4%0.0%3.5%0.7%
N 26.4%40.0%28.4%28.1%57.5%9.3%8.4%18.1%56.7%10.7%0.9%31.4%29.7%19.8%2.2%1.0%10.8%19.9%32.3%42.5%0.1%3.6%0.0%65.2%10.6%
Y 3.1%3.8%3.5%2.7%6.5%1.0%1.1%2.0%6.2%1.0%0.0%3.7%3.0%2.1%0.2%0.1%1.1%2.0%3.3%4.9%0.0%0.1%0.0%7.3%0.8%
N 24.9%38.5%26.3%27.3%53.8%8.7%7.7%17.2%53.4%10.3%1.0%29.7%27.9%18.9%2.2%0.9%10.1%19.5%30.6%39.6%0.2%3.9%0.0%61.5%10.4%
Y 1.8%2.0%1.0%1.5%3.0%0.3%0.5%1.5%2.5%0.3%0.1%1.5%1.1%1.5%0.2%0.0%0.4%1.5%1.7%1.7%0.0%0.1%0.0%2.2%0.6%
N 26.1%40.2%28.8%28.6%57.3%9.4%8.4%17.8%57.1%11.0%1.0%31.8%29.9%19.5%2.2%1.0%10.8%20.0%32.2%42.9%0.2%3.8%0.0%66.6%10.6%
Y 7.5%12.5%8.2%7.8%17.4%3.0%2.2%4.6%18.0%3.2%0.3%8.8%9.8%5.9%0.5%0.4%2.8%5.7%10.1%12.8%0.1%1.5%0.0%19.1%4.0%
N 20.4%29.8%21.6%22.2%42.9%6.6%6.7%14.7%41.6%8.1%0.8%24.6%21.1%15.1%1.8%0.7%8.4%15.8%23.8%31.8%0.1%2.5%0.0%49.7%7.2%
Y 12.2%17.3%11.8%9.2%27.5%4.1%3.7%9.2%24.1%4.2%0.2%12.5%13.1%9.6%1.0%0.5%4.1%10.1%14.4%16.9%0.0%1.5%0.0%27.9%5.1%
N 15.7%24.9%18.0%20.8%32.8%5.5%5.2%10.1%35.4%7.1%0.9%20.8%17.9%11.4%1.4%0.6%7.1%11.4%19.6%27.7%0.2%2.5%0.0%40.9%6.1%
Y 0.8%1.3%0.8%0.9%1.8%0.3%0.3%0.5%1.9%0.4%0.0%1.1%0.9%0.6%0.1%0.1%0.2%0.7%1.0%1.4%0.0%0.1%0.0%2.0%0.6%
N 27.1%40.9%29.0%29.2%58.5%9.3%8.6%18.8%57.7%10.9%1.0%32.2%30.1%20.3%2.3%1.0%11.0%20.8%33.0%43.2%0.2%3.9%0.0%66.8%10.7%
Y 4.1%6.2%3.7%3.9%8.7%1.5%1.1%2.9%8.3%1.6%0.1%4.6%4.4%2.9%0.4%0.1%1.6%3.3%5.0%5.9%0.0%0.9%0.0%10.1%1.6%
N 23.8%36.1%26.1%26.2%51.6%8.1%7.7%16.4%51.2%9.7%1.0%28.7%26.5%18.1%2.0%0.9%9.6%18.2%29.0%38.7%0.2%3.1%0.0%58.7%9.7%
Y 3.1%5.1%3.5%3.2%7.4%1.1%0.9%1.9%7.5%1.3%0.0%3.4%3.8%2.5%0.3%0.1%1.4%2.6%3.5%5.4%0.0%0.3%0.0%8.1%1.4%
N 24.8%37.2%26.4%26.9%52.9%8.6%7.9%17.3%52.1%10.0%1.1%29.9%27.2%18.4%2.1%0.9%9.9%18.8%30.4%39.2%0.2%3.7%0.0%60.7%9.8%
Monday 4.5%5.3%4.0%4.4%8.1%1.3%1.3%2.6%8.3%1.5%0.2%4.5%4.0%3.2%0.4%0.2%1.5%3.3%4.5%6.0%0.1%0.5%0.0%9.8%1.7%
Tuesday 3.7%6.2%4.5%4.3%9.0%1.2%1.2%2.7%8.6%1.6%0.2%4.5%4.7%2.9%0.4%0.1%1.7%2.9%5.2%6.3%0.0%0.5%0.0%9.9%1.2%
Wednesday 3.8%6.0%4.4%4.1%8.9%1.1%1.2%3.0%8.2%1.5%0.2%4.9%4.2%3.0%0.3%0.2%1.6%3.2%4.6%6.4%0.0%0.6%0.0%9.5%1.6%
Thursday 4.0%6.3%4.0%4.1%8.8%1.4%1.2%2.7%8.7%1.6%0.1%4.7%4.6%3.1%0.2%0.2%1.5%2.9%4.8%6.6%0.0%0.6%0.0%10.0%1.5%
Friday 4.5%6.5%4.8%4.7%9.5%1.7%1.5%3.0%9.4%1.8%0.1%5.4%5.0%2.9%0.4%0.2%1.9%3.4%5.4%6.9%0.0%0.6%0.0%10.8%1.8%
Saturday 3.8%6.7%4.6%4.2%9.1%1.7%1.3%2.8%9.1%1.7%0.2%5.1%4.7%3.2%0.3%0.2%1.5%3.0%5.1%7.1%0.0%0.6%0.0%10.3%1.8%
Sunday 3.7%5.2%3.6%4.2%6.9%1.3%1.1%2.4%7.2%1.6%0.1%4.1%3.8%2.7%0.4%0.1%1.5%2.7%4.3%5.4%0.0%0.5%0.0%8.5%1.6%
12-3 AM 2.0%3.6%2.9%2.9%4.4%1.0%0.6%1.7%4.7%1.1%0.2%3.5%2.5%1.5%0.1%0.0%0.7%1.7%2.7%4.3%0.0%0.4%0.0%6.2%1.1%
3-6 AM 1.8%2.3%2.0%2.1%3.2%0.7%0.4%1.3%3.3%0.9%0.1%2.2%1.9%1.1%0.2%0.1%0.6%1.3%2.0%2.8%0.1%0.3%0.0%4.0%0.8%
6-9 AM 4.0%6.1%3.7%3.7%8.7%1.3%1.1%2.6%8.3%1.5%0.3%4.1%4.5%3.1%0.4%0.1%1.5%3.2%4.7%5.9%0.1%0.9%0.0%9.0%1.5%
9-Noon 3.5%5.2%3.8%3.7%7.3%1.4%1.2%2.3%7.3%1.4%0.1%4.1%4.0%2.4%0.3%0.1%1.6%2.6%3.9%5.7%0.0%0.6%0.0%8.4%1.5%
Noon-3 PM 3.9%5.6%3.6%4.0%8.0%1.2%1.3%2.8%7.7%1.2%0.1%4.0%4.2%2.7%0.4%0.2%1.8%2.9%4.7%5.2%0.0%0.4%0.0%8.8%1.3%
3-6 PM 4.5%6.4%4.0%4.9%9.1%1.0%1.7%2.8%8.9%1.5%0.1%4.7%4.3%3.6%0.3%0.2%1.9%3.5%5.4%5.9%0.0%0.5%0.0%9.7%1.8%
6-9 PM 4.4%7.4%5.2%4.7%10.6%1.7%1.4%3.0%10.7%1.8%0.1%5.6%5.2%3.7%0.4%0.3%1.8%3.2%6.2%7.6%0.0%0.4%0.0%11.5%1.5%
9-Midnight 3.9%5.9%4.8%4.1%9.0%1.4%1.2%2.8%8.7%1.8%0.1%5.2%4.5%3.0%0.2%0.2%1.4%3.1%4.3%7.3%0.0%0.4%0.0%11.1%1.7%
Dark - Lighted 7.2%13.8%11.6%8.9%20.0%3.7%2.2%6.8%19.9%3.6%0.1%12.5%10.0%6.2%0.6%0.4%2.8%5.7%10.7%17.1%0.0%0.4%0.0%23.9%3.5%
Dark - Not Lighted 3.2%2.8%1.5%3.2%3.8%0.5%0.6%1.3%3.7%1.5%0.4%2.6%1.8%1.7%0.2%0.1%1.0%2.5%2.3%2.5%0.0%1.2%0.0%5.3%1.1%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Dawn 0.8%0.9%0.5%0.7%1.3%0.2%0.2%0.4%1.2%0.3%0.1%0.6%0.6%0.6%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.7%0.6%0.8%0.0%0.2%0.0%1.3%0.2%
Daylight 15.7%23.4%15.1%16.3%33.2%4.9%5.4%10.3%32.5%5.6%0.5%16.6%17.6%11.6%1.4%0.6%6.8%12.0%19.1%22.7%0.1%2.1%0.0%35.8%6.2%
Dusk 0.8%1.3%1.0%1.0%1.8%0.4%0.3%0.5%2.1%0.3%0.0%1.0%1.0%0.7%0.1%0.0%0.4%0.5%1.2%1.4%0.0%0.1%0.0%2.3%0.2%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%
Unknown 0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)
50-55 60+Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Context Classification
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R3+25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachment C-4 7 of 16
Attachment C-4
Orange County
Percent of All KSI Crashes 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
1.3%0.1%0.2%0.0%6.2%1.3%1.5%7.9%0.9%0.0%1.2%1.2%6.4%4.4%2.5%0.1%1.9%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.1%0.5%1.1%4.3%0.4%0.1%0.4%0.3%4.0%1.8%1.5%0.0%1.3%0.1%
0.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.1%0.2%0.7%2.9%0.1%0.0%0.6%0.5%1.9%1.7%0.7%0.0%0.6%0.0%
2.1%0.3%0.0%0.0%14.3%3.3%3.8%18.7%2.7%0.1%1.9%2.7%16.9%7.3%7.8%0.3%6.1%0.1%
0.7%0.1%0.0%0.0%7.2%0.8%2.3%9.8%0.4%0.0%1.7%1.5%7.0%4.2%3.8%0.2%2.0%0.1%
2.1%0.2%0.2%0.0%7.2%1.3%2.3%9.8%0.9%0.1%1.6%1.3%8.0%4.3%3.6%0.3%2.6%0.1%
3.3%0.3%0.3%0.0%8.9%1.7%2.7%11.6%1.6%0.2%0.8%1.1%11.5%5.0%4.1%0.2%4.1%0.1%
2.4%0.1%0.0%0.0%11.2%4.0%4.7%16.3%3.3%0.2%1.7%1.8%16.4%3.9%7.8%0.6%7.5%0.1%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.2%0.4%1.3%0.2%0.0%0.1%0.1%1.2%0.3%0.6%0.0%0.6%0.0%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.1%0.4%1.2%0.1%0.0%0.4%0.1%0.8%0.5%0.6%0.1%0.2%0.0%
0.4%0.1%0.0%0.0%1.9%0.7%0.8%2.9%0.5%0.0%0.2%0.3%2.8%1.0%1.4%0.1%0.9%0.0%
0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.7%0.2%0.4%1.2%0.2%0.0%0.1%0.1%1.1%0.3%0.5%0.0%0.4%0.0%
0.9%0.1%0.0%0.0%3.3%0.7%1.2%4.7%0.5%0.0%0.9%0.5%3.8%2.0%1.8%0.2%1.2%0.0%
13.0%1.1%0.7%0.0%61.3%13.5%20.0%83.3%10.8%0.7%10.0%10.6%74.2%32.6%33.1%1.6%27.0%0.5%
1.8%0.1%0.1%0.0%7.2%1.9%1.9%9.4%0.9%0.0%0.8%1.0%8.6%4.4%2.7%0.2%3.0%0.1%
12.1%1.1%0.6%0.0%57.5%19.3%19.3%78.5%10.4%0.7%10.1%10.1%69.5%30.3%32.1%1.6%25.2%0.4%
1.1%0.1%0.1%0.0%3.1%1.0%1.0%4.2%0.5%0.0%0.5%0.8%3.4%2.1%1.5%0.0%1.1%0.0%
12.8%1.0%0.6%0.0%61.5%20.3%20.3%83.8%10.8%0.7%10.4%10.2%74.6%32.6%33.4%1.7%27.1%0.4%
3.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%18.5%5.7%5.7%24.7%3.3%0.2%3.3%3.1%21.9%9.0%10.2%0.7%8.2%0.1%
10.9%1.0%0.7%0.0%46.2%15.6%15.6%63.3%8.0%0.5%7.6%8.0%56.2%25.7%24.6%1.1%20.0%0.3%
5.6%0.5%0.5%0.0%26.7%7.8%7.8%35.6%5.5%0.3%3.9%4.6%32.9%14.6%13.9%0.6%12.1%0.2%
8.3%0.7%0.2%0.0%37.9%13.5%13.5%52.4%5.8%0.5%7.0%6.5%45.2%20.1%20.9%1.2%16.1%0.3%
0.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.1%0.5%0.5%2.6%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.4%2.2%1.2%1.0%0.0%0.8%0.0%
13.3%1.2%0.7%0.0%62.6%20.8%20.8%85.4%10.9%0.7%10.5%10.6%75.9%33.5%33.9%1.8%27.4%0.5%
1.8%0.1%0.1%0.0%8.9%3.0%3.0%12.1%1.7%0.2%1.7%1.5%10.8%5.0%4.6%0.2%4.2%0.0%
12.0%1.1%0.6%0.0%55.7%18.3%18.3%75.8%9.6%0.6%9.2%9.6%67.3%29.7%30.2%1.6%24.0%0.4%
0.9%0.1%0.1%0.0%7.2%2.8%2.8%10.1%1.5%0.1%0.8%1.5%9.4%3.5%4.2%0.2%3.6%0.1%
13.0%1.1%0.6%0.0%57.5%18.5%18.5%77.9%9.8%0.7%10.1%9.6%68.7%31.1%30.6%1.6%24.6%0.4%
1.7%0.1%0.1%0.0%8.3%2.8%2.8%12.2%1.4%0.1%1.5%1.4%10.9%5.0%4.6%0.3%3.7%0.1%
1.8%0.1%0.1%0.0%8.5%3.2%3.2%12.9%1.4%0.0%1.6%1.7%11.1%4.9%5.0%0.1%4.2%0.1%
2.2%0.2%0.0%0.0%8.8%2.3%2.3%12.2%1.8%0.2%1.4%1.9%10.8%4.7%5.1%0.2%4.0%0.1%
2.2%0.3%0.1%0.0%8.5%3.1%3.1%12.7%1.5%0.1%1.7%1.5%11.1%5.3%4.7%0.2%4.1%0.0%
2.4%0.1%0.1%0.0%9.4%3.0%3.0%13.7%2.0%0.1%1.6%1.7%12.5%5.6%5.3%0.3%4.6%0.0%
2.3%0.2%0.2%0.0%9.1%2.9%2.9%13.2%1.8%0.1%1.6%1.5%12.0%4.8%5.4%0.5%4.3%0.0%
1.4%0.1%0.1%0.0%7.7%2.5%2.5%11.0%1.4%0.1%1.5%1.3%9.7%4.3%4.7%0.3%3.2%0.1%
1.9%0.1%0.2%0.0%4.7%1.9%1.9%7.2%1.1%0.1%1.0%0.8%6.6%2.4%3.0%0.2%2.7%0.1%
0.8%0.3%0.0%0.0%3.6%1.1%1.1%5.3%0.7%0.0%1.0%0.7%4.3%2.1%2.3%0.2%1.4%0.1%
1.6%0.2%0.0%0.0%8.3%2.7%2.7%12.1%1.6%0.1%1.4%1.5%10.9%4.6%4.8%0.3%4.0%0.1%
1.6%0.1%0.1%0.0%7.6%2.3%2.3%11.0%1.4%0.0%1.5%1.3%9.6%3.9%4.3%0.2%4.0%0.0%
1.6%0.0%0.1%0.0%8.1%2.5%2.5%11.5%1.3%0.1%1.5%1.5%10.0%4.9%4.4%0.2%3.5%0.0%
2.3%0.2%0.1%0.0%9.3%2.9%2.9%13.4%1.4%0.1%1.3%1.7%11.9%5.8%5.1%0.2%3.8%0.0%
1.9%0.1%0.1%0.0%10.3%3.4%3.4%14.9%1.9%0.2%1.5%1.9%13.6%5.9%5.8%0.3%4.8%0.1%
2.2%0.2%0.1%0.0%8.5%3.0%3.0%12.5%1.9%0.1%1.6%1.7%11.2%5.1%5.2%0.2%4.1%0.1%
6.0%0.7%0.4%0.0%19.6%6.2%6.2%28.2%4.2%0.3%2.2%3.1%27.4%10.3%11.3%0.7%10.0%0.3%
0.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.7%2.3%2.3%6.6%0.9%0.1%2.3%1.4%3.8%3.2%2.9%0.1%1.3%0.0%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.2%0.1%0.0%0.0%1.3%0.4%0.4%1.9%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.3%1.6%0.8%0.7%0.0%0.6%0.0%
6.9%0.4%0.3%0.0%33.8%10.2%10.2%48.4%5.6%0.3%5.7%5.9%42.7%19.3%18.9%0.8%15.2%0.1%
0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.7%0.7%0.7%2.7%0.4%0.0%0.3%0.4%2.4%0.9%1.1%0.1%1.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Median PresenceBike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
C4 C5 C6 None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNone
Attachment C-4 8 of 16
Attachment C-5
Orange County
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving only Car Truck 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 5.0%4.1%2.3%3.7%6.7%0.9%1.9%3.4%5.0%1.0%0.1%2.6%3.0%3.1%0.4%0.2%2.2%3.6%3.3%3.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%6.9%1.2%
Animal 0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Bicycle 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Head On 1.9%1.5%0.6%1.8%1.8%0.2%0.3%1.0%2.1%0.6%0.0%1.0%1.1%1.3%0.1%0.1%0.3%1.5%1.3%1.2%0.0%0.2%0.0%2.0%0.4%
Left Turn 5.9%12.9%7.0%4.3%19.0%2.2%1.2%4.7%17.3%2.6%0.1%6.6%10.1%6.1%0.4%0.3%1.9%5.2%11.0%10.3%0.1%1.4%0.0%17.8%3.6%
Off Road 4.9%5.4%2.1%6.7%5.5%0.6%1.9%2.6%6.4%1.3%0.3%3.0%3.6%3.1%0.3%0.2%2.6%3.4%4.3%3.6%0.2%0.8%0.0%5.4%1.8%
Other 4.4%4.6%3.3%5.0%6.4%1.2%2.0%2.5%6.4%1.0%0.3%3.9%3.2%2.5%0.4%0.1%2.5%3.1%3.5%4.8%0.1%0.5%0.0%6.8%1.4%
Pedestrian 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Rear End 3.9%10.6%11.1%5.2%16.2%4.0%0.3%2.8%18.5%3.8%0.2%10.9%9.1%4.0%0.4%0.3%0.8%3.1%8.7%15.9%0.0%1.0%0.0%23.3%3.2%
Right Turn 0.4%0.9%0.7%0.4%1.3%0.3%0.0%0.4%1.2%0.2%0.0%0.5%0.8%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.4%0.7%1.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.4%0.1%
Rollover 0.3%0.5%0.1%0.7%0.2%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.3%0.1%0.2%0.5%0.1%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.4%0.2%0.2%0.0%0.5%0.0%0.5%0.2%
Sideswipe 0.9%1.7%1.5%1.1%2.4%0.5%0.2%0.7%2.3%0.8%0.0%1.8%1.2%0.5%0.1%0.1%0.3%0.6%1.3%2.3%0.0%0.2%0.0%3.7%0.2%
Unknown 0.3%0.8%0.4%0.4%1.1%0.0%0.1%0.3%0.9%0.2%0.0%0.5%0.5%0.4%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.4%0.6%0.6%0.0%0.2%0.0%1.2%0.3%
Y 1.8%2.3%1.7%2.3%3.0%0.4%0.6%1.2%3.1%0.7%0.2%2.3%1.4%1.3%0.2%0.1%0.5%1.8%1.7%2.4%0.1%0.4%0.0%4.1%0.8%
N 26.1%40.8%27.4%27.1%57.7%9.5%7.5%17.2%57.4%10.9%1.2%29.1%31.2%20.3%2.1%1.1%10.5%20.1%33.3%40.8%0.2%4.8%0.0%64.7%11.7%
Y 2.2%3.2%3.1%2.1%5.5%0.8%0.8%1.5%5.2%0.9%0.1%2.9%2.7%1.8%0.1%0.2%0.7%1.7%2.6%4.3%0.0%0.1%0.0%6.2%0.8%
N 25.7%39.8%26.0%27.3%55.2%9.1%7.3%16.9%55.3%10.7%1.3%28.5%29.9%19.8%2.2%1.1%10.2%20.2%32.4%38.8%0.3%5.1%0.0%62.6%11.7%
Y 1.8%2.1%1.0%1.5%3.1%0.3%0.5%1.5%2.5%0.4%0.1%1.4%1.1%1.5%0.2%0.0%0.5%1.6%1.8%1.5%0.0%0.2%0.0%2.3%0.8%
N 26.1%41.0%28.1%27.9%57.6%9.6%7.6%16.9%58.1%11.2%1.3%30.0%31.4%20.0%2.1%1.2%10.5%20.2%33.2%41.6%0.3%5.0%0.0%66.6%11.7%
Y 8.3%14.6%9.7%8.7%20.3%3.7%2.2%5.1%21.0%3.9%0.4%10.0%11.8%6.6%0.6%0.5%3.1%6.5%12.0%14.7%0.1%2.0%0.0%22.9%5.3%
N 19.5%28.4%19.4%20.8%40.4%6.2%5.9%13.3%39.5%7.7%0.9%21.4%20.8%15.0%1.7%0.7%7.9%15.4%23.0%28.5%0.2%3.2%0.0%45.9%7.2%
Y 12.3%18.5%12.7%9.0%29.4%4.4%3.5%9.2%26.1%4.5%0.2%12.9%14.7%9.7%0.9%0.5%4.1%10.1%15.7%17.6%0.1%2.0%0.0%30.7%6.2%
N 15.6%24.6%16.4%20.4%31.3%5.5%4.6%9.3%34.4%7.1%1.1%18.5%17.9%11.9%1.3%0.7%6.9%11.7%19.3%25.6%0.2%3.2%0.0%38.1%6.3%
Y 0.8%1.3%1.0%0.9%1.7%0.4%0.2%0.5%1.9%0.4%0.0%1.3%0.8%0.7%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.7%0.9%1.6%0.1%0.1%0.0%2.3%0.6%
N 27.1%41.8%28.1%28.5%59.0%9.5%8.0%17.9%58.6%11.2%1.3%30.1%31.8%20.9%2.2%1.2%10.8%21.1%34.1%41.6%0.2%5.2%0.0%66.5%11.9%
Y 4.8%7.2%4.3%4.4%10.0%1.9%1.2%3.4%9.7%1.9%0.1%5.3%5.2%3.4%0.5%0.2%1.8%3.9%5.7%6.8%0.0%1.2%0.0%11.9%1.9%
N 23.1%35.8%24.7%25.0%50.7%8.0%7.0%15.0%50.8%9.7%1.2%26.1%27.3%18.2%1.8%1.1%9.1%17.9%29.3%36.4%0.3%4.0%0.0%57.0%10.6%
Y 3.7%6.2%4.0%3.6%8.8%1.3%1.1%2.1%9.1%1.5%0.0%3.9%4.8%3.0%0.4%0.1%1.6%3.1%4.4%6.2%0.0%0.5%0.0%9.7%2.0%
N 24.2%36.9%25.1%25.8%51.8%8.6%7.0%16.3%51.4%10.1%1.3%27.5%27.8%18.6%1.9%1.1%9.4%18.7%30.6%36.9%0.3%4.7%0.0%59.2%10.5%
Monday 4.5%5.7%3.9%4.4%8.4%1.3%1.1%2.8%8.6%1.5%0.2%4.5%4.1%3.4%0.4%0.2%1.4%3.5%4.8%5.8%0.1%0.7%0.0%9.9%2.0%
Tuesday 3.9%6.4%4.2%4.3%9.1%1.2%1.2%2.7%8.9%1.5%0.2%4.0%5.2%3.2%0.4%0.0%1.7%3.1%5.5%5.9%0.1%0.5%0.0%9.4%1.4%
Wednesday 3.9%6.0%4.4%3.9%9.3%1.1%1.1%2.7%8.4%1.9%0.2%4.8%4.4%3.1%0.3%0.2%1.5%3.3%4.5%6.6%0.0%0.9%0.0%9.8%1.9%
Thursday 3.9%6.3%3.8%4.2%8.5%1.3%1.2%2.3%8.9%1.5%0.2%4.2%4.8%3.1%0.2%0.2%1.5%3.0%4.8%6.2%0.1%0.8%0.0%9.7%1.7%
Friday 4.3%6.5%4.7%4.4%9.3%1.7%1.4%2.8%9.3%1.9%0.1%5.0%5.2%2.8%0.3%0.2%1.9%3.0%5.7%6.5%0.1%0.8%0.0%11.1%1.8%
Saturday 3.7%6.7%4.6%3.9%9.3%1.9%1.1%2.9%9.1%1.8%0.3%5.0%4.8%3.4%0.2%0.2%1.4%3.1%5.3%6.9%0.0%0.9%0.0%10.6%2.0%
Sunday 3.6%5.4%3.5%4.2%6.8%1.4%1.0%2.3%7.4%1.6%0.1%3.9%3.9%2.6%0.4%0.1%1.4%2.7%4.4%5.3%0.1%0.6%0.0%8.3%1.8%
12-3 AM 2.0%3.6%2.9%2.8%4.5%1.0%0.6%1.7%4.8%1.0%0.3%3.3%2.6%1.6%0.2%0.1%0.6%1.9%2.6%4.2%0.0%0.6%0.0%6.2%1.3%
3-6 AM 1.7%2.4%2.1%2.2%3.3%0.7%0.4%1.2%3.5%1.0%0.1%2.1%2.1%1.1%0.2%0.1%0.5%1.3%2.0%3.0%0.1%0.4%0.0%4.1%1.0%
6-9 AM 4.4%6.7%3.8%4.2%9.2%1.5%1.1%2.6%9.1%1.8%0.3%4.1%5.2%3.4%0.4%0.1%1.6%3.5%5.2%6.2%0.1%1.3%0.0%9.7%1.5%
9-Noon 3.8%6.0%4.3%3.9%8.4%1.8%1.2%2.3%8.6%1.8%0.1%4.6%4.7%2.7%0.3%0.1%1.7%2.8%4.8%6.5%0.0%0.9%0.0%9.8%1.9%
Noon-3 PM 3.9%6.0%3.9%3.9%8.8%1.3%1.2%2.9%8.5%1.2%0.1%4.4%4.6%2.6%0.4%0.2%1.8%2.8%5.1%5.7%0.0%0.3%0.0%9.9%1.5%
3-6 PM 4.5%6.8%4.0%4.8%9.5%1.1%1.5%2.8%9.4%1.5%0.2%4.6%4.7%3.7%0.4%0.2%1.8%3.5%6.0%5.7%0.1%0.7%0.0%9.9%2.2%
6-9 PM 3.9%6.5%4.5%4.2%9.1%1.5%1.1%2.6%9.5%1.6%0.1%4.4%5.0%3.3%0.3%0.3%1.6%3.1%5.4%6.4%0.0%0.5%0.0%10.0%1.5%
9-Midnight 3.7%5.0%3.6%3.4%7.8%1.1%1.1%2.3%7.2%1.6%0.1%3.8%3.8%3.1%0.1%0.2%1.3%2.9%3.9%5.5%0.0%0.5%0.0%9.2%1.6%
Dark - Lighted 7.2%12.6%9.9%8.2%18.0%3.3%2.2%6.1%18.0%3.2%0.2%9.8%9.7%6.4%0.5%0.4%2.7%5.8%10.1%14.3%0.1%0.5%0.0%21.2%4.1%
Dark - Not Lighted 2.7%2.2%1.2%2.8%2.8%0.3%0.5%0.9%2.7%1.4%0.5%2.1%1.3%1.5%0.2%0.1%0.8%2.3%1.6%1.8%0.1%1.5%0.0%3.6%0.9%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Dawn 0.7%0.8%0.4%0.6%1.2%0.1%0.2%0.3%1.1%0.3%0.1%0.6%0.5%0.6%0.1%0.0%0.2%0.6%0.6%0.6%0.1%0.3%0.0%1.3%0.2%
Daylight 16.4%26.1%16.6%16.8%36.7%5.8%4.9%10.7%36.6%6.4%0.6%17.9%20.1%12.5%1.5%0.7%6.7%12.5%21.7%25.0%0.1%2.7%0.0%40.4%7.0%
Dusk 0.8%1.3%0.9%0.9%1.8%0.4%0.3%0.4%2.0%0.3%0.0%0.9%1.0%0.7%0.1%0.1%0.5%0.6%1.0%1.4%0.0%0.2%0.0%2.2%0.3%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%
Unknown 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)
50-55 60+Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Context Classification
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R3+25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachment C-5 9 of 16
Attachment C-5
Orange County
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving only Car Truck 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
1.5%0.1%0.2%0.0%8.0%1.6%1.8%10.1%1.2%0.1%1.6%1.7%8.1%5.7%3.2%0.1%2.4%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.8%0.2%0.9%3.8%0.1%0.0%0.7%0.6%2.7%2.2%0.9%0.1%0.9%0.0%
2.2%0.3%0.0%0.0%17.1%4.4%4.3%22.1%3.6%0.1%2.4%3.0%20.5%8.2%9.7%0.3%7.5%0.1%
0.7%0.2%0.0%0.0%8.6%0.9%2.9%11.8%0.6%0.1%2.2%1.9%8.4%5.2%4.7%0.2%2.3%0.1%
2.6%0.2%0.2%0.0%8.5%1.3%2.4%11.1%1.0%0.1%1.9%1.4%9.0%5.1%3.9%0.3%2.7%0.2%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
3.2%0.1%0.0%0.0%14.5%5.2%5.9%20.9%4.4%0.2%2.2%2.2%21.3%5.0%9.9%0.8%9.9%0.1%
0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.2%0.2%0.5%1.7%0.2%0.0%0.2%0.1%1.6%0.4%0.7%0.0%0.9%0.0%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.1%0.4%0.9%0.1%0.0%0.4%0.1%0.5%0.3%0.5%0.0%0.1%0.0%
0.4%0.1%0.1%0.0%2.3%0.8%1.0%3.4%0.6%0.1%0.3%0.4%3.3%1.2%1.8%0.1%1.0%0.0%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.2%0.5%1.4%0.2%0.0%0.1%0.1%1.3%0.4%0.7%0.0%0.4%0.0%
1.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%3.6%0.8%1.3%5.1%0.7%0.0%1.0%0.5%4.2%2.2%2.0%0.2%1.3%0.0%
10.8%0.7%0.5%0.0%60.7%14.1%19.4%82.4%11.3%0.6%10.9%10.9%72.4%31.4%34.1%1.7%26.7%0.4%
1.3%0.1%0.0%0.0%5.7%1.6%1.6%7.6%0.9%0.0%0.6%0.7%7.3%3.2%2.5%0.1%2.6%0.1%
10.6%0.8%0.5%0.0%58.7%19.1%19.1%79.8%11.0%0.6%11.4%10.8%69.3%30.4%33.6%1.8%25.4%0.3%
1.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%3.3%0.9%0.9%4.3%0.6%0.0%0.6%0.9%3.4%2.2%1.7%0.1%0.9%0.0%
10.9%0.8%0.4%0.0%61.1%19.7%19.7%83.2%11.4%0.6%11.4%10.6%73.2%31.4%34.4%1.9%27.0%0.4%
3.2%0.1%0.1%0.0%21.1%6.4%6.4%28.2%4.2%0.2%3.9%3.5%25.2%9.8%12.2%0.9%9.6%0.1%
8.6%0.8%0.4%0.0%43.2%14.3%14.3%59.3%7.7%0.4%8.0%7.9%51.4%23.8%23.9%1.1%18.3%0.2%
4.9%0.4%0.3%0.0%28.0%7.8%7.8%37.0%6.2%0.2%4.5%5.0%34.0%14.5%15.4%0.7%12.7%0.1%
6.9%0.4%0.2%0.0%36.3%12.8%12.8%50.4%5.7%0.4%7.5%6.5%42.6%19.1%20.7%1.3%15.2%0.2%
0.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.0%0.5%0.5%2.6%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.4%2.2%1.2%1.1%0.0%0.8%0.0%
11.3%0.8%0.5%0.0%62.4%20.1%20.1%84.8%11.5%0.6%11.5%11.0%74.4%32.4%35.0%1.9%27.2%0.4%
2.0%0.1%0.2%0.0%10.3%3.3%3.3%13.9%2.2%0.2%2.3%1.9%12.2%5.6%5.6%0.3%4.9%0.0%
9.9%0.7%0.3%0.0%54.1%17.3%17.3%73.5%9.7%0.4%9.7%9.6%64.4%28.0%30.5%1.7%23.1%0.4%
1.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%8.6%3.4%3.4%12.1%1.7%0.1%1.0%1.8%11.1%4.1%5.2%0.2%4.4%0.1%
10.9%0.8%0.4%0.0%55.8%17.3%17.3%75.3%10.3%0.5%10.9%9.7%65.5%29.5%30.9%1.8%23.6%0.3%
1.4%0.2%0.2%0.0%8.4%3.0%3.0%12.6%1.4%0.1%1.6%1.4%11.1%4.8%4.9%0.3%3.9%0.1%
1.6%0.1%0.1%0.0%8.9%2.9%2.9%12.9%1.5%0.0%1.8%1.8%10.8%4.9%5.1%0.1%4.3%0.1%
1.9%0.1%0.0%0.0%8.9%2.4%2.4%12.3%2.0%0.1%1.6%2.0%10.7%4.7%5.6%0.2%3.8%0.1%
2.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%8.8%2.9%2.9%12.6%1.3%0.1%1.8%1.5%10.7%5.1%4.7%0.1%4.1%0.0%
1.5%0.0%0.1%0.0%9.2%3.0%3.0%13.1%2.2%0.1%1.9%1.7%11.9%5.1%5.5%0.3%4.6%0.0%
2.0%0.2%0.1%0.0%8.9%3.0%3.0%13.0%2.0%0.1%1.8%1.5%11.8%4.6%5.7%0.6%4.1%0.0%
1.5%0.1%0.1%0.0%7.8%2.4%2.4%10.9%1.5%0.0%1.5%1.5%9.5%4.3%4.6%0.3%3.3%0.1%
1.8%0.1%0.1%0.0%4.6%2.1%2.1%7.2%1.2%0.1%1.2%0.8%6.5%2.3%3.2%0.3%2.6%0.1%
0.8%0.2%0.0%0.0%3.8%1.1%1.1%5.4%0.8%0.0%1.2%0.7%4.4%2.0%2.7%0.2%1.4%0.0%
1.5%0.1%0.0%0.0%9.2%2.8%2.8%13.1%1.8%0.1%1.7%1.5%11.8%5.1%5.1%0.4%4.3%0.1%
1.6%0.2%0.1%0.0%8.6%2.6%2.6%12.3%1.7%0.0%1.9%1.6%10.6%4.4%5.1%0.2%4.4%0.0%
1.8%0.0%0.1%0.0%8.6%2.6%2.6%12.2%1.5%0.1%1.6%1.6%10.7%5.0%4.7%0.2%3.9%0.0%
1.9%0.2%0.1%0.0%9.7%3.0%3.0%13.8%1.4%0.1%1.3%1.8%12.2%5.8%5.5%0.2%3.8%0.0%
1.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%9.1%3.0%3.0%12.9%1.8%0.1%1.5%1.8%11.6%4.9%5.4%0.3%4.1%0.1%
1.5%0.1%0.0%0.0%7.2%2.5%2.5%10.5%1.7%0.0%1.7%1.7%8.9%4.2%4.4%0.2%3.4%0.1%
4.3%0.3%0.2%0.0%18.1%5.6%5.6%25.4%4.1%0.2%2.5%3.3%23.9%9.2%10.7%0.8%8.7%0.3%
0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.9%2.0%2.0%5.4%0.6%0.0%2.3%1.2%2.5%2.5%2.4%0.1%1.0%0.0%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.2%0.1%0.0%0.0%1.1%0.4%0.4%1.7%0.2%0.0%0.4%0.2%1.4%0.7%0.7%0.0%0.5%0.0%
6.8%0.4%0.3%0.0%37.0%10.8%10.8%52.2%6.5%0.4%6.4%6.4%46.3%20.3%21.1%1.0%16.7%0.1%
0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.7%0.7%0.7%2.6%0.4%0.0%0.3%0.4%2.4%0.9%1.1%0.1%1.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Median PresenceBike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
C4 C5 C6 None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNone
Attachment C-5 10 of 16
Attachment C-6
Orange County
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Motorcyclists 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 3.5%3.1%1.3%3.4%4.2%0.5%1.9%2.4%3.1%0.5%0.0%2.6%1.3%2.2%0.3%0.2%1.4%2.2%2.7%2.4%0.0%0.3%0.0%3.2%0.0%
Animal 0.3%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.2%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Bicycle 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Head On 1.1%0.8%0.0%1.3%0.6%0.0%0.3%0.3%0.6%0.6%0.0%0.5%0.3%0.6%0.2%0.0%0.3%0.7%0.9%0.2%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%
Left Turn 8.9%14.8%5.0%8.3%18.9%1.3%2.7%6.8%16.6%2.6%0.0%7.2%8.8%7.8%0.8%0.3%3.5%8.3%10.0%10.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%16.4%3.2%
Off Road 5.3%5.6%1.9%6.9%5.9%0.3%2.1%3.1%7.1%0.6%0.0%1.9%4.2%3.4%0.5%0.2%3.0%3.6%3.8%3.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.8%1.3%
Other 5.6%7.7%5.6%7.0%10.6%1.4%2.1%4.2%9.8%2.6%0.3%7.2%5.3%3.7%0.5%0.3%2.1%4.7%6.4%8.2%0.3%0.0%0.0%13.2%2.6%
Pedestrian 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Rear End 2.7%6.8%6.6%4.2%9.1%2.7%0.2%1.9%11.4%2.3%0.3%8.5%5.4%1.8%0.2%0.0%0.2%2.0%5.3%10.7%0.0%1.3%0.0%15.8%2.3%
Right Turn 0.0%0.3%0.6%0.3%0.5%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.3%0.2%0.8%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.2%0.7%0.0%0.3%0.0%1.3%0.0%
Rollover 2.7%1.3%1.3%2.4%2.6%0.3%0.3%1.6%2.3%1.0%0.2%1.6%0.8%1.8%0.3%0.0%0.8%1.8%1.1%2.2%0.0%0.3%0.0%2.3%0.6%
Sideswipe 0.8%1.4%2.7%1.4%3.2%0.3%0.2%0.8%3.1%1.0%0.0%2.9%1.1%0.8%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.7%2.0%2.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.8%0.3%
Unknown 0.3%1.0%0.6%0.2%1.6%0.2%0.0%0.5%1.1%0.3%0.0%1.1%0.5%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.5%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.6%0.0%
Y 1.6%3.5%1.0%2.1%4.0%0.0%0.5%1.1%3.2%0.8%0.5%2.1%1.1%1.9%0.2%0.2%0.6%2.0%2.0%2.2%0.0%1.0%0.0%3.5%0.6%
N 29.8%39.3%24.8%33.6%53.1%7.2%9.5%20.5%52.3%11.1%0.5%32.2%26.7%20.5%2.9%0.8%10.9%22.9%30.9%40.1%0.3%1.9%0.0%62.1%9.6%
Y 2.1%2.3%1.1%1.4%3.4%0.6%0.3%1.3%3.2%0.6%0.0%1.4%1.4%1.8%0.3%0.2%0.3%1.5%2.0%2.2%0.0%0.3%0.0%3.9%0.0%
N 29.3%40.6%24.6%34.2%53.8%6.6%9.7%20.3%52.3%11.3%1.0%32.8%26.4%20.6%2.7%0.8%11.2%23.4%30.9%40.1%0.3%2.6%0.0%61.7%10.3%
Y 3.4%3.9%1.3%2.9%5.1%0.5%0.8%2.9%4.8%0.0%0.0%2.9%1.9%3.2%0.0%0.0%0.5%2.4%2.9%3.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.5%1.0%
N 28.0%39.0%24.5%32.8%52.0%6.7%9.2%18.7%50.7%11.9%1.0%31.4%25.9%19.2%3.0%1.0%11.0%22.5%29.9%38.5%0.3%2.9%0.0%62.1%9.3%
Y 8.1%11.8%6.4%9.6%14.9%1.6%2.9%4.8%15.1%3.2%0.2%8.3%8.3%6.6%0.2%0.3%2.4%6.5%8.3%11.8%0.0%1.3%0.0%16.7%1.3%
N 23.3%31.1%19.3%26.1%42.2%5.6%7.1%16.7%40.4%8.7%0.8%25.9%19.5%15.8%2.9%0.6%9.1%18.3%24.5%30.5%0.3%1.6%0.0%48.9%9.0%
Y 14.3%18.8%7.7%13.1%25.0%2.6%4.7%9.7%22.2%4.0%0.3%12.2%10.7%11.8%1.3%0.5%4.2%12.9%14.0%14.3%0.0%1.0%0.0%23.5%4.2%
N 17.1%24.0%18.0%22.6%32.2%4.6%5.3%11.9%33.3%7.9%0.6%22.1%17.1%10.6%1.8%0.5%7.4%12.0%18.9%27.9%0.3%1.9%0.0%42.1%6.1%
Y 1.8%2.1%0.5%1.1%3.0%0.2%0.8%0.6%2.3%0.5%0.2%0.6%1.4%1.3%0.2%0.2%0.6%1.6%1.3%1.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%1.9%1.0%
N 29.6%40.7%25.3%34.6%54.1%7.0%9.2%20.9%53.3%11.4%0.8%33.6%26.4%21.1%2.9%0.8%10.9%23.2%31.6%41.0%0.3%2.6%0.0%63.7%9.3%
Y 2.9%4.5%1.9%2.6%5.6%1.1%1.0%1.1%5.8%1.4%0.0%3.0%2.9%1.9%0.3%0.0%1.1%1.6%4.2%3.4%0.0%0.3%0.0%7.4%1.0%
N 28.5%38.3%23.8%33.1%51.5%6.1%9.0%20.5%49.8%10.5%1.0%31.2%25.0%20.5%2.7%1.0%10.4%23.2%28.7%38.8%0.3%2.6%0.0%58.2%9.3%
Y 2.3%3.7%2.3%2.6%5.1%0.5%0.8%1.4%4.7%1.3%0.0%3.4%1.0%1.9%0.3%0.3%1.3%2.4%2.0%3.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.1%0.3%
N 29.1%39.1%23.5%33.1%52.0%6.7%9.2%20.1%50.9%10.6%1.0%30.9%26.9%20.5%2.7%0.6%10.2%22.5%30.9%38.8%0.3%2.9%0.0%59.5%10.0%
Monday 5.0%3.7%2.4%4.3%6.1%0.6%1.4%1.8%6.6%1.0%0.3%2.7%3.7%2.9%0.3%0.0%1.4%3.8%3.1%4.0%0.3%0.3%0.0%6.8%1.0%
Tuesday 2.4%5.8%3.9%3.4%8.0%0.6%0.8%2.4%6.6%2.1%0.2%5.1%3.0%2.1%0.6%0.3%0.8%2.4%4.5%5.6%0.0%1.0%0.0%8.7%1.0%
Wednesday 3.5%7.1%2.7%5.3%7.4%0.6%1.0%4.5%7.1%0.8%0.0%4.5%4.2%2.9%0.2%0.3%1.3%2.4%6.4%4.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%7.7%1.3%
Thursday 5.2%6.8%4.5%5.1%9.9%1.3%1.6%4.0%9.0%1.8%0.0%5.8%5.0%3.5%0.3%0.0%1.8%3.3%5.8%7.4%0.0%0.3%0.0%11.3%1.6%
Friday 5.6%7.1%4.2%6.6%9.3%1.1%2.1%3.1%9.7%1.9%0.2%6.4%3.7%4.2%0.5%0.3%1.9%5.3%4.4%7.3%0.0%0.6%0.0%10.0%2.3%
Saturday 5.0%6.9%4.3%5.6%9.1%1.8%1.9%2.7%9.3%2.3%0.0%5.6%4.3%3.4%0.8%0.0%2.4%4.2%3.6%8.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%12.2%1.3%
Sunday 4.7%5.5%3.7%5.4%7.4%1.1%1.1%3.1%7.2%2.1%0.3%4.2%4.0%3.5%0.3%0.0%1.9%3.6%5.1%4.9%0.0%0.6%0.0%9.0%1.9%
12-3 AM 1.8%3.9%1.4%2.9%3.7%0.5%0.3%1.4%4.0%1.1%0.2%2.7%2.9%1.1%0.0%0.0%0.3%1.3%3.1%3.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%5.1%1.3%
3-6 AM 0.8%1.1%0.8%0.6%1.9%0.2%0.2%0.8%1.3%0.5%0.0%1.1%0.8%0.3%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.9%0.9%1.1%0.0%0.3%0.0%1.6%0.3%
6-9 AM 2.4%4.0%2.7%2.4%6.2%0.5%0.3%2.4%5.3%1.0%0.2%4.0%2.4%1.6%0.3%0.0%0.8%2.0%3.1%4.4%0.0%0.6%0.0%6.8%1.3%
9-Noon 2.7%3.2%1.9%4.0%3.5%0.3%0.8%2.7%3.7%0.5%0.2%2.7%1.9%1.4%0.6%0.0%1.1%2.4%2.5%2.7%0.3%0.0%0.0%4.8%0.6%
Noon-3 PM 5.5%5.5%3.9%5.9%8.0%1.1%2.1%2.1%8.2%2.3%0.2%4.2%4.0%4.0%0.3%0.0%2.6%4.9%4.4%4.9%0.0%1.0%0.0%9.0%1.3%
3-6 PM 5.8%7.6%4.7%6.6%10.1%1.3%2.6%3.4%9.5%2.4%0.2%7.0%4.8%4.0%0.2%0.2%1.8%4.5%5.8%8.0%0.0%0.6%0.0%13.2%1.3%
6-9 PM 7.7%7.9%3.9%5.9%12.2%1.4%2.7%3.9%10.8%1.9%0.2%4.2%5.1%5.9%0.8%0.3%3.2%4.2%8.0%6.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.4%2.3%
9-Midnight 4.7%9.7%6.4%7.4%11.5%1.9%1.0%4.8%12.7%2.3%0.0%8.3%5.9%4.0%0.6%0.3%1.6%4.7%5.1%12.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%16.7%1.9%
Dark - Lighted 8.7%17.6%10.6%11.8%21.9%3.2%2.1%9.3%20.9%4.5%0.0%13.9%10.4%7.8%0.8%0.8%3.2%7.6%11.3%19.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%26.0%2.9%
Dark - Not Lighted 3.4%2.3%0.8%2.7%3.7%0.0%0.5%1.1%3.4%1.3%0.2%2.1%1.8%1.1%0.6%0.0%0.8%2.4%2.2%1.8%0.0%1.0%0.0%4.2%1.3%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Dawn 1.3%1.1%0.3%1.1%1.4%0.2%0.3%0.5%1.8%0.2%0.0%0.6%0.5%1.1%0.0%0.0%0.5%1.3%0.4%0.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.3%0.3%
Daylight 17.2%19.8%12.6%18.7%27.4%3.5%6.8%9.7%26.6%5.8%0.8%16.0%14.1%11.2%1.4%0.2%6.7%13.4%16.7%18.5%0.3%1.9%0.0%30.9%5.8%
Dusk 0.8%2.1%1.4%1.3%2.7%0.3%0.3%1.0%2.9%0.2%0.0%1.6%1.1%1.1%0.2%0.0%0.3%0.2%2.4%2.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.2%0.0%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Unknown 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)
50-55 60+Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Context Classification
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R3+25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachment C-6 11 of 16
Attachment C-6
Orange County
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Motorcyclists 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
2.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%5.0%1.1%1.8%7.1%0.8%0.0%1.0%0.6%6.3%4.0%2.1%0.0%1.8%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.2%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.3%0.0%0.6%1.9%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.6%0.6%1.4%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%
4.8%0.6%0.0%0.0%19.6%2.3%6.8%26.7%1.8%0.2%1.9%5.2%21.6%12.9%8.2%0.2%7.2%0.2%
1.6%0.3%0.3%0.0%9.8%1.1%1.9%12.4%0.5%0.0%1.6%1.3%10.0%4.3%4.7%0.2%3.4%0.3%
2.9%0.6%0.3%0.0%11.0%2.9%5.2%17.2%1.8%0.0%2.3%2.6%14.2%5.8%6.9%0.5%5.8%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
2.3%0.6%0.0%0.0%9.2%2.4%4.5%13.7%1.9%0.5%1.4%2.3%12.4%3.5%7.4%0.3%4.8%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.2%0.6%0.8%0.2%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.8%0.0%0.6%0.0%0.3%0.0%
0.6%0.3%0.0%0.0%3.9%0.3%1.1%5.2%0.2%0.0%1.1%0.6%3.5%2.1%1.8%0.3%1.0%0.2%
1.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%2.7%1.0%1.3%4.0%1.0%0.0%0.2%0.5%4.3%1.3%1.4%0.0%2.3%0.0%
1.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.1%0.3%0.5%1.6%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%1.6%0.6%0.2%0.0%1.1%0.0%
0.6%0.3%0.3%0.0%3.9%0.3%1.9%6.1%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.5%4.7%2.3%2.3%0.0%1.4%0.2%
16.4%2.6%0.6%0.0%60.1%11.3%22.5%84.9%8.4%0.6%10.0%13.2%70.7%34.1%31.6%1.4%26.2%0.5%
0.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.0%1.0%1.0%5.0%0.5%0.0%0.8%1.0%3.7%2.9%1.3%0.2%1.1%0.0%
16.4%2.9%1.0%0.0%59.9%23.5%23.5%86.0%7.9%0.6%10.1%12.7%71.7%33.5%32.5%1.3%26.6%0.6%
2.6%0.6%0.6%0.0%5.6%1.8%1.8%8.1%0.5%0.0%0.5%1.6%6.4%3.4%2.1%0.0%2.9%0.2%
14.5%2.3%0.3%0.0%58.3%22.7%22.7%82.9%7.9%0.6%10.5%12.1%68.9%33.0%31.7%1.4%24.8%0.5%
3.9%1.0%0.0%0.0%17.1%6.4%6.4%24.5%1.6%0.2%2.9%4.0%19.3%10.5%9.3%0.2%6.3%0.0%
13.2%1.9%1.0%0.0%46.9%18.0%18.0%66.5%6.8%0.5%8.1%9.7%56.0%25.9%24.5%1.3%21.4%0.6%
8.4%0.6%0.6%0.0%26.1%9.7%9.7%37.0%3.5%0.3%4.0%5.8%31.1%17.4%12.7%0.5%10.0%0.3%
8.7%2.3%0.3%0.0%37.8%14.8%14.8%53.9%4.8%0.3%6.9%7.9%44.3%19.0%21.1%1.0%17.7%0.3%
0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%3.2%0.8%0.8%4.2%0.2%0.0%0.6%1.0%2.7%2.1%1.3%0.0%1.0%0.0%
17.0%2.6%1.0%0.0%60.7%23.7%23.7%86.8%8.2%0.6%10.3%12.7%72.6%34.3%32.5%1.4%26.7%0.6%
1.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%5.8%2.7%2.7%8.5%0.6%0.2%1.0%1.0%7.4%3.7%3.2%0.0%2.4%0.0%
16.1%2.6%1.0%0.0%58.1%21.7%21.7%82.4%7.7%0.5%10.0%12.7%68.0%32.7%30.6%1.4%25.3%0.6%
1.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%4.2%2.1%2.1%6.6%1.6%0.0%0.6%1.0%6.6%2.9%2.7%0.0%2.6%0.0%
16.1%2.6%1.0%0.0%59.7%22.4%22.4%84.4%6.8%0.6%10.3%12.7%68.8%33.5%31.1%1.4%25.1%0.6%
1.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.4%2.6%2.6%10.3%0.8%0.0%1.6%2.1%7.4%5.6%3.2%0.2%2.1%0.0%
1.9%0.3%0.0%0.0%5.8%3.3%3.3%10.8%1.3%0.0%1.3%1.3%9.5%3.9%4.2%0.0%4.0%0.0%
2.9%1.0%0.3%0.0%7.8%2.4%2.4%12.1%1.1%0.2%1.4%1.9%10.0%3.4%5.0%0.2%4.5%0.3%
2.3%0.3%0.3%0.0%9.6%2.6%2.6%14.7%1.8%0.0%1.8%1.6%13.0%6.8%5.2%0.3%4.2%0.0%
4.8%1.0%0.0%0.0%9.6%4.3%4.3%16.1%0.8%0.0%1.3%3.1%12.6%6.8%4.8%0.3%4.7%0.3%
3.2%0.3%0.0%0.0%9.8%3.1%3.1%14.3%1.6%0.3%1.3%2.7%12.2%5.5%5.2%0.2%5.5%0.0%
1.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%7.6%3.4%3.4%12.7%1.0%0.2%2.3%1.0%10.6%4.5%6.3%0.3%2.7%0.0%
2.3%0.3%0.6%0.0%3.4%2.1%2.1%6.6%0.5%0.0%0.6%1.0%5.5%1.9%2.1%0.2%2.7%0.2%
0.0%0.6%0.0%0.0%1.3%1.0%1.0%2.7%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.8%1.8%1.3%1.3%0.0%0.2%0.0%
2.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.7%2.6%2.6%8.1%1.0%0.2%1.0%0.8%7.4%2.3%3.9%0.2%2.7%0.2%
1.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.6%2.0%2.0%7.6%0.3%0.0%1.0%1.0%6.0%2.4%2.9%0.0%2.6%0.0%
1.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%9.0%3.0%3.0%13.8%1.0%0.0%2.6%2.3%10.0%5.6%5.5%0.5%3.2%0.0%
4.2%0.6%0.0%0.0%9.7%3.7%3.7%15.3%2.6%0.2%2.1%2.3%13.7%6.9%5.0%0.3%5.8%0.0%
2.3%0.0%0.3%0.0%12.4%3.1%3.1%18.7%0.6%0.2%2.7%3.1%13.7%8.5%5.8%0.2%4.8%0.2%
3.9%1.3%0.0%0.0%11.6%4.1%4.1%18.2%2.4%0.2%0.8%2.6%17.4%7.4%7.4%0.2%5.6%0.2%
8.0%2.3%1.0%0.0%20.5%7.6%7.6%33.2%3.5%0.2%1.8%4.0%31.1%12.1%13.2%0.5%10.5%0.6%
0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.9%2.4%2.4%6.1%0.3%0.0%1.8%1.6%3.1%3.1%1.8%0.0%1.6%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.7%0.4%0.4%2.6%0.2%0.0%0.2%0.6%1.9%1.3%0.6%0.0%0.8%0.0%
7.7%0.6%0.0%0.0%29.4%10.3%10.3%45.2%4.0%0.3%6.6%6.6%36.4%18.4%16.9%0.6%13.7%0.0%
0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.1%1.0%1.0%3.9%0.3%0.2%0.6%0.8%2.9%1.6%1.3%0.3%1.1%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Median PresenceBike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
C4 C5 C6 None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNone
Attachment C-6 12 of 16
Attachment C-7
Orange County
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Bicyclist 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Animal 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Bicycle 33.1%41.6%25.3%32.0%57.9%10.1%13.5%23.7%54.3%8.2%0.4%33.6%22.3%23.5%4.0%1.2%15.4%25.5%29.3%45.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%76.2%11.5%
Head On 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Left Turn 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Off Road 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Pedestrian 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Rear End 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Right Turn 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Rollover 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Sideswipe 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Unknown 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Y 0.0%1.2%0.4%0.0%1.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.6%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.8%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.0%1.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.0%
N 33.1%40.4%24.9%32.0%56.3%10.1%13.5%23.7%52.7%8.2%0.4%33.2%21.5%23.1%4.0%1.2%15.4%25.5%28.4%44.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%75.4%11.5%
Y 6.9%8.2%5.3%5.3%12.6%2.4%2.4%4.9%11.0%2.0%0.0%8.5%3.6%4.9%0.8%0.0%2.4%4.3%7.2%9.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%18.0%1.6%
N 26.1%33.5%20.0%26.7%45.3%7.7%11.0%18.8%43.3%6.1%0.4%25.1%18.6%18.6%3.2%1.2%13.0%21.2%22.1%35.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%58.2%9.8%
Y 0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
N 32.7%41.6%25.3%31.6%57.9%10.1%13.5%23.3%54.3%8.2%0.4%33.6%22.3%23.1%4.0%1.2%15.4%25.5%28.8%45.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%76.2%11.5%
Y 4.9%8.6%5.7%4.0%11.3%3.6%1.2%3.7%13.1%1.2%0.0%6.5%4.9%4.9%1.2%0.0%1.6%2.9%7.2%10.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%16.4%4.1%
N 28.2%33.1%19.6%27.9%46.6%6.5%12.2%20.0%41.2%6.9%0.4%27.1%17.4%18.6%2.8%1.2%13.8%22.6%22.1%34.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%59.8%7.4%
Y 18.0%17.1%10.2%13.8%27.9%3.2%6.1%14.3%21.2%3.7%0.0%12.1%8.5%15.0%2.4%0.4%6.5%15.9%12.0%17.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%32.8%2.5%
N 15.1%24.5%15.1%18.2%30.0%6.9%7.3%9.4%33.1%4.5%0.4%21.5%13.8%8.5%1.6%0.8%8.9%9.6%17.3%27.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%43.4%9.0%
Y 0.4%0.8%0.4%0.4%1.2%0.0%0.4%0.0%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%1.0%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.0%
N 32.7%40.8%24.9%31.6%56.7%10.1%13.1%23.7%53.1%8.2%0.4%33.2%21.9%23.1%4.0%1.2%15.0%25.5%28.4%44.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%75.4%11.5%
Y 4.1%4.1%2.9%3.6%7.3%0.4%1.6%3.3%5.7%0.4%0.0%3.6%2.8%3.2%0.0%0.0%1.6%2.9%3.8%4.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.9%2.5%
N 29.0%37.6%22.4%28.3%50.6%9.7%11.8%20.4%48.6%7.8%0.4%30.0%19.4%20.2%4.0%1.2%13.8%22.6%25.5%40.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%71.3%9.0%
Y 2.0%2.9%1.2%2.0%3.6%0.8%0.4%2.9%2.9%0.0%0.0%1.2%1.6%2.4%0.4%0.0%0.8%1.9%2.4%2.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.7%0.0%
N 31.0%38.8%24.1%30.0%54.3%9.3%13.1%20.8%51.4%8.2%0.4%32.4%20.6%21.1%3.6%1.2%14.6%23.6%26.9%42.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%70.5%11.5%
Monday 6.5%6.1%5.3%6.1%9.3%2.4%2.0%4.1%10.6%1.2%0.0%5.7%4.5%4.0%1.2%0.0%2.4%3.8%5.8%8.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%16.4%0.8%
Tuesday 5.3%6.1%4.9%5.3%9.7%1.2%2.9%3.3%8.6%1.6%0.0%6.1%2.4%3.6%0.0%0.4%3.6%2.4%5.3%7.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%13.9%0.0%
Wednesday 3.7%4.9%4.1%3.2%8.9%0.8%1.2%3.7%7.3%0.4%0.0%4.9%2.4%3.2%0.8%0.0%1.6%4.3%3.4%5.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%11.5%0.8%
Thursday 3.7%6.5%2.0%3.6%7.3%1.2%0.8%3.7%6.1%1.2%0.4%5.3%1.6%3.6%0.0%0.4%1.2%3.4%4.8%4.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%11.5%0.8%
Friday 6.5%4.9%4.1%6.1%6.5%2.8%2.9%4.9%6.1%1.6%0.0%4.9%3.2%3.2%1.2%0.0%2.8%5.8%3.8%5.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%9.8%1.6%
Saturday 2.9%7.3%3.3%4.5%8.1%1.2%1.2%1.6%9.8%0.8%0.0%3.6%5.7%2.0%0.0%0.4%2.0%1.9%3.8%7.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%7.4%4.1%
Sunday 4.5%5.7%1.6%3.2%8.1%0.4%2.4%2.4%5.7%1.2%0.0%3.2%2.4%3.6%0.8%0.0%1.6%3.8%2.4%5.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.7%3.3%
12-3 AM 1.6%2.0%1.2%1.6%2.8%0.4%0.4%1.2%1.6%1.6%0.0%2.0%1.2%0.8%0.0%0.0%0.8%1.0%1.9%1.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.5%0.0%
3-6 AM 2.4%1.2%1.2%2.8%1.6%0.4%0.8%1.2%2.4%0.4%0.0%2.0%0.4%0.8%0.4%0.0%1.2%1.4%1.0%1.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.3%0.0%
6-9 AM 6.1%7.3%4.1%4.5%10.9%2.0%1.6%4.9%9.8%1.2%0.0%5.3%3.2%6.1%0.4%0.0%2.4%4.8%5.3%7.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%13.9%1.6%
9-Noon 4.5%5.7%5.3%4.0%10.1%1.2%1.6%4.1%9.0%0.8%0.0%5.3%4.9%2.8%0.8%0.4%1.2%5.8%2.4%8.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%14.8%1.6%
Noon-3 PM 4.5%6.1%2.9%3.2%8.5%2.0%2.0%3.7%6.5%1.2%0.0%4.9%3.2%3.2%0.8%0.0%1.6%3.4%3.8%7.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%12.3%0.8%
3-6 PM 5.3%6.5%4.5%7.3%8.9%0.4%2.9%3.7%9.0%0.8%0.0%5.7%2.4%3.6%0.4%0.4%4.0%2.9%4.8%7.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%11.5%1.6%
6-9 PM 5.3%9.0%3.7%5.7%9.7%2.4%2.4%2.9%11.4%1.2%0.0%5.7%4.5%4.5%0.4%0.4%2.4%3.8%7.2%7.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%13.1%2.5%
9-Midnight 3.3%3.7%2.4%2.8%5.3%1.2%1.6%2.0%4.5%0.8%0.4%2.8%2.4%1.6%0.8%0.0%1.6%2.4%2.9%3.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.9%3.3%
Dark - Lighted 5.3%9.0%7.8%6.1%13.0%2.8%1.6%4.9%13.1%2.4%0.0%10.1%5.3%2.8%1.2%0.4%2.0%3.4%7.7%12.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%14.8%2.5%
Dark - Not Lighted 3.7%3.7%0.8%3.6%3.6%0.8%0.8%1.6%4.5%0.8%0.4%2.0%1.6%2.0%0.8%0.0%1.6%2.9%2.9%1.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.6%1.6%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.4%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Dawn 1.2%1.6%0.0%0.4%1.6%0.8%0.4%1.2%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.2%1.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.4%1.0%1.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.6%0.0%
Daylight 21.2%26.5%15.9%21.1%37.7%5.3%9.8%15.5%33.5%4.9%0.0%20.6%13.8%15.8%2.0%0.8%10.9%16.8%16.8%28.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%50.8%7.4%
Dusk 0.8%0.4%0.4%0.4%0.8%0.4%0.4%0.0%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.8%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.5%0.5%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.6%0.0%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.0%
Unknown 0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)
50-55 60+Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Context Classification
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R3+25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachment C-7 13 of 16
Attachment C-7
Orange County
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Bicyclist 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
12.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%65.3%11.0%23.7%90.6%7.8%1.6%9.0%6.9%84.1%38.8%32.2%0.4%26.9%1.6%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.2%0.4%0.0%1.2%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.6%0.8%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%
12.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%64.1%10.6%23.7%89.4%7.3%1.6%9.0%6.9%82.4%38.0%31.8%0.4%26.5%1.6%
2.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%12.7%5.3%5.3%18.8%1.2%0.4%2.4%1.6%16.3%8.6%5.7%0.0%5.7%0.4%
9.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%52.7%18.4%18.4%71.8%6.5%1.2%6.5%5.3%67.8%30.2%26.5%0.4%21.2%1.2%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
12.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%65.3%23.3%23.3%90.2%7.8%1.6%9.0%6.9%83.7%38.4%32.2%0.4%26.9%1.6%
0.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%13.5%4.1%4.1%17.1%1.6%0.4%0.8%0.8%17.6%6.1%4.5%0.0%8.2%0.4%
11.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%51.8%19.6%19.6%73.5%6.1%1.2%8.2%6.1%66.5%32.7%27.8%0.4%18.8%1.2%
5.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%29.0%11.0%11.0%40.4%4.5%0.4%3.3%2.9%39.2%20.0%13.9%0.4%10.6%0.4%
6.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%36.3%12.7%12.7%50.2%3.3%1.2%5.7%4.1%44.9%18.8%18.4%0.0%16.3%1.2%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.2%0.0%0.0%1.2%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.6%0.8%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%
12.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%64.1%23.7%23.7%89.4%7.3%1.6%9.0%6.9%82.4%38.0%31.8%0.4%26.5%1.6%
2.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.2%1.2%1.2%10.2%0.8%0.0%0.4%0.0%10.6%5.3%2.0%0.0%3.7%0.0%
9.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%57.1%22.4%22.4%80.4%6.9%1.6%8.6%6.9%73.5%33.5%30.2%0.4%23.3%1.6%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.1%0.8%0.8%4.9%1.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.1%2.0%2.0%0.0%1.6%0.4%
12.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%61.2%22.9%22.9%85.7%6.5%1.6%9.0%6.9%78.0%36.7%30.2%0.4%25.3%1.2%
0.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%11.6%2.2%2.2%14.7%2.4%0.8%1.2%1.6%15.1%9.0%2.0%0.4%5.7%0.8%
2.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%7.6%5.8%5.8%15.9%0.4%0.0%0.8%1.6%13.9%4.9%6.9%0.0%4.1%0.4%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.9%3.6%3.6%11.8%0.4%0.4%0.8%1.2%10.6%5.3%4.9%0.0%2.0%0.4%
1.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.4%4.3%4.3%10.6%1.2%0.4%2.4%1.2%8.6%3.7%6.5%0.0%2.0%0.0%
2.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%9.4%1.4%1.4%13.9%1.6%0.0%1.2%0.4%13.9%6.9%4.1%0.0%4.5%0.0%
2.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%9.1%2.2%2.2%12.7%0.8%0.0%1.6%0.8%11.0%4.5%3.3%0.0%5.7%0.0%
2.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.0%1.4%1.4%11.0%0.8%0.0%0.8%0.0%11.0%4.5%4.5%0.0%2.9%0.0%
1.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.9%0.4%0.4%4.5%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%4.5%2.0%1.6%0.0%1.2%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.5%1.4%1.4%4.5%0.0%0.4%0.4%0.8%3.7%2.4%0.8%0.4%0.4%0.8%
0.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%9.8%5.1%5.1%16.7%0.4%0.4%1.6%2.9%13.1%5.7%5.3%0.0%6.1%0.4%
1.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.7%3.3%3.3%13.1%2.0%0.4%0.4%0.4%14.7%5.3%4.9%0.0%4.9%0.4%
2.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%7.2%2.5%2.5%11.0%2.0%0.4%0.8%1.2%11.4%6.1%4.1%0.0%3.3%0.0%
1.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%9.4%3.3%3.3%15.1%1.2%0.0%1.6%1.6%13.1%6.1%8.6%0.0%1.6%0.0%
1.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%9.8%4.7%4.7%16.7%1.2%0.0%1.6%0.0%16.3%7.3%5.3%0.0%5.3%0.0%
2.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%7.6%0.4%0.4%9.0%0.4%0.0%2.0%0.0%7.3%3.7%1.6%0.0%4.1%0.0%
5.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%13.8%3.3%3.3%20.8%0.8%0.4%1.2%0.0%20.8%7.8%6.5%0.4%6.9%0.4%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.7%1.8%1.8%7.3%0.4%0.4%2.0%0.8%5.3%3.7%2.0%0.0%2.0%0.4%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.4%0.4%0.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.8%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.2%0.0%0.0%2.4%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%2.4%1.6%0.0%0.0%1.2%0.0%
6.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%35.1%15.2%15.2%56.7%6.1%0.8%4.9%6.1%52.7%24.9%22.9%0.0%15.5%0.4%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.1%0.4%0.4%1.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.6%0.4%0.0%0.0%1.2%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Median PresenceBike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
C4 C5 C6 None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNone
Attachment C-7 14 of 16
Attachment C-8
Orange County
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Pedestrians 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
2-3 4-5 6-8 0-25 30-35 40-45 50-55 60+
Angle 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Animal 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Bicycle 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Head On 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Left Turn 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Off Road 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Other 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Pedestrian 23.1%37.9%39.0%27.8%61.8%10.4%10.0%20.1%59.8%10.1%0.0%42.9%28.4%15.7%1.7%0.1%11.1%15.3%30.9%53.9%0.0%0.7%0.0%68.9%6.3%
Rear End 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Right Turn 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Rollover 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Sideswipe 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Unknown 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Y 0.7%1.4%0.4%1.0%1.3%0.3%0.1%1.0%1.2%0.3%0.0%1.1%0.7%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.6%1.4%0.6%0.0%0.2%0.0%1.9%0.2%
N 22.4%36.4%38.6%26.8%60.5%10.1%9.8%19.1%58.7%9.8%0.0%41.8%27.7%15.1%1.7%0.1%11.0%14.6%29.4%53.2%0.0%0.5%0.0%67.0%6.1%
Y 6.9%6.6%7.1%6.3%12.7%1.6%3.0%4.5%11.8%1.3%0.0%7.8%6.1%2.9%0.3%0.0%3.4%3.5%6.8%9.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%11.5%1.2%
N 16.2%31.2%31.9%21.5%49.1%8.8%6.9%15.6%48.0%8.8%0.0%35.1%22.3%12.8%1.4%0.1%7.7%11.7%24.1%44.9%0.0%0.7%0.0%57.4%5.2%
Y 0.6%0.7%1.0%0.6%1.6%0.1%0.3%0.6%1.3%0.1%0.0%1.4%0.3%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.3%0.6%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.4%0.0%
N 22.5%37.1%38.0%27.2%60.2%10.3%9.7%19.5%58.5%10.0%0.0%41.5%28.1%15.4%1.7%0.1%10.8%15.0%30.2%52.6%0.0%0.7%0.0%67.4%6.3%
Y 3.5%3.5%3.2%3.1%6.4%0.9%1.4%2.2%6.4%0.1%0.0%3.6%2.6%1.9%0.1%0.0%2.3%1.8%2.9%4.5%0.0%0.2%0.0%5.4%0.7%
N 19.7%34.4%35.8%24.7%55.3%9.6%8.5%17.9%53.5%10.0%0.0%39.4%25.8%13.8%1.6%0.1%8.8%13.5%28.0%49.4%0.0%0.5%0.0%63.5%5.6%
Y 7.9%10.1%11.4%5.4%19.5%4.3%2.9%7.1%16.8%2.7%0.0%11.4%8.3%5.4%0.7%0.1%3.3%5.5%8.4%15.3%0.0%0.2%0.0%18.0%2.1%
N 15.2%27.7%27.6%22.4%42.2%6.1%7.1%13.0%43.1%7.4%0.0%31.5%20.1%10.3%1.0%0.0%7.8%9.8%22.5%38.6%0.0%0.5%0.0%50.8%4.2%
Y 0.3%1.0%0.7%0.6%1.1%0.3%0.1%0.3%1.4%0.1%0.0%0.7%0.9%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.3%0.0%1.0%1.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.9%0.2%
N 22.8%36.8%38.3%27.2%60.6%10.1%9.8%19.8%58.4%10.0%0.0%42.2%27.5%15.5%1.7%0.1%10.8%15.3%29.9%52.9%0.0%0.7%0.0%67.9%6.1%
Y 1.9%2.7%2.6%2.3%4.9%0.3%0.9%1.4%4.3%0.6%0.0%3.1%2.3%1.0%0.1%0.0%0.9%1.3%2.4%3.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.9%0.2%
N 21.2%35.1%36.4%25.5%56.9%10.1%9.1%18.6%55.5%9.5%0.0%39.8%26.1%14.7%1.6%0.1%10.3%14.0%28.5%50.2%0.0%0.7%0.0%63.0%6.1%
Y 1.0%1.6%2.5%1.6%3.1%0.3%0.6%1.0%2.9%0.6%0.0%1.9%2.0%0.6%0.0%0.0%0.6%0.6%0.6%3.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.7%0.0%
N 22.1%36.3%36.6%26.2%58.6%10.1%9.4%19.1%56.9%9.5%0.0%41.1%26.4%15.1%1.7%0.1%10.6%14.6%30.2%50.2%0.0%0.7%0.0%65.1%6.3%
Monday 3.3%4.3%5.3%4.0%7.7%1.3%1.7%1.9%7.4%2.0%0.0%5.8%3.3%2.0%0.3%0.0%1.6%1.9%3.5%7.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%9.6%1.2%
Tuesday 3.3%5.5%6.4%5.0%8.8%1.4%1.4%3.3%8.8%1.6%0.0%6.1%4.6%2.3%0.3%0.0%2.0%2.6%3.9%8.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%11.9%0.7%
Wednesday 3.6%5.1%5.6%4.3%8.3%2.0%1.7%2.9%8.7%1.0%0.0%6.1%3.3%2.4%0.6%0.0%2.1%2.6%4.0%7.4%0.0%0.2%0.0%8.9%1.2%
Thursday 3.0%5.8%5.8%2.7%9.8%2.0%1.3%3.3%8.2%1.7%0.0%6.6%3.9%2.3%0.3%0.1%1.4%1.8%4.2%8.7%0.0%0.2%0.0%10.1%0.7%
Friday 3.8%6.9%6.2%4.1%11.4%1.4%0.9%3.6%10.8%1.6%0.0%7.3%5.8%2.3%0.3%0.0%1.3%3.2%5.5%9.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%10.3%1.6%
Saturday 3.2%6.4%5.1%4.7%8.7%1.0%1.9%2.9%8.8%1.0%0.0%6.0%4.4%2.4%0.0%0.0%1.6%1.6%5.9%6.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.2%0.7%
Sunday 2.9%3.9%4.6%3.0%7.0%1.3%1.0%2.2%7.1%1.2%0.0%5.0%3.1%2.0%0.0%0.0%1.1%1.6%3.9%5.9%0.0%0.0%0.0%9.8%0.2%
12-3 AM 2.3%3.5%4.9%3.7%5.1%1.9%1.2%2.2%5.9%1.4%0.0%5.7%2.4%1.3%0.0%0.0%1.3%1.1%3.2%6.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.2%0.5%
3-6 AM 2.6%2.9%2.6%2.3%4.3%1.4%0.6%2.0%4.5%1.0%0.0%3.4%2.1%1.6%0.1%0.0%0.7%1.6%3.1%3.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.6%0.5%
6-9 AM 2.5%4.2%3.9%2.6%7.3%0.7%1.2%2.3%6.4%0.7%0.0%3.6%3.1%2.1%0.6%0.0%1.1%1.9%3.2%5.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.3%1.2%
9-Noon 2.2%2.2%2.3%1.9%4.1%0.6%1.7%1.2%3.2%0.6%0.0%2.3%1.4%1.0%0.0%0.1%1.7%1.0%1.3%3.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.3%0.7%
Noon-3 PM 2.2%3.2%1.6%2.9%3.7%0.4%0.9%2.5%3.5%0.1%0.0%1.6%2.6%1.7%0.0%0.0%1.1%1.4%2.9%2.3%0.0%0.2%0.0%3.0%0.9%
3-6 PM 3.0%3.2%3.3%3.4%5.8%0.6%1.7%1.7%5.5%0.6%0.0%2.9%2.7%2.3%0.1%0.0%1.9%2.6%2.3%4.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%5.4%0.2%
6-9 PM 3.9%11.0%10.4%6.0%17.0%2.3%1.2%4.8%16.6%2.7%0.0%13.1%6.6%3.3%0.6%0.0%1.7%2.4%8.7%15.3%0.0%0.5%0.0%19.7%0.9%
9-Midnight 4.5%7.8%10.0%5.1%14.4%2.6%1.6%3.5%14.3%2.9%0.0%10.4%7.4%2.4%0.3%0.0%1.6%3.2%6.3%13.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%17.3%1.4%
Dark - Lighted 6.6%18.2%23.1%10.8%31.1%6.1%2.7%8.5%31.5%5.2%0.0%26.1%13.0%5.3%0.4%0.0%3.3%4.7%14.5%31.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%36.5%1.9%
Dark - Not Lighted 5.9%6.1%4.0%5.1%9.0%1.7%1.4%3.3%8.7%2.6%0.0%5.8%4.6%3.4%0.1%0.0%1.9%3.5%5.8%6.4%0.0%0.5%0.0%12.9%1.4%
Dark - Unknown Lighting 0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Dawn 0.3%1.0%1.0%0.6%1.6%0.1%0.1%0.6%1.3%0.3%0.0%0.7%1.0%0.1%0.3%0.0%0.1%0.2%0.6%1.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.4%0.2%
Daylight 9.0%11.4%9.5%9.7%18.4%1.9%5.3%6.6%16.0%1.9%0.0%8.8%8.7%6.1%0.6%0.1%5.6%6.3%8.5%12.7%0.0%0.2%0.0%15.5%2.8%
Dusk 1.0%1.0%1.0%1.4%1.3%0.4%0.3%0.7%1.9%0.1%0.0%1.1%1.0%0.4%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.3%1.4%1.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%2.1%0.0%
Other 0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.3%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.0%
Unknown 0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
3 Lanes or
Less 4-5 Lanes 6+ Lanes None 1 to 2
Number of Lanes Turn Lanes Posted Speed Roadway Classification AADT (2022)
50-55 60+Major
Collector
Minor
Collector Local None
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
< 15000 15,000-
30,000 30,000+C1 C2 C2TPrincipal
Arterial
Minor
Arterial
Context Classification
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
C3C C3R3+25 or less 30-35 40-45
Attachment C-8 15 of 16
Attachment C-8
Orange County
Percent of All KSI Crashes involving Pedestrians 2018-2022
Mode:All Collisions
All
Angle
Animal
Bicycle
Head On
Left Turn
Off Road
Other
Pedestrian
Rear End
Right Turn
Rollover
Sideswipe
Unknown
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
12-3 AM
3-6 AM
6-9 AM
9-Noon
Noon-3 PM
3-6 PM
6-9 PM
9-Midnight
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighting
Dawn
Daylight
Dusk
Other
Unknown
Type
Alcohol Related
Hit and Run
Time of Day
Lighting
Conditions
Distracted Driving
Intersection
Related
Drug Related
Aging Driver
Teenage Driver
Day of the Week
Aggressive Driving
Context Classification
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
20.6%1.9%1.6%0.0%66.5%13.0%20.5%87.1%11.7%1.2%5.9%8.1%86.0%37.1%30.5%1.6%30.3%0.4%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
0.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.7%0.1%0.7%2.3%0.1%0.1%0.4%0.4%1.7%1.4%0.7%0.0%0.4%0.0%
20.1%1.9%1.6%0.0%64.7%12.9%19.8%84.8%11.6%1.0%5.5%7.7%84.2%35.7%29.8%1.6%29.9%0.4%
4.4%0.2%0.7%0.0%15.6%3.5%3.5%19.5%1.2%0.0%1.2%2.5%17.1%10.4%4.0%0.3%5.8%0.1%
16.2%1.6%0.9%0.0%50.9%17.1%17.1%67.6%10.5%1.2%4.8%5.6%68.9%26.7%26.4%1.3%24.6%0.3%
0.9%0.2%0.0%0.0%1.0%0.7%0.7%1.7%0.6%0.0%0.3%0.1%1.9%1.2%0.6%0.0%0.6%0.0%
19.7%1.6%1.6%0.0%65.5%19.8%19.8%85.4%11.1%1.2%5.6%7.9%84.1%36.0%29.9%1.6%29.8%0.4%
1.9%0.2%0.0%0.0%7.5%1.9%1.9%9.5%0.6%0.0%1.0%0.4%8.7%4.2%2.7%0.3%2.7%0.1%
18.7%1.6%1.6%0.0%59.0%18.6%18.6%77.6%11.1%1.2%4.9%7.7%77.3%32.9%27.7%1.3%27.6%0.3%
6.1%0.9%1.4%0.0%19.8%4.6%4.6%25.0%4.0%0.4%0.9%2.0%26.6%10.3%7.7%0.3%11.3%0.0%
14.5%0.9%0.2%0.0%46.7%15.9%15.9%62.1%7.7%0.7%5.1%6.1%59.4%26.9%22.8%1.3%19.1%0.4%
0.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.6%0.1%0.1%1.6%0.3%0.1%0.1%0.1%1.7%0.6%0.6%0.0%0.9%0.0%
19.9%1.9%1.6%0.0%64.9%20.4%20.4%85.5%11.4%1.0%5.8%7.9%84.2%36.6%29.9%1.6%29.5%0.4%
1.6%0.0%0.0%0.0%4.8%2.0%2.0%6.8%0.3%0.1%0.1%0.6%6.5%2.9%2.0%0.0%2.2%0.1%
19.0%1.9%1.6%0.0%61.7%18.5%18.5%80.3%11.4%1.0%5.8%7.5%79.5%34.2%28.5%1.6%28.2%0.3%
0.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%3.6%1.0%1.0%4.5%0.4%0.1%0.1%0.9%4.0%1.7%1.4%0.3%1.6%0.0%
19.9%1.9%1.6%0.0%62.9%19.5%19.5%82.7%11.3%1.0%5.8%7.2%81.9%35.4%29.0%1.3%28.8%0.4%
3.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.1%2.3%2.3%11.0%1.9%0.1%0.9%0.9%11.3%4.2%4.6%0.6%3.6%0.0%
2.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.9%3.5%3.5%13.7%1.4%0.0%1.0%1.2%13.0%6.2%4.8%0.1%4.0%0.0%
3.3%0.0%0.0%0.0%9.9%1.3%1.3%12.3%1.7%0.3%0.7%1.6%12.0%5.8%3.0%0.0%5.5%0.0%
3.3%0.9%0.0%0.0%7.5%3.9%3.9%12.1%2.3%0.1%0.7%1.6%12.3%5.1%4.2%0.1%5.1%0.1%
4.7%0.2%0.2%0.0%10.6%3.0%3.0%14.5%2.2%0.3%0.7%1.0%15.2%6.4%5.5%0.1%4.9%0.0%
2.8%0.2%0.9%0.0%9.7%2.7%2.7%13.3%1.2%0.1%1.0%0.9%12.7%5.3%4.8%0.3%4.0%0.1%
0.9%0.5%0.5%0.0%7.1%2.4%2.4%10.3%1.0%0.1%0.9%1.0%9.5%4.2%3.6%0.3%3.2%0.1%
2.3%0.5%0.2%0.0%7.1%1.2%1.2%9.0%1.6%0.1%0.7%0.6%9.4%3.6%3.5%0.0%3.6%0.0%
1.4%0.2%0.2%0.0%4.8%1.3%1.3%6.8%1.3%0.0%1.2%0.6%6.4%3.6%2.0%0.0%2.5%0.0%
1.9%0.9%0.0%0.0%6.9%1.9%1.9%9.2%1.3%0.0%0.6%1.6%8.4%3.5%4.0%0.4%2.6%0.0%
1.6%0.0%0.2%0.0%5.0%0.9%0.9%6.4%0.3%0.0%0.3%0.3%6.1%2.5%1.4%0.1%2.6%0.0%
1.2%0.0%0.2%0.0%4.7%1.2%1.2%6.5%0.4%0.0%0.3%0.9%5.8%3.2%1.7%0.0%1.9%0.1%
2.8%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.7%1.5%1.5%8.8%0.6%0.1%0.6%0.6%8.4%4.5%1.7%0.4%2.9%0.0%
5.6%0.0%0.2%0.0%14.5%5.5%5.5%21.5%3.5%0.3%0.9%1.6%22.8%8.4%7.9%0.4%8.4%0.1%
3.7%0.2%0.5%0.0%12.1%5.5%5.5%18.9%2.7%0.6%1.4%2.0%18.8%7.9%8.1%0.1%5.9%0.1%
11.9%1.4%1.2%0.0%28.5%9.1%9.1%40.9%6.4%0.7%1.2%2.0%44.8%15.5%14.3%0.7%17.2%0.3%
1.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.7%3.6%3.6%13.0%2.7%0.3%3.0%2.5%10.5%6.9%6.5%0.3%2.3%0.0%
0.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%
0.0%0.2%0.0%0.0%1.3%0.5%0.5%2.0%0.3%0.0%0.1%0.4%1.7%0.7%0.7%0.0%0.9%0.0%
6.8%0.2%0.5%0.0%21.0%5.0%5.0%28.0%1.7%0.1%1.4%2.6%25.9%12.9%7.7%0.6%8.7%0.1%
0.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%1.9%0.8%0.8%2.7%0.3%0.0%0.1%0.4%2.5%0.9%1.2%0.0%1.0%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.3%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.1%0.0%
0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Median PresenceBike Lane/Paved Shoulder > 4 ft Bike Slots Sidewalks
C4 C5 C6 None One Side Both
Sides NoneNoneOne Side Both
Sides None One Side Both
Sides Paved OtherGrassMultipleNone
Attachment C-8 16 of 16
Every week, 5 people die and 35 people are seriously injured
in Central Florida crashes. Vision Zero is an international
movement to reach zero traffic fatalities.
Vision Zero Central Florida’s goal is simple: saving lives. Zero
traffic deaths. Everyone should be able to travel safely around
Central Florida without the fear of death or serious injury.
This coordinated planning effort led by MetroPlan Orlando in
partnership with local agencies will result in a comprehensive
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan for our three-county region
(Orange, Osceola, Seminole), as well as additional action
plans tailored for each county and city.
What will the Vision Zero Safety
Action Plan Include?
The regional plan and each county or city action
plan will include the following:
• High Injury Network: Analyzing data to identify
places on the transportation system with the
highest risk for fatal and serious injury crashes
so that we can focus on our most important
problem areas.
• Equity Component: Identifying and prioritizing
efforts in disadvantaged communities that are
disproportionately affected by traffic crashes.
• List of Priority Streets and Intersections:
Producing a list of feasible projects
that have the most safety impact for
the region.
• Educational and Enforcement Programs:
Identifying key behavioral changes needed to
reduce crashes and methods for encouraging
those changes.
• Sustained Effort: Establishing a defined process
and identifying an organization responsible for
carrying out, updating, and monitoring progress.
• Public Meetings: Public engagement is a key
part of the study.
• Outcome: Identified projects will be included in
MPO or local jurisdiction priority projects list for
funding/implementation.
3-COUNTY REGION
(2018-2022)
41% of our traffic
deaths occur on 2%
of our roadways.
327,500 total
crashes
1,465 deaths
including:
9,500 serious
injuries
motorist deaths
pedestrian deaths
motorcyclist deaths
bicyclist deaths
What Is Vision Zero Central Florida & Why Do We Need to Take Action?
This work is being funded by a $3.79 million Safe Streets and Roads for All federal grant.
802
359
252
52
ST. CLOUD
KISSIMMEE
ORLANDO
BELLE
ISLE
EDGEWOODWINDERMERE
WINTER GARDEN
OAKLAND
OCOEE
WINTER PARK
EATONVILLE MAITLAND
ALTAMONTE SPRINGS
CASSELBERRY OVIEDO
WINTER SPRINGS
LONGWOOD
LAKE MARYAPOPKA
SANFORD Seminole
Orange
Osceola
Visit our website to review
crash data, learn more
about safety, provide
feedback and get details
for upcoming events:
VisionZeroCFL.gov
HOW CAN YOU GET
INVOLVED?
This planning initiative encourages
participation from people of all ages
across our region, including community
leaders, residents, and visitors. Join us in
this quest to eliminate deaths and serious
injuries on Central Florida’s roads. We can
save lives when each of us does our part
and we all work together.
Sometimes crash data doesn’t tell the whole
story - and that’s where you can help make
transportation safer! Go to the “Help Identify
Safety Problems” tab on VisionZeroCFL.gov to tell
us about areas where you feel unsafe traveling.
HEAR FROM YOUR
NEIGHBORS
HELP IDENTIFY SAFETY
PROBLEMS
Central Floridians know firsthand why we need
Vision Zero. Hear what they said by watching a
short video and share the need for safer roads:
https://bit.ly/VZCFvideo
Questions? Email
VisionZero@MetroPlanOrlando.gov
Memorandum
Introduction
A core element of Vision Zero action plans is authentic engagement. While engagement can come
in many forms—including in-person workshops and meetings, safety audits, surveys, and newsletters—
social media plays a special role. It can bring awareness to the issue, provide educational materials,
and serve as a call to action—all to a broad audience that might not otherwise be aware of efforts
to improve safety on our streets.
Social Media Messages
A series of social media messages have been developed that pivot from messages prepared by the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA – trafficsafetymarketing.gov). The messages
have been tailored with statistics relevant to our local crash patterns, and they apply the Vision Zero
Central Florida branding. Social media posts have been developed to highlight the:
• High fatal crash rate in Central Florida
• Dangers of driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol
• Importance of seatbelt use
• Importance of helmet use
• Importance of following traffic rules
• Dangers of distracted driving
• Special circumstances of teen driving
• Disproportionate impact to vulnerable road users
• Dangers of hit-and-run crashes
Local jurisdictions can customize the posts with their logo and additional local information if desired.
For example, posts related to driving under the influence could be paired with information about
how to get a safe ride home in a local community. Posts can also be timed with other traffic safety
campaigns for greater effect. Sample posts for each potential campaign are presented in Table 1
and the 2024 NHTSA Traffic Safety Campaigns are summarized in Table 2.
Date: April 25, 2024
To: Vision Zero Central Florida Partners – Public Information
Officers
From: Mary Ann Horne, MetroPlan Orlando
Kathrin Tellez, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Vision Zero Central Florida – Social Media Post Guidance
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Social Media Post Guidance, April 25, 2024
Page 2 of 6
Table 1: Draft Posts
Topic Caption Image
High fatal crash rate
in Central Florida
Join us on our quest to reach zero traffic deaths on Central
Florida roads.
To learn about what's being done to improve road safety
and how you can help, visit VisionZeroCFL.gov. #VisionZero
Dangers of driving
under the influence of
drugs and/or alcohol
If you think getting high makes you a better driver, you’re
wrong – dead wrong. If You Feel Different, You Drive
Different.
Or
Think driving yourself home after drinking is cheaper? Think
again!
Average rideshare ? $25
Average DUI ? $10,000
The choice is simple — if you’ve been drinking, call a sober
friend, rideshare, or taxi to get you home safely.
Or
Would you ruin the day? Ruin a year? Ruin a family? Drunk
driving ruins lives. If you’ve been drinking, call a sober friend,
rideshare, or taxi to get you home safely.
Or
Be the life of the party. And the next one. Don’t drive drunk
or high.
To learn about what's being done to improve road safety
and how you can help, visit VisionZeroCFL.gov. #VisionZero
Importance of
seatbelt use
While we are doing our part to make our roads safer, we
need you to do yours by always wearing your seatbelt and
making sure all your passengers are secured.
Buckle Up. Every Trip. Every Time.
Or
Click it or Ticket.
To learn about what's being done to improve road safety
and how you can help, visit VisionZeroCFL.gov. #VisionZero
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Social Media Post Guidance, April 25, 2024
Page 3 of 6
Topic Caption Image
Importance of helmet
use
While we are doing our part to make our roads safer, we
need you to do yours by always wearing a helmet.
To learn about what's being done to improve road safety
and how you can help, visit VisionZeroCFL.gov. #VisionZero
Importance of
following traffic rules
Think you don’t have time to stop for a red light? You are
dead wrong.
Or
Stop on Red
Or
To learn about what's being done to improve road safety
and how you can help, visit VisionZeroCFL.gov. #VisionZero
Dangers of distracted
driving
While we are doing our part to make our roads safer, we
need you to do yours by paying attention.
Don’t drive distracted. Eyes Forward.
Or
Put the Phone Away or Pay
To learn about what's being done to improve road safety
and how you can help, visit VisionZeroCFL.gov. #VisionZero
Special
circumstances of
teen driving
Targeted to parents:
Your teen looks up to you more than you think. Set a good
example when you’re behind the wheel—don’t drive
distracted or impaired, don’t speed and always wear a seat
belt. #TeenDriver
#Parents: We all know parenting #teens can be challenging.
While some battles aren’t worth fighting, protecting your
teen behind the wheel is. Before you hand over the car keys,
make sure they know the rules of the road in Florida.
Targeted to teens:
Hey teens! Drive like your friends’ lives depend on it! Take it
slow. #TeenDriver
You’re in the driver’s seat now. Be Safe. Everyone buckles up.
#TeenDriver
To learn about what's being done to improve road safety
and how you can help, visit VisionZeroCFL.gov. #VisionZero
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Social Media Post Guidance, April 25, 2024
Page 4 of 6
Topic Caption Image
Vulnerable Road
Users
Safer speeds save lives. Watch out for others on our roads.
To learn about what's being done to improve road safety
and how you can help, visit VisionZeroCFL.gov. #VisionZero
Dangers of hit-and-
run crashes
If you are involved in a crash, stay at the scene and call for
help. It’s not just the law – you could save a life.
Or
Just stop. Stay at the scene and call for help.
To learn about what's being done to improve road safety
and how you can help, visit VisionZeroCFL.gov. #VisionZero
Source: Fehr & Peers and MetroPlan Orlando, Based on NHTSA Safety Campaigns
Table 2: 2024 NHTSA Traffic Safety Campaigns
Month Monthly Campaign Other Campaigns
January • Impaired Driving – Buzzed Driving is Drunk Driving
• National Passenger Safety Week (January 24-27)
February • Impaired Driving – Fans Don’t Let Fans Drive Drunk
March • Vehicle Safety Recall Week (March 4-10)
• Impaired Driving – Buzzed Driving is Drunk Driving
April • National Distracted Driving
Month
• Distracted Driving (April 1-8) – U Drive. U Text. U Pay. Pay
Attention or Pay the Price
• Drug Impaired Driving Campaign (April 20) – If you feel
different, you drive different
• Alcohol Awareness month (National Institute of Health)
May
• National Youth Traffic
Safety Month
• National Bicycle Safety
Month
• Motorcycle Awareness
Month
• National Heatstroke Prevention Day (May 1)
• Click it or Ticket (May 13-June 2)
June • Tire Safety Week (dates not determined yet)
• Secure your Load Day (June 6)
July • Vehicle Theft Prevention
Month
• Impaired Driving/Drug Impaired Driving (July 4) – Buzzed
Driving Is Drunk Driving
• Speed Campaign (July 8-31)
August • Impaired Driving/Drug Impaired Driving (August 14–
September 2) – Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over
September
• Child Passenger/Occupant Protection Safety Week –
(September 15-21)
• National Seat Check Saturday (September 21)
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Social Media Post Guidance, April 25, 2024
Page 5 of 6
Month Monthly Campaign Other Campaigns
October • Pedestrian Safety Month
• Teen Driver Safety Week/Teen Driving Issues (October 20-
26)
• National School Bus Safety Week (October 21-25)
• Impaired Driving (October 31) – Buzzed Driving is Drunk
Driving
November
• Drunksgiving/Blackout Wednesday/Thanksgiving
(November 23-30) – Buzzed Driving is Drunk Driving
• Occupant Protection (November 23-December 1) –
Buckle Up. Every Trip. Every Time
December
• National Drunk & Drug-
Impaired Driving
Prevention Month
• Impaired Driving/Drug Impaired Driving (December 1–
December 10) – Buzzed Driving Is Drunk Driving / If You
Feel Different, You Drive Different
• Older Driver Safety Week (December 2–6)
• Impaired Driving Drug-Impaired Driving (December 11–
January 1, 2025) Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over / If You
Feel Different, You Drive Different / Drive High, Get a DUI
• TV Bureau of Advertising Roadblock (December 26–
January 1, 2025) – Buzzed Driving Is Drunk Driving
Source: https://www.trafficsafetymarketing.gov/sites/tsm.gov/files/2024-03/communications-calendar-2024-15962-v7-
tag.pdf and https://www.trafficsafetymarketing.gov/sites/tsm.gov/files/2023-12/events-calendar-2024-15963_v8-tag.pdf
Draft posts are provided as an attachment, and the original files are available for customization.
Agency Public Information Officers are encouraged to look at the resources available from NHTSA as
well as the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT – fdot.gov/Safety) for additional messages.
Content Sharing
Once your social media message has been refined to reflect your community, be sure to tag
MetroPlan Orlando as well as other Vision Zero Partners. For example, if you are a city, consider
tagging your County as well. District 5 of the Florida Department of Transportation has a social media
presence and can help amplify your message.
Consider cross posting on several social media platforms and translating messages into languages
prevalent in your community to reach a wider demographic. The platforms most used in the region
include:
• Facebook
• Instagram
• X (formerly twitter)
• LinkedIn
• TikTok
• NextDoor
Once content is shared, please let us know if you find these templates useful or have suggestions for
future templates. If you have a success story, please let us know so we can highlight your agencies’
efforts in a future MetroPlan Orlando Newsletter. For maximum benefit, each post should include a
hyperlink to the Vision Zero Central Florida hub site where people can find additional information,
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Social Media Post Guidance, April 25, 2024
Page 6 of 6
provide feedback, and learn how to get involved – VisionZeroCFL.gov as well as link to Vision Zero
resources in your community, such as your Action Plan as well as any upcoming activities.
This completes our Social Media Post Guidance. If you have questions or feedback, please contact
Mary Ann Horne at MaryAnn.Horne@metroplanorlando.gov.
Attachments: PDF of Campaigns
5 people are killed onCentral Florida roadsevery week.
THAT’S 15% HIGHER THAN THENATIONAL AVERAGE
VisionZeroCFL.gov
1 in 5 deadly crasheson Central Florida roadsinvolves drunk driving.1 in 6 involves drugs.
SAVE A LIFE DON’T DRIVE DRUNK OR HIGH
VisionZeroCFL.gov
WEARING A SEATBELT CAN SAVE YOUR LIFE
1 in 3 people who diein Central Florida carcrashes are notwearing a seatbelt.
VisionZeroCFL.gov
WEARING A HELMET CAN SAVE YOUR LIFE
Almost half the peoplekilled on motorcyclesin Central Florida werenot wearing helmets.
VisionZeroCFL.gov
Red light running killedor seriously injured over300 people in ourcommunity in thepast 5 years.
STOPPING ON RED SAVES LIVES
VisionZeroCFL.gov
1 in 3 serious injurycrashes in CentralFlorida involvesdistracteddriving.
PAYING ATTENTION CAN SAVE A LIFE
VisionZeroCFL.gov
TEACH YOUR TEENS SAFE DRIVING!
Only 6% of driversin Central Floridaare teens. Butthey’re in 13% ofserious injurycrashes.
VisionZeroCFL.gov
MAINTAIN SAFE SPEEDS ANDSHARE THE ROAD WITH OTHERSTHEY BELONG THERE TOO
About 3% of all crashesinvolve people walking,biking, or motorcycling.But those make up halfthe fatal crashes inCentral Florida.
VisionZeroCFL.gov
IF YOU HIT SOMEONE, DON’T RUN!PULL OVER AND MAKE SURE THEY’RE OK
10% of all serious injurycrashes are hit-and-runs.That number doubleswhen the person hitis walking or bikingin Central Florida.
VisionZeroCFL.gov
City of Winter Garden
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan
DRAFT
Page 1 of 3
Regional Engagement Efforts
The engagement strategies for the MetroPlan Orlando Regional
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan were designed to complement
strategies at the county and local plan levels, such that
collectively there was a much broader reach and impact than
could be realized by any one agency.
Task Force, Steering Committees and Working Groups
A regional Vision Zero Task Force provided feedback and
strategic guidance throughout the preparation of the plan and
included people representing local agencies, the Florida
Department of Transportation, public health officials, the medical
professionals, bicycling and pedestrian advocacy groups, and
members of the public. Throughout the course of the project, the
regional Task Force met 5 times around the following topics:
August 2023: Introduction to Vision Zero and the Safe System
Approach, Project Overview, and High-Level Crash Trends.
September 2023: High Injury Network, Crash Trends, Public
Engagement, and Hub Site Overview.
November 2023: Public Engagement Update, Countermeasures,
Policy Benchmarking, Reduction Goals.
February 2024: Public Engagement Update, Policy Benchmarking
Outcomes, Preliminary Prioritization Process, and Project
Development Process.
April 2024: Public Engagement Update, Project Prioritization,
Project Development, and Action Plan Development.
Each task force meeting was recorded, and summaries are
available on the hub site
(https://www.visionzerocfl.gov/pages/project-resources).
The Task Force provided key feedback on the technical analysis,
public engagement strategies, policy benchmarking, action plan
elements, and project prioritization criteria. Several smaller focused
discussions were conducted with key stakeholders to review the
policy benchmarking and prioritization criteria and feedback from
the Task Force was incorporated into the final set of actions and
prioritization criteria.
Vision Zero
Central Florida by
the Numbers
22 Vision Zero Action Plans
1 Regional Task Force
3 County Steering
Committees
18 Local Working Groups
40+ community events with
1,000+ of interactions with
the public
400+ views of Call-to-Action
video
150+ local government
meetings
15+ updates to MetroPlan
Orlando Board and
committees
Over 10,000 views by over
2,700 unique users of
VisionZeroCFL.gov
345+ survey responses
1 Regional Press Conference
4 Safety Champion Speaker
Series Events
30+ mentions on local media
outlets
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
E- Local Engagement Plan
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
City of Winter Garden
Vision Zero Safety Action Plan
DRAFT
Page 2 of 3
Speaker Series
MetroPlan Orlando facilitated a Safety Champion Speaker Series, a series of webinars and events
with safety experts from the region and country presenting topics centered around the Safe System
Approach. As of June 2024, the following speaker series events have occurred or have been
scheduled.
- World Day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims, November 15, 2023
- Moving the Needle on Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety, Rebecca Sanders, PhD, April 4, 2024
- Centering Safety and Equity, Charles Brown, May 23, 2024
- From the Perspective of those Left Behind, Melissa Wandall, June 4
- A Plan for Action for Walking & Cycling, Dan Burden, June 13
- Stories of Speed Management, Loreen Bobo, Whit Blanton, Makenzi Rasey (LADOT), August/
September 2024
This series is intended to continue beyond plan adoption with a quarterly speaker series event and an
annual safety summit for all jurisdictions in the region to share their progress, successes and failures so
we can learn as a region. Recordings of the sessions are available on the MetroPlan Orlando
YouTube Channel.
Media Briefing
In December 2023, MetroPlan Orlando hosted a Media Briefing to introduce the plan to the local
media and generate interest from across the region. The MetroPlan Orlando Board and staff, as well
as Florida Department of Transportation staff were present at the event, which also included:
• 5 English and 1 Spanish-language broadcast outlet
• 25+ minutes of on-air coverage following event
• Fact sheets in English, Spanish and Haitian Creole
Technical Appendix
E- Local Engagement Plan
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
Memorandum
Introduction
The MetroPlan Orlando region has an overall fatal crash rate 15 percent higher than the national
average and 10 percent higher than the statewide average. MetroPlan Orlando, the Metropolitan
Planning Organization, is preparing a Regional Vision Zero Action Plan to understand where crashes
are most likely to occur, why crashes result in fatalities and serious injuries, and how to reduce the
severity and frequency of these crashes. This effort will be rooted in the core elements of Vision Zero
and the Safe System approach. The purpose of the Action Plan is to identify projects, programs, and
strategies to eliminate fatalities and serious injuries on the region’s roadways.
In coordination with the Regional Vision Zero Action Plan, the City of Ocoee will prepare its own
Vision Zero Action Plan, which will also be rooted in the core elements of Vision Zero and the Safe
System approach. The purpose of the Action Plan is to identify projects, programs, and strategies to
eliminate roadway related fatalities and serious injuries within the City.
The following memorandum outlines potential stakeholder and public engagement opportunities for
the City of Ocoee to further Vision Zero efforts in Central Florida that complement the regional
strategies.
Funding for this effort is provided by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets for All (SS4A)
grant program. The SS4A grant program is funding the preparation of regional, county, and all local
agency Vision Zero action plans in the MetroPlan Orlando region.
Core Elements of Vision Zero
The Vision Zero Network has established ten core elements that communities must meet to become a
designated Vision Zero community. Meeting these elements opens the way to pursue supplemental
planning and implementation funds through the USDOT’s SS4A program. The ten core elements are
structured in three primary categories, as summarized in Table 1 along with their applicability to the
Plan Approach. The elements noted in blue italics directly relate to Stakeholder and Public
Engagement.
Date: December 11, 2023
To: City of Ocoee
From: Ryan Mansfield, Kittelson & Associates
Subject: City of Ocoee Safety Action Plan - Public Engagement
Strategy
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Safety Action Plan
Public Engagement Strategy Guidance
Page 2 of 6
Table 1 | Core Elements of Vision Zero and Applicability to Regional and Local Plans
General Strategy Strategy Details Plan Approach
Category: Leadership and Commitment
Public, High-Level, and
Ongoing Commitment
Key elected officials and leaders
within public agencies, including
transportation, public health, and
police, commit to the goal of
eliminating traffic fatalities and
serious injuries within a specific
timeframe. Leadership across these
agencies consistently engages in
prioritizing safety via a
collaborative working group and
other resource sharing efforts.
Resolution guidance will be provided to
support adoption. All agencies in the
region are expected to adopt a Vision
Zero Resolution.
Authentic Engagement Meaningful and accessible
community engagement toward
Vision Zero strategy and
implementation is employed, with a
focus on equity.
A variety of engagement activities have
been identified as part of the regional
and local Vision Zero action plans, as
described in this document.
Strategic Planning A Vision Zero Action Plan is
developed, approved, and used to
guide work. The Plan includes
explicit goals and measurable
strategies with clear timelines, and
it identifies responsible stakeholders.
The primary product of this process is a
Vision Zero Action Plan.
Project Delivery Decision-makers and system
designers advance projects and
policies for safe, equitable
multimodal travel by securing
funding and implementing projects,
prioritizing roadways with the most
pressing safety issues.
The primary components of project
identification and prioritization will include
safety and equity.
Category: Safe Roadways and Safe Speeds
Complete Streets for All Complete Streets concepts are
integrated into communitywide
plans and implemented through
projects to encourage a safe, well-
connected transportation network
for people using all modes of
transportation. This prioritizes safe
travel of people over expeditious
travel of motor vehicles.
Safety projects will be developed through
the Complete Street lens to balance the
competing needs of all roadway users,
prioritizing the most vulnerable.
Context-Appropriate
Speeds Travel speeds are set and
managed to achieve safe
conditions for the specific roadway
context and to protect all roadway
users, particularly those most at risk
in crashes. Proven speed
management policies and
practices are prioritized to reach
this goal.
Speed is one of the leading contributors
to fatal crashes in the region and
identifying appropriate target speeds on
high crash corridors will be a key strategy.
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Safety Action Plan
Public Engagement Strategy Guidance
Page 3 of 6
General Strategy Strategy Details Plan Approach
Category: Data-driven Approach, Transparency, and Accountability
Equity-Focused
Analysis and Program
Commitment is made to an
equitable approach and
outcomes, including prioritizing
engagement and investments in
traditionally under-served
communities and adopting
equitable traffic enforcement
practices.
Equity factors will be incorporated into the
analysis and project prioritization.
Proactive, Systemic
Planning
A proactive, systems-based
approach to safety is used to
identify and address top risk factors
and mitigate potential crashes and
crash severity.
A detailed crash analysis will be
conducted to identify top crash locations
and causes.
Responsive, Hot Spot
Planning
A map of the community’s fatal
and serious injury crash locations is
developed, regularly updated, and
used to guide priority actions and
funding.
The mapped data will help inform project
prioritization and will be used in the
prioritization of improvements.
Comprehensive
Evaluation and
Adjustments
Routine evaluation of the
performance of all safety
interventions is made public and
shared with decision makers to
inform priorities, budgets, and
updates to the Vision Zero Action
Plan.
MetroPlan Orlando will take the lead on
updating crash data in a safety
dashboard annually and reevaluating the
high injury network every 3 to 5 years.
Note: The elements noted in blue italics directly relate to Stakeholder and Public Engagement.
Source: Vision Zero Network, 2023
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Safety Action Plan
Public Engagement Strategy Guidance
Page 4 of 6
Stakeholder Engagement Strategies
The City of Ocoee will identify representatives from local agency staff and safety partners to take
part in a Local Agency Working Group. Local Agency Working Group meetings will be organized
around the topics of Vision Zero and Safe Systems Approach, Community Crash Profiles, Policy
Assessment and Countermeasures, and Priority Projects. Members of the Working Group may also
participate in the following:
• Stakeholder conversations with stakeholders that may not be in the Working Group.
• Presentations to City Boards and Commissions will provide opportunities for feedback from
jurisdictional leaders as the plan progresses to ensure political support.
The City of Ocoee will reach out to residents and business owners using the following tools:
• Post project materials and a link to the Regional Safety Dashboard with local safety
information on the City’s website; this will provide access to the regional feedback map
and online survey.
• Have a project information booth at up to two local community events or other venues
where large groups of people are expected. These Pop-up Events will host engaging and
interactive activities to inform, educate and receive feedback.
Within the Action Plan, a summary of public engagement activities and feedback received
throughout the process will be provided, as well as a summary of how that feedback was
incorporated into the plan. Additional information about stakeholder and public engagement
strategies is provided in Table 2 and a schedule is provided in Table 3.
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Safety Action Plan
Public Engagement Strategy Guidance
Page 5 of 6
Table 2 | Stakeholder and Public Engagement Strategies
Strategy Description Goal Considerations
Working Group
The working group will include staff from key
departments that have responsibility for some aspect of
the transportation system, with periodic feedback from
elected officials.
Obtain feedback on plan analyses and materials as they
are prepared to understand concerns and perspectives
of others in the local jurisdiction.
The consultant team will lead four Working Group
meetings.
Project Website
A project link on the City’s website that can be linked to
the MetroPlan Orlando SS4A site developed for the
project.
Website can serve as a landing page for project
materials, links to resources, and links to on-line mapping
and survey.
MetroPlan Orlando is developing a regional website
which includes a Crash Database with information for all
jurisdictions in the region, online mapping tool, and
online surveys. The City can use their local website to
host local documents and link to the regional website
for additional information.
Pop-up Event
Host engaging and interactive activities at key
community locations. Examples could include a sidewalk
pop-up with a community input activity adjacent to a
park or in a major pedestrian serving commercial area.
Reach people where they are and reach those who are
not typically engaged in the planning process.
The consultant team will attend up to two pop-up
events.
Social Media Posts
A series of project branded social media posts, including
a variety of materials and messages, posted on the City’s
social media platforms.
Reach people through social networks, encourage
residents to share with their social network.
Using a diversity of platforms to maximize reach. The
City can consider posting on social media platforms
about the project.
Passive Engagement
Opportunities
Passive engagement opportunities such as flyers at
community centers and libraries, social media posts
directing the public to the project website, branded
comment boxes that allow community members to
submit their concerns, sidewalk decals/stickers temporary
installed at high pedestrian generator locations.
Meet people where they are and provide project
information.
The consultant team will develop a flyer describing
overall project goals and links to the website for the
City.
Source: MetroPlan Orlando, 2023
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Safety Action Plan
Public Engagement Strategy Guidance
Page 6 of 6
Table 3 | Stakeholder and Public Engagement Schedule
Strategy October November December January February March April May June
Kick-Off Meeting
Working Group #1: Vision Zero & Safe Systems Approach
Working Group #2: Community Crash Profiles
Working Group #3: Policy Assessment & Countermeasures
Working Group #4: Priority Projects
Project Website
Pop-up Events
Social Media Posts
Passive Engagement Opportunities
Regional Online Mapping
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
F- Local Engagement Materials
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
F- Local Engagement Materials
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Plan
Zero deaths and serious injuries on our roads is our goal
Questions?
Contact information:
Ginger Corless: vcorless@ocoee.org
Sarah Larsen: sarah.larsen@metroplanorlando.gov
Ryan Mansfield: rmansfield@kittelson.com
What is Vision Zero?
Vision Zero is Ocoee’s approach to
eliminate traffic-related fatalities and
serious injuries:
•Reframes traffic deaths as preventable.
•Integrates human failings
into the approach.
•Focuses on preventing fatal
and severe crashes rather than
eliminating all crashes.
•Aims to establish safe systems rather
than relying on individual responsibility.
•Applies data-driven decision making.
•Establishes road safety as
a social equity issue.
What are we doing?
Developing a Comprehensive
Safety Action Plan to
eliminate traffic related
fatalities and serious injuries.
•Data-driven analysis
to identify the High
Injury Network, which is
where serious and fatal
crashes are occurring.
•Public outreach to identify
issues and possible solutions.
•Recommendations to
reduce serious and fatal
crashes, including:
— Systemic countermeasure
to reduce crashes
— Specific road projects to
reduce crashes
— Actionable, measurable
strategies and policy
changes
Visit our interactive map
to identify existing safety
problems or tell us how
you would improve the
city streets
Visit the Vision Zero
Website to learn more
Help us develop a vision zero
plan so we can all travel safey!
Elements of a Vision Zero Plan
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Plan
Traffic Safety Toolbox
Lighting
Speed Management
Chokers Chicanes
Crosswalks
Traffic Signals
Bike Lanes
Raised
Crosswalks
Rumble strips
Roundabouts
Counting down to zero
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Plan
Zero deaths and serious injuries on our roads is our goal
Questions?
Contact information:
Sarah Larsen: sarah.larsen@metroplanorlando.gov
Ryan Mansfield: rmansfield@kittelson.com
What is Vision Zero?
Vision Zero is an approach to eliminate
traffic-related fatalities and serious
injuries:
• Reframes traffic deaths as preventable.
• Integrates human failings
into the approach.
• Focuses on preventing fatal
and severe crashes rather than
eliminating all crashes.
• Aims to establish safe systems rather
than relying on individual responsibility.
• Applies data-driven decision making.
• Establishes road safety as
a social equity issue.
What are we doing?
Developing a Comprehensive
Safety Action Plan to
eliminate traffic related
fatalities and serious injuries.
• Data-driven analysis
to identify the High
Injury Network, which is
where serious and fatal
crashes are occurring.
• Public outreach to identify
issues and possible solutions.
• Recommendations to
reduce serious and fatal
crashes, including:
— Systemic countermeasure
to reduce crashes
— Specific road projects to
reduce crashes
— Actionable, measurable
strategies and policy
changes
Visit our interactive
dashboard to observe
local crash trends
Visit the Vision Zero
Website to learn more
Help us develop a vision zero
plan so we can all travel safey!
Elements of a Vision Zero Plan
Crashes by Lighting Type
Daylight Dusk/Dawn Dark
Crash Summary | 2018-2022
Winter Garden | 24 Fatal and Severe Crashes
33% of serious injury and fatal crashes
involved distracted driving
46% of serious and fatal injury crashes
involved pedestrians and bicyclists
100% of fatal crashes
occurred on roadways posted at 35 mph or above
*(XX/XX): (Number of Total Crashes/Number of Fatal and Serious Injury Crashes)
Oakland | 2 Fatal and Severe Crashes
0% of serious injury crashes
involved distracted driving
50% of serious injury crashes
involved pedestrians
50% of serious injury crashes
occurred on roadways posted at 35 mph or higher
*No fatal crashes occurred from
2018–2022 in Oakland *(XX/XX): (Number of Total Crashes/Number of Fatal and Serious Injury Crashes)
Ocoee | 89 Fatal and Severe Crashes
26% of serious injury and fatal crashes
involved distracted driving
30% of fatal crashes
involved pedestrians
90% of fatal crashes
occurred on roadways posted at 35 mph or higher
*(XX/XX): (Number of Total Crashes/Number of Fatal and Serious Injury Crashes)
Crashes by Lighting Type
Daylight Dusk/Dawn Dark
Crashes by Time of Day and Severity
Crashes by Time of Day and Severity
Crashes by Time of Day and Severity
Fatal
Incapacitating Injury
Non-Incapacitating
Injury
Possible Injury
Property Damage
Only
Fatal
Incapacitating Injury
Non-Incapacitating
Injury
Possible Injury
Property Damage
Only
Fatal
Incapacitating Injury
Non-Incapacitating
Injury
Possible Injury
Property Damage
Only
Crashes by Lighting Type
Daylight Dusk/Dawn Dark No. of Crashes Hour of Day No. of CrashesNo. of Crashes Hour of Day
Hour of Day
Speed Influences Drivers’ Cone of Vision
Pedestrian’s Risk of Death or Serious Injury
Higher Speed Risks and Countermeasures
Roundabouts Delineators Speed enforcement
Flashing Yellow Arrow Traffic calming Protected Intersection
Protected Only Left Turns
Vote for Intersection and Corridor
Potential Countermeasures
Vote for Pedestrian/Bicycle Potential Countermeasures
Separate Bicycle Lanes
Add/Widen Sidewalk
Pedestrian safety improvements
Midblock Pedestrian Crossing Shorter signal cycle lengths
Countermeasures you would like to see
Municipality
% of Severe Injury
Crashes Covered
by the High Injury
Network
% of Fatal Crashes
Covered by the High
Injury Network
Town of Oakland 100% N/A *
City of Winter
Garden 59% 86%
City of Ocoee 54% 100%
*No fatal crashes occurred from 2018–2022 in Oakland
The High Injury Network is a
collection of roadways where
a disproportionate number
of fatal and severe injury
crashes occur.
Focusing efforts on these
roadways can have a large
impact on reducing severe
injuries and fatalities on our
roadway system.
High Injury Network
LEGEND
State and County Road
High Injury Network
Local Road High Injury Network
State and County Road
High Injury Network Intersection
Local Road
High Injury Network Intersection
Fatal Crash
Severe Injury Crash
City/Town Boundary
(OHFWHG2IÀFLDOV*XLGH
More people die on Central Florida roads each year, outpacing even the rapid population growth in our
region. Traditional ways of addressing transportation safety clearly are not working, and we need a culture
shif t. The good news is we can eliminate traffic deaths, if we make safety a part of all we do. Vision Zero is
a global movement to end traffic deaths and serious injuries by taking a systemic approach to road safety.
Traffic deaths and injuries are unacceptable -- and preventable. We CAN reach our goal of zero deaths
and serious injuries, if we all work together. As elected officials, you have an important role. This guide
offers background data, along with some ways you can help Central Florida get to zero.
,Q2XU5HJLRQ
+RZ9LVLRQ=HUR$SSURDFKHV&UDVKHV
:K\:H1HHG 9LVLRQ=HUR
2%
10 %
% OF ALL CRASHES
% OF ALL CRASHES WHERE SOMEONE
IS KILLED OR SEVERELY INJURED
0.5%
3%
1%
4%
4%
11 %
BIKE PEDESTRIAN
AUTO
ALL KSI FATA L
MOTORCYCLE
HIT & RUN AS A % OF ALL CRASHES
HIT & RUN AS A % OF CRASHES WHERE
SOMEONE WAS KILLED OR
SEVERELY INJURED
17 %
19 %
14 %
7%
22%
20%
11 %
5%
ALCOHOL-INVOLVED CRASHES ALL CRASHES BY MODE HIT AND RUN CRASHES
72 %
of crashes that result in a death or
serious injury occur on roads with a
posted speed of 40 mph or greater
74 %
of crashes involving death or
serious injury to a pedestrian occur
on roads with four or more lanes
Crashes that happen between PLGQLJKW$0
are more likely to result in a death
or serious injury
LATE NIGHT CRASHES CRASHES ON MULTI-LANE ROADS CRASHES ON HIGH-SPEED ROADS
96
• 7UDIÀFGHDWKVDUHLQHYLWDEOH
• Human behavior needs to be perfect
• We should prevent all crashes
• Individual responsibility is the key to saving lives
• Incorporating safety improvements is too
expensive
75$',7,21$/$3352$&+
• 7UDIÀFGHDWKVDUHSUHYHQWDEOH
• Plans should anticipate human mistakes
• We should concentrate on preventing fatal
and severe crashes
• A safe systems approach is the key to saving
lives
• Eliminating deaths and serious injuries is not
expensive
9,6,21=(52$3352$&+
<RXU5ROHDVDQ(OHFWHG2IÀFLDO
+RZGRZHJHW
WR9LVLRQ=HUR"
Vision Zero is
holistic and includes a variety of strategies,
including behavior, infrastructure, legislative, and policy changes.
Vision Zero evaluation
establishes a high injury network (HIN)
where most serious crashes happen and identifying root causes of crashes that may be infrastructure or behavior based.
Vision Zero also
LGHQWLÀHVVKRUWWHUPÀ[HVDQGVWUDWHJLHV
where they’re most needed, along with long-term projects that will transform infrastructure.
:KDWLV\RXUSDUWLQWKH
VROXWLRQ"
<RXDUHDFRPPXQLW\LQÁXHQFHU
Share the Vision Zero message with the media, your constituents, community groups and at community events and encourage people to tell their stories.
You set local policy and strategic direction.
Actively participate in creation of your jurisdiction’s plan and look for ways to infuse Vision Zero into all actions (ordinances, development review, long range plans, etc.).
You can advocate at the state level
for legislative changes that will give local governments more tools in the safety toolbox .
'LIIHUHQW3RSXODWLRQV)DFH'LIIHUHQW,PSDFWV
Constituents in your community may face the effects of crashes in very different ways or more profoundly
WKDQRWKHUVOHDGLQJWRVRFLDOHTXLW\LVVXHVZKLFKHOHFWHGRIÀFLDOVVKRXOGEHSUHSDUHGWRDGGUHVV2QHZD\WR
understand this issue is through the lens of transportation disadvantaged communities, which are designated
through consideration and analysis of many factors, including poverty rates, motor vehicle ownership, and
access to destinations.
Although only
of the regional
population lives in a
designated transportation
disadvantaged community.
25% POPULATION
Almost
of all crashes and 54% of
fatal crashes occur within
or adjacent to these
communities.
50% CRASHES
7RROVWR+HOS<RX6XSSRUW6DIHW\
+XE6LWH
View local crash statistics for your jurisdiction and
see who the contact person is for your Vision Zero
Action Plan: YLVLRQ]HURFÁJRY
)DFW6KHHWVDQG&RPPXQLFDWLRQ7RROV
Download studies, one-pagers, and other tools
for the region at-large and for each county:
YLVLRQ]HURFÁJRYSDJHVSURMHFWUHVRXUFHV
6DIHW\9LGHRV
Understand the perspectives of locals impacted
by crashes, and learn what we can do next as a
region: \RXWXEHFRP#PHWURSODQBRUODQGR
6WRU\6KDULQJ
Encourage constituents to share personal stories
online of loss or survival:
GULYLQJGRZQKHDUWDFKHRUJ
48(67,216"
0HWUR3ODQ7HFKQLFDO3URMHFW0DQDJHU Mighk Wilson - 0LJKN:LOVRQ#0HWUR3ODQ2UODQGRJRY
0HWUR3ODQ&RPPXQLW\2XWUHDFK6WUDWHJLVW Mary Ann Horne - 0DU\$QQ+RUQH#0HWUR3ODQ2UODQGRJRY
*HQHUDO,QTXLULHV VisionZeroCFL#0HWUR3ODQ2UODQGRJRY
7DNH $FWLRQ
6WHS8SDVD
6DIHW\&KDPSLRQ
Commit to supporting the 9LVLRQ =HURSULQFLSOHVIRUHOLPLQDWLQJWUDIÀFdeaths and serious injuries by the year 2050. More information is provided on the next page and at
KWWSV YLVLRQ]HURQHWZRUNRUJ
Learn more about safety by attending a Vision Zero VSHDNHUVHULHVZHELQDU. More information is provided at
KWWSV ZZZYLVLRQ]HURFÁJRYSDJHV
SURMHFWUHVRXUFHV
Familiarize yourself with the parts of your jurisdiction that lie within or close to the +LJK,QMXU\1HWZRUN.
3URPRWHWUDIÀFVDIHW\ to your constituency through email messages, newsletters, social media, speaking engagements, etc.
Support your jurisdiction’s Vision Zero Resolution and 9LVLRQ=HUR$FWLRQ3ODQ.
Pledge to use the word crash or collision LQVWHDGRI$FFLGHQW.
Familiarize yourself with the Vision Zero Action plan for WKHHQWLUHUHJLRQ.
%HD9RLFH
IRU&KDQJH
Support a 9LVLRQ=HURHYHQW sponsored by MetroPlan Orlando or your local jurisdiction – or organize one of your own!
+ROGFRQYHUVDWLRQVZLWKUHVLGHQWV about WKHIXQGDPHQWDOVDQGEHQHÀWVRI9LVLRQZero – particularly among underserved communities along the High Injury Network.
Submit a JXHVWFROXPQto your community paper or other local media outlet.
Incorporate 9LVLRQ=HURPHVVDJHV when you speak to community groups.
0RUH$ERXW9LVLRQ=HUR
9LVLRQ=HURLVDQLQWHUQDWLRQDOPRYHPHQWWRUHDFK]HURWUDIÀFIDWDOLWLHV9LVLRQ=HUR&HQWUDO)ORULGD·VJRDOLVVLPSOH VDYLQJOLYHV=HURWUDIÀFGHDWKV(YHU\RQHVKRXOGEHDEOHWRWUDYHOVDIHO\DURXQG&HQWUDO)ORULGDZLWKRXWWKHIHDURIGHDWKRUVHULRXVLQMXU\
Vision Zero recognizes that
humans make mistakes and
therefore the transportation
system should be designed to
minimize the consequences of
human error. The Vision Zero
approach is fundamentally
different from the traditional
WUDIÀFVDIHW\DSSURDFKLQ
American communities in
six key ways.
'(),1,7,21
SOURCE: VISION ZERO NETWORK
2 Integrates KXPDQIDLOLQJ
into the approach.
3 Focuses on preventing IDWDO
DQGVHYHUHFUDVKHV rather
than eliminating all crashes.
4 Aims to establish VDIHV\VWHPV
rather than relying on
individual responsibility.
5 Applies GDWDGULYHQ decision
making - using using facts
and metrics to guide strategic
choices aligned with goals.
1 5HIUDPHVWUDIÀFGHDWKV
as SUHYHQWDEOH.
Establishes road safety as a
VRFLDOHTXLW\LVVXH, identifying
the need for improved
impartiality, fairness and justice.
+RZ6SHHG$IIHFWV7UDIÀF&UDVKHV
'($7+5,6. 10 %
'($7+5,6. 50%
'($7+5,6. 90 %
20
MPH
40
SPEEDLIMIT40
MPH
SOURCES: PROPUBLICA, VISION ZERO NETWORK
30
SPEEDLIMIT30
MPH
/RZHUVSHHGVLQFUHDVHD
GULYHU·V ÀHOGRIYLVLRQ and
allow for more time to react to
unexpected situations in the road.
Increasing vehicle speeds from
0 3+ to 03+ increases the
likelihood of a pedestrian death
when hit from 10 % to 90%.
,)+,7%<$3(5621'5,9,1*$7
5(6($5&+6+2:6
9HKLFOH6WRSSLQJ'LVWDQFHV
20
MPH
40
MPH
50
MPH
30
MPH
Depending on speed and roadway conditions, the distance needed to fully stop
and prevent a crash can vary. Note that this distance includes perception or reaction
time; actual distances will also vary based on the type of vehicle and its condition.
CONDITIONS PLUS SPEED IMPACT CHANCE OF CRASH.
03+ 67233,1*',67$1&(,1)((7
0 FT 100 FT 200 FT 300 FT 400 FT 500 FT
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
DRY
WET
DRY-IMPAIRE D
WET-IMPAIRE D
DRY
WET
DRY-IMPAIRE D
WET-IMPAIRE D
DRY
WET
DRY-IMPAIRE D
WET-IMPAIRE D
DRY
WET
DRY-IMPAIRE D
WET-IMPAIRE D
DRY/WE T: describes road
conditions
IMPAIRE D : combines road
conditions plus a drug or
alcohol impairment that
slows reaction time.
/
More than
70 %
of crashes that result in
a death or serious injury
occur on roadways with a
posted speed limit 40 mph
or greater, while only 13%
of roadways have a posted
speed limit of 40 mph or
greater.
of our fatal FUDVKHVLQYROYH
DOFRKRORUGUXJLPSDULPHQW
:RUGV 0DWWHU
All too often our news media and crash reporting refer to SUHYHQWDEOHFUDVKHV
DVDFFLGHQWV. This word choice implies that nothing could have been done to
prevent a crash.
/HW·VFRPPLWWRXVLQJWKHZRUG´FUDVKµRU´FROOLVLRQµQRW´DFFLGHQWµ to
acknowledge that roadway crashes can be systematically addressed as the
reality is that we can prevent these tragedies by taking a proactive, preventative
approach which prioritizes transportation safety as a public health issue.
$FFLGHQW
Cras h
1 +7736 -2851$/66$*(38%&20'2,$%6 2+7736 &5$6+127$&&,'(17&20
Changing How We Speak Based on the Data
Research conducted at the University of South
Florida1 related to framing of media reports in
bicycle crashes found that news reports:
“...largely functioned to remove blame from the motorist and to highlight the bicyclist’s actions.
7KHVHOLQJXLVWLFVWUDWHJLHVUHÁHFWWKHassumption that responsibility for safety rests on the bicyclist
and detracts attention from potential social policy
reform that would lead to fewer bicyclist fatalities.”
Rethinking Traditional Approaches
“Before the labor movement, factory owners would say ‘it
was an accident’ when American workers were injured in
unsafe conditions.
Before the movement to combat drunk driving, intoxicated
drivers would say ‘it was an accident’ when they crashed
their cars.
Planes don’t have accidents. They crash. Cranes don’t
have accidents. They collapse. And as a society, we expect
answers and solutions.” 2
9LVLRQ=HUR .H\7HUPV
High Injury Network (HIN) A collection
of streets where a disproportionate
number of crashes that result in
someone being killed or severely
injured (KSI) occur.
KSI An acronym that refers to crashes
where someone was killed or suffered a
serious injury.
Safe System Approach The Safe
System approach aims to eliminate
death and serious injuries for all
roadway users. It takes a holistic view
of the transportation system that
anticipates human mistakes and seeks
to keep impacts of crashes at levels the
human body can withstand.
Serious Injury Crash A crash that results
in severe laceration, broken or distorted
H[WUHPLWLHVFUXVKLQMXULHVVLJQLÀFDQW
burns, unconsciousness when taken
from crash scene, suspected skull,
chest, or abdominal injury or paralysis.
Signal Four Analytics Source of crash
data for the region, based on data
received from the Florida Department
of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles
(FLHSMV). Also known as Signal4.
SS4A The Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law (BIL) established the Safe Streets
and Roads for All (SS4A) discretionary
program with $5 billion in appropriated
IXQGVRYHU\HDUV7KH
SS4A program funds regional, local,
and Tribal initiatives through grants to
prevent roadway deaths and serious
injuries. Preparation of this plan is
IXQGHGZLWKD PLOOLRQ66$JUDQW
Underserved Community $VGHÀQHG
by the USDOT, disadvantaged
communities experience a
disproportionate burden as
a result of underinvestment in
transportation, based on the following
ÀYHFRPSRQHQWV 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ
Insecurity, Climate and Disaster Risk
Burden, Environmental Burden, Health
Vulnerability, and Social Vulnerability.
Vision Zero A strategy to eliminate all
WUDIÀFIDWDOLWLHVDQGVHYHUHLQMXULHVZKLOH
increasing safe, healthy, equitable
mobility for all.
Vulnerable Road User (VRU) A term
used to describe those unprotected by
an outside shield as they sustain greater
risk of injury in any crash with a vehicle,
e.g., people walking, people bicycling
and people motorcycling.
Every week, 5 people die and 35 people are seriously injured
in Central Florida crashes. Vision Zero is an international
PRYHPHQWWRUHDFK]HURWUDIÀFIDWDOLWLHV
9LVLRQ=HUR&HQWUDO)ORULGD·VJRDOLVVLPSOH VDYLQJOLYHV=HUR
WUDIÀFGHDWKV(YHU\RQHVKRXOGEHDEOHWRWUDYHOVDIHO\DURXQG
&HQWUDO)ORULGDZLWKRXWWKHIHDURIGHDWKRUVHULRXVLQMXU\
7KLVFRRUGLQDWHGSODQQLQJHIIRUWOHGE\0HWUR3ODQ2UODQGRLQ
SDUWQHUVKLSZLWKORFDODJHQFLHVZLOOUHVXOWLQDFRPSUHKHQVLYH
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanIRURXUWKUHHFRXQW\UHJLRQ
2UDQJH2VFHROD6HPLQROH DVZHOODVDGGLWLRQDODFWLRQ
SODQVWDLORUHGIRUHDFKFRXQW\DQGFLW\
What will the Vision Zero Safety
Action Plan Include?
7KHUHJLRQDOSODQDQGHDFKFRXQW\RUFLW\DFWLRQ
SODQZLOOLQFOXGHWKHIROORZLQJ
• High Injury Network:$QDO\]LQJGDWDWRLGHQWLI\
SODFHVRQWKHWUDQVSRUWDWLRQV\VWHPZLWKWKH
KLJKHVWULVNIRUIDWDODQGVHULRXV LQMXU\ FUDVKHV
VRWKDWZHFDQIRFXVRQ RXU PRVW LPSRUWDQW
SUREOHPDUHDV
• Equity Component:,GHQWLI\LQJDQGSULRULWL]LQJ
HIIRUWVLQGLVDGYDQWDJHGFRPPXQLWLHVWKDWDUH
GLVSURSRUWLRQDWHO\DIIHFWHGE\WUDIÀFFUDVKHV
• List of Priority Streets and Intersections:
3URGXFLQJDOLVWRIIHDVLEOHSURMHFWV
WKDWKDYHWKHPRVWVDIHW\LPSDFWIRU
WKHUHJLRQ
• Educational and Enforcement Programs:
,GHQWLI\LQJNH\EHKDYLRUDOFKDQJHVQHHGHGWR
UHGXFHFUDVKHVDQGPHWKRGVIRUHQFRXUDJLQJ
WKRVHFKDQJHV
• Sustained Effort: (VWDEOLVKLQJDGHÀQHGSURFHVV
DQGLGHQWLI\LQJDQRUJDQL]DWLRQUHVSRQVLEOHIRU
FDUU\LQJRXWXSGDWLQJDQGPRQLWRULQJSURJUHVV
• Public Meetings: 3XEOLFHQJDJHPHQWLVDNH\
SDUWRIWKHVWXG\
Outcome: ,GHQWLÀHGSURMHFWVZLOOEHLQFOXGHGLQ
032RUORFDOMXULVGLFWLRQSULRULW\SURMHFWVOLVWIRU
IXQGLQJLPSOHPHQWDWLRQ
What Is Vision Zero Central Florida & Why Do We Need to Take Action?
This work is being funded by a $3.79 million Safe Streets and Roads for All federal grant.
325,775 total
crashes
1,466 deaths
9,500 serious
injuries
3-COUNTY REGION (2018-2022)
OCOEE (2018-2022)
13
bicyclist
deaths
pedestrian
deaths
motorist
deaths 4
9
motorcyclist
deaths 0
people were killed
on our roadways,
including:
0
Ocoee
Logo
Placeholder for
excludes limited access facilities
HOW CAN YOU GET
INVOLVED?
This planning initiative is designed to
HQFRXUDJHSDUWLFLSDWLRQIURPDOOPHPEHUV
RIRXUUHJLRQLQFOXGLQJFRPPXQLW\
OHDGHUVUHVLGHQWVYLVLWRUVDQGSHRSOH
ERWK\RXQJDQGROG-RLQXVLQWKLVTXHVW
WRHOLPLQDWHGHDWKVDQGVHULRXVLQMXULHVRQ
&HQWUDO)ORULGD·VURDGV
We can make progress and save lives in
WKHÀJKWIRUVDIHW\E\ZRUNLQJWRJHWKHU
DQGHDFKGRLQJRXUSDUW
Vision Zero Action Plan Schedule
Orange County
Fall 2023
%HJLQ3XEOLF
(QJDJHPHQW
Winter 2023
Task Force #3
&RXQWHUPHDVXUHVDQG
3ROLFLHV
Spring 2024
Task Force #4
3URMHFW3ULRULWL]DWLRQ
ST. CLOUD
KISSIMMEE
ORLANDO
BELLE
ISLE
EDGEWOOD WINDERMERE
WINTER GARDEN
OAKLAND
OCOEE
WINTER PARK
EATONVILLE MAITLAND
ALTAMONTE SPRINGS
CASSELBERRY OVIEDO
WINTER SPRINGS
LONGWOOD
LAKE MARY APOPKA
SANFORD
Fall 2023
Task Force #1
Kickoff
Fall 2023
Task Force #2
&UDVK$QDO\VLV
Spring 2024
&RQWLQXH 3XEOLF
(QJDJHPHQW
Spring 2024
Task Force #5
)LQDO$FWLRQ3ODQ
Seminole
Orange
Osceola
9LVLWRXUZHEVLWHWR
UHYLHZFUDVKGDWDOHDUQ
LQIRUPDWLRQDERXWWKH
VWXG\DQGÀQGRXWDERXW
XSFRPLQJHYHQWV
VisionZeroCFL.gov
MetroPlan Orlando Project Manager: Sarah LarsenVODUVHQ#PHWURSODQRUODQGRRUJ
Consultant Project Manager: Jorge BarriosMEDUULRV#NLWWHOVRQFRP
What is Vision Zero?
Vision Zero is Ocoee’s approach to
eliminate traffic-related fatalities
and serious injuries:
• Reframes traffic deaths as
preventable.
• Integrates human failings into the
approach.
• Focuses on preventing fatal and
severe crashes rather than eliminating
all crashes.
• Aims to establish safe systems
rather than relying on individual
responsibility.
• Applies data-driven decision making.
• Establishes road safety as a social
equity issue.
Help us develop a vision zero
plan so we can all travel safely!
Questions?
Contact information:
Ginger Corless
vcorless@ocoee.org
Sarah Larsen
sarah.larsen@metroplanorlando.gov
Ryan Mansfield
rmansfield@kittelson.com
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Plan
Zero deaths and serious injuries on our roads is our goal
Visit the Vision Zero
website to learn more!
https://www.visionzerocfl.gov/
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
G- Working Group Meeting Notes
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
G- Working Group Meeting Notes
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
Working Group 1 Meeng Notes City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Acon Plan
City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Acon Plan
Working Group 1 Meeng Notes
Date: October 30, 2023
Time: 2:30 – 4:00 PM
Meeng Locaon: Ocoee City Hall, Lake Olympia Conference Room
A$endees:
• Ginger Corless (City of Ocoee, Deputy Development Services Director & CRA Administrator)
• Luis Mar,nez (City of Ocoee, GIS)
• Anoch P. Whi2ield (City of Ocoee, Planning)
• Tom Smothers (City of Ocoee, Fire Chief)
• Cur,s Moser (City of Ocoee, Communica,ons)
• Carolina Vaca (City of Ocoee, CRA)
• Saima Plasencia (City of Ocoee, Police Department)
• Milen Womack (City of Ocoee, Public Works)
• Jason Sartorio (MetroPlan Orlando)
• Ryan Mansfield (Ki9elson & Associates)
• Pa9y Hurd (Ki9elson & Associates)
• Chandler Schramm (Ki9elson & Associates)
Meeng Notes:
Working Group Member Introducons
• Sign in sheet + introduc,ons
What to Expect from the Plan
• Short term goals: develop the ac,on plan and iden,fy preliminary projects.
Vision Zero:
• Define Safety in our context.
o Roadways/transporta,on system
o Focus on severe injury/fatality occurrences.
• City of Ocoee staff noted mul,ple barriers to reaching zero serious injury and fatal crashes
including:
1
Working Group 1 Meeng Notes City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Acon Plan
o Outreach, target audience, educa,on
o High rankings on aggressive driving
o Cost for par,cipa,on? Plan covered by the grant.
o Previous experience with “Vision Zero”
o Integra,on with exis,ng social media
o Speed management
o Driver behavior. Cell phones, etc.
o Interconnec,vity
o Sidewalk/bike lane gaps
•Data possibly to be sourced from regional trail masterplan
•Capture this in GIS (Healthy West Orange Trails, Bike/Walk Central Florida, Luis
to coordinate with PJ)
Crash Trends:
• City was interested in data on percent devia,on for crashes that aren’t reported
o City asked if any Informa,on from insurance companies is gathered
o Impact of human nature into decision making:
•Habits/trends with ,ckets vs warnings (cost, ,me, etc)
•City was interested in seeing a breakdown by age group for some data sets
• City staff noted several crash trends they have encountered including:
o Speed on Silver Star, ligh,ng deficiencies, behavior around construc,on
• Interest in near-misses
o Videos from red light cameras, but no data
o Project will look to City staff to help iden,fy some areas where these have been
historically bad and ensure they are included in the plan process
Safe Systems Approach
• Interest in dis,nc,on between Good vs Fast
• Educa,on on “crashes” vs “accidents”
• City asked if adjacent land-uses are considered when looking at crash areas. The project can
certainly make recommenda,ons for code implementa,on at a local level. Can’t speak to
regional level.
• Interest in the crash data on the slower speed roads (leads into the bigger issue of balancing
with the regional plan approach and what roads are captured in each)
• City noted that sight distances at access points are poor in many areas; would be helpful to see
those included in crash reports
Public Engagement:
• Seasonal target?
o Winter: tree-ligh,ng/jolly jamboree
o February: Healthy west-orange block party
o April: Fire Department open house (700ppl last year)
• City experience:
o Need a “gimme”/hook/freebie
o Keep discussion short and engaging
2
Working Group 1 Meeng Notes City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Acon Plan
o Social Media has a decent reach so far
•NextDoor
•Ocoee Youth Network
•Shared stories
•Messaging on Water Bills
•Printable handouts at City Hall
•Commission mee,ngs
•QR codes
•Senior Center mee,ngs
•Teen Driving workshops (Auto Auc,on)
o Coordina,on with the City Website
•Link to “Hub”
•Interest in linking it to the feedback map?
•City asked if VZero has specific distribu,on materials? MetroPlan to check, but
presump,on is no.
Project Schedule
• Working Group mee,ng #2 coordina,on to iden,fy possible dates in December.
Miscellaneous:
• City expressed interest in the impact of turning radius on crashes. What are other jurisdic,ons
doing? Pa9y suggested we can do some research and provide some policy recommenda,ons.
• Ki9elson staff will coordinate to include Vision Zero project informa,on on the City of Ocoee
website.
Next Steps:
• City staff will provide the following data:
o Data from movable speed signs (+1 permanent)
o Data from red-light cameras, especially historical trends, if iden,fiable
o Direc,on on policy content they wish the project to review
o Ginger to provide data on previous project efforts with similar coverage
• Ongoing coordina,on on dis,nc,on between jurisdic,ons and coverage (regional vs local)
• Ki9elson staff will con,nue the crash analysis and coordinate with Ginger Corless to schedule the
second working group mee,ng in December.
3
Working Group 2 Meeting Notes City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Action Plan
City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Action Plan
Working Group 2 Meeting Notes
Date: January 18, 2024
Time: 1:30 – 3:00 PM
Meeting Location: Ocoee City Hall, Lake Olympia Conference Room
Attendees:
• Ginger Corless (City of Ocoee, Deputy Development Services Director & CRA Administrator)
• Steve Krug (City of Ocoee)
• Mike Rumer (City of Ocoee)
• Luis Martfnez (City of Ocoee, GIS)
• Anoch P. Whitiield (City of Ocoee, Planning)
• Tom Smothers (City of Ocoee, Fire Chief)
• Curtfs Moser (City of Ocoee, Communicatfons)
• Carolina Vaca (City of Ocoee, CRA)
• Milen Womack (City of Ocoee, Public Works)
• Sarah Larsen (MetroPlan Orlando)
• Ryan Mansfield (Kittelson & Associates)
• Patty Hurd (Kittelson & Associates)
• Andrew Garrison (Kittelson & Associates)
Meeting Notes:
Resolution
o Resolution will be brought to the Commission when more information about the Safety Action
Plan is available
o The Commission may want to make some changes to the resolution language
o Resolution has been brought to the CRA board
High Injury Network
o Maguire Rd is a city road, not a SR
o Blueford Ave & Ohio St intersection is a city intersection
o Update HIN to include Clarke Rd from Clarcona Ocoee to SR 50
o Equity data comes from Justice 40 and ETC data
o Clip the equity map to only show within the city boundary
1
Working Group 2 Meeting Notes City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Action Plan
Crash Profiles
• Clarcona Ocoee Rd and Clarke Rd is going through a widening project and the intersection is
being upgraded
• Wesmere Pkey and Maguire Rd is surprising that it showed up on the HIN
• Expected Clarcona Ocoee Rd and Clarke Rd would have more ped crashes
o There are near misses with the trail crossing
Crash Trends:
o Crash type chart -change the y-axis to show the actual value, keep the % at the top of the bar
o Lighting chart -just added street lighting on SR 50
o All lighting throughout the city was upgraded to LED
o Include comparison to the regional effort, this is what the commission would like to see
▪Compare to regional data, lighting in particular
▪Similar for road user behavior
o Mode share chart -include total numbers as well as percentage
o Define injury severities. What is a severe injury?
o Use consistent language. Update "killed" to "fatal" throughout.
General Discussion
• Keep language simple, avoid acronyms
• Data doesn't support disadvantaged actually experiencing more F&SI
• Are the areas we're calling equity actually equity areas?
• Policy Review
o Bus Rapid Transit study by us for MetroPlan
• Late April Fire Department event
o Carolina will help coordinate
Next Steps:
• City staff will provide any policy, guidance, or standards they want reviewed
• Kittelson staff will contfnue with countermeasure identfficatfon based on the identffied HIN and
policy review
• Kittelson staff will coordinate with Ginger Corless to schedule the third working group meetfng in
March
2
Working Group 3 Meeting Notes City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Action Plan
City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Action Plan
Working Group 3 Meeting Notes
Date: March 26, 2024
Time: 1:30 – 3:00 PM
Meeting Location: Ocoee City Hall, Lake Olympia Conference Room
Attendees:
• Ginger Corless (City of Ocoee, Deputy Development Services Director & CRA Administrator)
• Mike Rumer (City of Ocoee)
• Luis Martfnez (City of Ocoee, GIS)
• Anoch P. Whitiield (City of Ocoee, Planning)
• Tom Smothers (City of Ocoee, Fire Chief)
• Chris McKinsley (City of Ocoee, Police Department)
• Carolina Vaca (City of Ocoee, CRA)
• Milen Womack (City of Ocoee, Public Works)
• Sarah Larsen (MetroPlan Orlando)
• Ryan Mansfield (Kittelson & Associates)
• Patty Hurd (Kittelson & Associates)
• Andrew Garrison (Kittelson & Associates)
Meeting Notes:
High Injury Network
o Kittelson will review crash data on Ocoee Apopka Road to determine whether the roadway
should be included in the HIN. This roadway is expected to experience significant development.
o Kittelson will review crash data at Clarke Road & SR 50 to determine whether the intersection
should be included in the HIN.
o Kittelson will review crash data at Bluford Avenue & Silver Star Road to determine whether the
intersection should be included in the HIN.
▪It was also noted that Bluford Avenue (south of Silver Star Road) has a middle school,
elementary school, and associated pedestrian traffic.
1
Working Group 3 Meeting Notes City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Action Plan
Engineering Projects
• SR 50 Corridor
o Ranked high for BRT.
▪Funding is likely not going to be available for this corridor.
o Consider cycle track.
o Need funding for parallel facilities.
▪Old Winter Garden Road is being developed as a parallel facility and will be
extended westward through Maguire Road to SR 50 with a connection at
Economic Court. This location at Economic Court is a full median opening today
and is planned for signalization.
o Bridge in the Lake Bennet area limits the ability to widen sidewalk.
o Turnpike exit onto SR 50 has merge conflict issues near Marshall Farms Road.
o Bluford Avenue is a major focus of the City’s trail network and it is a goal to improve
connections across SR 50 so citizens can access local parks.
• Silver Star Road Corridor
o The City recommended that Kittelson review the Silver Star Road corridor plan.
▪The City can provide these plans if needed.
o This planned project is ranked in the 20’s on the MetroPlan Orlando TIP. The City is
continuing to push for the project to move up on the MetroPlan list.
o The downtown master plan studied a roundabout at Silver Star Road & Bluford Avenue,
but the study determined there wasn't enough space for a roundabout.
o The City is pursuing the realignment of Palm Drive near the Silver Star Road corridor.
o The City is pursuing a roundabout at Franklin Street & Taylor Street.
▪The project is currently unfunded and needs a targeted PD&E study.
o The City is connecting a trail to Taylor Street.
o There is missing and/or narrow sidewalk on the north and south side of Silver Star Road
corridor. There is also minimal ROW in the area.
o Cycle track and wide walk will help slow speeds. This will also help disadvantaged
communities in the City.
o There is a new skatepark on the north side of Silver Star Road that will draw new traffic.
Wayfinding signage should be used to direct citizens to the park.
• Clarke Road Corridor
o A signal retiming project was completed before the ongoing widening project from
White Road to A D Mims Road.
▪Consider adjusting timing again after widening is complete.
o New developments are planned north of Silver Star Road so drivers won't need to go
south as often.
o There are high pedestrian volume areas on the corridor near SR 50 and Silver Star Road.
o The corridor already has friction course on the roadway so High Friction Surface
Treatment may not be an appropriate countermeasure.
• Clarcona Ocoee Road Corridor
o Roadway improvements are ongoing on the eastern portion of the corridor that will
reduce traffic on Clarcona Ocoee Road.
▪There is heavy traffic near SR 429 and the two schools in this area.
o City staff noted that this is a County road not a City road.
o City staff noted that a signal is planned at the intersection with Fountains West
Boulevard.
o A signal is being installed at Ingram Road/Lake Meadow Road.
2
Working Group 3 Meeting Notes City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Action Plan
• Bluford Avenue Corridor
o The City will provide the 60% plans for ongoing project in this area.
• Maguire Road/Old Winter Garden Road Intersection
o New developments are planned to the west of this intersection. Old Winter Garden Road
will be extended westward through Maguire Road to SR 50
o A roundabout probably wouldn't work due to topography so this countermeasure will be
removed.
o Turnpike is redoing the bridge to the south of the intersection.
• Silver Star Road/Clarke Road Intersection
o City staff asked for clarification on the difference between centerline hardening and
median nose extension.
o Centerline hardening adds vertical features like bollards on the centerline to separate
traffic more clearly. A median nose extension pushes the median further into the
intersection to reduce the turning movement radii.
Non-Engineering Projects
• Speed zone cameras in school zones will be considered by the City Commission shortly.
o They could select a pilot project or citywide installation.
• Lowering speed limits would allow golf carts to use the roads more easily, which is not desired.
The City is not interested in lowering speeds on City roads.
Policy Review
• Comp Plan
o The City currently uses AM and PM peak hours and AADT for LOS
Project Prioritization
• Possible additional criteria:
• Proximity to schools and parks
• By 2045 goal is to have a park within a 10 minute /1/4 mile walk within every citizen
• Safe pedestrian connection to parks
• Connection to trails
• Does the project have committed funding?
General Discussion
• Kittelson will provide a copy of the elected official guide for the project.
• Provide a graphic of each safety countermeasure Kittelson recommends.
• County requested the City put together list of projects for sales tax initiative.
Next Steps
• Kittelson staff will update the HIN if necessary.
• Kittelson staff will refine projects and prioritfzatfon criteria.
• Kittelson staff will coordinate with Ginger Corless to schedule the fourth working group meetfng
in May/June.
3
Working Group 4 Meeting Notes City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Action Plan
City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Action Plan
Working Group 4 Meeting Notes
Date: March 28, 2024
Time: 1:30 – 3:00 PM
Meeting Location: Ocoee City Hall, Lake Olympia Conference Room
Attendees:
• Ginger Corless (City of Ocoee, Deputy Development Services Director & CRA Administrator)
• Steve Krug (City of Ocoee, Public Works Director)
• Luis Martinez (City of Ocoee, GIS)
• Tom Smothers (City of Ocoee, Fire Chief)
• Carolina Vaca (City of Ocoee, CRA)
• Milen Womack (City of Ocoee, Public Works)
• Kaitlyn Ochoa (City of Ocoee, Community Event Aide)
• Sarah Larsen (MetroPlan Orlando)
• Ryan Mansfield (Kittelson & Associates)
• Patty Hurd (Kittelson & Associates)
• Andrew Garrison (Kittelson & Associates)
Meeting Notes:
Engineering Projects:
• SR 50
o SR 50 from SR 429 to Clarke Road is within the CRA’s boundary
▪The CRA is another agency that will require coordination
▪The CRA plan is currently being updated
▪The CRA is another funding opportunity
▪Clarify which projects are in the CRA
o Carolina will provide the CRA boundary
o SR 50 and Bluford is a priority intersection for the CRA
▪The intersection connects two parks
o Revise lighting countermeasure to be enhanced lighting at intersections rather than
corridor lighting
• Silver Star Road
1
Working Group 4 Meeting Notes City of Ocoee – Vision Zero Action Plan
o Call out the Silver Star plan in report and the commission meeting slides (do this for all
Ocoee studies)
o Combine Silver Star ped/bike and intersection projects
o State put friction course on Silver Star Road
o Silver Star will be resurfaced in 2028. Highlight which improvements could be worked in
to a resurfacing project.
o Note access to middle school
o Commission has discussed filling sidewalk gap for a long time. Applied for boardwalk to
fill sidewalk gap so as not to trigger need to treat run off.
• Maguire Rd and Old Winter Garden Rd
o Add crash priority to PPT slide
o Remove protected left turns countermeasure – left turns are already protected. Heavy
southbound congestion would be worsened by protected only left turn.
o Development is ongoing. Don’t reference development in the report, but improvements
may be incorporated into development.
o CRA has earmarked $800,000 for improvements at this intersection
o The new Turnpike bridge will be higher, which may cause additional issues at this
intersection.
• Clarcona Ocoee Rd and Clarke Rd
o County has approved plans at this intersection. The left turns will be protected on all
four approaches.
o Remove this project from the list.
• SR 50 and Maguire Rd
o Is there a predominant direction where sideswipe crashes are occurring?
▪Likely SBL and vehicles in SBR that want to go SBT
▪Check data
• Christine Ave and Mack St
o There may be ROW issues with fitting sidewalk on the local street.
o Remove this project from the list.
• All projects
o Document which projects are within the CRA.
o Document if there is a correlated local ongoing project.
o Separate costs into short-, mid-, and long-term in the report.
• Project ranking
o Keep the project ranking as is but highlight City projects on the list.
• Commission Meeting
o Discuss project prioritization criteria at City Commission meeting
o Clarify that the City can go after funding on their own
o Mention resolution, but don’t go into detail
o Reference that Vision Zero is an international roadway safety effort
Next Steps:
• Commission Meeting:
o Kittelson will coordinate with MetroPlan to identify someone to present at the City
Commission meeting.
o Will plan for a 5-minute presentation.
o Target commission meeting on June 18th.
o Carolina will help coordinate to get on the meeting agenda.
2
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
H- Non-Engineering Countermeasure Toolkit
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
H- Non-Engineering Countermeasure Toolkit
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Updated April 2024
2
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
3
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Overview
Introduction & How to Use this Toolkit
The MetroPlan Orlando Regional Vision Zero Action
Plan identifies engineering and non-engineering
countermeasures to implement around the region to
reach the goal of zero traffic fatalities or serious injuries
on our roadways by 2050. Engineering countermeasures
aim to change roadway features to remove hazards,
manage speeds, separate roadway users in space and
time, and increase visibility and awareness. An Engineering
Countermeasure Toolkit was developed as a part of
this process and will aid in the selection of appropriate
engineering countermeasures throughout the region.
Non-engineering countermeasures aim to influence users
by changing the social environment to encourage or
enforce the desired behavior. Strategies can be employed
at scale to influence large segments of the community,
like through marketing campaigns, and high-visibility
enforcement and publicized sobriety checkpoints that
affect the social environment by increasing the perceived
risk of being caught, or can be focused on specific
roadway user types, like teen drivers or motorcyclists.
Non-engineering countermeasures fall under the Vision
Zero Core Elements of Authentic Engagement, Strategic
Planning, Project Delivery, Equity Focused Analysis and
Program, and Proactive, Systemic Planning.
This toolkit presents non-engineering countermeasures
organized into the five categories of the Safe System
approach, which include Safe Road Users, Safe Speeds,
Safe Roads, Post Crash Care, and Safe Vehicles. The non-
engineering countermeasures outlined below are not
intended to be an exhaustive list of strategies but serve
as a framework for identification of non-engineering
countermeasures as a part of Action Plan development. As
agencies implement non-engineering countermeasures,
they should consider how they will reach the most
vulnerable populations. References to source documents
are provided and users of this guide are encouraged
to review applicable source documents related to their
specific safety issues and goals.
ORGANIZATION OF THE TOOLKIT
A. SAFE ROAD USERS
• Public Information Campaigns/Social Marketing
Campaigns/Educational Campaigns
• Enforcement
B. SAFE SPEEDS
• Speed Limit Setting
• High Visibility Enforcement
• Automated Enforcement
D. POST CRASH CARE
• Emergency Medical Services
• Trauma Care
• Fatal Crash Response Team
• Traffic Incident Management
• Post Crash Strategies
E. SAFE VEHICLES
• Emerging Technology
• Vehicle Maintenance
C. SAFE ROADS
• Improve and Share Data
• Pilot/Demonstration Projects
• Road Maintenance/Maintenance of Traffic
• Policy/Standards
• Grant Opportunities
Safe System Framework
Source: FHWA
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
4
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Transportation safety education plays an important role in shaping and shifting behavior. Many jurisdictions across the
country are increasing community engagement and education to make streets safer for all. For example, the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) has educational campaigns centered on their Target Zero framework under the
slogan of Arrive Alive that includes TV, radio, social media and in-person outreach.
Strategies included in this section are:
1. Public Information Campaigns / Social Marketing Campaigns / Educational Campaigns
2. Enforcement
A. Safe Road Users
Public Information Campaigns /
Social Marketing Campaigns /
Educational Campaigns
Public Information Campaigns focusing on discouraging
risky behavior like drinking and driving and/ or speeding
can complement the engineering countermeasures that
are designed to target primary risk factors in the MetroPlan
Orlando region. These types of campaigns should also be
used to encourage positive behaviors such as seat belt usage,
increased awareness of pedestrians and bicyclists, and
appropriate crosswalk behaviors.
Targeted education, such as on buses and bus shelters, on
billboards, at movie theaters, or on local radio stations, may
be directed at vulnerable populations with the help of local
partners, and at certain behaviors of drivers, pedestrians,
and bicyclists to deter risky behaviors that result in specific
collision types. Specific locations on the high-injury network,
as well as partner agency campaigns with FDOT may also
be appropriate for concentrated educational messages.
MetroPlan Orlando will consider joint efforts with FDOT and
other local partners to develop outreach campaigns focusing
on discouraging common violations leading to fatalities and
severe injuries on our roadways, based on the collision profiles
identified in the Safety Analysis. Education and outreach
campaigns should target the behaviors that are most likely
to result in crashes where someone is killed or severely injured
(referred to as KSI crashes), and/or vulnerable populations
including:
Reducing driving under the influence as 6% of KSI crashes
involve someone driving under the influence of alcohol,
3% of KSI crashes involve someone driving under the
influence of drugs, 21% of fatal crashes involve someone
driving under the influence of alcohol and 16% of fatal
crashes involve someone driving with a drug impairment.
Enforcing seatbelt laws and encouraging helmet use as 9%
of KSI crashes included a vehicle occupant not wearing
a seatbelt, while 38% of motor vehicle occupants who
died were not wearing a seatbelt. For motorcycle crashes,
5% of KSI crashes and 43% of fatal crashes involved a
motorcyclist not wearing a helmet.
Providing education around driver behavior, as 24% of KSI
collisions were caused by a failure to yield the right-of-
way, with another 10% caused by running a redlight or stop
sign; aggressive driving was a factor in 5% of KSI crashes;
distracted driving was a factor in 29% of KSI crashes; and
speeding was a factor in 4% of KSI crashes.
Teens are disproportionately represented in KSI crashes –
they comprise 5.5% of licensed drivers and are involved in
12.5% of KSI crashes.
Education focused on people outside of cars and trucks,
sometimes referred to as ‘vulnerable road users’, since
crashes involving pedestrians, bicyclists and motorcyclists
accounted for about 3% of overall crashes, 25% of serious
injury crashes and 48% of fatal crashes in the region.
Almost 20% of pedestrian KSI and 19% of bicyclist KSI
crashes were hit and run, as compared to 9% of all
crashes.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
5
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
A. SAFE ROAD USERS
Some examples of educational programs include:
Partner with Local Schools on Transportation Safety
Partnering with local school districts to promote safe road user
behavior. Programs can provide education to students based on
grade level to teach safe walking and biking strategies, as well
as safe driving strategies to older students. The importance of
wearing seatbelts and bicycle helmets could also be included
in the curriculum. There could be opportunities for schools to
support walking school buses, bike rodeos and other strategies
that teach students how to walk and bike to school safety, based
on the context surrounding their school.
Education campaigns could also involve students promoting safer
driving to their parents by holding signs during pick-ups and drop-
offs, and providing educational materials aimed at parents who
might not be aware of seatbelt, cell phone and move-over laws.
Expanding existing youth programs presents an opportunity to
provide ongoing Safe Routes to School education to all students
each year. There are a variety of existing resources available that
could be promoted through schools to students taking on-line
driver education, including the Teen Driver Challenge (https://
www.flsheriffs.org/law-enforcement-programs/teen-driver-
challenge), free and low cost behind the wheel training provided
by the Florida Safety Council (https://www.floridasafetycouncil.
org/categories), as well as resources that teens can provide to
others to promote safe driving (https://flteensafedriver.org/). There
are also other programs available to high school students to
teach them about the dangers of alcohol and driving, including
Every 15 Minutes, Sober Graduation, and DUI mock trials, which
provide opportunities for local agencies and law enforcement to
partner with schools to deliver educational campaigns.
Educational Materials on New Roadway Design
Changes
Temporary demonstrations, like pop-up installations, can
physically showcase proposed safety infrastructure and
emergency response to the public in a tangible way. Using
social media platforms and neighborhood community groups to
promote materials and videos focused on new types of roadway
designs and the region’s major violation issues could direct
community conversations for meaningful outcomes.
Educational Materials on Traffic Safety Laws
Partnering with the Florida Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles
department as well as FDOT to develop materials to send
to drivers upon renewal of their driver’s license or vehicle
registration related to new traffic safety laws, how to use traffic
control devices, and sharing the dangers of driving under
the influence of drugs or alcohol, or not wearing seatbelts or
helmets. These materials could be customized at the regional
level based on the most pressing crash issues.
Partner with Local Experts
Local partners should serve as community liaisons between
MetroPlan Orlando, counties and cities, and the public.
Working with community partners and public institutions that
have relationships with residents strengthens the engagement
process by building trust and drawing on an established
base of stakeholders. Local partners could help tailor the
engagement process or incorporate engagement into existing
programs and resources to educate people more effectively
about roadway safety. These local experts could share
information about how to report a crash to law enforcement,
how to file an insurance claim, provide bicycle lights and
reflective gear to communities who ride in dark conditions,
provide helmet fittings and car seat installations, and identify
alternative transportation options for aging people or people
with disabilities who are no longer able to drive.
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
6
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Share the Road/Bicyclists May Use Full Lane
Awareness Programs
The purpose of these programs is to increase drivers’ awareness
of bicyclists’ rights and the need for mutual respect of bicyclists
on the roadway. Educational efforts are intended to improve
the safety of all road users, including bicyclists, and to enhance
understanding and compliance with relevant traffic laws. These
programs should be coupled with providing the appropriate
signage and pavement markings depending on the roadway
characteristics. Bicycles May Use Full Lane signs have been shown
to be effective in conveying to motorists that bicyclists may use
the travel lane. Placement of road signs and pavement markings
along roads that do not have separated bicycle facilities should
consider the road context, traffic volumes and prevailing speeds.
Promote Motorcyclist Safety Programs
Motorcyclist safety includes motorcycle safety awareness for
non-motorcyclists, such as Look Twice campaigns as well as
education, including classroom and on-roadway training to
help motorcyclists ride more defensively and develop the skills to
operate their motorcycle under a variety of conditions, including
evasive maneuvers. More information can be found here: https://
www.fdot.gov/Safety/motorcyclesafety.shtm and https://www.
flhsmv.gov/driver-licenses-id-cards/motorcycle-rider-education-
endorsements/florida-rider-training-program-courses/.
DUI Strategies and Considerations
Crashes involving someone driving under the influence are
more likely to result in a fatality or serious injury. As detailed in
the Crash Analysis, 21% of fatal crashes involve someone driving
under the influence of alcohol and 16% of fatal crashes involve
someone driving under the influence of drugs. Considerations for
addressing DUI collisions also extend beyond the transportation
profession and increasing funding for efforts that focus on
prevention and education, such as alcohol problem assessment
and treatment programs, would support less-punitive measures
to reduce DUI collisions. Strategies generally fall under three
categories:
1. Deterrence policies focus on raising the actual and
perceived risk of detection of driving under the influence.
These policies should be highly visible to increase awareness
of the risks of driving under the influence. Publicized sobriety
checkpoints, saturation patrols, and other forms of high-
visibility enforcement are effective for safety outcomes.
2. Prevention and education policies focus on mobilizing and
educating the community and intervening before driving
under the influence takes place. According to NHTSA
research, drug use problem assessment and treatment
programs, as well as alcohol intervention in settings such
as a doctor’s office, are highly effective strategies for
improving safety outcomes. NHTSA educational campaigns
include materials for driving under the influence of alcohol,
marijuana, and other drugs, including prescription drugs.
3. Limited access policies focus on making underage access to
alcohol and drugs more difficult and seek to limit excessive
alcohol consumption.
Additionally, there are organizations who provide free rides or
tows to people who are impaired, such as the AAA Tow to Go
Program (https://www.acg.aaa.com/drivers-safety/tow-to-go.
html). NHTSA has developed a SaferRide App (https://youth.gov/
federal-links/saferride-app-could-save-your-life) that allows users
to call a taxi or pre-programmed friend. In some communities,
there are also organizations and businesses that provide free or
subsidized rides, like the Drunk Driving Prevention Program that
serves military bases (https://www.ddpp.us/) and local law firms
that offer tow service and free ride shares around holidays. When
communities have events that include drinking, like around St.
Patrick’s Day, Fourth of July and New Years, consider partnering
with local organizations that can pay for and promote free rides.
A. SAFE ROAD USERS
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
7
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Enforcement
When educational campaigns do not yield the desired behavior
change, there is a role for the enforcement of traffic safety laws
consistently and fairly, focused on behaviors that are most
likely to result in a severe injury or fatality. In many instances,
the enforcement activity can be coupled with education and
support, like providing bike lights to people seen riding bikes
at night without lights, or people under seen riding a bike
without a helmet can be provided with a free helmet along with
educational material (people under the age of 16 are required
to wear a helmet).
A data driven approach can be used to identify roadways and
time of day/days of week when people may be more likely to
speed or engage in other undesired behaviors, like driving under
the influence. This allows for law enforcement to focus their
limited resources, such as along a high injury network corridor or
around a cluster of alcohol serving establishments. Additional
information about high visibility enforcement and automated
enforcement is provided in subsequent sections.
A. SAFE ROAD USERS
BEST FOOT FORWARD PROGRAM
Best Foot Forward (BFF) focuses on one simple, measurable goal: to get more drivers to yield and stop for pedestrians in
marked crosswalks, as Florida law requires. Best Foot Forward works to accomplish this goal using the proven, “Triple-E”
approach of combining community education with low-cost engineering changes and high-visibility enforcement.
Within the MetroPlan Orlando Region, the BFF program has resulted in increased yielding rates for pedestrians at 100’s of
crosswalks and has worked to improve dozens of crossing locations in partnership with local agencies.
For more information visit: https://www.iyield4peds.org/.
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
8
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Streets and roads within the MetroPlan Orlando region should address the safety of all road users, including those who
walk, bike, roll, drive, and take transit. Although engineering countermeasures such as lane narrowing, road diets, and
speed feedback signs, can reduce the travel speeds of most drivers to appropriate levels, they should be accompanied
by policy and enforcement strategies.
Strategies included in this section are:
1. Speed Limit Setting
2. High Visibility Enforcement
3. Automated Enforcement
B. Safe Speeds
Speed Limit Setting
Speed limits and operating speeds are connected, so speed
limits are a relevant factor in traffic safety outcomes. As part
of the previous version of MUTCD (Section 2B.13), speed limits
on roadways were generally set by the 85th percentile travel
speed based on an engineering study; the 85th percentile speed
represents the speed at which 85 percent of people are driving
at or below. The latest version of the MUTCD (Section 2B.21) and
the Manual on Speed Zoning for Highways, Roads, and Streets
in Florida (Chapter 9) provide some flexibility in setting speed
limits where the context of the roadway plays a greater role
in setting speed limits that are consistent with the surrounding
land use. According to FHWA’s Safe System Approach for
Speed Management, lowering the speed limit on high-speed
roads has a greater effect on mean operating speeds than
lowering the speed limits on low-speed roads (even for the
same reduction in speed limit). However, even changes in lower
speed environments can produce safety benefits, especially for
vulnerable road users.
Setting appropriate speed limits for roadways based on their
context, accompanied by the appropriate engineering and
non-engineering countermeasures, will have the greatest
potential to reduce fatal and severe injury outcomes. A holistic
approach throughout the region should be employed such that
drivers in the region become accustomed to driving at slower
speeds. Changes in how traffic signals are operated can help
maintain overall travel times along corridors, even when people
are driving slower between intersections. Collaboration between
agencies, including MetroPlan Orlando, FDOT, counties and local
agencies is a critical component.
High Visibility Enforcement
According to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) research, High Visibility Enforcement (HVE) is one of
the most effective enforcement strategies for safety outcomes.
The goal of HVE is to promote voluntary compliance with traffic
laws by providing a multifaceted approach to enforcement
that garners public attention through highly visible patrols,
such as checkpoints, saturation patrols, or message boards.
FDOT provides resources related to HVE through the Alert Today
initiative. More information and how to apply for HVE activities is
provided here: https://alerttodayflorida.com/HVE.
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
9
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Automated Enforcement
Automated enforcement uses cameras and other technology
to detect when someone has committed a roadway violation.
A strictly data-driven approach to automated enforcement
places cameras in locations on the HIN with the highest number
of severe collisions. In Florida, the following forms of automated
enforcement are legal:
Red-light Cameras
Detects when a vehicle has entered an intersection on a red-light
and a citation is mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle,
who may not have been the person driving. The first notice of
violation does not result in points on your license provided the
citation is paid. Angle crashes are the most common crash type
related to red-light running, with a disproportionate number
resulting in a severe injury or fatality.
School Bus Cameras
Detects when a person illegally passes a school bus in a vehicle.
This law went into effect in July 2023, as detailed in Senate Bill
766 (https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/766). Several
jurisdictions and school districts are piloting the technology.
School Zone Speed Cameras
Detects people speeding in school zones. This law went into
effect in July 2023, as detailed in HB 657 (https://www.flsenate.
gov/Session/Bill/2023/657). Tickets are sent in the mail to the
registered owner of vehicles captured traveling more than 10
miles per hour over the posted school zone limit while the school
zone is activated. Several communities and school districts are
piloting the technology.
Wrong Way Detection
Detects when a vehicle enters a limited access facility against
the flow of traffic. FDOT has deployed wrong way driving
technology at numerous off-ramps throughout the region. The
system detects when a vehicle is traveling the wrong way on
a facility and starts a cascading series of actions, including
alerting the driver to their mistake using flashing lights, notifying
law enforcement, and notifying other drivers through message
boards along the freeway.
Automated speed enforcement outside of school zones is not
currently allowed in the State of Florida. Other states have passed
legislation to allow for automated speed enforcement in specific
circumstances, such as on high crash corridors where speeding is
a contributing factor. MetroPlan Orlando will continue to monitor
potential changes to state legislation for future use of speed
cameras outside of school zones.
B. SAFE SPEED
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
10
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
C. Safe Roads
Improve and Share Data
Numerous pieces of data can help inform appropriate
engineering and non-engineering countermeasures, including
crash data, roadway system data, and population and land use
data. Incomplete or inconsistent datasets can also affect the
ability of countermeasures to be deployed equally throughout
the region. Collaboration with local law enforcement and
providing feedback to the Office of Safety, such as noting
additional data needs (e.g. better data on scooter or wheelchair
usage) can help improve the quality of data collected as part
of crash reports. Maintaining a regional Geographic Information
System (GIS) database with transportation system information
can help identify the characteristics of roadways where a
disproportionate number of KSI crashes occur. Near-miss analyses
can also help provide a more nuanced review of safety issues
at specific locations. Connected vehicle data can also provide
regional speed and other roadway system operations data, such
as locations of hard braking, that could be used to further identify
root causes of crashes or identify locations for enforcement of
speeding.
Pilot/Demonstration Projects
There may be unique or innovative transportation safety
solutions proposed in some communities where the public and/
or elected officials are hesitant to implement a solution new to
the community. By implementing a project on a pilot basis (one
to three years, with before, during and after evaluations) or a
demonstration basis (a very short timeframe ranging from a few
hours to a few months), the public and elected officials can learn
more about the potential benefits of a treatment before a more
permanent installation is completed. Pilots and demonstration
projects can also help identify design changes or educational
outreach that should be included in the final implementation.
Before and After Studies
Understanding the actual safety benefits of engineering
countermeasures deployed across the region can help
communities deploy limited resources to strategies that work best
to reduce fatal and severe injury crashes.
Safe Road strategies are typically related to engineering countermeasures (see Engineering Toolkit for details related to engineering
countermeasures). However, a non-engineering framework can support implementation of appropriate engineering countermeasures.
Strategies that can help supplement road improvements are included in this section.
Strategies included in this section are:
1. Improve and Share Data
2. Pilot/Demonstration Projects
3. Road Maintenance/Maintenance of Traffic
4. Policy/Standards
5. Grant Opportunities
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
11
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Road Maintenance/Maintenance of
Traffic
Improperly maintained roads can lead to crashes, with
vulnerable roadway users disproportionately impacted, such
as loose gravel on a roadway that could affect the turning and
stopping ability of someone on a motorcycle, or debris in the bike
lane that causes a bicyclist to potentially lose control or veer into
an adjacent travel lane to avoid a bike lane hazard. Heaved/
sinking sidewalks can also pose a trip hazard for pedestrians.
When a roadway or lane closure is required for a land
development project, a roadway project, or maintenance,
maintenance of traffic (MOT) plans are typically prepared. In
some instances, bike lanes and sidewalks are closed with no
advance warning, or the detours may be excessively long and
then not used, which can lead to negative safety outcomes.
Chapter 6 of the 11th Edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices includes additional guidance for how to
accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians in work zones.
Policy/Standards
A change in policies and standards may be necessary to change
transportation safety outcomes. A separate policy benchmarking
process was conducted to identify MetroPlan Orlando policies
that could be a barrier to Vision Zero. In some jurisdictions,
changing roadway design standards, level of service policies, site
development policies and parking policies, may be needed. As
Action Plans across the region are adopted and implemented,
there will be opportunities to measure progress, identify strategies
that are working, and identify new strategies for implementation.
Grant Opportunities
Funding will be a limiting factor in the implementation of
engineering countermeasures. Understanding what grant
programs are available and their respective requirements can
help to provide additional safety funding in addition to the Safe
Streets and Roads for all (SS4A) program. Appendix B provides
preliminary information on available transportation safety
funding sources.
C. SAFE ROADS
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
12
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Post-crash care is more than just medical care. It also includes the training of personnel, design of roadway infrastructure,
and availability and location of emergency vehicles. Post-crash care also includes providing additional resources to the
victims and their families such as resources for physical and mental rehabilitation. People who have a traumatic injury
are more likely to survive if they receive an appropriate level of care within one hour, and positive outcomes diminish
significantly after that hour.
Strategies included in this section are:
1. Emergency Medical Services
2. Trauma Care
3. Fatal Crash Response Team
4. Traffic Incident Management
5. Post Crash Strategies
D. Post Crash Care
Emergency Medical Services
People involved in a collision have a higher chance of survival
if they can quickly receive medical care. In many cases, law
enforcement officers and fire department staff are the first
responders to arrive at a collision location. Collisions can also
put the lives of first responders and other road users at risk due to
increased congestion during the crash response, which may lead
to secondary crashes.
MetroPlan Orlando could coordinate with local partners to
improve response times and ensure safety in both arriving and
attending to patients at the scene. Strategies include ensuring
emergency vehicles are highly visible (e.g., retroreflective striping
and chevrons, high-visibility paint, and built-in passive lights)
and implementing emergency vehicle signal preemption, which
allows emergency vehicles to break a normal signal cycle and
proceed through an intersection.
Trauma Care
Effective emergency trauma care coordination can significantly
increase crash survival rates and reduce fatalities. MetroPlan
Orlando could work with local partners to identify funding
sources to improve their existing infrastructure to be able to
provide the highest care for victims. Recommended strategies to
improve trauma care include providing funding for appropriate
first responder equipment (e.g., hydraulic, and pneumatic
extrication tools), research for and adoption of technology aimed
at reducing triage time (e.g., automatic vehicle reporting of
severe crashes to EMS, EMS vehicle collision avoidance systems,
and geolocation of nearest EMS vehicles), and promotion of
federal- and state-certified training programs.
STOP THE BLEED
Orlando Health offers a community training class called
Stop the Bleed that is designed for bystanders who have
little or no medical training but who may be called upon as
immediate responders to provide initial trauma care and
bleeding control to a victim of traumatic injury prior to the
arrival of emergency medical services (EMS).
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
13
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
D. Post Crash Care
Fatal Crash Response Team
In the event of a traffic fatality, analysis and evaluation of
relevant contributing factors are crucial in reducing the risk
of a severe crash at that location. One strategy would be for
the formation of a cross-agency group that mobilizes after
each fatal crash, including law enforcement, transportation
professionals, and public health officials. This would assist with
accurate investigation and documentation of potentially
relevant infrastructural and environmental crash factors, while
identifying additional factors that may have contributed to
the fatal crash outcome. It can also expedite interventions to
improve the crash location/circumstances and address similar
risk factor locations and situations. The selection of appropriate
engineering countermeasures sound consider emergency
response time; however, a slight potential increase in emergency
vehicle response time would need to be considered in context
with the potential to reduce crash frequency and severity, which
could reduce overall calls for service in the region.
Traffic Incident Management
Traffic crashes increase the likelihood of secondary crashes and
pose a threat to the safety of incident responders as well as the
traveling public. Crashes also affect travel reliability, commerce,
and transportation system performance. Traffic Incident
Management (TIM) consists of a planned and coordinated
multi-disciplinary process to detect, respond to, and clear traffic
incidents so that traffic flow may be restored as safely and quickly
as possible. Effective TIM reduces the duration and impacts of
traffic incidents; improves the safety of motorists, crash victims,
and emergency responders; and reduces the frequency of
secondary crashes. TIM is an integral component of the United
States Department of Transportation (USDOT) National Roadway
Safety Strategy (NRSS), and is specifically called out as a key
element for the post-crash care objective.
FDOT is primarily responsible for TIM in the region and utilizes
their traffic management centers (TMCs) in each of their
districts to manage traffic on the state highway system. Several
local jurisdictions also have traffic management centers. The
incorporation of TIM on additional high crash corridors where
systems are not currently deployed could also be considered.
FDOT and the University of Central Florida are also working
on traffic incident predictions that could provide advanced
warnings to first responders when a crash may be imminent
based on conditions to allow for first responders to stage closer
to potential crash locations or to deploy enforcement teams to
prevent the crash.
Post Crash Strategies
When individuals are injured in collisions, they rely on first
responders to quickly locate them, stabilize their injuries, and
transport them to medical facilities. Post-crash care also
includes forensic analysis at the crash site and traffic incident
management, so that traffic flow may be restored as safely and
quickly as possible. Policy action through the justice system
and appropriate design of roadways to lessen the risk of future
crashes can also help inform safety programs.
Crash reporting practices, such as complete data collection
and documentation of road user behavior and infrastructure,
and sharing data across agencies or organizations (e.g., law
enforcement, health officials, transportation officials, and
hospitals) can help lead to a greater understanding of the
holistic safety landscape, and thus lead to improved investments
in safety.
To ensure a crash survivor receives the care needed to recover
and restore body and mind to an active life within society, they
require medical rehabilitation with specialists that can range
from orthopedics, neurosurgery, physical and occupational
therapy, and prosthetics to psychology and neuropsychology.
Severe and fatal collisions not only affect the victim involved, but
their family and friends as well. Across the nation and in Canada,
there are chapters of Families for Safe Streets. Individual chapters
advocate at their state capitol and work with lawmakers and
non-profits like Mothers Against Drunk Driving to share their
stories and testify before legislative committees and congress.
Supporting victims’ families can come in many forms. World Day
of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims is an annual event held
on the third Sunday in November in remembrance of those who
have died or have been affected by motor vehicle collisions,
and to draw attention to the goal of Vision Zero.
D. POST CRASH CARE
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
14
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Safe vehicles are another element of the Safe System approach and will increasingly add more redundancy or avoidance features to
the system. MetroPlan Orlando and its local partners do not have an influence on vehicle design but could keep vehicle technology
advances in mind as part of their future policy and design considerations. For example, smart signal technology, which communicates
with devices embedded in newer vehicles, will allow agencies to collect data at multiple intersections, providing a better
understanding of how people are using the network in real time.
Strategies included in this section are:
1. Emerging Technology
2. Vehicle Maintenance
E. Safe Vehicles
Emerging Technology
Leveraging connected and autonomous vehicle (CAV)
technology and crash-avoidance systems are a key part of
the “Safe Vehicles” category. Connected vehicles wirelessly
communicate with other vehicles and infrastructure (like
signals) to provide data for instantaneous decision-making
(e.g., reporting driver speed or collisions). Data from signals in
combination with data from vehicles could allow the agencies
within the MetroPlan Orlando area to deploy real time speed-
related signal operations, allowing for enhanced safety through
adaptable systems. The City of Lakeland is using a red-light
running detection system to identify when a person driving
is likely to run a red light, and the traffic signal automatically
extends the all-red time at the intersection to prevent a crash.
Some states are exploring requirements that new vehicles sold
after a certain date must include speed limiter systems that
electronically prevent drivers from driving more than 10 miles per
hour over the posted speed limit. The National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) has also issued a recommendation that
speed assistance technology be deployed more widely. The
Federal Motor Safety Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is
exploring a potential speed limiter mandate for heavy duty
trucks. While there are not currently national or State of Florida
speed limiter technology requirements, this could change in
the future as the technology evolves, and if more traditional
approaches to transportation safety (engineering and
behavioral strategies) do not yield the desired outcomes.
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
15
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Vehicle Maintenance
Vehicle maintenance issues can also contribute to traffic
crashes, including:
Cracked Windshields
Cracked windshields can obstruct a driver’s vision. In a crash
situation, seconds count and even a small obstruction can make
a difference in the driver’s response time.
Lights and Wipers
Light and wipers play a role in safe driving. If you cannot see or
be seen, your chances of being involved in a crash increase.
Faulty Brakes
Faulty brakes can increase the distance it takes a person to slow
or stop a vehicle.
Improperly Maintained Tires
Improperly maintained tires can increase your chance of roll over
crash, especially for trucks and sport utility vehicles. Balding tires
can also reduce friction between the tire and roadway surface,
increasing the stopping distance, which can be exacerbated on
wet pavement.
Approximately 18 people outside of a vehicle were killed on our
highways between 2018 and 2022, with most of these people
outside a disabled vehicle. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration is conducting a research study on the impact
of vehicle maintenance on traffic crashes (https://www.fmcsa.
dot.gov/research-and-analysis/research/impact-vehicle-
maintenance-safety). Community based organizations can be
a resource to provide low and no-cost vehicle maintenance to
people who are not able to afford basic vehicle maintenance
and repairs but are reliant on a vehicle to get to work and
provide care for family members.
E. SAFE VEHICLES
16
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
17
Non-Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Appendix A - Resources and References
1. http://www.floridatim.com/
2. https://alerttodayflorida.com/HVE
3. https://flteensafedriver.org/
4. https://flteensafedriver.org/72-safe-driving-tips-that-could-save-your-life/
5. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/tim/
6. https://roadwarrior.app/blog/10-safe-driving-tips/
7. https://www.fdot.gov/Safety/motorcyclesafety.shtm
8. https://www.fdot.gov/traffic/teo-divisions.shtm/cav-ml-stamp/Wrong-Way-driving
9. https://www.flhsmv.gov/driver-licenses-id-cards/motorcycle-rider-education-endorsements/florida-rider-training-program-courses/
10. https://www.flhsmv.gov/resources/handbooks-manuals/
11. https://www.flhsmv.gov/safety-center/driving-safety/
12. https://www.floridasafetycouncil.org/categories,
13. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/657
14. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/766
15. https://www.flsheriffs.org/law-enforcement-programs/teen-driver-challenge
16. https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/research-and-analysis/research/impact-vehicle-maintenance-safety
17. https://www.geico.com/information/safety/auto/teendriving/top-ten-tips/
18. https://www.nhtsa.gov/book/countermeasures/countermeasures-that-work
19. https://www.nhtsa.gov/book/countermeasures-that-work/bicycle-safety/countermeasures/unproven-further-evaluation/share-road
20. https://www.safemotorist.com/articles/defensive-driving/
21. https://www.trustedchoice.com/insurance-articles/wheels-wings-motors/defensive-driving-tips/
22. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (2005). A Guide for Reducing Alcohol-Related Collisions.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.17226/23419. pg. 106.
23. https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/11th_Edition/part6.pdf
Appendix B - Federal Funding Opportunities
Grant Name Awarding Entity Website Typical Projects Funded Standalone Available Funding Matching Requirements Most recent/ Upcoming NOFO
Dates
Notes of Interest
Rebuilding American
Infrastructure with
Sustainability and Equity
(RAISE)
USDOT https://www.transportation.
gov/RAISEgrants/raise-nofo
Surface transportation projects that have
significant local or regional impact; could
include projects with a safety component.
No $2.2B 2022-26; $113.75M was
for planning, preparation, or
design of projects last round
20% match Nov-23 https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/
files/2022-09/RAISE%202022%20Award%20
Fact%20Sheets_1.pdf
Infrastructure for Rebuilding
America Discretionary Grant
Program (INFRA)
USDOT https://www.transportation.
gov/grants/infra-grants-
program
Primarily freight related. No awards range from $9M to
$150M. Average award is
$40M.
20% match Mar-23 For projects that improve safety, generate
economic benefits, reduce congestion,
enhance resiliency, and hold the greatest
promise to eliminate freight bottlenecks and
improve critical freight movements.
Reconnecting Communities
Pilot Program (RCP)
USDOT https://www.transportation.
gov/grants/reconnecting-
communities
Highway removal projects, through
disadvantaged communities. Would fund
replacement infrastructure and includes
safety components.
No $1B 2022-2026; $250M for
planning; $750M capital
construction
20% match Sep-23
Safe Streets and Roads for All
(SS4A)
USDOT https://www.transportation.
gov/grants/SS4A
Transportation safety projects. Yes $5B 2022-2026 20% match Feb-24 Projects must be identified in a
comprehensive safety action plan to receive
implementation funding.
Federal Transit Administration
Capital Funds (FTA)
Federal Transit https://www.transit.dot.gov/
funding/grants/urbanized-
area-formula-grants-5307
Funds safe access to transit projects Yes $6.9B in 2022 20% match See Bicycles and Transit, Flex Funding for
Transit Access, the FTA Final Policy Statement
on the Eligibility of Pedestrian and Bicycle
Improvements Under Federal Transit Law,
and FTA Program & Bicycle Related Funding
Opportunities
Areas of Persistent Poverty
Program (AoPP)
Federal Transit https://www.transit.dot.
gov/grant-programs/areas-
persistent-poverty-program
Funds projects that provide access to transit
in disadvantaged communities, including
safety improvements.
Yes $20 M Minimum federal share is 90% Jan-23
Carbon Reduction Program
(CRP)
FHWA https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
environment/sustainability/
energy/
Planning, bicycle and pedestrian facilities,
bike share programs, road diets, etc.
Yes Around $1.2B per year (2022-
2026)
Project must be part of the state TIP and
consistent with LRSTP and Metropolitan
Transportation Plan; does not fund
recreational trails
Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality Improvement
Program (CMAQ)
FHWA https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
environment/air_quality/
cmaq/
Projects, including bicycle and pedestrian
facilities, that reduce emissions.
Yes Around $2.4B per year (2022-
2026), 2022 Funding for Florida
was $148M
Project for planning, feasibility analyses,
and revenue forecasting associated with
the development of a project that would
subsequently be eligible to apply for
assistance under the BIP
Highway Safety Improvement
Program (HSIP)
FHWA https://highways.dot.gov/
safety/hsip/shsp
Safety projects on the highway system. Yes*$3B per year (2022-2026)Projects must be consistent with a state's
Strategic Highway Safety Plan, funding is only
for Highway projects, public transportation,
and port facilities, Small local agencies also
eligible
Appendix B - Federal Funding Opportunities
Grant Name Awarding Entity Website Typical Projects Funded Standalone Available Funding Matching Requirements Most recent/ Upcoming NOFO
Dates
Notes of Interest
Railway-Highway Crossings
(Section 130) Program (RHCP)
FHWA https://highways.dot.gov/
safety/hsip/xings/railway-
highway-crossing-program-
overview
Railroad crossing improvements. Yes*$245 M per year Set aside from HSIP, Small local agencies also
eligible
National Highway
Performance Program (NHPP)
FHWA Implementation Guidance
for the National Highway
Performance Program (NHPP)
as Revised by the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law (dot.gov)
Could include safety improvements as part of
other improvements.
Yes $29B per year (2022-2026)No match required Only for Highway projects; Administered by
the State
Promoting Resilient
Operations for Transformative,
Efficient, and Cost Saving
Transportation (PRO TECT)
FHWA https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
environment/sustainability/
resilience/
Protecting transportation facilities from
flooding.
No $1.4B (2022-2026)20% match, can be
combined
Funds can only be used for activities that
are primarily for the purpose of resilience
or inherently resilience related. With certain
exceptions, the focus must be on supporting
the incremental cost of making assets more
resilient.
Surface Transportation Block
Grant Program (STBG)
FHWA https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
specialfunding/stp/
Planning, bicycle and pedestrian facilities,
bike share programs, road diets, etc.
Yes Around $14B per year (2022-
2026)
If called a bicycle facility, it must be primarily
for transportation instead of recreation, but
recreational trails are also permitted, Small
local agencies also eligible
Transportation Alternatives
(TA) Set-Aside
FHWA https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
environment/transportation_
alternatives/
Planning, bicycle and pedestrian facilities,
bike share programs, road diets, etc.
Yes Around $1.4B per year (2022-
2026)
20% match Part of STBG; Administered by the State, Local
agencies also eligible
Recreational Trails Program
(RTP)
FHWA https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
environment/recreational_
trails/
Recreational trails Yes 2022 Funding for Florida was
$2.6M
20% match; Flexibility may
apply
Part of STBG; Administered by the State
Safe Routes to School
Program (SRTS)
FHWA https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
environment/safe_routes_to_
school/
Projects that improve safety for students
going to school
No 20% match; Flexibility may
apply
Part of STBG; Administered by the State
Appendix C - FDOT Funding Opportunities
Grant Name Website Typical Projects Funded Standalone Available Funding Matching Requirements Anticipated Solicitation Notes of Interest
Transportation Alternatives
Program (TAP)
https://www.fdot.gov/planning/
systems/tap/default.shtm
Bicycle/pedestrian facilities,
recreational trails, SRTS projects
Yes $49M annually FDOT covers 20% match with toll
credits
District 5 To be determined and
announced
Part of the Federal TA set aside of the STBG https://fdotwww.blob.core.
windows.net/sitefinity/docs/default-source/planning/systems/systems-
management/document-repository/tap/ta_set-aside-program_fl_
overview-highlights_2015-2021.pdf?sfvrsn=7c0d8522_2
Shared-Use Nonmotorized (Sun)
Trail Program
https://www.fdot.gov/planning/
systems/suntrail/guidance.shtm
Shared use trails Yes $25M annually Likely September 2024 Project must be within the Suntrail network, a priority of the applicable
jurisdiction, and consistent with applicable plans. Local agency must
commit to operation and maintenance of trail. Separate Request for
Funding, but must be included in FDOT Work Plan https://fdotwww.
blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/default-source/planning/systems/
suntrail/guidance/suntrail_guidanceforsubmittaloffundingrequest_ppt.
pdf?sfvrsn=3ac9b7ba_2
Highway Safety Improvement
Program
Reports and Plans (fdot.gov)Transportation safety projects Yes $148M in 2022 Jan-24 Must show how project improves safety; part of FHWA HSIP funding
Safe Routes to School https://www.fdot.gov/Safety/
programs/safe-routes.shtm
Transportation safety projects
that improve safety for student
going to/from school
No $7M annually 100% funded, cost-
reimbursement
Jan-24 Funded through HSIP
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
I- Benchmarking Evaluation
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
I- Benchmarking Evaluation
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Memorandum
Date: April 30, 2024
To: Vision Zero Central Florida Partners
From: Patty Hurd, PE, AICP, Kittelson and Associates,
Ryan Mansfield, PE, RSP1, Kittelson and Associates
Subject: City of Ocoee ² Policy Review and Benchmarking
Overview
This memorandum summarizes the results of a policy review and benchmarking assessment
of the City of Ocoee transportation policies, plans, and programs against a framework of
Vision Zero and Safe System elements for the City of Ocoee Vision Zero Action Plan. The
review identified potential policy barriers to reaching zero serious injuries and fatalities on
roads throughout the City and identified specific actions and policy changes that could be
integrated into other planning documents.
As a part of the Regional Vision Zero Action Plan, Policy Benchmarking Guidance was
developed, which is provided as an Attachment. This policy review and benchmarking
follows the guidance outlined in that document, which consists of the following steps:
1. Identify relevant documents and establish a framework for policy review and
benchmarking.
2. Review documents and conduct a policy review.
3. Apply benchmarking tool.
4. Incorporate findings into Action Plan.
The outcomes of the first three steps are documented in this technical memorandum along
with preliminary Action Plan strategies; these strategies are based on discussions with the City
Working Group. Each potential action is organized around the Core Elements of Vision Zero,
with the Safe System strategy that the action is aligned with identified. Implementation timing
and resource needs are also noted.
Core Elements of Vision Zero
The Vision Zero Network has established 10 core elements, as summarized in Table 1. They
provide a framework for what an effective safety program encompasses. Evaluating existing
policies, programs, and projects against these core elements will help local agencies
understand what is working to reduce severe crashes and what the gaps are in their existing
safety programs. This information can then be used to inform stronger safety-related policies
and programs as part of each agency's Action Plan.
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Page 2 of 14
Table 1 | Core Elements of Vision Zero
General Strategy Strategy Details
Category: Leadership and Commitment
Public, High-Level,
and Ongoing
Commitment
Key elected officials and leaders within public agencies, including
transportation, public health, and police, commit to the goal of eliminating
traffic fatalities and serious injuries within a specific timeframe. Leadership
across these agencies consistently engages in prioritizing safety via a
collaborative working group and other resource sharing efforts.
Authentic
Engagement
Meaningful and accessible community engagement toward Vision Zero
strategy and implementation is employed, with a focus on equity.
Strategic Planning
A Vision Zero Action Plan is developed, approved, and used to guide work. The
Plan includes explicit goals and measurable strategies with clear timelines, and
it identifies responsible stakeholders.
Project Delivery
Decision-makers and system designers advance projects and policies for safe,
equitable multimodal travel by securing funding and implementing projects,
prioritizing roadways with the most pressing safety issues.
Category: Safe Roads and Safe Speeds
Complete Streets for
All
Complete Streets concepts are integrated into communitywide plans and
implemented through projects to encourage a safe, well-connected
transportation network for people using all modes of transportation. This
prioritizes safe travel of people over expeditious travel of motor vehicles.
Context-Appropriate
Speeds
Travel speeds are set and managed to achieve safe conditions for the specific
roadway context and to protect all roadway users, particularly those most at
risk in crashes. Proven speed management policies and practices are
prioritized to reach this goal.
Category: Data-Driven Approach, Transparency, and Accountability
Equity-Focused
Analysis and
Program
Commitment is made to an equitable approach and outcomes, including
prioritizing engagement and investments in traditionally under-served
communities and adopting equitable traffic enforcement practices.
Proactive, Systemic
Planning
A proactive, systems-based approach to safety is used to identify and address
top risk factors and mitigate potential crashes and crash severity.
Responsive, Hot Spot
Planning
$PDSRIWKHFRPPXQLW\·VIDWDODQGVHULRXVLQMXU\FUDVKORFDWLRQVLVGHYHORSHG
regularly updated, and used to guide priority actions and funding.
Comprehensive
Evaluation and
Adjustments
Routine evaluation of the performance of all safety interventions is made
public and shared with decision makers to inform priorities, budgets, and
updates to the Vision Zero Action Plan.
Source: Vision Zero Network, 2023
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Page 3 of 14
Policy Review and Benchmarking
The following presents the results of the policy review and benchmarking as applied to the
plans, policies and programs developed by the City of Ocoee.
Identify and Review Relevant Documents and Establish Review
Framework
The following documents were identified in consultation with City staff to be included in the
policy review:
x Comprehensive Plan (2002), Transportation Element
x Article 3, Design Standards, 3.02 Streets and Other Pavements
x City of Ocoee Trails Master Plan
x Downtown Ocoee Master Plan (2016)
x SR 50/UCF Connector Alternatives Analysis
x Healthy West Orange Trails Initiative
The documents listed above were then reviewed and relevant pieces of information from the
review framework were documented.
Policy Review
Each document noted above was reviewed and information from the review framework
categories was documented. The framework tool was used to collect information, by
category, from each document. This review was documented in a table summarizing the key
content from each document by category, as summarized in Table 1.
Benchmarking
Based on the policy review summary, the benchmarking tool was used to provide a high-
level assessment of the overall status of how safety is incorporated and prioritized within
existing policies and processes. The assessment aims to identify strengths of the existing safety
program, and opportunities for enhancements aligned with Vision Zero and Safe System
Approach best practices.
The policy review and benchmarking assessment are summarized in Table 2. Some notable
successes from the benchmarking and policy review include:
x The City of Ocoee has multiple policies that align with Vision Zero best practices and
prioritize safety, multimodal enhancements, and vulnerable road users.
The City of Ocoee is beginning an update to their Comprehensive Plan. The policy review
included an evaluation of elements that are being considered for the Comprehensive Plan
updates. Elements that are being considered to include in the Comprehensive Plan updates:
x Context classification
x Level of traffic stress for pedestrians and bicyclists
x Transit level of service
The policy scan and benchmarking assessment also identified opportunities for enhanced
alignment with Vision Zero and Safe System Approach best practices. The key opportunities
City of Ocoee and the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan could consider are:
Consider the following updates the Comprehensive Plan:
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Page 4 of 14
Consider including policy to implement a traffic calming plan on local and collector
streets
Consider policy supporting the adoption of a complete streets policy and Vision Zero
policy
Consider adding Complete Streets goal of serving all users to the goals and objectives
of the Transportation Element (page 2-35)
Consider incorporating the High Injury Network under safety enhancements
Consider adopting a policy to monitor vehicular crashes in the City
Objective 2.4, policy 2.4.1 ² The City shall promote increased parking in the downtown
area. Evaluate if this policy is still needed. Consider reviewing the Orlando Code of
2UGLQDQFHV· SDUNLQJ VWDQGDUGV WR LGHQWLI\DPHQGPHQWV QHHGHG WR SURPRWH LQILOO
development. Consider including bicycle parking.
In addition to Policy 3.1.2, consider monitoring speeding on local and collector
roadways.
Consider updating Policy 3.2.3 to require sidewalks on both sides of the road on all
roadways, with sidewalks meeting PROWAG standards.
Consider the following updates the Engineering Design Standards:
x Consider including other best practices including Public Right-of-Way Accessibility
Guidelines (PROWAG), Americans with Disability Act (ADA), AASHTO Roadside
Design Guides, NACTO Urban Street Design Guide, NACTO Urban Bikeway Design
*XLGH 1$&72 'RQ·W *LYH8S DW WKH Intersections
x Consider aligning horizontal alignments minimum design with context classification.
Consider a minimum design speed of 25 MPH or 30 MPH for town center.
x Consider reducing minimum radii at intersections based on NACTO guidance or the
draft 2015 FDOT Freight Roadway Design Considerations
x Consider including speed management tools appropriate by context classification.
x Consider including streetscape criteria.
Consider the following updates the City Land Development Codes:
x In coordination with the fire department, consider reducing pavement widths in
section 5 6-3.C. The current minimum pavement width for a residential street with
over 1,500 Average Daily Traffic is 36 feet. Consider introducing yield streets as
recommended in the NACTO Urban Street Design Guild, which suggests a curb to
curb width of 24-28 feet.
x Consider increasing sidewalk widths in section 5 6-3.H to align with PROWAG
standards.
x Consider including criteria for landscape/streetscape space between curb and
sidewalk.
x Consider including criteria or recommendations for on-street parking.
x Consider requiring pedestrian and bicycle connections to adjacent developments.
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Page 5 of 14
Vision Zero Action Items
Based on the policy benchmarking and subsequent discussions, potential actions to
incorporate in the Action Plan were developed, as summarized on the following pages by
the core elements of Vision Zero. Also noted with each potential action is which Safe System
strategy it aligns with. The actions presented below may be refined and modified as they are
incorporated into the Action Plan document; should there be differences between this
document and the Action Plan, the Action Plan action items should take precedence.
The initial time frame for implementation was identified for three time periods, assuming
actions in the plan would be implemented over a 5-year period:
1. Immediate (within one year) ² Action is expected to be implemented within one
year.
2. Near-term (within two to three years) ² Action is expected to be implemented
within two to three years. These are actions that may require additional resources
and collaboration with other agencies.
3. Longer-term (within four to five years) ² These longer-term actions may be
contingent on the completion of prior actions, require additional staffing and
other resources, and require significant collaboration with other agencies.
Depending on the progress of immediate and near-term actions, some longer-
term actions could be accomplished earlier or could be moved beyond five
years.
The expected level of staff time/resources was also identified for each action with the
following assumptions:
x Low ² Estimated to be less than 40 hours total time that could be incorporated
into existing processes with currently available resources. No additional
staffing/funding resources are expected to be required for low effort
strategies.
x Medium ² Estimated to be between 40 and 120 hours of effort. While an
individual medium- effort strategy could likely be accomplished with existing
resources, it may be difficult to accomplish multiple concurrent medium-effort
actions.
x High ² Estimated to be over 120 hours of effort and additional outside resources,
such as data, IT infrastructure, and/or collaboration with outside agencies. While
an individual high-effort strategy could be accomplished with existing resources, it
may be difficult to accomplish multiple concurrent medium and high-effort
actions. Additional staff or consultant support may be needed to accomplish
these items within the 5-year time, which could require additional funding
resources.
For some actions, it may be a one-time occurrence, and for other activities it may be
recurring action that is incorporated into an existing or new process. This is noted as one-time
or on-going.
It is expected that the Safety Action Plan would be updated at least every five years and the
effectiveness of various strategies assessed, with new actions developed, actions that are
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Page 6 of 14
successful retained, and actions that did not yield the expected results discontinued. Actions
that are deemed not to be feasible for implementation in this plan may be considered for
subsequent plan updates.
For each potential action item, the time frame, level of effort, and if it is a one-time
occurrence or an on-going program are noted in the following format.
Summary of Action (Safe System Element) [Time Frame/Staff time and
Resources/Duration]
As the following actions are further refined for inclusion in the Action Plan, performance
measures will also be developed.
Public, High-Level Commitment
1. Adopt a Vision Zero Resolution that specifies a target date to reach zero or set a
specific target goal to reduce fatal and severe injuries (All Safe System Elements).
[Immediate/Low/One-time]
2. Adopt a Complete Streets policy (Safe Road Users, Safe Speeds).
[Immediate/Low/One-time]
3. Coordinate with regional Traffic Incident Management (TIM) staff to provide
training and resources to local first responders (EMS, Fire and Police) related to
Vision Zero and Safe System (Post-crash Care). [Longer-term/High/On-going]
Authentic Engagement
1. Incorporate meaningful engagement as part of the development of the
upcoming Comprehensive Plan. [Immediate/Medium/On-going]
Strategic Planning
1. Update the City Vision Zero Action Plan at least every 5 years (All Safe System
Elements). [Longer-term/High/On-going]
2. Implement transportation system performance metrics in Comprehensive Plan
and Transportation Plan that better align with goals of vision zero, including
quality of service (i.e. bicycle level of traffic stress and pedestrian level of traffic
stress), accessibility, efficiency metrics (i.e. 24-hour capacity framework, 16-hour
efficiency, total hours below capacity, hourly demand-to-capacity) and other
potential metrics (Safe Roads, Safe Speeds). [Near-term/Medium/One-time]
3. Develop a Safe Routes to School plan to address barriers to walking or biking to
school (Safe Roads, Safe Speeds and Safe Road Users). [Longer-term/High/On-
going]
Project Delivery
1. Incorporate inclusion on the HIN into project prioritization process (Safe
Roads and Safe Speeds). [Longer-term/Medium/On-going]
Complete Streets for All
1. Apply WRROV SUHVHQWHGLQ&HQWUDO )ORULGD·V9LVLRQ=HUR(QJLQHHULQJ &RXQWHUPHDVXUHV
Toolkit to all roadway design projects (Safe Roads and Safe Speeds). [Longer-
term/Medium/On-going]
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Page 7 of 14
2. 3URYLGH&HQWUDO)ORULGD·V 9LVLRQ =HUR(QJLQHHULQJ&RXQWHUPHDVXUHV 7RRONLWWR
developers as they prepare road plans for new developments. Consider including
the &HQWUDO)ORULGD·V 9LVLRQ =HUR(QJLQHHULQJ&RXQWHUPHDVXUHV 7RRONLWLQWKH 'HVLJQ
Standards and Guidelines Manual (Safe Roads and Safe Speeds). [Longer-
term/Medium/On-going]
3. Consider including best practice elements such as the Public Right-of-Way
Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG), Americans with Disability Act (ADA), AASHTO
Roadside Design Guides, NACTO Urban Street Design Guide, NACTO Urban
%LNHZD\ 'HVLJQ*XLGH 1$&72'RQ·W *LYH 8S DW WKH Intersections (Safe Roads and
Safe Speeds) in City design standards. [Near-term/low/One-time]
Context Appropriate Speeds
1. Evaluate potential to include target speed reductions as part of roadway
improvements (Safe Speeds). [Near-term/High/On-going]
2. Develop traffic calming program (Safe Speeds). [Near-term/Medium/On-
going]
3. Identify corridors where traffic signal timing strategies could be used to control
speeds and conduct a pilot project in partnership with FDOT and Orange
County (Safe Speeds). [Near-term/High/One-time]
Equity Focused Analysis & Programs
1. Track crash outcomes by disadvantaged community status (Safe Road
Users). [Near- term/High/On-going]
Proactive/Systemic
1. Develop traffic calming program (Safe Speeds). [Near-term/Medium/On-
going]
2. Develop speed management plan (Safe Speeds). [Near-term/Medium/On-
going]
Responsive/Hot Spot
1. 1. 0RQLWRU 0HWUR3ODQ 2UODQGR·V annual update of crash dashboard, report on
progress and if new focus areas/crash trends are emerging (All Safe System
Elements). [Near- term/High/On-going]
Evaluation and Adjustment
1. Develop process to conduct before and after studies for City roadway projects
(Safe Roads). [Immediate/High/On-going]
The final action plan items will be reflected in the Vision Zero Action Plan. Attachments:
Benchmarking Guidance
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Table 1 | Document Review Summary
Document Name Description Safety Policies and Goals Safety Data and Analysis Countermeasures VZ Core Element Link
Comprehensive Plan (2002),
Transportation Element
The main objective of the
Transportation Element is to determine
future transportation needs and
establish transportation improvement
priorities for the City of Ocoee to the
year 2020.
Policy 2.4.2
The City shall ensure streetscape improvements that
accommodate pedestrian activity and encourage
the use of transit.
Complete Streets for All
Policy 2.6.1
The City shall increase the number of
neighborhoods, commercial areas, parks, and
recreation facilities served by transit and
bicycle/pedestrian facilities.
Complete Streets for All
Policy 2.8.1
The City shall ensure connectivity of the sidewalk
network and monitor number of sidewalk miles
added.
Monitor sidewalk added Construct sidewalks Complete Streets for All
Policy 2.8.2
The City shall ensure the connectivity of the bicycle
network and monitor number of bike lane miles
added.
Monitor bicycle lanes added Construct bicycle facilities Complete Streets for All
Policy 2.9.1
The City shall increase the number of
neighborhoods, commercial areas, parks, and
recreation facilities served by bicycle/pedestrian
facilities, which connect to the West Orange Trail.
Network enhancements Complete Streets for All
Objective 3.1 The City shall seek to minimize the
QXPEHURIWUDIILFDFFLGHQWV RQWKH&LW\·VURDGZD\V
Monitor crashes Responsive, Hot Spot Planning
Policy 3.1.2
The City shall support improvements, which
incorporate traffic calming measures on necessary
roadways.
Traffic calming Context-Appropriate Speeds
Policy 3.2.1
The City shall support the existence of facilities,
which allow bicycles and pedestrians to travel
separately from vehicles.
Separated bicycle and pedestrian
facilities
Proactive, Systemic Planning
Policy 3.2.3
The City shall require the presence of two-sided
sidewalk coverage on key roads connecting schools
and residential areas.
Construct sidewalks Complete Streets for All
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Page 9 of 14
Document Name Description Safety Policies and Goals Safety Data and Analysis Countermeasures VZ Core Element Link
Article 3, Design Standards, 3.02 Streets
and Other Pavements
3.02.02 Sidewalks/Bikeways: It is the intent of the City
that every new residential lot or non-residential
development shall construct its portion of the city
wide pedestrian/bikeway system. If a variance to
these provisions is granted, the Owner/Developer
shall execute a sidewalk agreement with the City to
ensure the future installation of the facilities.
Construct sidewalks and bicycle
facilities
Proactive, Systemic Planning
City of Ocoee Trails Master Plan Identifies future trails system Construct sidewalks and bicycle
facilities
Proactive, Systemic Planning
Healthy West Orange Trails Initiative
Identifies future trails system Bluford Multipurpose Path - City to provide a safe
route to schools
IURPWKH2DVLV$SDUWPHQWV :LOOFRQQHFWWRWKH&LW\·V
existing trail that runs north to Silver Star Rd.
Connecting at the Middle School it provides an
important route to schools for area children. Silver
Star/Franklin Complete Street Project - Trails -
Includes a cycle track on Silver Star, connection to
the WOT west of SR 429. Ocoee Apopka Rd Trails -
Palm Parkway north to McCormick Road - 0-·WUDLOV
along the west side of Ocoee Apopka. Project is
planned as a part of widening project needed for
capacity. Clarke Road Multipurpose Paths between
A.D. Mims and Clarcona Ocoee Rd - Multipurpose
Path to be installed as part of 4-laning Clarke Rd.
Tomyn Blvd/Windermere Rd- important regional
connection. Ocoee has identified
·-multipupose path. The Rd will be widened to 4-
lanes.
Construct sidewalks and bicycle
facilities
Proactive, Systemic Planning
SR 50/UCF Connector Alternatives
Analysis
Recommended alternative includes Bus
Rapid Transit (BRT) service traveling in
mixed-traffic along SR 50 from Oakland in
west Orange County into Downtown
Orlando to connect to LYNX Central Station
and then on to Alafaya Trail, then up
Alafaya Trail to UCF.
Identified pedestrian and bicycle safety and mobility
challenges along SR 50. Recommends queue jumps
at specific intersections and station locations.
Evaluate safety data Proactive, Systemic Planning
Downtown Ocoee Master Plan, 2016
The Downtown Master Plan is the
springboard to the rediscovering of
downtown Ocoee and the rallying cry for
the citizens and city leaders to fulfill the
vision of a long-deserved rebirth of this
gem by the lake.
Connect the West Orange Trail to Downtown by
enhancing bicycle facilities on Ocoee Apopka Road, Palm
Drive, and Plant/Franklin Street.
Construct sidewalks and bicycle
facilities
Proactive, Systemic Planning
Connect the West Orange Trail to the lake by enhancing
bicycle facilities along Oakland Avenue.
Construct sidewalks and bicycle
facilities
Proactive, Systemic Planning
Make additional east-west connections by expanding the
grid to the west and filling in missing links where possible
network enhancements
Proactive, Systemic Planning
Link Silver Star to Oakland and Franklin network enhancements Proactive, Systemic Planning
Be Pedestrian, Bike and Transit Friendly Proactive, Systemic Planning
Foster safer routes to school Proactive, Systemic Planning
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Page 10 of 14
Table 2 | Benchmarking Assessment Tool
6WUDWHJ\ %HQFKPDUNV 1RWD&XUUHQW3UDFWLFH 2FFDVLRQDO3UDFWLFH ,QVWLWXWLRQDO3UDFWLFH 1RWHV2SSRUWXQLWLHVIRU
3ROLF\3URFHVV
5HILQHPHQW
&DWHJRU\ /HDGHUVKLSDQG&RPPLWPHQW
3XEOLF+LJK/HYHODQG2QJRLQJ&RPPLWPHQW
$JHQF\OHDGHUVKLSKDVPDGHDSXEOLFFRPPLWPHQW
WRWKHJRDORIHOLPLQDWLQJWUDIILF IDWDOLWLHVDQGVHULRXV
LQMXULHVZLWKLQDVSHFLILFWLPHIUDPH
3ODQLQSURFHVV
$JHQF\OHDGHUVKLSLVFRQVLVWHQWO\HQJDJHGLQ
SULRULWL]LQJVDIHW\YLDFROODERUDWLYHHIIRUWV [
.H\VWDNHKROGHUVKDYHPDGHDFOHDUSXEOLF
VWDWHPHQWLQVXSSRUWRI9LVLRQ=HURHIIRUWVDQG
WLPHOLQH
[
$QLQWHUGHSDUWPHQWDOVDIHW\ZRUNLQJJURXSUHJXODUO\
FRRUGLQDWHVZLWKOHDGHUVKLSWRGLVFXVVSURJUHVV [
$XWKHQWLF(QJDJHPHQW
7KHDJHQF\FRQGXFWVRXWUHDFKWRVSHFLILF
FRPPXQLWLHVLQWHUHVWVDQG SRSXODWLRQV [
3XEOLFPHHWLQJVDQGZRUNVKRSVDUHKRVWHGUHJXODUO\
DQGDWWLPHVDQGORFDWLRQVFRQYHQLHQWIRUWKH
FRPPXQLW\
[
7KHFRPPXQLW\LQFOXGLQJKLVWRULFDOO\GLVDGYDQWDJHG
FRPPXQLWLHVWUXVWDQGIHHO HQJDJHGE\WKHDJHQF\ [
7KHVWDNHKROGHUJURXSVDUH UHSUHVHQWDWLYHRIWKH
FRPPXQLW\DWODUJH [
7KHDJHQF\HQJDJHVUHJXODUO\ZLWKFRPPXQLW\
EDVHGRUJDQL]DWLRQVDQGOHDGHUV [
7KHDJHQF\UHFRJQL]HVWKH YDOXHRIFRPPXQLW\LQSXW
E\SURYLGLQJJUDQWRSSRUWXQLWLHVPDGHLQSDUWQHUVKLS
ZLWKFRPPXQLW\EDVHGRUJDQL]DWLRQVDQGQRQSURILWV
VXSSRUWLQJ9LVLRQ=HURZRUN
[
6WUDWHJLF3ODQQLQJ
&UDVKGDWDLVFROOHFWHGUHJXODUO\DQGXVHGWRLQIRUP
GHFLVLRQVEHIRUHSODQGHYHORSPHQW [
7KHDJHQF\DXJPHQWVWUDGLWLRQDOFUDVKGDWDIURP
SROLFHGDWDZLWKGDWDIURPRWKHUVRXUFHVVXFKDV
KRVSLWDOV
[
7KHDJHQF\KDVHVWDEOLVKHGDQDSSURSULDWHWLPHOLQH
WRUHDFK]HURWUDIILF IDWDOLWLHV
3ODQLQSURFHVV
7KHDJHQF\KDVHVWDEOLVKHGQHDUWHUPDQGLQWHULP
JRDOVIRUDFKLHYLQJ]HURWUDIILF IDWDOLWLHV
3ODQLQSURFHVV
7KHDJHQF\KDVGHOLQHDWHGFOHDUDFWLRQLWHPVWR
DFKLHYHHDFKJRDO
3ODQLQSURFHVV
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Page 11 of 14
$OHDGGHSDUWPHQWRUSRVLWLRQKDVEHHQ HVWDEOLVKHG
IRUHDFKDFWLRQLWHP [
7KHOHDGDJHQF\IRUHDFKDFWLRQLWHPLGHQWLILHV
SDUWQHUVWRKHOSFRPSOHWHWKHDFWLRQ [
7KHDJHQF\KDVGHWHUPLQHG DSSURSULDWHIXQGLQJ
QHHGVIRUHDFKDFWLRQLWHP [
7KHDJHQF\KDVPDLQWDLQHGD9LVLRQ=HURZHEVLWHWR
LQIRUPWKHSXEOLFDERXWWKH LQLWLDWLYH
VSURJUHVV WKLV
FRXOGLQFOXGHDOLQNWRUHJLRQDOUHVRXUFHVIURPWKH
DJHQF\·VKRPHSDJH
[
3DUWRI UHJLRQDOHIIRUW
$WKLUGSDUW\DXGLWV9LVLRQ=HURSURJUHVVDQGUHSRUWV
RXWFRPHVRQWKHZHEVLWH [
'HSDUWPHQWVDQGVWDIIDUH SURYLGHGUHVRXUFHVIRU
VDIHW\UHODWHGWUDLQLQJDQGVWDIIGHYHORSPHQW[
6WDIIDWPXOWLSOHOHYHOVDQGLQPXOWLSOHGHSDUWPHQWV
DUHVDIHW\FKDPSLRQVWRHQVXUH FRQWLQXLW\ZKHQD
VDIHW\FKDPSLRQGHSDUWV
[
$GHTXDWHSROLFLHVUHODWHGWRHTXLWDEOH
WUDQVSRUWDWLRQKDYHEHHQ IRUPXODWHG [
7KHDJHQF\KDVGHWHUPLQHG VXLWDEOHSHUIRUPDQFH
PHDVXUHVWRDVVHVVHTXLWDEOHWUDQVSRUWDWLRQ
3ODQLQSURFHVV
$GHTXDWHSROLFLHVUHODWHGWRPXOWLPRGDO
WUDQVSRUWDWLRQKDYHEHHQ IRUPXODWHG [
6XLWDEOHSHUIRUPDQFHPHDVXUHVWRDVVHVVPXOWLPRGDO
WUDQVSRUWDWLRQKDYHEHHQ HVWDEOLVKHG [
7KHDJHQF\KDVGHYHORSHGSROLFLHVWRPDLQWDLQ
ELF\FOHDQGSHGHVWULDQIDFLOLWLHVGXULQJFRQVWUXFWLRQ
SURMHFWVWKDWDIIHFWURDGZD\RSHUDWLRQV
[
7KHDJHQF\KDVHVWDEOLVKHGDQHIILFLHQWFLWL]HQ
UHTXHVWSURFHVVDQGDPHWKRGRORJ\IRUHYDOXDWLQJ
UHTXHVWV
[
3URMHFW'HOLYHU\
$GHTXDWHSROLFLHVUHODWHGWRWUDQVSRUWDWLRQVDIHW\
KDYHEHHQIRUPXODWHG
3ODQLQSURFHVV
7KHDJHQF\KDVGHWHUPLQHGVXLWDEOHSHUIRUPDQFH
PHDVXUHVWRDVVHVVWUDQVSRUWDWLRQVDIHW\ [
7UDQVSRUWDWLRQVDIHW\LVLQFRUSRUDWHGLQWRHYHU\
&DSLWDO,PSURYHPHQW3URMHFWWRWKHH[WHQW
DSSOLFDEOH
[
)+:$
VSURYHQFRXQWHUPHDVXUHVDUHLPSOHPHQWHGLQ
SURMHFWV [
7KHDJHQF\LPSOHPHQWV1+76$
V&RXQWHUPHDVXUHV
WKDW:RUN [
7KH DJHQF\VKDUHVSURMHFW RXWFRPHVDQG
HIIHFWLYHQHVVZLWKWKHSXEOLF [
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Page 12 of 14
7KHDJHQF\SURYLGHVIXQGLQJIRUSURMHFWVWKDWUHGXFH
IDWDODQGVHULRXVLQMXU\FROOLVLRQV [
7KHUHLVVXIILFLHQWIXQGLQJDOORFDWHGIRUIXWXUHSURMHFWV
WKDWPD\UHGXFHIDWDODQGVHULRXVLQMXU\FROOLVLRQV [
7KHDJHQF\DSSOLHVIRUJUDQWVWRIXQGVDIHW\SURMHFWV
IURPWUDGLWLRQDOVRXUFHV [
7KHDJHQF\DSSOLHVIRUJUDQWVWRIXQGVDIHW\SURMHFWV
IURPQRQWUDGLWLRQDOVRXUFHV [
3URMHFWVLQFHQWLYL]LQJ WUDQVLWELNLQJZDONLQJDQG
FDUSRROLQJRYHUVLQJOHRFFXSDQWYHKLFOHVDUH
SULRULWL]HGDQGLPSOHPHQWHG
[
&DWHJRU\ 6DIH5RDGZD\VDQG6DIH6SHHGV
&RPSOHWH6WUHHWVIRU$OO
7KHDJHQF\KDVDOORFDWHG DGHTXDWHIXQGLQJIRU
FRPSOHWHVWUHHWVSURMHFWV [
7KHDJHQF\KDVDFRPSOHWHVWUHHWVSODQ[
&RPSOHWH6WUHHWHOHPHQWVKDYHEHHQLQFRUSRUDWHG
LQWRSODQQLQJGRFXPHQWV [
9XOQHUDEOHXVHUVDUHSULRULWL]HGLQSURMHFWSODQQLQJ
DQGLPSOHPHQWDWLRQ [
7KHDJHQF\DFWLYHO\FRRUGLQDWHVZLWKQHLJKERULQJ
PHPEHUDJHQFLHVDQGQHLJKERULQJPXQLFLSDOLWLHVWR
SURYLGHFRQQHFWLRQVIRUSHRSOHZDONLQJDQGELNLQJ
[
$SSURSULDWHSUDFWLFHVDUH IROORZHGWRVHWVSHHGOLPLWV
EDVHGRQFRQWH[W [
&RQWH[W$SSURSULDWH6SHHG
7KH DJHQF\VXJJHVWVVSHFLILFUXOHVWRVHWVSHHGOLPLWV
QHDUVFKRROVDQGDUHDVZLWKDKLJKQXPEHURI
YXOQHUDEOHURDGXVHUV
[
$SSURSULDWHSURFHGXUHVDUHIROORZHGWRHQIRUFH
VSHHGOLPLWV [
7KHUHDUHRQJRLQJHGXFDWLRQSURJUDPVFDPSDLJQV
UHODWHGWRWUDIILFVSHHGV [
7KHDJHQF\IROORZVSURSHU PHWKRGVWRPRGLI\
H[LVWLQJURDGZD\V WRDFKLHYHVDIHVSHHGV
3ODQLQSURFHVV
&DWHJRU\ 'DWD'ULYHQ$SSURDFK7UDQVSDUHQF\DQG$FFRXQWDELOLW\
(TXLW\)RFXVHG$QDO\VLVDQG 3URJUDPV
7KHDJHQF\KDVGHYHORSHGHIIHFWLYHSURJUDPVDQG
VWUDWHJLHVWRKHOSSHRSOHZLWKRXWKRXVLQJDQGORZ
LQFRPHLQGLYLGXDOVDFFHVVMREVDQGVHUYLFHV
(TXLW\LVDIDFWRULQSURMHFWSULRULWL]DWLRQ
(TXLW\LVUHIOHFWHGLQWKHDJHQF\·VYLVLRQDQGJRDOVIRU
VDIHW\
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Page 13 of 14
*HRJUDSKLFLQHTXLW\LVFRQVLGHUHGLQWKHDJHQF\·V
GDWDDQDO\VLV
7KHDJHQF\UHSRUWVVDIHW\RXWFRPHV
GHPRJUDSKLFDOO\
'DWDRQGLVWULEXWLRQRIVWRSVDQGWLFNHWLQJLVDQDO\]HG
GHPRJUDSKLFDOO\
7KH DJHQF\KDVIRUPXODWHG HIIHFWLYHSROLFLHVWR
PLWLJDWHWKHGLVSURSRUWLRQDWHLPSDFWRIILQHVIRU
PLQRUYLRODWLRQVRQORZLQFRPHLQGLYLGXDOV
,PSRUWDQWLQIRUPDWLRQDQGHGXFDWLRQPDWHULDOVDUH
SURYLGHGLQFRPPRQODQJXDJHVVSRNHQE\UHVLGHQWV
ZKRVHILUVWODQJXDJHLVQRW(QJOLVK
7KHDJHQF\XVHVGDWDWRLGHQWLI\DQGV\VWHPDWLFDOO\
DGGUHVVWUHQGVDQGULVNIDFWRUVWRSUHYHQWVHYHUH
FROOLVLRQV
3URDFWLYH6\VWHPLF
&RPPRQFROOLVLRQSDWWHUQVKDYHEHHQPDWFKHGZLWK
DGHTXDWH FRXQWHUPHDVXUHV
3ODQLQSURFHVV
7KHDJHQF\ZRUNVWRFRQWLQXRXVO\LPSURYHWKH
DFFXUDF\RI FUDVKUHSRUWV [
7KHDJHQF\XVHVWKH+LJK,QMXU\1HWZRUN +,1 LQ
SURMHFWSULRULWL]DWLRQ [
5HDFWLYH+RW6SRW
$GHPRJUDSKLFDQDO\VLVRIWKH+,1 KDVEHHQ
FRQGXFWHG
3ODQLQSURFHVV
7KHDJHQF\URXWLQHO\PRQLWRUVDQGUHSRUWVFROOLVLRQ
GDWDWRWKHSXEOLF [
(YDOXDWLRQDQG$GMXVWPHQW
,QWHUVHFWLRQGHVLJQDQGFRQWUROGHFLVLRQVDUH
HYDOXDWHGWRUHGXFHNLQHWLFHQHUJ\WUDQVIHUWR
YXOQHUDEOHXVHUV
3ODQLQSURFHVV
'HPRQVWUDWLRQSURMHFWVDUH XVHGWRWHVWWKHVWUDWHJLHV
DQGJHWIHHGEDFNIURPWKH SXEOLF
3ODQLQSURFHVV
7KHDJHQF\KDVDSURFHVVWRDGGUHVVXQGHUUHSRUWLQJ
RIFROOLVLRQV HVSHFLDOO\IRUYXOQHUDEOHURDG XVHUV [
City of Ocoee Vision Zero Memo
Policy Benchmarking
Attachment
Final Memorandum
Introduction
The MetroPlan Orlando region has an overall fatal crash rate 15 percent higher than the national
average and 10 percent higher than the statewide average. MetroPlan Orlando is preparing a
Regional Vision Zero Action Plan to understand where crashes are most likely to occur, why crashes
result in fatalities and serious injuries, and how to reduce the severity and frequency of these crashes.
This effort will be rooted in the core elements of Vision Zero and the Safe System approach. The
purpose of the Action Plan is to identify projects, programs, and strategies to eliminate fatalities and
serious injuries on the region’s roadways.
Funding for this effort is provided by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets for All (SS4A)
grant program. The SS4A grant program is funding the preparation of regional, county, and local
agency Vision Zero action plans in the MetroPlan Orlando region.
This memorandum outlines a process to benchmark existing policies and guidelines against the Vision
Zero core elements to meet the Safe Street for All requirement to review existing regional policies and
guidelines.
Core Elements of Vision Zero
The Vision Zero Network has established 10 core elements, as summarized in Table 1. They provide a
framework for what an effective safety program encompasses. Evaluating existing policies, programs,
and projects against these core elements will help local agencies understand what is working to
reduce severe crashes and what the gaps are in their existing safety programs. This information can
then be used to inform stronger safety-related policies and programs as part of each agency's
Action Plan.
Date: October 10, 2023
To: Vision Zero Central Florida Consultants
From: Mighk Wilson, MetroPlan Orlando
Nicole Waldheim and Kathrin Tellez, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Vision Zero Central Florida – Policy Benchmarking
Guidance
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Policy Benchmarking Guidance, October 10, 2023
Page 2 of 12
Table 1 | Core Elements of Vision Zero
General Strategy Strategy Details
Category: Leadership and Commitment
Public, High-Level,
and Ongoing
Commitment
Key elected officials and leaders within public agencies, including transportation, public
health, and police, commit to the goal of eliminating traffic fatalities and serious injuries
within a specific timeframe. Leadership across these agencies consistently engages in
prioritizing safety via a collaborative working group and other resource sharing efforts.
Authentic
Engagement
Meaningful and accessible community engagement toward Vision Zero strategy and
implementation is employed, with a focus on equity.
Strategic Planning
A Vision Zero Action Plan is developed, approved, and used to guide work. The Plan
includes explicit goals and measurable strategies with clear timelines, and it identifies
responsible stakeholders.
Project Delivery
Decision-makers and system designers advance projects and policies for safe, equitable
multimodal travel by securing funding and implementing projects, prioritizing roadways
with the most pressing safety issues.
Category: Safe Roads and Safe Speeds
Complete Streets for
All
Complete Streets concepts are integrated into communitywide plans and implemented
through projects to encourage a safe, well-connected transportation network for
people using all modes of transportation. This prioritizes safe travel of people over
expeditious travel of motor vehicles.
Context-Appropriate
Speeds
Travel speeds are set and managed to achieve safe conditions for the specific
roadway context and to protect all roadway users, particularly those most at risk in
crashes. Proven speed management policies and practices are prioritized to reach this
goal.
Category: Data-Driven Approach, Transparency, and Accountability
Equity-Focused
Analysis and
Program
Commitment is made to an equitable approach and outcomes, including prioritizing
engagement and investments in traditionally under-served communities and adopting
equitable traffic enforcement practices.
Proactive, Systemic
Planning
A proactive, systems-based approach to safety is used to identify and address top risk
factors and mitigate potential crashes and crash severity.
Responsive, Hot Spot
Planning
A map of the community’s fatal and serious injury crash locations is developed, regularly
updated, and used to guide priority actions and funding.
Comprehensive
Evaluation and
Adjustments
Routine evaluation of the performance of all safety interventions is made public and
shared with decision makers to inform priorities, budgets, and updates to the Vision Zero
Action Plan.
Source: Vision Zero Network, 2023
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Policy Benchmarking Guidance, October 10, 2023
Page 3 of 12
Benchmarking Process
The benchmarking process is typically comprised of the following steps, each of which are described
in more detail within this memorandum.
1. Identify and review relevant documents and procedures
2. Review and refine benchmarks
3. Conduct initial benchmarking by consultant team and agency staff project manager
4. Facilitate focused benchmarking discussion with stakeholders with knowledge of planning,
engagement, project delivery and other elements contained within the benchmarking matrix
5. Identify opportunities for policy enhancements and barriers to change
6. Incorporate findings into Action Plan
Step 1 – Identify and Review Relevant Documents and Procedures
The first step of the benchmarking process is to identify all relevant local policies, plans, programs,
and projects that have a role in transportation safety and conduct a review.
Documents to review may include, but are not limited to:
x Comprehensive Plan
x Transportation Plans, including active transportation plans
x Capital Improvement Program
x Design policies (multimodal, complete streets, speed, other), standards and guidelines, and
land development code requirements
x Department Standard Operating Procedures
As a part of the benchmarking process, clear documentation of critical information from each plan is
important. For each document reviewed, it is recommended that the following information, at a
minimum, be documented. Each summary element is defined below, and an example summary is
provided in Table 2.
Document Name: Name of document (and link to where the document can be found).
Document Description: One to three sentence description of the purpose of the document.
Goals and Policies: Documentation of what is intended to be achieved with transportation
safety and supporting guidance, rules, procedures to achieve it.
Data and Analysis: Documentation of existing safety data/analysis or known challenges (if
any).
Countermeasures: Documentation of proposed or programmed safety solutions to address
key needs.
Vision Zero Link: How the document addresses one or more of the Vision Zero core elements
(see Table 1).
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Policy Benchmarking Guidance, October 10, 2023
Page 4 of 12
Table 2 | Example Plan Documentation
Name Description Safety Policies
and Goals
Safety Data
and Analysis Countermeasures VZ Core
Element Link
Notes/
Opportunities for
Policy/Process
Refinement
CIP
Identifies 5-
year list of
multimodal
improvements
Zero fatalities
and serious
injuries is
stated as one
of the primary
goals for
capital
projects.
Project
prioritization
approach
includes safety
criteria.
CIP projects are
scored, in part,
based on
equity criterion.
Regional High
Injury Network is
referenced in
the document.
Separated bike
lanes
Speed studies
Traffic calming
Restriping
Project
Delivery:
Working to
advance
projects and
policies for
safe,
equitable
multimodal
travel
Start tracking
total funding
spend on safety
projects.
Step 2 – Review and Refine Benchmarks
The next step is to determine how your existing policies and program align with the Vision Zero core
elements and where gaps may exist. Potential Vision Zero benchmarks, centered around the core
elements of Vision Zero and the Safe System approach, have been developed as presented in
Table 3, and provided as an excel spreadsheet, and are intended to help assess what agencies are
currently doing well related to Vision Zero and where potential changes to policies, programs and
practices could be considered as a part of the development of their Vision Zero Action Plan. Not all
benchmarking criteria will apply to all agencies, and some agencies may wish to develop additional
criteria.
A process to follow in conducting the benchmarking is provided in the next section.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Policy Benchmarking Guidance, October 10, 2023
Page 5 of 12
Table 3 | Vision Zero Benchmarks
Strategy Benchmarks
Not a
Current
Practice
Occasional
Practice
Institutional
Practice
Category: Leadership and Commitment
Public, High-
Level, and
Ongoing
Commitment
Key elected officials and leaders have made a public
commitment to the goal of eliminating traffic fatalities
and serious injuries within a specific timeframe.
Key elected officials are consistently engaged in
prioritizing safety via collaborative efforts.
Key stakeholders have made a clear, public
statement in support of Vision Zero efforts and timeline.
An interdepartmental safety working group regularly
coordinates with leadership to discuss progress.
Public meetings and workshops are hosted regularly
and at times and locations convenient for the
community.
Authentic
Engagement
The agency conducts outreach to specific
communities, interests, and populations.
The community, including historically disadvantaged
communities, trust and feel engaged by the agency.
The stakeholder group is representative of the
community at large.
The agency engages regularly with community-based
organizations and leaders.
The agency recognizes the value of community input
by providing grant opportunities made in partnership
with community-based organizations and nonprofits
supporting Vision Zero work.
Crash data is collected regularly and used to inform
decisions before plan development.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Policy Benchmarking Guidance, October 10, 2023
Page 6 of 12
Strategy Benchmarks
Not a
Current
Practice
Occasional
Practice
Institutional
Practice
Strategic
Planning
The agency augments traditional crash data from
police data with data from other sources, such as
hospitals.
The agency has established an appropriate timeline to
reach zero traffic fatalities.
The agency has established near-term and interim
goals for achieving zero traffic fatalities.
The agency has delineated clear action items to
achieve each goal.
A lead department or position has been established
for each action item.
The lead agency for each action item identifies
partners to help complete the action.
The agency has determined appropriate funding
needs for each action item.
The agency has maintained a Vision Zero website to
inform the public about the initiative's progress; this
could include a link to regional resources from the
agency’s home page.
A third-party audits Vision Zero progress and reports
outcomes on the website.
Departments and staff are provided resources for
safety related training and staff development.
Staff at multiple levels and in multiple departments are
safety champions to ensure continuity when a safety
champion departs.
Adequate policies related to equitable transportation
have been formulated.
The agency has determined suitable performance
measures to assess equitable transportation.
Adequate policies related to multimodal
transportation have been formulated.
Suitable performance measures to assess multimodal
transportation have been established.
Non-transportation policies support transportation
safety, such as land use, open space, parks, etc.
The agency has developed policies to maintain
bicycle and pedestrian facilities during construction
projects that affect roadway operations.
The agency has developed policies to maintain
bicycle and pedestrian facilities during construction
projects that affect roadway operations.
The agency has established an efficient citizen request
process and a methodology for evaluating requests.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Policy Benchmarking Guidance, October 10, 2023
Page 7 of 12
Strategy Benchmarks
Not a
Current
Practice
Occasional
Practice
Institutional
Practice
Project
Delivery
Adequate policies related to transportation safety
have been formulated.
The agency has determined suitable performance
measures to assess transportation safety.
Transportation safety is incorporated into every Capital
Improvement Project to the extent applicable.
FHWA's proven countermeasures are implemented in
projects.
The agency implements NHTSA's Countermeasures
that Work.
The agency shares project outcomes and
effectiveness with the public.
The agency provides funding for projects that reduce
fatal and serious injury collisions.
There is sufficient funding allocated for future projects
that may reduce fatal and serious injury collisions.
The agency applies for grants to fund safety projects
from traditional sources.
The agency applies for grants to fund safety projects
from non-traditional sources.
Projects incentivizing transit, biking, walking, and
carpooling over single-occupant vehicles are
prioritized and implemented.
Category: Safe Roadways and Safe Speeds
Complete
Streets for All
The agency has allocated adequate funding for
complete streets projects.
The agency has a complete streets plan.
Complete Street elements have been incorporated
into Comprehensive Plans and other planning
documents.
Vulnerable users are prioritized in project planning and
implementation.
The agency actively coordinates with neighboring
municipalities to provide connections for people
walking and biking.
Appropriate practices are followed to set speed limits
based on context.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Policy Benchmarking Guidance, October 10, 2023
Page 8 of 12
Strategy Benchmarks
Not a
Current
Practice
Occasional
Practice
Institutional
Practice
Context
Appropriate
Speed
The agency uses specific rules to set speed limits near
schools and areas with a high number of vulnerable
road users.
Appropriate procedures are followed to enforce
speed limits.
There are ongoing education programs/campaigns
related to traffic speeds.
The agency follows proper methods to modify existing
roadways to achieve safe speeds.
The agency follows proper methods to modify existing
roadways to achieve safe speeds.
Category: Data Driven Approach, Transparency and Accountability
Equity
Focused
Analysis and
Programs
The agency has developed effective programs and
strategies to help people without housing, and low-
income individuals access jobs and services.
Equity is a factor in project prioritization.
Equity is reflected in the agency’s vision and goals for
safety.
Geographic inequity is considered in the agency’s
data analysis.
The agency reports safety outcomes
demographically.
The police department policy for traffic stops consider
equity
Data on distribution of stops and ticketing is analyzed
demographically.
The agency has formulated effective policies to
mitigate the disproportionate impact of fines for minor
violations on low-income individuals.
Important information and education materials are
provided in common languages spoken by residents
whose first language is not English.
The agency uses data to identify and systematically
address trends and risk factors to prevent severe
collisions.
Proactive /
Systemic
Common collision patterns have been matched with
adequate countermeasures.
The agency works to continuously improve the
accuracy of crash reports.
The agency uses the High Injury Network (HIN) in
project prioritization.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Policy Benchmarking Guidance, October 10, 2023
Page 9 of 12
Strategy Benchmarks
Not a
Current
Practice
Occasional
Practice
Institutional
Practice
Reactive /
Hot Spot
A demographic analysis of the HIN has been
conducted.
The agency routinely monitors and reports collision
data to the public.
Evaluation
and
Adjustment
Intersection design and control decisions are
evaluated to reduce kinetic energy transfer to
vulnerable users.
Demonstration projects are used to test the strategies
and get feedback from the public.
The agency has a process to address underreporting
of collisions, especially for vulnerable road users.
Steps 3 through 5 – Using the Benchmarks
The following describes how to use the Vision Zero benchmarks to assess your agency’s safety
program.
Identify Stakeholders: Determine who participates in the benchmarking assessment. This can be
done with the Task Force, Steering Committee or Working Group assembled to develop the local
agency safety plan, or with a subset of stakeholders who represent transportation and safety interests
and have knowledge about the agency’s practices. At a minimum, participants should include
representatives from Engineering, Planning/Community Development, and Enforcement.
Review and Customize Benchmarks: The benchmarks listed for each of the Vision Zero core elements
represent strategies to make improvements and adjustments to a safety program. It is recommended
to consider all of these when assessing a safety program, but not required. In coordination with the
review committee, review the benchmarks to determine which should be included in the
benchmarking assessment, which should not, and any customizations to the language. The strategies
provide a starting point but can be revised based on the goals of your safety program.
Populate the Benchmarks: Using the results of the plan review, the consultant team should complete
an initial pass through the Table 3 matrices based on their review of various plans and documents, as
well as initial discissions with agency staff, and populate and “x” in the appropriate column, denoting
the level of institutionalization. A column documenting rationale or notes can be added. In addition
to using the plan review to populate the matrix, a discussion with the local agency project manager
can be another resource to populate the level of institutionalization columns. An example is
summarized in Table 4.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Policy Benchmarking Guidance, October 10, 2023
Page 10 of 12
Table 4 | Example of Populating the Benchmarks
Strategy Benchmarks Not a Current
Practice
Occasional
Practice
Institutional
Practice Notes
Project
Delivery
The agency has determined
suitable performance
measures to assess
transportation safety.
x
The Comprehensive
Plan includes
performance measures
for severe crashes.
Project
Delivery
FHWA's proven
countermeasures are
implemented in projects.
x
The CIP includes some
of the FHWA proven
countermeasures
including bike lanes
and road diets.
Proactive /
Systemic
The agency uses the High
Injury Network (HIN) in
project prioritization.
x
A HIN will be developed
as part of the Action
Plan and incorporated
into future project
prioritization.
Stakeholder Workshop: To obtain feedback and input on the benchmarking assessment matrix, a
virtual or in-person stakeholder workshop can be held. The goals for the workshop are to:
x Provide education on a Vision Zero safety program and benchmarks.
x Obtain feedback on the already populated benchmarks (based on the inputs from the plan
review).
x Finalize the level of institutionalization for all the benchmarks.
x Identify gaps and the associated challenges in the current safety program.
The workshop can be an hour and a half in length and follow this format:
x Overview of safety planning with a focus on Vision Zero and the Safe System Approach. (5
minutes)
x Describe the 10 core Vision Zero elements. (5 minutes)
x Break into three groups – the groups are organized around the Vision Zero categories of 1)
Leadership and Commitment 2) Safe Roads and Speeds 3) Data Driven Approach,
Transparency and Accountability. Participants will rotate through three groups and spend 25
minutes in each one.
Facilitators will capture the following information:
o Confirm the x’s are in the proper institutionalization categories for each benchmark (2)
minutes)
o For any benchmarks without an “x” obtain feedback from the group (5 minutes)
o For the benchmarks marked as “occasional” or “not a current practice,” discuss why.
Obtain feedback on the challenges and solutions. These conversations will form the
basis of policy recommendations to be included in the Action Plan (18 minutes)
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Policy Benchmarking Guidance, October 10, 2023
Page 11 of 12
Table 5 summarizes how to obtain the information. In total this portion of the agenda will be 75
minutes.
x Wrap Up. (5 minutes)
Table 5 | Example of Capturing Feedback on Benchmarks
Strategy Benchmarks Status Notes Challenges Ideas
Project
Delivery
The agency has
determined suitable
performance
measures to assess
transportation safety.
Occasional
Practice
The Comprehensive
Plan includes
performance
measures for severe
crashes.
Do not have staff
resources to track
performance
measures beyond
severe crashes.
Speed is an
emphasis area so
develop metrics to
track this issue.
Coordinate with
FDOT and
MetroPlan Orlando
to track outcomes
on regional
roadways.
Project
Delivery
FHWA's proven
countermeasures are
implemented in
projects.
Occasional
Practice
The CIP includes
some of the FHWA
proven
countermeasures
including bike lanes
and road diets.
Not all of the
proven
countermeasures
have political
support.
Identify which of
the other proven
countermeasures
could be
implemented
locally; consider
educating elected
officials and the
public.
Proactiv/
Systemi
The agency uses the
High Injury Network
(HIN) in project
prioritization.
Not a
Current
Practice
A HIN will be
developed as part
of the Action Plan
and incorporated
into future project
prioritization.
May not have
resources to
periodically update
HIN.
Incorporate HIN
and safety analysis
into
Comprehensive
Plan Updates and
other planning
processes.
Alternative: If a stakeholder workshop is not possible, focused interviews with key stakeholders can be
held to obtain input on the benchmarks, areas of success, and gaps/challenges. Identify key
stakeholders and set up individual interviews. Provide background on the benchmarks and walk
through each one to obtain their input on level of institutionalization. Use the successes and
challenges tabs, summarized in Table 5 to capture feedback.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Policy Benchmarking Guidance, October 10, 2023
Page 12 of 12
Step 6 – Develop the Action Plan
Based on the benchmarking effort and findings, actions and next steps can be identified to enhance
the local safety program.
Drawing from the challenges and ideas generated at the workshop (or interviews), the consultant
team will develop a set of next steps to be completed as part of the safety planning process or be
included in the plan for further consideration. Table 6 summarizes how to develop the next steps (in
matrix format) related to identified policy, programmatic, and policy changes.
Table 6 | Example Action Plan Template
Strategy Actions Near Term Action Action to be Included
in Plan
Longer-Term
Consideration
Project
Delivery
Make better use of FHWA
countermeasure resources x x
Project
Delivery
Develop policy to consider
FHWA proven
countermeasures first in
project prioritization
x x
Project
Delivery
Develop metrics to
evaluate speed-related
severe crashes
x x
Proactive /
Systemic
Develop HIN and
incorporate into project
prioritization criteria.
x x
Have any questions?
If you have questions related to the policy review, or if you have an approach not included in the list,
please contact Mighk Wilson at mwilson@metroplanorlando.org.
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
J- Engineering Countermeasure Toolkit
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
J- Engineering Countermeasure Toolkit
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
2
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
3
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Overview
Introduction and How to Use this Toolkit
MetroPlan Orlando will complete its first comprehensive Vision
Zero Action Plan in Spring 2024. The Plan outlines actions that
MetroPlan Orlando, including its 3 counties and incorporated
cities, will take in the next five years and beyond to eliminate
deaths and serious injuries on the region’s roadways by 2050. The
purpose of this Engineering Countermeasure Toolkit is to establish
a shared understanding of key strategies available to address
roadway safety issues in our community that align with the Safe
System Approach. The key objectives of this Toolkit are to:
1. Inform partner jurisdictions about safety treatment options
and their appropriate uses and contexts,
2. Communicate safety tools using easy-to-understand
language and graphics,
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 Toolkit describes a variety of engineering countermeasures,
how they can be applied to address safety, and their expected
effectiveness i.e., crash reduction, when available. The expected
crash reduction is based on Crash Modification Factors from the
Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Crash Modification
Clearinghouse or other published studies. The Toolkit also includes
general information about each tool’s application, typical
placement, estimated costs, and delivery timelines.
This Toolkit is meant to provide guidance for engineering
countermeasures applicable to crashes and safety concerns
identified in the MetroPlan Orlando region; it does not provide
an exhaustive list of all safety countermeasures. This Toolkit is not
meant to replace engineering investigation, feasibility evaluation,
and design. The selection of engineering countermeasures for a
specific location is always subject to professional judgement and
context-sensitive design.
The Engineering Countermeasure Toolkit 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. Non-engineering countermeasures are identified in
a separate document.
Systemic Treatments
The implementation of systemic treatments is a common Vision
Zero approach that implements low-cost safety measures on
a network level to reduce the risk of severe and fatal crashes.
The treatments that are typically considered for systemic
implementation are relatively effective, lower cost, and well-
suited for implementation at multiple locations. Some systemic
treatments can be implemented with limited study and design,
such as retroreflective signal backplates, high-visibility crosswalks
or curb extensions created with paint, bollards, and turn wedges.
Although systemic treatments are often discussed in contrast with
spot treatments, some treatments may be useful in both spot and
systemic safety.
Source: FHWA
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
4
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
The countermeasures are organized into the following categories:
What You’ll See Inside:
Organization of the Toolkit
A. Signals
B. Signing and Striping
C. Bikeways
D. Pedestrian Facilities
E. Intersections and Roadways
F. Speed Management
G. Other Engineering Strategies
For each engineering countermeasure, the following information is provided, with a description of select sections provided below.
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
5
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Organization of the Toolkit
Modal Safety Emphasis
Closely related to the countermeasure categories is the
“Modal Safety Emphasis” which represents the user group
that predominantly benefits from the implementation of the
countermeasure. The classification of user groups is not meant to
include every possible mode with the understanding that certain
countermeasures will benefit modes with closely related travel
characteristics. For example, a countermeasure that is designed
to reduce left-turn crashes at an intersection will benefit motor
vehicles and motorcycles alike. The Modal Safety Emphasis areas
include the following user groups:
Pedestrians
Bicycles
Motor Vehicles
Safe System Strategy
Within the Safe System Approach Framework, how we plan,
construct, and operate our roadways should anticipate human
error and consider human
vulnerabilities. Strategies
to achieve those goals are
highlighted below.
These principles provide a system
with built-in redundancies to eliminate or greatly reduce the
likelihood of death or serious injury when a crash occurs. However,
strategies have varying levels of effectiveness, feasibility, and
implementation time frames. FHWA has further developed a
draft Safe Systems Solutions Hierarchy (as of July 2023) within the
Safe System element of Safe Roads, as described below. Within
that framework, the most effective strategies include removing
conflicts and minimizing hazards, and where that is not feasible,
better management of the conflict through speed reductions and
managing conflicts in time.
• Remove Conflicts: Eliminate the most severe conflicts
between roadway users, such as through the relocation of
a utility pole, construction of a roundabout or provision of a
median barrier.
• Manage Vehicular Speeds: Reduce the speed of
vehicles to align with the context of the roadway, the hazards,
and conflicts between roadway users; includes horizontal and
vertical deflection elements.
• Manage Conflicts in Time: Where conflicts cannot be
removed, can they be separated in time, through signal
timing strategies or providing dedicated space for other
roadway users.
• Increase Attentiveness and Awareness: Where
conflicts cannot be removed, improve the visibility of the
conflicts.
• Implement Enforcing Features to Slow Traffic: Similar
to managing vehicular speeds, these are roadway features
that help enforce the desired speed, like speed feedback
signs.
Applicable Facility Type
The applicable facility types represent general characteristics
for land use and users where each countermeasure might be
appropriate. The applicable facilities are categorized using a
preliminary context classification system of:
• Urban Streets (FDOT Context Classification C4, C5, C6 and
CT2)
Roads should be
designed to encourage
appropriate roadway user
behavior for the context.
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
6
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
• Suburban Streets (C4, C3C and C3R)
• Rural Roads (C2)
For purposes of this toolkit, countermeasures for both urban and
suburban roadways could be considered on C4 roadways. For
strategies related to C1 facilities, please refer to the FDOT Context
Classification Guide and the Florida Design Manual (FDM).
Some treatments are more appropriate for use on urban arterial
streets with higher traffic volumes and a mix of different users,
while others are better used on rural roads where speeds tend
to be higher. However, choosing the best tool for a location will
depend on location-specific characteristics like number of travel
lanes, geometry, vehicle speeds, and volumes. The selection
of countermeasures should also consider the future roadway
context.
Crash Reduction Effectiveness
The potential effectiveness of each countermeasure was based
on published research, including information from FHWA’s Crash
Modification Factor (CMF) Clearinghouse, FHWA’s Proven Safety
Countermeasures, and other published references (see complete
list of references at end of this section). The CMF Clearinghouse
provides peer reviewed studies and a link to the applicable study.
As this toolkit is intended to be a quick resource guide to help
identify the range of potential countermeasures, the anticipated
effectiveness of various treatments was summarized into the
following categories:
• Unknown: No quantitative data is available
• Low: Expected Crash Reduction ≤ 30%
• Medium: 31%≤ Expected Crash Reduction ≤ 60%
• High: Expected Crash Reduction ≥ 61%
The expected crash reduction represents a multiplicative
factor indicating the proportion of crashes that are expected
to be reduced after the implementation of a countermeasure
with the reduction only applying to crashes affected by the
countermeasure. For example, changing left-turn phasing would
only apply to left-turn crashes on the approach where the
countermeasure is being implemented. For locations where more
than one countermeasure is being considered, the interaction
between countermeasures should be considered. For more
information on the application of multiple CMFs, refer to the
“Using CMFs” section of the Crash Modification Clearinghouse
(https://www.cmfclearinghouse.org/using_cmfs.php )
Some countermeasures may result in a decrease in some types of
crashes and an increase in others. For example, installing a traffic
signal may reduce fatal and serious injuries for motorists turning
to/from the major roadway, but increase rear end crashes, which
tend to result in fewer injuries.
Detailed crash analysis based on the most current crash
modification factor is recommended as the intent of the factors
provided in this document is to allow for a quick comparison of
the expected effectiveness of specific countermeasures relative
to their cost as well as highlight the need for additional data to
document the effectiveness of specific improvements that may
be implemented regionally. The estimated effectiveness of each
tool is only applicable to the crash type being mitigated i.e., the
Focus Crash Type.
Included in FHWA Proven Safety
Countermeasures
This field refers to whether the countermeasure is included in
FHWA’s Proven Safety Countermeasures Initiative (PSCi). The
PSCi is a collection of 28 countermeasures and strategies
effective in reducing roadway fatalities and serious injuries.
Each countermeasure addresses at least one safety focus area
– speed management, intersections, roadway departures, or
pedestrians/bicyclists – while others are crosscutting strategies
that address multiple safety focus areas.
Cost
The cost information is meant to convey an overall order of
magnitude to help compare potential strategies; the cost data
does not necessarily reflect the cost of each improvement
as a standalone construction project. Most countermeasures
would not likely be implemented as a standalone project but
incorporated into a larger intersection or corridor enhancement
project. For example, many elements could be incorporated into
routine resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation (RRR) projects.
Additionally, costs do not include elements that might be unique
to specific projects, such as right-of-way acquisition, need to
upgrade drainage systems, retaining walls to facilitate sidewalk
construction, need to upgrade other roadway elements to meet
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or Public Rights of Way
Organization of the Toolkit
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
7
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Access requirements (PROWAG) requirements, and other factors.
Therefore, actual costs could vary significantly.
The assigned cost ratings for countermeasures are as follows:
• Low ($): Typically, $10,000 or less
• Medium ($$): Typically, $10,000 to $100,000
• High ($$$): Typically, $100,000 +
The appendix provides more detailed cost estimates for some
countermeasures where recent cost data is available from FDOT
other local partners; not all countermeasures are included.
These costs can be used to develop high-level cost estimates of
projects for regional prioritization such that projects across the
region can be compared.
Implementation Timeline
This field represents the typical time to implement the
countermeasure. It should be noted that there may be some
variability in implementation timeline based on whether the
countermeasure can be implemented using “Quick Build”
materials or permanent materials. The assigned timeline
thresholds for implementation are as follows:
Quick Build; Typically, within 1 year
Short: Typically, within 1 to 3 years
Medium: Typically, 3 to 5 year s
Long: Typically, 5 years and more
Considerations
This section provides some additional information about the
countermeasure that need to be part of the evaluation about
whether the countermeasure is appropriate for selection. For
example, some countermeasures may affect drainage or require
additional maintenance.
Where the countermeasure is included or mentioned in the FDOT
Design Manual (FDM) or FDOT’s Traffic Engineering Manual, the
appropriate section is noted.
Additional sources of the countermeasures include:
• CMF Clearinghouse (Federal Highway Administration, 2023)
(http://www.cmfclearinghouse.org/)
• Application of Pedestrian Crossing Treatments for Streets and
Highways (NCHRP, 2016) (https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/316091509_Application_of_Pedestrian_Crossing_
Treatments_for_Streets_and_Highways)
• Development of Crash Modification Factors for Uncontrolled
Pedestrian Crossing Treatments (NCHRP, 2017) (https://
www.nap.edu/catalog/24627/development-of-crash-
modification-factors-for-uncontrolled-pedestrian-crossing-
treatments)
• Evaluation of Pedestrian-Related Roadway Measures
(Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, 2014) (http://
www.pedbikeinfo.org/cms/downloads/PedestrianLitReview_
April2014.pdf)
• Evolution of the Protected Intersection (Alta Planning and
Design, December 2015) (https://altago.com/wp-content/
Organization of the Toolkit
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
8
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
The selection of countermeasures should also consider the target
speed of the roadway. To establish a target speed based on the
roadway context and the goal of improving transportation safety
outcomes, the FDOT Context Based Design Speeds for Arterials
and Collectors should be used as a starting point, as presented in
Table 1.
Target Speed
Context
Classification
Allowable Design
Speed Range (MPH)SIS Minimum (MPH)
C1 Natural 55-70 65
C2 Rural 55-70 65
C2T Rural Town 25-45 40
C3 Suburban 35-55 50
C4 Urban General 25-45 45
C5 Urban Center 25-35 35
C6 Urban Core 25-30 30
Table 1: Allowable Design Speed Range by Context Classification
Guidance from FDOT Central Office related to target speed
setting recommends setting an initial target speed on the low
end of the allowable range, and then providing justification for
increases. From there, the following factors should be used to
establish a recommended target speed:
• Fatal and severe injury collision history
• Potential crash risk
• Existing and potential future context classification
• Number of lanes
• Type and density of surrounding land uses
• Number of access points and signal spacing
• Presence and characteristics of on-street parking
• Total pavement width available
• Presence of transit, pedestrian generators, and bicycle
activity
• Bicycle facility type
• Posted speeds on surrounding roadways
• Types of travelers (regional or local)
• Level of truck traffic
Additional guidance can be found in the FDOT Context
Classification Guide, February 2022 as well as the Speed
Management section of the 2024 FDOT Design Manual.
Source: FDOT Context Classification Guide, February 2022
Different Types of Speed
Target Speed is the highest speed at which vehicles
should operate on a thoroughfare in a specific context,
consistent with the level of multi-modal activity generated
by adjacent land uses, to provide both mobility for
motor vehicles and a supportive environment for
pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit users.
Design Speed is the speed that is used to determine
the geometric features of a road or street,
such as curves, slopes, lane width, intersection
spacing, sight distance and other features.
Speed Limits specify the maximum speed people are
permitted to drive on a road, typically shown on signs along
the road, and usually determined based on an engineering
study that considers the prevailing travel speeds.
Operating Speed refers to the speed at which people
are observed driving under free-flow conditions.
Under ideal conditions, target, design, posted
and operating speeds all align. When there are
discrepancies, roadway design elements may need to
be changed to achieve the desired speed outcomes.
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
9
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
uploads/Evolution-of-the-Protected-Intersection_ALTA-2015.
pdf)
• Manual for Selecting Safety Improvements on High Risk Rural
Roads (FHWA, 2014) (https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/hrrr/
manual/)
• Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection
System (FHWA) (http://www.pedbikesafe.org/pedsafe/)
• Proven Safety Countermeasures (FHWA), (https://highways.
dot.gov/safety/proven-safety-countermeasures)
Transportation safety countermeasure information is quickly
evolving and users of this document are encouraged to use the
most current information available.
Cost information based on FDOT cost per mile model reports:
https://www.fdot.gov/programmanagement/estimates/
documents/costpermilemodelsreports)
References
10
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
11
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Countermeasure List
SUMMARY OF COUNTERMEASURES
A. SIGNALS
Advanced Dilemma Zone Detection
Audible Push Button Upgrade
Bicycle Signal/Exclusive Bike Phase
Bike Detection
Extend Green Time For Bikes
Extend Pedestrian Crossing Time
Extend Yellow and All Red Time
Extended Time Pushbutton
Flashing Yellow Turn Phase
Leading Pedestrian Interval and Pedestrian Recall
Pedestrian Countdown Timer
Pedestrian Detection
Pedestrian Scramble
Prohibit Right-Turn-on-Red
Prohibit Turns During Pedestrian Phase
Protected Left Turns
Red Light Camera
Separate Right-Turn Phasing
Shorten Cycle Length
Signal Interconnectivity and Coordination / Green Wave
Signal Preemption
Supplemental Signal Heads
Traffic Signal
Upgrade Signal Head
B. SIGNING AND STRIPING
Advance Stop Bar
Advance Yield Markings
Chevron Signs on Horizontal Curves
Curve Advance Warning Sign
Flashing Beacon as Advance Warning
LED-Enhanced Sign
Painted Centerline and Raised Pavement Markers at Curves
Pavement Speed Legends
Prohibit Left Turn
Striping Through Intersection
Time-Based Turn Restriction
Upgrade Intersection Pavement Markings
Upgrade Signs with Fluorescent Sheeting
Upgrade Striping
Upgrade to Larger Warning Signs
Wayfinding
Yield To Pedestrians Sign
D. PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Add Sidewalk
Co-Locate Bus Stops and Pedestrian Crossings
Curb Extensions
High-Visibility Crosswalk
Install/Upgrade Pedestrian Crossing at Uncontrolled Locations
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon
Restripe Crosswalk
Shared Use Path
Widen Sidewalk
F. SPEED MANAGEMENT
G. OTHER ENGINEERING STRATEGIES
Appropriate Speed Limits
Chicane
Landscape Buffer
Lane Narrowing
Speed Cameras
Speed Feedback Sign
Speed Sensitive Rest on Red
Variable Speed Limits
Access Management/Close Driveway
Create or Increase Clear Zone
Far-Side Bus Stop
Intersection Lighting
Relocate Select Hazardous Utility Poles
Remove Obstructions For Sightlines
Segment Lighting
Upgrade Lighting to LED
C. BIKEWAYS
Bicycles May Use Full Lane Sign
Bike Lane/Buffered/Separated Bike Lane
Floating Transit Island
Mixing Zone
Parking Buffer
Separated Bikeway
Two-Stage Turn Queue Bike Box
E. INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAYS
All-Way Stop Control
Bicycle Crossing (Solid Green Paint)
Bike Box
Centerline Hardening
Close Slip Lane
Crosswalk Density
Curb-Return Radius Reduction
Delineators, Reflectors, and/or Object Markers
Directional Median Openings to Restrict Left Turns
Doubled-up, Oversized Stop Signs
Enhanced Daylighting/Slow Turn Wedge
Extend Bike Lane to Intersection
Gateway Treatments
Green Conflict Striping
Guardrail
Hardened Median Nose Extension
High Friction Surface Treatment
Impact Attenuators
Intersection Reconstruction and Tightening
Lane Repurposing
Median Barrier
On-Street Parking
Paint and Plastic Median
Paint and Plastic Mini Circle/Mini Roundabout
Partial Closure/Diverter
Protected Intersection
Raised Crosswalk
Raised Intersection
Raised Median
Reduced Left-Turn Conflict Intersection
Refuge Island
Retroreflective Signal Backplates
Roundabout
Rumble Strips
Safety Edge
Speed Hump, Speed Table or Speed Cushion
Straighten Crosswalk
Superelevation at Horizontal Curve Locations
Widen/Pave Shoulder
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
12
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
13
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Under the signal timing and phasing category, strategies relate to changing signal timing based on local context, such as extending the
pedestrian time if there are large volumes of pedestrians, or if pedestrians are not able to cross the intersection within the time allotted.
Extending yellow and red time can help clear the intersection and reduce the potential for red light running. Additional signal heads
can increase visibility. In locations where there are high pedestrian and bicycle volumes, right-turning vehicles may not be able to turn
when they have a green light due to pedestrians in the crosswalk. Providing a separate right-turn phase could help clear right-turning
vehicles and reduce conflicts with pedestrians.
Sometimes giving people walking a head start can make them more visible to people driving. Installing a new traffic signal or
pedestrian signal can help allocate the right-of-way, reduce conflicting movements, and provide pedestrians a protected crossing. In
heavy pedestrian areas, installing a pedestrian scramble where all vehicles must stop, and pedestrians can cross diagonally can be a
more efficient way to operate the intersection and reduce vehicle conflicts with pedestrians. Pedestrian recall provides a WALK signal
each cycle without pedestrians having to push buttons.
Other strategies such as converting permissive lefts to protected lefts (at least when the pedestrian crossing is activated) can be
highly effective in reducing conflicts with pedestrians. Reducing cycle length can decrease pedestrian delay which can reduce the
occurrence of pedestrians crossing against the signal and red-light running.
Strategies included in this section are:
A. Signals
2. Audible Push Button Upgrade
3. Bicycle Signal/Exclusive Bike Phase
4. Bike Detection
5. Extend Green Time For Bikes
6. Extend Pedestrian Crossing Time
7. Extend Yellow and All Red Time
8. Extended Time Pushbutton
9. Flashing Yellow Turn Phase
10. Leading Pedestrian Interval and Pedestrian Recall
11. Pedestrian Countdown Timer
12. Pedestrian Detection
13. Pedestrian Scramble
14. Prohibit Right-Turn-on-Red
15. Prohibit Turns During Pedestrian Phase
16. Protected Left Turns
17. Red Light Camera
18. Separate Right-Turn Phasing
19. Shorten Cycle Length
20. Signal Interconnectivity and Coordination / Green Wave
21. Signal Preemption
22. Supplemental Signal Heads
23. Traffic Signal
24. Upgrade Signal Head
1. Advanced Dilemma Zone Detection
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
14
A. SIGNALS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
15
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASUREA. SIGNALS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
16
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASUREA. SIGNALS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
17
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASUREA. SIGNALS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
18
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASUREA. SIGNALS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
19
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASUREA. SIGNALS
Home
Home
Home
Home
20
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
21
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Installing additional signs and pavement markings can be a low-cost way to improve safety outcomes. However, to be effective, they
often need to be implemented with other roadway modifications for maximum effectiveness, and sign clutter should be avoided. These
types of projects can often be implemented with planned Resurfacing, Restoration and Rehabilitation (RRR) projects.
B. Signing and Striping
1. Advance Stop Bar
2. Advance Yield Markings
3. Chevron Signs on Horizontal Curves
4. Curve Advance Warning Sign
5. Flashing Beacon as Advance Warning
6. LED-Enhanced Sign
7. Painted Centerline and Raised Pavement Markers at Curves
8. Pavement Speed Legends
9. Prohibit Left Turn
10. Striping Through Intersection
11. Time-Based Turn Restriction
12. Upgrade Intersection Pavement Markings
13. Upgrade Signs with Fluorescent Sheeting
14. Upgrade Striping
15. Upgrade to Larger Warning Signs
16. Wayfinding
17. Yield To Pedestrians Sign
Strategies included in this section are:
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
22
B. SIGNING AND STRIPING
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
23
B. SIGNING AND STRIPING
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
24
B. SIGNING AND STRIPING
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
25
B. SIGNING AND STRIPING
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
26
B. SIGNING AND STRIPING
Home
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
27
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
In the MetroPlan Orlando region, people bicycling are overrepresented in collisions where someone is seriously injured or killed.
Providing dedicated space for cyclists separate from high-speed vehicle traffic can improve safety outcomes. Where dedicated space
cannot be provided or there is a high density of conflict areas such as driveways or side streets, managing vehicle speeds, increasing
visibility, and improving the predictability of roadway users can help to manage and reduce those conflicts and is critical to improving
safety outcomes.
One of the most effective measures is a dedicated pathway separate from vehicle travel. While bike lanes may help to reduce the
potential for a collision by making drivers aware of the likely presence of bicyclists, they are not as effective as a separate path with
minimal conflicts with side-streets or driveways especially on higher speed roadways. People bicycling are particularly vulnerable in
conflict zones.
Some countermeasures aim to increase cyclist visibility in conflict zones and provide clear direction to other roadway users. In areas
where there is constrained right-of-way, signing and pavement markings can be effective. However, like most strategies these are
context specific. For example, shared lane markings are appropriate on roadways with vehicle travel speeds of less than 25 mph and
daily traffic volumes of less than 2,000. As speeds and traffic volumes increase, additional separation should be provided between
vehicles and cyclists. The strategies below assume that other roadway design elements are incorporated to manage vehicle speeds to
an appropriate level for the proposed bicycle facility.
Strategies included in this section are:
C. Bikeways
1. Bicycles May Use Full Lane Sign
2. Bike Lane/Buffered/Separated Bike Lane
3. Floating Transit Island
4. Mixing Zone
5. Parking Buffer
6. Separated Bikeway
7. Two-Stage Turn Queue Bike Box
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
28
C. BIKEWAYS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
29
C. BIKEWAYS
Home
Home
Home
30
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
31
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
People walking are also overrepresented in collisions in the MetroPlan Orlando region where someone is killed or seriously injured.
Providing more visible and frequent marked and controlled crossings, decreasing pedestrian crossing distance, and extending the
amount of time to cross the street can help to reduce collisions. Many of these strategies also benefit other modes of travel although the
primary benefit is to people walking.
Lighting is also a key element and can improve the visibility of all roadway users. Pedestrian detection can be used at trail crossings
where users might not activate the crossing signal. Installing a median barrier can be a way to discourage pedestrian crossings,
however a review of the pedestrian desire lines in the area should be conducted as there may be a reason, such as a bus stop on one
side of the street and a shopping center or apartment complex on the other side. It is unlikely and unrealistic to expect pedestrians to
walk a significant distance out of their way to use a protected crossing, especially in Florida weather. Typically, people are not willing to
walk more than 300 to 400 feet to a crossing and while it may not be practical to install a pedestrian crossing every 600 to 800 feet (such
that you are never farther than 300 to 400 feet from the nearest crossing), other strategies such as relocating a bus stop could also be
part of the solution.
Strategies included in this section are:
D. Pedestrian Facilities
1. Add Sidewalk
2. Co-Locate Bus Stops and Pedestrian Crossings
3. Curb Extensions
4. High-Visibility Crosswalk
5. Install/Upgrade Pedestrian Crossing at Uncontrolled Locations
6. Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
7. Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon
8. Restripe Crosswalk
9. Shared Use Path
10. Widen Sidewalk
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
32
D. PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
33
D. PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
34
D. PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Home Home
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
35
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Changing intersection and roadway design features such as eliminating turn lanes where people driving do not have to stop (sometimes
known as slip lanes) to slow vehicle turning movements, narrowing travel lanes to promote slower speeds, and constructing sidewalks are some
effective methods. Many intersection and roadway design measures may require public outreach and detailed analysis. For example, partially
closing a roadway could result in community concerns about increased traffic on other streets or the need to make improvements at other
locations.
Some improvements such as a protected intersection where setbacks, dedicated lanes, and curbs protect people walking and bicycling, and
force slow turns for people driving, can be expensive and might need to be programmed as a capital improvement project. There are often
opportunities to take advantage of reallocating right-of-way, especially as part of planned resurfacing projects. For instance, lane repurposing
to add/enhance bicycle and pedestrian facilities are good candidates for inclusion with other planned roadway projects. For many of the
roadway design changes noted below, there are opportunities for cost savings when incorporated as part of routine maintenance projects, like
resurfacing.
E. Intersections and Roadways
1. All-Way Stop Control
2. Bicycle Crossing (Solid Green Paint)
3. Bike Box
4. Centerline Hardening
5. Close Slip Lane
6. Crosswalk Density
7. Curb-Return Radius Reduction
8. Delineators, Reflectors, and/or Object Markers
9. Directional Median Openings to Restrict Left Turns
10. Doubled-up, Oversized Stop Signs
11. Enhanced Daylighting/Slow Turn Wedge
12. Extend Bike Lane to Intersection
13. Gateway Treatments
14. Green Conflict Striping
15. Guardrail
16. Hardened Median Nose Extension
17. High Friction Surface Treatment
18. Impact Attenuators
19. Intersection Reconstruction and Tightening
20. Lane Repurposing
21. Median Barrier
22. On-Street Parking
23. Paint and Plastic Median
24. Paint and Plastic Mini Circle/Mini Roundabout
25. Partial Closure/Diverter
26. Protected Intersection
27. Raised Crosswalk
28. Raised Intersection
29. Raised Median
30. Reduced Left-Turn Conflict Intersection
31. Refuge Island
32. Retroreflective Signal Backplates
33. Roundabout
34. Rumble Strips
35. Safety Edge
36. Speed Hump, Speed Table or Speed Cushion
37. Straighten Crosswalk
38. Superelevation at Horizontal Curve Locations
39. Widen/Pave Shoulder
Strategies included in this section are:
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
36
E. INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAYS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
37
E. INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAYS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
38
E. INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAYS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
39
E. INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAYS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
40
E. INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAYS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
41
E. INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAYS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
42
E. INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAYS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
43
E. INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAYS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
44
E. INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAYS
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
45
E. INTERSECTIONS AND ROADWAYS
Home
Home
Home
46
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
47
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Speed is an overarching contributing factor to many fatal and serious-injury crashes across all collision types in the region, with most
fatal and severe injury crashes occurring on high-speed roadways. Therefore, a focus of engineering countermeasures is context
appropriate speeds. A variety of proven techniques can be applied to reduce travel speed that are also considered as cross cutting
strategies:
• Lane Repurposing – Reallocating the right-of-way to serve all roadway users can result in a reduction in the number of travel lanes
on a street, which can enable the slowest driver to set the operating speed on a street, rather than the fastest driver. (See discussion
in intersection and roadways)
• Traffic calming – Vertical devices such as speed humps and speed tables, horizontal devices such as bulbouts, chicanes, or mini
traffic circles/roundabouts all have documented speed-reduction effects. These treatments are typically limited to local and
collector roads, but sometimes are installed on arterial roadways depending on the context. (Traffic calming measures, such as
speed humps and raised intersections are provided in the intersection and roadways section)
• Signal Coordination – Traffic signal coordination to maintain desired operating speeds along corridors. This strategy can reduce
the incentive for people to drive more than the posted speed limit between intersections as it removes the potential for travel time
savings. (See discussion in signals)
• Realigning skewed intersections – Broad, wide-radius turns can be made at high speeds. Tighter turns, closer to 90 degrees with a
small radius are made at lower speeds. This strategy can also have the added benefit of reducing intersection crossing distances
and increasing overall visibility. (See discussion in intersection and roadways)
• Reducing travel lane widths – Narrower travel lanes encourage lower vehicle speeds. Recent updates to the American Association
of State Highway Transportation Official’s (AASHTO) A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets included allowances for
narrow travel lanes in recognition of safety research that showed little or no difference in crash history in a variety of contexts.
• Roundabouts – By introducing horizontal deflection onto otherwise straight roadways, roundabouts can reduce operating
speeds. Additionally, roundabouts have proven safety benefits compared to standard intersections. (See information related to
roundabouts in Intersection and roadway design)
Strategies included in this section are:
F. Speed Management
2. Chicane
3. Landscape Buffer
4. Lane Narrowing
5. Speed Cameras
6. Speed Feedback Sign
7. Speed Sensitive Rest on Red
8. Variable Speed Limits
1. Appropriate Speed Limits
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
48
F. SPEED MANAGEMENT
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
49
F. SPEED MANAGEMENT
Home
Home
Home
Home
50
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
51
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Several other strategies are not focused on a singular mode and can benefit all roadway users. For example, consolidating driveways
and improving lighting can benefit all roadway users. Curbside management is most commonly needed in urban areas where there
is high competition for curb space, where effective management strategies can reduce passenger loading from travel lanes, reduce
double parked delivery vehicles, and increase transit reliability.
G. Other Engineering Strategies
1. Access Management/Close Driveway
2. Create or Increase Clear Zone
3. Far-Side Bus Stop
4. Intersection Lighting
5. Relocate Select Hazardous Utility Poles
6. Remove Obstructions For Sightlines
7. Segment Lighting
8. Upgrade Lighting to LED
Strategies included in this section are:
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
52
G. OTHER ENGINEERING STRATEGIES
Home
Home
Home
Home
FHWA PROVEN SAFETY COUNTERMEASURE
53
G. OTHER ENGINEERING STRATEGIES
Home
Home
Home
Home
54
VISION ZERO CENTRAL FLORIDA
55
Engineering Countermeasures Toolkit
Appendix A - Cost Estimate Details
Primary Safe System
Strategy
Secondary Safe System
Strategy (if applicable)
Countermeasure Cost Considerations Cost Estimate Range
Remove severe
conflicts
Enforcing feature to
slow traffic
Roundabout/Mini
Roundabout
Extent of overall roadway reconstruction,
drainage, landscaping and pedestrian
amenities can affect overall cost. Does
not include Right of Way.
"Neighborhood: $25-
100K
Collector: $150-$250k
Arterial: $250k+
Multilane: $500k+"
Remove severe
conflicts
Enforcing feature to
slow traffic Mini Traffic Circle Drainage, landscaping and pedestrian
amenities can affect overall cost. $8,000-$15,000
Remove severe
conflicts -
Sidewalk Network
Enhancements (close
gaps)
Does not include utility relocation/
drainage.
$226,150/mile (5' one
side, 4" depth)
Remove severe
conflicts
Increase attentiveness
and awareness
Corridor Access
Management
Cost varies depending on strategies,
such as median construction, closing/
reconfiguring driveways, etc.
Varies
Remove severe
conflicts
Increase attentiveness
and awareness Median U-turn
Costs of the lower end of range if a minor
modification; costs on the upper end of
the range roadway if reconstruction is
required.
$50,000-$1,000,000
Remove severe
conflicts -Shared Use Path
Depending on number of driveways,
additional treatments may be necessary
to increase visibility of people on path
at conflict locations. May require right-
of-way, drainage improvements, and a
landscaping plan.
$410,483/mile, 12' path,
bidirectional
Remove severe
conflicts -Buffered/Separated
Bike Lanes
Cost of Paint Only; other treatments may
be needed. $11.50/sf
Remove severe
conflicts -Median Barriers
Depends on materials selected - cable
barrier can be about a third of the cost as
a concrete barrier
$10,000-20,000 per
100 ft
-High Friction Surface
Treatment
Depends on the overall composition of
the overlay.
$42,000-$190,000/lane/
mile
Manage speed -Appropriate Speed
Limits
Cost considerations include engineering
study to target speed, identifying
appropriate countermeasures to achieve
desired speed, and implementing
engineering countermeasures as
applicable.
Varies
Manage speed Enforcing feature to
slow traffic Speed Cameras
Depends on existing infrastructure
along corridor. Currently these are only
allowed in school zones and upgrades to
school zone extents, signage and other
equipment may be necessary. Does not
include educational outreach campaign
costs.
$60,000-$80,000
56
APPENDIX A - COST ESTIMATE DETAILS
Primary Safe System
Strategy
Secondary Safe System
Strategy (if applicable)
Countermeasure Cost Considerations Cost Estimate Range
Manage speed -Variable Speed Limits
Often implemented as part of a TSMO
program; cost for signage only. Should
roadway reconstruction be required, cost
could be significantly higher.
$25,000-$30,000/mile
Manage speed Enforcing feature to
slow traffic Speed Hump Drainage could affect overall cost. $1,500-5,500
Manage speed Enforcing feature to
slow traffic Speed Table Drainage could affect overall cost. $2,000-20,000
Manage speed Enforcing feature to
slow traffic Chicanes Drainage could affect overall cost. $2,500-16,000
Manage speed -Curb-Return Radius
Reduction
Drainage and ADA requirements could
affect overall cost. $15,000-40,000
Manage speed Increase attentiveness
and awareness Raised Crossing Drainage and ADA requirements could
affect overall cost. $39,000 - $45,500
Manage speed Increase attentiveness
and awareness Raised Intersection Drainage and ADA requirements could
affect overall cost. $106,500 - $124,000
Manage speed Enforcing feature to
slow traffic Lane Narrowing
Based on cost to mill and restripe roadway
to provide marked parking. Actual cost
could be lower if milling and resurfacing
are not required.
$334,500/lane/mile
Manage speed Enforcing feature to
slow traffic Landscape Buffer
Maintenance plan for landscaping
may need to be developed. Cost
considerations include right-of-way,
drainage, irrigation, and maintenance.
Varies
Manage speed Manage conflicts Signal Retiming
Depends on existing signal hardware/
software and if it is implemented as part
of a larger retiming program.
$0-$5,440
Manage speed Manage conflicts Lane Repurposing
Cost could be significantly higher if
curbs are being moved and drainage is
affected.
$334,500/lane/mile
Manage speed -Corner Radius
Reduction
Drainage and ADA requirements can
affect overall cost. $15,000-40,000
Manage speed Increase attentiveness
and awareness Curb Extension
Materials (concrete vs asphalt),
landscaping, drainage, ADA
requirements, and extent of other
required roadway changes can affect
overall cost; cost is for one corner; may be
economies of scale if constructed at all
corners of the intersection.
$2,000-20,000
Manage conflicts
in time
Increase attentiveness
and awareness Crosswalk Density
If new RRFBs or other treatments are being
considered, please consult those items for
cost.
$100 for a regular
striped cross-walk,
$300 for a ladder
crosswalk and $3,000
for patterned concrete
crosswalk.
Manage conflicts
in time
Increase attentiveness
and awareness
Medians and Pedestrian
Refuge Islands
Materials (concrete vs asphalt),
landscaping, drainage, ADA
requirements, and extent of other
required roadway changes can affect
overall cost; cost is for one refuge; may
be economies of scale if constructed
at multiple locations along the same
corridor.
$10,000-$40,000
57
APPENDIX A - COST ESTIMATE DETAILS
Primary Safe System
Strategy
Secondary Safe System
Strategy (if applicable)
Countermeasure Cost Considerations Cost Estimate Range
Manage conflicts
in time
Increase attentiveness
and awareness Median Nose Extension
Cost can very significantly depending on
linear feet, materials (paint vs asphalt),
drainage requirements, ADA requirements
and other site specific factors. Cost is per
leg.
$500-20,000
Manage conflicts
in time -Leading Pedestrian
Intervals (LPI)
Depends on existing signal hardware/
software and if it is implemented as part
of a larger retiming program.
$0-$5,440
Manage conflicts
in time -No Right Turn on Red
blank-out signs
Cost depends on existing signal
hardware/ software. Cost per sign. $4,500-$15,000
Manage conflicts
in time -Pedestrian Hybrid
Beacons (PHBs)
Depends on the size of crossing, type of
mast arm required, and other site specific
features.
$75,000-$265,000/unit
Manage conflicts
in time -
Rectangular Rapid
Flashing Beacons
(RRFBs)
Solar powered units can reduce
cost of running electricity. Costs only
include RRFB system. If implemented in
conjunction with high visibility crosswalks,
median refuge and other elements, costs
would be higher.
$4,500-$52,00
Manage conflicts
in time
Increase attentiveness
and awareness
Restricted Crossing
U-turn
Costs of the lower end of range if a minor
modification; costs on the upper end of
the range roadway if reconstruction is
required.
$50,000-$1,000,000
Manage conflicts
in time
Increase attentiveness
and awareness
Hardened Centerlines
and Turn Wedges
Cost depends on selected treatments/
materials, size of intersection and number
of approaches where countermeasure is
installed. Cost is per approach.
$1,000 - $2,000
Manage conflicts
in time -Retime Signals: Yellow
Change Intervals
Depends on existing signal hardware/
software and if it is implemented as part
of a larger retiming program.
$0-$5,440
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
Enforcing feature to
slow traffic Gateway Treatments Cost depends on extent of treatments $10,000-65,000
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-High Visibility Crosswalk Depends on the size the size the
crosswalk, and the paint used. $600-5,700
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-Bike Box Cost of Paint Only; other treatments may
be needed. $11.50/sf
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-Lighting
Cost depends on a number of variables,
including type of fixtures, frequency of
lighting,, and presence of electricity in
corridor.
Varies
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-Improving Sight Lines
Cost depends on type of strategy, such
as landscaping maintenance, closing of
slip lanes, removal of on-street parking or
straightening of crosswalk.
Varies
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-Backplates with
Retroreflective Borders
A structural/wind analysis should be
conducted.
"$35/head to add
reflective tape to
existing backplates
$110/head to install
new backplates
with integrated
retroreflective material"
58
APPENDIX A - COST ESTIMATE DETAILS
Primary Safe System
Strategy
Secondary Safe System
Strategy (if applicable)Countermeasure Cost Considerations Cost Estimate Range
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-Enhanced Signing and
Pavement Markings
Cost depends on the types of signage
and pavement marking treatments.
$800 - $1,300 per
location
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
Remove conflicts Bicycle Lanes
Enhancements
Cost depends on the range of treatments
applied and if right-of-way is needed. Varies
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-Refresh pavement
markings
Overall cost per location can be reduced
when implemented along a corridor or
areawide.
$22-600 each ($180
avg)
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-
Doubled-up (left
and right), oversized
advance intersection
warning signs, with
supplemental street
name plaques (can
also include flashing
beacon).
Flashing beacon cost is not included. $50-150/sign
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-Retroreflective sheeting
on sign posts.Depends on size of sign. $50-250/sign
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-
Enhanced pavement
markings that delineate
through lane edge lines.
Overall cost per location can be reduced
when implemented along a corridor or
areawide.
$1-10/linear foot
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-
Doubled-up (left and
right), oversized Stop
signs.
Can also be paired with flashing beacons
that are not included in cost estimate. $50-150/sign
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-Properly placed stop
bar / Advance stop bar Not limited to stop control intersections. $500
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-
Removal of vegetation,
parking, or obstructions
that limit sight distance.
Similar to improving sight-lines. Cost can
vary depending on elements included. Varies
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-
Double arrow warning
sign at stem of
T-intersections.
Depends on size of sign. $50-150/sign
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-
Chevron Signs for
Horizontal Curves
or other advanced
delineation.
Can be paired with other treatments, like
rumble strips.$1-10/linear foot
Increase
attentiveness and
awareness
-
Longitudinal Rumble
Strips and Stripes on
Two-Lane Roads
Best when implemented as part of
an overall resurfacing project for cost
effectiveness.
$5000-$6,000/mile
Enforcing feature to
slow traffic -Mobile Speed
Feedback Signs
Solar powered units can reduce cost of
running electricity. $7,000-18,000
Enforcing feature to
slow traffic -On-Street Parking
Based on cost to mill and restripe roadway
to provide marked parking. Actual cost
could be lower if milling and resurfacing
are not required.
$334,500/lane/mile
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
K- Project Details
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
K- Project Details
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
L- Prioritization Criteria
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
L- Prioritization Criteria
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
Memorandum
Introduction
A core element of Vision Zero Action Plans is Project Delivery where decision-makers and system
designers advance projects and policies for safe, equitable multimodal travel by securing funding
and implementing projects, prioritizing roadways with the most pressing safety issues. As part of the
Regional Vision Zero Action Plan, transportation safety countermeasures will be identified for the top
30 high injury network (HIN) segments, identified using the Safety Score, which is calculated based on
the total number of crashes, the highest level of injury sustained in each crash, and the travel mode
of victims. As a part of the County and jurisdictional action plans being prepared concurrently,
transportation safety countermeasures will also be identified for their top corridors.
This document outlines the process to develop criteria that can be used to prioritize roadway
improvements that have transportation safety benefits. The criteria will be used to identify projects to
incorporate into the typical MetroPlan Orlando project funding process through the Metropolitan
Transportation Plan (MTP), as well as select projects that could be a part of a regional
implementation grant application through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets and
Roads for All (SS4A) grant program. This document summarizes prioritization criteria used by MetroPlan
Orlando on other planning projects and presents Vision Zero Action Plan prioritization criteria.
Existing Criteria
As the regional planning agency, MetroPlan Orlando has developed evaluation criteria based on
goals articulated in the 2045 MTP to prioritize transportation system improvements. Most recently, a
prioritization process was completed for the Prioritized Project List (PPL) and the Active Transportation
Plan (ATP) project. The criteria from the PPL is summarized in Table 1 and the criteria from the ATP
project is summarized in Table 2, along with its potential applicability to the regional Vision Zero
Action Plan as the criteria used for Vision Zero project prioritization should have some alignment with
the criteria used for other regional planning purposes. Based on the review, all criteria used in the PPL
and ATP prioritization processes have some applicability to Vision Zero.
Date: April 26, 2024
To: Vision Zero Central Florida Partners
From: Mighk Wilson, MetroPlan Orlando
Kathrin Tellez, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Vision Zero Central Florida – Project Prioritization
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 2 of 15
Table 1: Prioritized Project List Evaluation Criteria and Applicability to Vision Zero Action Plan
Goal Area / Weight PPL Evaluation
Criteria
Applicable to
Vision Zero Notes
Safety and Security /
33%
Crash Rate Yes
Improving safety is the primary goal of the
Vision Zero Action Plan.
Fatal & Serious Injury
Crash Rates Yes
Number of
Pedestrian & Bicycle
Crashes
Yes
Evacuation Route
Designation Yes
Potential changes on designated evacuation
routes would need to be reviewed to assess if
changes could negatively affect the
evacuation process.
Reliability and
Performance / 13%
Travel Time Reliability
(Auto) Yes While safety projects can reduce crashes,
thereby reducing non-recurring congestion
and increasing auto travel time reliability, these
metrics are traditionally focused on congestion
relief projects. As these metrics are not
included as a part of the Vision Zero Action
Plan, these effects may be best measured as
part of the Congestion Management Process
(CMP) or other auto-focused study.
Unreliability on
Constrained Corridor Yes
Fiber Optic Presence Yes
Segment Actively
Monitored/Managed Yes
Relative Change:
Future Congested
Speeds
Yes
Access &
Connectivity / 27%
Transit System
Headways Yes
Safety projects in areas with a high density of
destinations have the potential to benefit
multiple trip types.
Population: ½ Mile of
Non-Transit Corridor Yes
Jobs: ½ Mile of Non-
Transit Corridor Yes
Food & Healthcare
Locations: ½ Mile of
Corridor
Yes
Cultural &
Recreational
Locations: ½ Mile of
Corridor
Yes
MTP Centrality
Analysis Score
(Critical Sidewalk
Need)
Yes Closing sidewalk gaps could improve safety
outcomes.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 3 of 15
Goal Area / Weight PPL Evaluation
Criteria
Applicable to
Vision Zero Notes
Health &
Environment / 7%
Bicycle Level of
Traffic Stress (LTS) Yes
Projects that improve the bicycle level of traffic
stress would either have a separation
component (such as a shared use path) or a
speed reduction element. Would need to bring
LTS into the analysis.
Residential Density: ¼
Mile of Multimodal
Facility
Yes
Projects in areas with a high density of
destinations have the potential to benefit
multiple trip types.
Non-Residential
Density: ¼ Mile of
Multimodal Facility
Yes
Projects in areas with a high density of
destinations have the potential to benefit
multiple trip types.
Public Health
Indicator Rates Yes
While safety projects are likely to improve
public health outcomes, this can be difficult to
measure.
Intensity & Proximity:
Environmental
Justice Populations
Yes Safety projects can improve mobility choices
for Environmental Justice populations.
Relative Change:
Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) (2020
vs. 2045)
Yes
A reduction in VMT on a per capita basis could
reduce per capita crash exposure. While safety
projects and providing other transportation
options are likely to reduce vehicle miles of
travel on a per capita basis, this can be difficult
to measure.
Investment &
Economy / 20%
Percentage of
Commercial Vehicle
Traffic
Yes Transportation safety projects on truck routes
may need additional considerations.
Statewide Truck
Bottlenecks Yes Reducing or eliminating truck bottlenecks
could have a safety benefit.
Intensity & Proximity:
Freight Intensive
Land Uses
Yes
Transportation safety projects in the vicinity of
freight intensive land uses may need additional
considerations.
Relative Change:
Vehicle Hours
Traveled
Yes
A reduction in total vehicle hours of travel
could reduce crash exposure and improve
crash outcomes.
Cost Burdened
Households: ¼ Mile
of Corridor
Yes Safety projects can improve mobility choices
for cost burdened households.
Percentage of Visitor
Traffic Yes
Transportation safety projects in high visitor
areas may need additional considerations, like
wayfinding.
Cost of Congestion Yes Safety projects can reduce non-recurring
congestion caused by traffic crashes.
Source: MetroPlan Orlando; Fehr & Peers, 2024
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 4 of 15
Table 2: Active Transportation Plan Evaluation Criteria and Applicability to Vision Zero Action
Plan
Goal Area / Weight ATP Evaluation Criteria Applicable to
Vision Zero Notes
Transportation
Disadvantaged /
Historically
Underserved Areas1 /
15%
Meets 4 or 5 of the ETC1 Criteria or
in an area with > 18% of
households identified as Zero Car
Households
Yes
The effects of traffic crashes
disproportionately affect
people who live in
transportation disadvantaged
communities.
Meets 2 or 3 of the ETC Criteria or
in an area with ≥ 12% of
households identified as Zero Car
Households
Meets 1 of the ETC Criteria or in an
area with ≥ 6. 3% of households
identified as Zero Car Households
Bicycle and
Pedestrian Safety /
30%
More than 5 crashes involving a
person walking or biking or any
pedestrian / bicycle fatalities
Yes
Improving safety outcomes is a
key goal of the Vision Zero
Action Plan, but not limited to
bicyclists and pedestrians.
4 - 5 bike/ped crashes
2 - 3 bike/ped crashes
1 bike/ped crash
Accessibility and
Connectivity,
Comfort4
Percent improvement in walking
access to destinations Yes
Safety projects in areas with a
high density of destinations
have the potential to benefit
multiple trip types. However,
these criteria may be difficult
to consistently measure across
the region. Would need to
bring LTS into the analysis.
Percent improvement in biking
access to destinations. Yes
Number of people for whom
access is improved for walking
trips.
Yes
Number of people for whom
access is improved for biking trips. Yes
New or improved PLOC2 for a
walking facility Yes
New or improved LTS3 for a biking
facility Yes
Jurisdictional
Significance
Qualitative low/medium/high
ranking by local jurisdiction on the
proposed project’s local
significance
Yes This factors local preferences
and priorities.
Regional Impact Facility eligible for inclusion in the
SunTrail or Coast to Coast Network No
1. Additional information can be found on the US DOT Equitable Transportation Community (ETC) Explorer website:
https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/equity/justice40/etc-explorer
2. PLOC = Pedestrian Level of Comfort
3. LTS = Level of Traffic Stress
4. See Active Transportation Plan for additional details on how accessibility was evaluated.
Source: MetroPlan Orlando; Fehr & Peers, 2024
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 5 of 15
Draft Vision Zero Prioritization Criteria
Based on the priorities identified by the MetroPlan Orlando Board in various MetroPlan Orlando policy
documents, the goals of the Vision Zero Action Plan and the criteria used in other recent projects,
such as the Active Transportation Plan, an initial set of prioritization criteria was developed and
shared with the Regional Task Force for feedback. Initial feedback from the Task Force was
incorporated into an updated set of draft prioritization criteria that was then discussed with a subset
of key stakeholders, including the consultant teams working on county and local plans, as well as
representatives from Orange, Osceola and Seminole counties.
Potential evaluation criteria presented in Table 3 primarily focus on safety and transportation
disadvantage, with some additional prioritization criteria to consider, such as incorporation of the
Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) proven safety countermeasures, potential effectiveness,
and regional impact. Some criteria presented in Table 3 may be more applicable for a local agency
to include as a part of their plan to differentiate between projects. Key considerations for each of the
potential criteria include ease of analysis and replicability of the prioritization are provided to help
inform the selection of the final prioritization criteria.
Table 3: Potential Evaluation Criteria Regional Vision Zero Action Plan
Performance Indicator Description Scoring Considerations
Transportation Underserv
Communities
Meets 4 or 5 of the ETC
Criteria
The effects of traffic crashes
disproportionately affect people who live in
transportation underserved communities.
These criteria will also be a factor in future
SS4A applications. However, this factor may
not be relevant for state funding sources. As
more than 50% of the HIN is through a
transportation underserved community,
disadvantage is accounted for in some of the
other potential prioritization criteria. This data
is readily available for all roadways in the
region and can be consistently measured. The
ETC criteria measure different aspects of
transportation disadvantage and there are
opportunities for jurisdictions to weigh different
criteria as part of a local prioritization process,
if desired.
Meets 2 or 3 of the ETC
Criteria
Meets 1 of the ETC Criteria
Safety Score
Divide scores into quartiles,
with the highest quartile
receiving all points, second
quartile receiving 75% of
points, etc.
e Safety Score was the basis of the HIN/Top
Intersection identification and weights crashes
including people outside a vehicle higher
than car and truck occupants. This data is
readily available for all roadways in the region
and can be consistently measured.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 6 of 15
Performance Indicator Description Scoring Considerations
Do proposed
improvements include
FHWA’s proven safety
countermeasures?
Points allocated based on a
proportion of project that
includes proven safety
countermeasures.
A focus on only FHWA proven safety
countermeasures could limit application of
innovative approaches as well as other
countermeasures that have a proven crash
reduction benefit. However, use of these
proven strategies could result in projects that
are eligible for additional funding sources. Use
of this performance indicator would need to
identify a method to consistently evaluate
potential safety benefit of projects for
comparison purposes.
Reduction in Target Speed/
Design Speed (for segment
improvements)
Points allocated based on
reduction in Target Speed.
Points would be allocated based on overall
reduction in Target Speed within the
allowable range for the context classification/
designation; projects with target speed
already at the lowest end of the range would
receive full points. At a planning stage, there
may be insufficient information to set target
speed that can be kept throughout the
entirety of the planning, design and
construction process. For new roadways,
points could potentially be allocated on a
sliding scale depending on target speed and
context (100% for target speed at lowest end
of allowable range).
Number of KSI crashes per
mile linked to the safety
concern that the
countermeasure addresses.
Scaled point application
based on the highest to
lowest.
This criterion was in the 2023 SS4A Grant
application. The criteria would ensure that
identified improvements have a connection
to the crashes on a corridor.
Project is on multiple high
injury networks.
Scaled point application
based on the overlap of
networks, with a 100%
overlap receiving all points.
A project on both the regional HIN and a
county HIN, or county HIN and a local HIN
would potentially have regional and local
significance that could make it a good
candidate for SS4A funding. This data is readily
available and could measure the potential
regional impact of an improvement.
Road already has planned
improvements
Scaled point application
based on level of planning/
construction readiness.
Could be an opportunity to leverage already
committed funds to accelerate project
delivery. May be difficult to measure
consistently.
Would the proposed
project provide secondary
benefits to the community?
This performance standard
would prioritize projects that
could have co-benefits, such
as providing reciprocal
access that reduces trips on
the regional network or
creates a new connection
between land uses.
The metric could include a discussion of land
uses, surrounding community characteristics
with clear connection to proposed
improvement, and includes community input
and support received. May be difficult to
measure consistently at the regional scale.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 7 of 15
Performance Indicator Description Scoring Considerations
Project includes vehicular
capacity increasing
elements.
Scaled point application
based on the amount of
vehicle capacity provided,
with no additional capacity
receiving 100% of points.
This performance indicator could penalize
projects in rapidly growing areas where
roadway expansions are needed to
accommodate growth and have been
planned for. To support development of safer
streets in growing communities, criteria could
include considerations for roadways
developed with low Target Speeds that
incorporate appropriate bicycling and
pedestrian facilities for the context, frequent
crossing locations, street lighting and other
features that are shown to promote
transportation safety. Could include
considerations for providing new parallel
facilities rather than widening existing
corridors. Converting a conventional
intersection to a roundabout would not count
as adding capacity.
Improvements include low
cost/quick build
improvements of proven
effectiveness
Points could be allocated
based on how quickly
improvements could be
implemented (0-2 years, 2-5
and beyond 5 years)
One of the goals of SS4A is the
implementation of low cost / quick build
strategies. These should be implemented at a
number of locations as there could be
significant administrative costs if only
implemented at a few locations.
Source: MetroPlan Orlando; Fehr & Peers, 2024
Based on the considerations presented in Table 3, initial prioritization criteria, feedback from the Task
Force, and focused conversations with stakeholders, prioritization criteria were developed and goal
area weights established, as presented in Table 4. The primary purpose of this criteria is to identify
projects that could be included in a regional SS4A grant application or other safety-focused grant
program. Once projects throughout the region are identified, they will be ranked for prioritization.
High priority safety improvements identified through this process may also be added to the 2050 MTP
or incorporated into an already planned project in the PPL or TIP. Local jurisdictions can also use
these criteria or a modified version for their own project prioritization process. For projects selected for
inclusion in a regional SS4A grant application, additional information will be needed for the grant
application, requiring a greater level of planning than is occurring for this initial screening. Information
related to potential SS4A grant application criteria is provided at the end of this memorandum.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 8 of 15
Table 4: Safety Project Evaluation Criteria Scoring and Weight
Performance Indicator Description Criteria Scoring Goal Area Weight
Safety Score – Corridor
Projects
Source: Signal 4 Analytics,
MetroPlan Orlando HIN
Calculations.
Analysis Notes: Reflects
score weighted on a per
mile basis for corridors. See
notes below for scoring of
intersections.
> 10,424 to 17,478 1.0
50%
> 8,953 to 10,424 0.75
> 6,903 to 8,953 0.50
1,410 to 6,903 0.25
Safety Score –
Intersection Projects
Source: Signal 4 Analytics,
MetroPlan Orlando HIN
Calculations.
> 1,050 to 10,140 1.0
> 299 to 1,050 0.75
> 36 to 299 0.50
1 to 36 0.25
Transportation
Underserved
Source: Regional Equity
Profiles, MetroPlan Orlando.
Analysis Notes: A buffer of
100 feet should be applied
to each corridor to identify if
it is with a census tract that
meets the criteria. For
corridors that cross multiple
census tracts, use data from
census tract that at least
50% of corridor travels
through.
Meets 4 or 5 of the ETC Criteria 1.0
15%
Meets 2 or 3 of the ETC Criteria 0.75
Meets 1 of the ETC Criteria 0.50
Is within the top 50th percentile of
the region but does not meet any
of the ETC Criteria
0.25
Safety Benefit
Notes: Based on the FDOT
context classification
guidelines, where
applicable. Where a context
classification has not been
set, use proposed reduction
in speed or resulting target
speed to determine scoring.
Potential countermeasures
to achieve the desired
target speed would need to
be conceptually identified.
Target Speed set for the lowest
allowable for context classification
or functional classification (corridor
project).
1.0
15%
Project is on a C3C, Principal
Arterial, Minor Arterial, or Major
Collector and includes major
speed reduction elements (corridor
project).
0.75
Project is on a C3C, Principal
Arterial, Minor Arterial, or Major
Collector and includes minor
speed reduction elements (corridor
project).
0.50
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 9 of 15
Performance Indicator Description Criteria Scoring Goal Area Weight
Project includes features that slow
vehicles through an intersection
(roundabout, reduced curb radii,
protected intersection elements,
etc.) (intersection project).
1.0
Project primarily includes elements
that are tied to safety history (such
as lighting, high friction surface
treatment, signal phasing
modifications, outreach/
engagement) (intersection or
corridor project).
1.0
Project is on multiple high
injury networks [Regional,
County (all roads),
County (County roads),
Local (all roads), Local
(local roads) or high-risk
network]
Notes: Overlapping HINs can
be found on
visionzerocfl.gov.
Project is on 2 networks 1.0
10%
Project is on 1 network 0.5
Implementation Timeline
Notes: assessment of
implementation time should
also consider agency
coordination.
Project primarily includes low-cost /
quick build elements, or 1.0
10%
A publicly available concept plan
that included public engagement
has been prepared; or
1.0
At least 50% of project extents are
in an adopted plan that included
public engagement specific to the
project corridor; or
0.75
Project can be completed within
5-years; or 1.0
Project is identified as an unfunded
need in the MTP. 0.5
Source: MetroPlan Orlando; Fehr & Peers, 2024
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 10 of 15
Scoring Guidance
The following provides some scoring guidance to assist in the development of consistent prioritization
scores across the region. The sample calculations are intended to capture a wide range of situations,
but there may be circumstances that were not considered and consultation with MetroPlan Orlando
staff is advised.
For the purposes of scoring guidance, sample projects were developed to serve as examples:
Example Corridor Project 1: Holden Avenue from Rio Grand Avenue S to Lake Holden Hill Drive
(Regional HIN Corridor 31).
Example Project Description: Mark a crosswalk at Almark Drive at Holden Avenue and provide
a raised crosswalk, median refuge and RRFB. Install Speed Feedback signs.
Example Corridor Project 2: Oak Ridge Road from S. Orange Blossom Trail to S Orange Avenue
(Regional HIN Corridor 16).
Example Project Description: Install a raised median and add additional marked and
controlled crossing locations, co-located with transit stops, improve lighting, and incorporate
additional speed management strategies, such as travel lane narrowing. Widen sidewalks
where feasible. Design for a target speed of 35 miles per hour (current posted speed is 45).
Safety Score
The Safety Score was calculated for each corridor and intersection based on the process outlined in
the Regional High Injury Network memorandum dated February 29, 2024, with crash weights assigned
based on the crash severity and if someone outside a car or truck was involved. Safety Scores for
each HIN segment and top intersection are provided on the HIN factsheets developed for each
jurisdiction.
Example Corridor Project 1 (Holden Avenue): This segment has a safety score of 10,402 and
falls into the second quartile of the scoring criteria and is assigned 37.5 points for the Safety
Score criteria (0.75 * 50).
Example Corridor Project 2 (Oak Ridge Avenue): This segment has a safety score of 12,054 and
falls into the first quartile of the scoring criteria and is assigned 50 points for the Safety Score
criteria (1.0 * 50).
Transportation Underserved
Transportation underserved data was developed as a part of the Regional Equity Profiles prepared
by MetroPlan Orlando. A GIS layer with data by census tract is provided on the Vision Zero hub site
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 11 of 15
and at this link: Equity Index_V2 | Tableau Public 1. A buffer of 100 feet should be applied to each
corridor to identify if it is with a census tract that meets the criteria as this will capture roads that might
be on the boundary of a transportation underserved community. For corridors that cross multiple
census tracts, use data from census tract that at least 50 percent of corridor travels through. If the
corridor is within 2 census tracts when considering the 100-foot buffer, use the data for the most
underserved tract.
Example Corridor Project 1 (Holden Avenue): There are four census tracts that touch this
road segment, as shown on Figure 1. Based on a review of the ETC data, data from the
checked census tract should be used as it bounds the longest length of the corridor.
The tract meets 2 of the 5 criteria and would receive 11.25 points for the transportation
undeserved category (0.75 * 15).
Figure 1: Example Corridor 1 ETC Calculations
Example Corridor Project 2 (Oak Ridge Avenue): This segment is adjacent to two
transportation underserved tracts, as shown in Figure 2. One tract meets 4 of the 5 ETC
criteria and the other meets 2 of the 5 criteria. This corridor would be assigned 15 points
for the Transportation Underserved criteria (1.0 * 15), based on using the data from the
most underserved tract.
1 https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/sigal.carmenate/viz/EquityIndex_V2/DisadvantagedIndicator
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 12 of 15
Figure 2: Example Corridor 2 ETC Calculations
Safety Benefit
The scoring for the Safety Benefit category is the most subjective of all the scoring criteria and should
be based on a general description of safety elements that would be included in a corridor project.
While it is understood that specific details might change in the final design, the overall goals of the
project should be noted, such as speed reduction through physical roadway features or low/cost
quick build speed management elements.
Example Corridor Project 1 (Holden Avenue): The project includes minor speed reduction
elements (1 raised crosswalk) and some awareness countermeasures (speed feedback sign).
The speed limit for the roadway is posted at 35 mph and the prevailing speed is 45 miles per
hour based on connected vehicle data. More effective measures are likely needed to
achieve a prevailing travel speed of 35 miles per hour. As the project includes minor speed
reduction elements, it is assigned half the available points for this criterion and is assigned 7.5
points for Safety Benefit (0.5 * 15).
Example Corridor Project 2 (Oak Ridge Avenue): The project includes significant speed
reduction elements and would be designed to achieve a target speed at the lowest
allowable speed for the context classification, which would allow for full points in this category
to be assigned or 15 points for Safety Benefit (1.0 * 15).
Regional Benefit
Projects on multiple HINs are expected to benefit a larger number of people, and these roads are
likely to have more severe safety issues if they are on multiple HINs. The Regional HIN memorandum
identifies the HIN overlap for the 118 regional HIN segments. The Vision Zero hub site has a web map
that identifies all HINs to determine the overlap.
Example Corridor Project 1 (Holden Avenue): This segment is on three High Injury Networks, the
regional HIN, the All-Roads Orange County HIN and the Orange County roads HIN. This
segment would be assigned 10 points for the Regional Benefit criteria (1.0 * 10).
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 13 of 15
Example Corridor Project 2 (Oak Ridge Avenue): This segment is on three High Injury Networks,
the regional HIN, the All-Roads Orange County HIN and the Orange County roads HIN. This
segment would be assigned 10 points for the Regional Benefit criteria (1.0 * 10).
Implementation Timeline
Safety projects do not start to save lives until they are implemented, so prioritizing projects that have
the greatest chance of being implemented within 5-years will provide a greater safety benefit while
more complex projects are planned and designed. For the assessment of if a project can be
completed within 5-years, considerations should be made for projects included in the MTP in the Plan
Period II or III where additional funding could help accelerate the implementation timeframe. For
projects within Plan Period I, is there sufficient time to incorporate additional safety elements into the
design? If a project is about to be constructed or has recently had corridor improvements, the
effectiveness of those improvements should be monitored for a few years after project completion to
assess their effectiveness and relative need for additional countermeasures.
Example Corridor Project 1 (Holden Avenue): A portion of this corridor is identified in the 2045
MTP for an operational / safety project between US 17/92 and S. Orange Avenue with an
estimated cost of $6.5 million in 2020 dollars. This is an unfunded need. While the project is in an
adopted plan that included some level of public engagement, it is likely that the engagement
did not focus on the specific corridor or identify specific needs. However, proposed project
elements include primarily low-cost and quick build elements that could be implemented on a
pilot basis. Therefore, this corridor is assigned 10 points for Implementation Timeline (1.0 * 10).
Should the MTP project be considered for prioritization through this process, the points for this
category would decrease, with the points for the safety benefit potentially increasing.
Example Corridor Project 2 (Oak Ridge Avenue): There is an unfunded project identified for the
entire length of the corridor (MTP Project 7132) that would provide operational and safety
improvements, with an estimated cost of $8 million in 2020 dollars. While the project is in an
adopted plan that included some level of public engagement, it is likely that the engagement
did not focus on the specific corridor or identify specific needs. The project does not primarily
include low cost/quick build elements as significant speed management is needed along the
corridor, including access management. Therefore, this corridor is assigned 5 points for
Implementation Timeline as it is an unfunded need in the 2045 MTP (0.5 * 10).
Table 5 provides a summary of the scoring comparison, which shows that the example Holden
Avenue project would score 76.25 points while the Oak Ridge Avenue project would score 95 points.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 14 of 15
Table 5: Scoring Example Summary
Performance Indicator Example Project 1
(Holden Avenue)
Example Project 2
(Oak Ridge Avenue)
Safety Score – Corridor Projects 37.5 50.0
Safety Score – Intersection Projects1 N/A N/A
Transportation Underserved 11.25 15
Safety Benefit 7.5 15
Regional Benefit 10 10
Implementation Timeline 10 5
Total 76.25 95
1. For an intersection project, the intersection score would replace the corridor score.
Source: MetroPlan Orlando; Fehr & Peers, 2024
SS4A Implementation Grant Criteria
The following summarizes key aspects for the SS4A Implementation Grant criteria based on the 2024
Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO):
• Safety Impact – is the project likely to significantly reduce or eliminate roadway KSIs, employ
low-cost high-impact strategies over a wide geographic area, and include evidence-based
projects and strategies?
• Equity, Engagement and Collaboration – Includes investments in transportation underserved
communities and outreach with a variety of public and private stakeholders.
• Effective Practices and Strategies – Projects are reflective of practices that promote systemic
safety improvements.
• Other USDOT Strategic Goals – Projects also address other goals, such as sustainability and
resilience, and support economic competitiveness.
• Project Readiness – Project can be completed within 5-years; includes outreach,
environmental review, design, all agency approvals, ROW acquisition, all other needed
activities, and construction.
While the funding criteria is likely to change with the 2025 NOFO, implementing agencies will need to
be able to develop narratives and analysis to support the above criteria.
Next Steps
A rubric for tracking of projects on the regional, county and local roads HIN was developed and it is
anticipated that as projects are developed, the relevant information will be included in a GIS layer of
the various HIN/project segments for further prioritization and tracking at the regional level. The rubric
includes the following data needs:
Project ID: to be developed based on municipality name.
Road Information: Road name and extents.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Project Prioritization, April 26, 2024
Page 15 of 15
Project Description: Brief project description that provides overall goals of the project and
some specific strategies that would be included, like lane narrowing, intersection treatments,
midblock crossings, lighting, and other details that can help with a general understanding of
the project. Avoid generic terms such as safety improvement.
Other Project IDs: MTP, FDOT or other project identification number for tracking purposes.
Prioritization Scores: Scores for each of the prioritization criteria.
Existing Posted Speed: Current posted speed - use weighted average if multiple posted
speeds.
Target Speed: Proposed Target Speed; if the proposed target speed is not identified, it is
assumed that the existing posted speed would remain.
Low Cost / Quick Build: Yes or no based on primary composition of project; if it includes utility
relocation, curb reconstruction, drainage, ROW acquisition, etc., it is likely not quick build.
Planning Level Cost Estimate: High level planning costs based on information provided in the
engineering toolkit and published FDOT information.
Notes: Any additional information that might be helpful to track, such as recently completed
improvements where effectiveness should be monitored.
CHAPTER 9
Technical Appendix
M- Data Management Plan
Crosswalk at the Bluford Avenue and McKey Street intersection
City of Ocoee
Technical Appendix
M- Data Management Plan
Vision Zero Safety Action PlanVision Zero Safety Action Plan
Memorandum
Date: November 10, 2023
To: Vision Zero Central Florida Partners
From: Mighk Wilson, MetroPlan Orlando
Stephen Spana, Fehr & Peers
PJ Smith, xGeographic
Subject: Vision Zero Central Florida – Data Management Plan
Introduction
This data management plan provides information that will assist MetroPlan Orlando in maintaining the
Vision Zero Central Florida hub site on an annual and ongoing basis. Information is provided on
critical GIS layers, associated instructional documents, and information on document storage,
sources and methods of data management. Updates to crash data on the hub site are expected to
occur in the third quarter of each calendar year as data within the Signal Four Analytics (S4)
database becomes finalized for the prior calendar year.
Critical GIS Layers
The ArcGIS Hub Site will be refreshed annually with new crash data downloaded from the Signal Four
Analytics online tools. As part of the annual process to refresh the crash data, numerous input files are
used to transform the raw crash data into a formatted database that can be appended to the
existing online layer. The GIS layers that are used to update the S4 database are described in this
section of the report along with important metadata and data storage information. The listing below
does not include municipality-specific files that were generated in 2023 and 2024.
Layer Listing
Layer Source Update Frequency Next Refresh
Signal 4 Analytics Crashes
File Name: S4.gdb
Signal 4 Analytics Annual June 2024
MetroPlan Coverage Area
File Name: MetroPlan_Area.shp
F.G.D.L. None None
MetroPlan Jurisdictions
File Name: MetroPlan_Juris.shp
MetroPlan Orlando Annual June 2024
Wave Roadways xGeographic Annual June 2024
File Name: xWave.shp
Federal Aid Highway System
File Name: Federal_Aid_Highway_System_TDA.shp
F.H.W.A. Annual June 2024
ETC Indicator
File Name: ETC_Indicator.shp
U.S.D.O.T. Annual June 2024
Additional Data
Crashes between rail vehicles and non-motorized vehicles are not included within the S4 database.
The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) District 5 Rail Administration Manager (part of the
Modal Development office) maintains a record of incidents that occur along rail lines and at railroad
crossings in the region. The incidents from the prior calendar year will need to be requested and
geocoded into the database for consideration in crash analysis. This information can also be
supplemented by information from the Federal Railroad Administration
(https://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/OfficeofSafety/default.aspx).
Data from the Florida Injury Surveillance System (FISS) dataset can be used to document deaths,
emergency room visits and hospitalizations for people who were injured while walking and biking,
including information for people who were injured or killed while walking or bicycling when a vehicle
was not involved. While this information cannot be geocoded to a specific location, the overall
trends should be documented.
Metadata
All of the GIS files that are used to generate the final Signal Four Analytics crash file are populated
with important metadata. This includes information on how the data was created, what the layer
data fields include (including field value descriptions), and update frequency information. The five
GIS files described in the Layer Listing are already embedded with this necessary information, so
Metadata does not need to be updated on an annual basis.
Data Storage Locations
The Signal Four Analytics crash file is stored on ArcGIS Online with a static geodatabase name of
S4.gdb. This file can be downloaded for use from the ArcGIS Online account at any time by project
team members and partnering organizations.
Source files, including the MetroPlan Coverage Area, MetroPlan Jurisdictions, Wave Roadways,
Federal Aid Highway System and ETC Indicators are maintained by third parties and are stored in
various locations. The four source (input) files that are updated annually can be found in the
following locations or by contacting the following stakeholders:
• MetroPlan Coverage Area: This file is stored on the MetroPlan Orlando server. This file will not
update unless the underlying MetroPlan Orlando coverage area changes in the future.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Data Management Plan, November 10, 2023
Page 2 of 5
• MetroPlan Jurisdictions: This file is stored on the MetroPlan Orlando server. This file is updated
semi-regularly by MetroPlan Orlando as municipal boundaries change.
• Wave Roadways: This file is stored by xGeographic and is updated four times annually,
ensuring that road features, demographic data, and proximity data is as accurate as possible
at the time that the crash data cross-reference is made. Contact pjsmith@xgeographic.com
to obtain this file.
• Federal Aid Highway System: This file is stored online and is maintained by the Federal Highway
Administration. The file can be downloaded by clicking on “Federal Aid Highway System
Shapefile” at the following link: https://www.fdot.gov/statistics/fedaid/default.shtm
• ETC Indicator: This file is stored online and is maintained by the U.S. Department of
Transportation. The file can be downloaded by following the instructions at the following link:
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/0920984aa80a4362b8778d779b090723/page/Hom
epage/
Critical Documents
Along with this data management plan, numerous documents are stored on the MetroPlan Orlando
server that serve as critical analytical tools and data management files for the project team. These
files are explained below.
• Regional Projects Data Directory
o The regional projects data directory is an excel spreadsheet that provides instructions
for municipalities to develop GIS files that can be easily merged to form a regional file.
This includes field names and specific field values.
• S4.atbx (GIS Toolbox)
o This toolbox file is used to generate formatted crash data to be appended to the
existing crash data on ArcGIS Online.
• MetroPlan VZ Systemic Matrix
o The systemic matrix includes detailed crash analytics that are used in official Vision Zero
Central Florida plan documents. The project team will review the need to update these
statistics in future years.
• Source Layer Information
o The source layer information document provides more in-depth information in excel
format pertaining to the input files used as part of this project.
Signal Four Data Update Procedures
On an annual basis, a GIS analyst will run the S4.atbx ArcGIS toolbox to generate a new set of crash
data to be appended to the existing online layer. Steps to set up and run this toolbox are included
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Data Management Plan, November 10, 2023
Page 3 of 5
below. Note: It is critical that the steps outlined below are followed while running the tool, as certain
manual data edits are made while the tool is executed.
Annual Data Integration Steps
1. Log into https://signal4analytics.com/analysis
2. Download the latest full year of crash data
a. Insert a custom date range (01/01/XXXX through 12/31/XXXX)
b. Set the geographic boundary to MetroPlan Orlando
c. Download the Crash Event csv and the GIS Geolocation
3. Conduct QA/QC of crash data:
a. Map all crash data within the geographic boundary of MetroPlan Orlando to identify
crashes that are being mapped outside the region.
b. A list of crashes that resulted in a fatality or serious injury that are unmapped shall be
prepared, and based on data within the crash report, the analyst shall attempt to
identify the location for mapping. A list of all crashes in the region that are unmapped
shall be prepared for forwarding to the agency for further review.
4. In ArcGIS, run models 1.01-1.03 in the S4 Toolbox (S4.atbx)
a. Model 1.01 removes crashes located outside of the MetroPlan geographic boundary
i. The MetroPlan_Area file, which is used to run Model 01.01, can be requested
from PJ Smith at pjsmith@xgeographic.com
b. Model 1.02 removes fields which are unnecessary to the analysis.
c. Model 1.03 transforms the bicycle and pedestrian typing data from the download into
a useable format (i.e., replaces numerical data categories with text descriptions)
5. In ArcGIS, run model 2.01 in the S4 Toolbox (S4.atbx) to join crash event, and bike/ped typing
data to the crash locations.
6. In ArcGIS, run model 03.01 in the S4 Toolbox (S4.atbx) to append jurisdictions to the database.
a. The MetroPlan_Juris file, which is used to run Model 02.01, can be requested from
MetroPlan Orlando.
b. If the Spatial Join is taking a long time to run, temporarily add MetroPlan_Juris to the
working GDB file.
7. In ArcGIS, run model 03.02 in the S4 Toolbox (S4.atbx) to remove redundant fields.
8. In ArcGIS, run models 04.01 and 04.02 in the S4 Toolbox (S4.atbx) to tag crashes near the
federal aid network.
a. Crashes selected within 100 feet of the Federal Aid network layer and populated with
“Y” if within the radius, and a “N” if not within the radius. Roadways on “Private Road”
or “Parking Lot” are provided a value of “N”.
9. In ArcGIS, run model 05.01 in the S4 toolbox (S4.atbx). The output file is named S4_Crashes.
10. Run model 06.01 to add the KSI and MODE classifications to the crash data.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Data Management Plan, November 10, 2023
Page 4 of 5
11. Run model 07.01. This flags all collisions occurring on Limited Access facilities (i.e., Interstates,
Toll Roads) using the ROAD_SYSTEM_IDENTIFIER field in the Signal4 data (where
ROAD_SYSTEM_IDENTIFIER = Interstate or Turnpike/Toll). After running this model, manually
inspect the collisions where LIMITED_ACCESS_1 = 1, as some will be incorrectly classified as
occurring on Interstates or Toll Roads. To do this, query the xGeographic Wave database to
show roads where ROAD_TYPE = “FDOT – Limited Access”. Change LIMITED_ACCESS_1 = 1 to
LIMITED_ACCESS_1 = 0 for any of these cases (estimated time 1-2 hours).
12. Create field called LIMITED_ACCESS_2 (Type: Short Integer). The previous step will NOT capture
all collisions occurring on Limited Access facilities, because some occurring on Interstates/Toll
Roads are classified using ROAD_SYSTEM_INDENTIFIER = State or US. Since we cannot query
Limited Access facility collisions using the State or US ROAD_SYSTEM_IDENTIFIER field (since
many state or US roads are not limited access facilities) we need to flag them manually using
the LIMITED_ACCESS_2 field. Set a Definition Query of LIMITED_ACCESS_1 = 0 (to view all
collisions not deemed to be Limited Access collisions in the previous step) and visually inspect
collisions occurring along Interstates/Toll roads. Any collisions occurring along these facilities
with the ON_STREET_ROAD_HIGHWAY field representing the facility name (e.g. I-4, Interstate 4,
I4, etc.) should be given a value of LIMITED_ACCESS_2 =1.
13. Run model 07.02, which creates a final limited access field, LIMITED_ACCESS_FINAL, showing
whether a collision occurs on a limited access facility (if LIMITED_ACCESS_1 = 1 OR
LIMITED_ACCESS_2 =1).
14. Run model 08.01, which flags all collisions occurring on private roadways and/or parking lots.
15. Run models 09.01 through 09.17. To obtain the xWave_Major and xWave_Minor files, contact
PJ Smith at pjsmith@xgeographic.com. The ETC_Index file should be provided pre-formatted.
16. Create a new GDB titled “S4.gdb” in a folder marked with a year; for example, the folder
name for the 2018-2022 data addition is titled “2022”, and the folder for the appended 2023
data will be titled “2023”. Export S4_Crashes into S4.gdb.
17. Append the S4.gdb file to the existing crash database on ArcGIS Online.
Vision Zero Central Florida
Memo: Data Management Plan, November 10, 2023
Page 5 of 5
Ocoee 2023 100 Million VMT Estimation Method
1. Orange County 2023 Daily VMT: 43,315,328
a. Source: https://www.fdot.gov/statistics/mileage-rpts/default.shtm
2. Ocoee/Orange County BEBR Population Proportion: 49,711/1,492,951 = 0.03329
a. https://bebr.ufl.edu/population/population-data/
3. Ocoee Daily VMT Estimation: 1,442,277
4. Ocoee Annual VMT Estimation: 1,442,277*365 = 526,430,954
5. Ocoee 100M VMT = 5.26
Public Road Mileage and Miles Traveled, 2021 Page 5 of 7
Inter-
state
Turnpike &
Freeways
Other
Princ.
Arterials
Minor
Arterials
Major
Collectors
Minor
Collectors Locals Total
Inter-
state
Turnpike &
Freeways
Other Princ.
Arterials
Minor
Arterials
Major
Collectors
Minor
Collectors Locals Total
CENTERLINE MILES DAILY VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
Miami-Dade
Rural 0.000 0.000 68.417 11.385 14.631 55.282 93.843 243.558 0 0 1,287,407 54,250 132,642 205,108 33,092 1,712,498
Large Urbanized 28.370 111.448 236.137 405.438 543.583 39.699 5,786.680 7,151.355 5,519,326 12,870,328 9,332,961 9,440,130 5,126,577 269,566 10,079,814 52,638,702
County Total 28.370 111.448 304.554 416.823 558.214 94.981 5,880.523 7,394.913 5,519,326 12,870,328 10,620,368 9,494,379 5,259,219 474,673 10,112,906 54,351,201
Monroe
Rural 0.000 0.000 32.934 15.636 4.005 15.274 58.079 125.928 0 0 498,590 47,786 2,645 10,606 29,353 588,980
Small Urban 0.000 0.000 84.708 6.161 37.348 17.012 457.304 602.533 0 0 1,817,784 84,043 130,658 29,399 344,565 2,406,448
County Total 0.000 0.000 117.642 21.797 41.353 32.286 515.383 728.461 0 0 2,316,374 131,828 133,302 40,005 373,918 2,995,427
Nassau
Rural 12.902 0.000 51.751 3.813 120.285 26.384 50.051 265.186 759,273 0 498,173 30,789 270,391 35,060 32,783 1,626,469
Small Urban 0.000 0.000 11.612 38.134 37.866 5.662 524.686 617.960 0 0 164,188 650,531 264,120 10,634 407,635 1,497,108
County Total 12.902 0.000 63.363 41.947 158.151 32.046 574.737 883.146 759,273 0 662,360 681,320 534,512 45,694 440,419 3,123,577
Okaloosa
Rural 17.546 0.000 27.784 76.234 19.786 32.533 152.200 326.083 489,442 0 506,347 582,479 60,746 18,214 100,216 1,757,444
Small Urban 7.008 0.000 10.680 5.509 12.672 0.000 225.035 260.904 197,366 0 314,147 83,812 100,894 0 174,852 871,071
Small Urbanized 0.000 0.000 48.090 30.925 42.381 0.000 877.826 999.222 0 0 1,868,487 730,619 331,730 0 896,260 3,827,096
County Total 24.554 0.000 86.554 112.668 74.839 32.533 1,255.061 1,586.209 686,808 0 2,688,981 1,396,910 493,370 18,214 1,171,328 6,455,611
Okeechobee
Rural 0.000 7.472 61.331 3.795 64.370 15.338 120.725 273.031 0 225,654 379,388 27,530 80,944 8,432 79,075 801,023
Small Urban 0.000 0.000 29.987 0.986 21.045 1.100 209.587 262.705 0 0 390,571 7,167 67,904 917 162,849 629,407
County Total 0.000 7.472 91.318 4.781 85.415 16.438 330.312 535.736 0 225,654 769,959 34,697 148,847 9,349 241,924 1,430,431
Orange
Rural 0.000 20.205 29.112 3.574 17.973 20.360 78.764 169.988 0 753,739 373,907 11,997 35,625 91,818 51,590 1,318,676
Small Urban 0.000 0.000 1.726 0.000 2.345 0.000 10.617 14.688 0 0 83,711 0 24,857 0 8,249 116,817
Large Urbanized 24.673 141.197 166.879 288.324 467.416 93.301 3,420.986 4,602.776 3,747,665 9,947,020 6,657,189 6,635,256 4,906,639 703,401 5,937,614 38,534,783
County Total 24.673 161.402 197.717 291.898 487.734 113.661 3,510.367 4,787.452 3,747,665 10,700,758 7,114,807 6,647,253 4,967,121 795,219 5,997,453 39,970,276
Osceola
Rural 0.000 45.396 82.583 21.079 52.611 9.749 96.074 307.492 0 1,405,182 522,284 60,036 213,263 12,615 62,928 2,276,309
Small Urban 6.032 4.501 8.472 17.518 24.516 0.000 110.496 171.535 676,859 107,873 419,851 227,730 192,068 0 85,855 1,710,235
Large Urbanized 1.853 20.407 73.832 45.093 108.489 28.591 851.886 1,130.151 219,704 835,479 2,439,871 976,894 907,781 125,742 1,485,689 6,991,160
County Total 7.885 70.304 164.887 83.690 185.616 38.340 1,058.456 1,609.178 896,563 2,348,533 3,382,006 1,264,659 1,313,112 138,357 1,634,473 10,977,704
Palm Beach
Rural 0.145 0.170 68.946 28.621 34.330 29.633 68.335 230.180 13,920 7,412 801,343 208,507 73,978 71,822 40,538 1,217,520
Small Urban 0.000 0.000 15.945 26.304 11.301 23.172 96.471 173.193 0 0 205,354 240,718 53,127 81,926 77,461 658,586
Large Urbanized 45.873 44.391 225.753 229.213 278.002 199.786 2,502.370 3,525.388 9,051,870 3,228,302 8,638,753 5,523,020 3,288,128 1,837,818 4,362,001 35,929,892
County Total 46.018 44.561 310.644 284.138 323.633 252.591 2,667.176 3,928.761 9,065,790 3,235,714 9,645,450 5,972,245 3,415,233 1,991,566 4,480,001 37,805,998
Pasco
Rural 7.119 14.886 25.447 22.485 59.022 0.757 167.117 296.833 426,378 418,897 310,976 237,043 222,052 568 109,462 1,725,377
Small Urbanized 0.000 2.326 44.376 41.920 55.725 21.292 299.714 465.353 0 50,707 755,454 557,343 299,427 81,032 331,633 2,075,596
Large Urbanized 13.498 2.653 88.442 40.785 131.145 57.275 1,296.088 1,629.886 1,191,002 103,805 3,841,233 1,174,644 1,418,134 407,839 2,307,452 10,444,109
County Total 20.617 19.865 158.265 105.190 245.892 79.324 1,762.919 2,392.072 1,617,380 573,409 4,907,663 1,969,030 1,939,613 489,439 2,748,547 14,245,082
Pinellas
Rural 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 8.203 8.203 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,373 5,373
Large Urbanized 31.287 1.102 135.873 280.180 272.881 54.314 2,880.152 3,655.789 3,127,684 9,477 6,496,341 5,018,399 1,850,395 280,165 5,022,985 21,805,446
County Total 31.287 1.102 135.873 280.180 272.881 54.314 2,888.355 3,663.992 3,127,684 9,477 6,496,341 5,018,399 1,850,395 280,165 5,028,358 21,810,819
Public Road Mileage and Miles Traveled, 2022 Page 5 of 7
Inter-state
Turnpike &
Freeways
Other
Princ.
Arterials
Minor
Arterials
Major
Collectors
Minor
Collectors Locals Total
Inter-
state
Turnpike &
Freeways
Other Princ.
Arterials
Minor
Arterials
Major
Collectors
Minor
Collectors Locals Total
CENTERLINE MILES DAILY VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
Miami-Dade
Rural 0.000 0.000 68.417 11.385 14.631 55.282 95.218 244.933 0 0 1,230,963 56,527 144,855 219,347 36,105 1,687,797
Large Urbanized 28.381 111.424 236.137 405.413 543.633 39.699 5,803.380 7,168.067 5,974,904 13,656,947 9,547,568 9,668,246 5,519,744 290,860 10,572,160 55,230,428
County Total 28.381 111.424 304.554 416.798 558.264 94.981 5,898.598 7,413.000 5,974,904 13,656,947 10,778,531 9,724,773 5,664,599 510,207 10,608,266 56,918,225
Monroe
Rural 0.000 0.000 32.934 15.636 4.005 15.274 58.312 126.161 0 0 478,274 54,141 2,645 10,887 30,621 576,567
Small Urban 0.000 0.000 84.708 6.161 37.348 17.012 459.830 605.059 0 0 1,895,709 76,226 132,594 26,756 361,043 2,492,327
County Total 0.000 0.000 117.642 21.797 41.353 32.286 518.142 731.220 0 0 2,373,982 130,367 135,239 37,643 391,664 3,068,894
Nassau
Rural 12.902 0.000 51.751 3.813 120.285 26.384 50.576 265.711 770,330 0 633,696 34,459 275,615 35,849 34,645 1,784,593
Small Urban 0.000 0.000 11.612 38.134 37.866 5.662 530.191 623.465 0 0 181,817 706,546 267,142 10,596 430,987 1,597,088
County Total 12.902 0.000 63.363 41.947 158.151 32.046 580.767 889.176 770,330 0 815,513 741,005 542,756 46,445 465,631 3,381,681
Okaloosa
Rural 17.546 0.000 27.784 76.234 19.786 32.533 152.889 326.772 517,715 0 518,262 600,706 65,932 18,585 105,349 1,826,550
Small Urban 7.008 0.000 10.680 5.509 12.672 0.000 226.057 261.926 207,355 0 324,999 84,232 109,130 0 183,784 909,499
Small Urbanized 0.000 0.000 48.090 30.925 42.381 0.000 881.810 1,003.206 0 0 1,843,406 736,006 341,140 0 941,773 3,862,325
County Total 24.554 0.000 86.554 112.668 74.839 32.533 1,260.756 1,591.904 725,070 0 2,686,666 1,420,944 516,202 18,585 1,230,907 6,598,374
Okeechobee
Rural 0.000 7.472 61.331 3.795 64.370 15.338 120.725 273.031 0 274,222 395,589 28,463 81,492 8,432 82,697 870,895
Small Urban 0.000 0.000 29.987 0.935 21.045 1.100 209.587 262.654 0 0 402,793 7,013 70,289 934 170,394 651,423
County Total 0.000 7.472 91.318 4.730 85.415 16.438 330.312 535.685 0 274,222 798,382 35,475 151,781 9,366 253,091 1,522,317
Orange
Rural 0.000 20.205 29.112 3.574 17.973 20.360 79.366 170.590 0 1,156,465 446,185 11,804 35,480 95,062 54,366 1,799,361
Small Urban 0.000 0.000 1.726 0.000 2.345 0.000 10.699 14.770 0 0 89,007 0 24,388 0 8,698 122,093
Large Urbanized 24.673 142.053 166.879 288.324 467.088 93.207 3,446.073 4,628.297 4,216,047 11,403,751 6,529,252 7,042,893 5,248,607 705,662 6,247,662 41,393,874
County Total 24.673 162.258 197.717 291.898 487.406 113.567 3,536.138 4,813.657 4,216,047 12,560,216 7,064,444 7,054,697 5,308,475 800,724 6,310,726 43,315,328
Osceola
Rural 0.000 45.396 82.583 21.079 52.611 9.749 97.386 308.804 0 1,636,089 568,507 52,336 305,704 14,871 66,709 2,644,215
Small Urban 6.032 4.501 8.472 17.518 24.516 0.000 112.006 173.045 772,557 135,179 444,353 260,140 206,533 0 91,061 1,909,823
Large Urbanized 1.853 20.407 73.832 45.093 108.489 28.591 863.524 1,141.789 231,348 977,736 2,554,721 998,892 936,166 124,898 1,575,068 7,398,828
County Total 7.885 70.304 164.887 83.690 185.616 38.340 1,072.916 1,623.638 1,003,905 2,749,004 3,567,580 1,311,368 1,448,403 139,769 1,732,838 11,952,867
Palm Beach
Rural 0.145 0.170 68.946 28.621 34.330 29.633 68.368 230.213 13,268 8,959 940,358 222,460 38,471 69,174 42,303 1,334,992
Small Urban 0.000 0.000 15.945 26.304 11.301 23.172 96.471 173.193 0 0 229,429 254,438 38,877 76,059 81,087 679,889
Large Urbanized 45.873 44.391 225.753 229.213 278.236 199.786 2,503.893 3,527.145 9,281,613 3,583,092 8,929,438 5,685,375 3,239,649 1,782,698 4,564,772 37,066,636
County Total 46.018 44.561 310.644 284.138 323.867 252.591 2,668.732 3,930.551 9,294,880 3,592,051 10,099,225 6,162,273 3,316,996 1,927,931 4,688,162 39,081,518
Pasco
Rural 7.119 14.886 25.447 22.485 59.022 0.757 173.207 302.923 440,616 495,997 316,804 239,184 227,240 568 118,647 1,839,055
Small Urbanized 0.000 2.326 44.376 41.920 55.725 21.292 310.575 476.214 0 61,174 746,449 572,200 298,164 81,317 357,469 2,116,773
Large Urbanized 13.498 2.653 88.442 40.785 131.145 57.275 1,343.447 1,677.245 1,237,178 123,279 3,886,423 1,106,770 1,393,444 407,293 2,495,410 10,649,796
County Total 20.617 19.865 158.265 105.190 245.892 79.324 1,827.229 2,456.382 1,677,794 680,450 4,949,677 1,918,154 1,918,847 489,177 2,971,526 14,605,624
Pinellas
Rural 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 8.225 8.225 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,634 5,634
Large Urbanized 31.287 1.102 135.873 280.180 272.881 54.314 2,887.924 3,663.561 3,266,705 9,477 6,580,571 5,064,999 1,844,295 280,979 5,267,573 22,314,600
County Total 31.287 1.102 135.873 280.180 272.881 54.314 2,896.149 3,671.786 3,266,705 9,477 6,580,571 5,064,999 1,844,295 280,979 5,273,208 22,320,234
Estimates of Population by County and City in Florida: April 1, 2023
Revenue Sharing Use Only
Population Population Census Inmate Estimate
County, City,Estimate Change Count Population less Inmates
and State April 1, 2023 2020–2023 April 1, 2020 April 1, 2023 April 1, 2023
Okeechobee County 39,591 -53 39,644 1,846 37,745
Okeechobee 5,361 107 5,254 0 5,361
UNINCORPORATED 34,230 -160 34,390 1,846 32,384
Orange County 1,492,951 63,043 1,429,908 4,153 1,488,798
Apopka 58,293 3,420 54,873 0 58,293
Bay Lake 29 0 29 0 29
Belle Isle 7,239 207 7,032 0 7,239
Eatonville 2,370 21 2,349 0 2,370
Edgewood 2,631 -54 2,685 0 2,631
Lake Buena Vista 21 -3 24 0 21
Maitland 19,964 421 19,543 0 19,964
Oakland 5,402 1,886 3,516 0 5,402
Ocoee 49,711 2,416 47,295 0 49,711
Orlando 326,988 19,415 307,573 592 326,396
Windermere 3,041 11 3,030 0 3,041
Winter Garden 50,800 3,836 46,964 0 50,800
Winter Park 30,706 911 29,795 59 30,647
UNINCORPORATED 935,756 30,556 905,200 3,502 932,254
Osceola County 439,225 50,569 388,656 302 438,923
Kissimmee 82,714 3,488 79,226 191 82,523
St. Cloud 61,997 3,033 58,964 0 61,997
UNINCORPORATED 294,514 44,048 250,466 111 294,403
Palm Beach County 1,532,718 40,527 1,492,191 2,603 1,530,115
Atlantis 2,147 5 2,142 0 2,147
Belle Glade 17,286 588 16,698 0 17,286
Boca Raton 100,491 3,069 97,422 0 100,491
Boynton Beach 82,208 1,828 80,380 0 82,208
Briny Breezes 500 -2 502 0 500
Cloud Lake 140 6 134 0 140
Delray Beach 67,213 367 66,846 0 67,213
Glen Ridge 215 -2 217 0 215
Golf 281 26 255 0 281
Greenacres 45,476 1,486 43,990 0 45,476
Gulf Stream 959 5 954 0 959
Haverhill 2,193 6 2,187 0 2,193
Highland Beach 4,303 8 4,295 0 4,303
Hypoluxo 2,687 0 2,687 0 2,687
Juno Beach 3,883 25 3,858 0 3,883
Jupiter 61,333 286 61,047 0 61,333
Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Florida Florida Estimates of Population 2023