Speakers from Bike Utah and Lehi City told Provo’s Transportation Mobility Advisory Committee that a “safe‑systems” approach — designing streets to anticipate human error and reduce the severity of crashes — underpinned many of the most successful bike‑and‑pedestrian safety programs they visited in New Jersey.

Chris Wilkie, co‑director of Bike Utah and a Provo resident, and Mike West, Lehi City planner, described touring Jersey City and Hoboken, where officials pursued different but complementary tactics: Hoboken focused on pedestrian safety and “daylighting” intersections to improve sight lines, while Jersey City has rapidly deployed low‑cost protected bike lanes and physical separations using paint, parking buffers and jersey barriers.

Wilkie summarized the approach: the goal is to design streets so that “you shouldn't have to pay with their lives for making a mistake.” He and West highlighted data showing much lower road‑fatality rates in countries with sustained safety programs and noted that speed is a primary determinant of crash severity: the presenters cited research showing pedestrian survivability falls sharply as vehicle speeds increase.

The presenters recommended implementing context‑appropriate infrastructure, starting with low‑cost pilots to test designs and learn before committing to permanent construction. Examples included using painted buffer parking as a low‑cost protected bike lane, flexible delineators to narrow perceived lane width and daylighting (removing parking near corners to improve sight lines for drivers and pedestrians).

After the presentation, Provo engineering staff reported local steps that reflect the same philosophy: the city has completed signage for the 8 East Bikeway “from the Maverik on State Street all the way up to the BYU campus” and has installed a temporary chicane on Navajo Drive as a traffic‑calming pilot. The chicane was installed with resident support, will remain for a one‑year trial and be evaluated for speed impacts; staff noted snow‑plow width (14 feet) as a constraint when considering permanent treatments.

Committee members asked whether Hoboken’s success was intentional or circumstantial due to narrow historic streets; Wilkie said redevelopment choices had been intentional in Hoboken and Jersey City. Attendees discussed tradeoffs — narrower streets can slow traffic but can complicate access and parking — and praised low‑cost, iterative approaches that allow cities to test treatments and then refine them.

Provo staff said they will monitor pilot projects, continue community outreach and consider other low‑cost treatments informed by the tour and local testing. No council or TMAC ordinance changes were proposed during the presentation; presenters and staff framed immediate next steps as monitoring, outreach and pilot evaluations.