Committee considers leading pedestrian intervals, signal improvements and automated enforcement for safety

Committee members discussed specific safety treatments that could reduce crashes and increase bicyclist comfort, including leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs) at crossing locations, signal timing evaluations for high-injury corridors and the use of automated enforcement in targeted areas such as school zones. Why it matters: signal timing and enforcement are proven strategies to reduce risky turning and speeding behaviors that cause serious injuries. Planner (city staff) said the plan currently lists a strategy to identify prioritized signal improvements and that staff will clarify what that strategy includes (for example, LPIs, signal timing changes, and prohibiting right turns on red at specific crossings). The committee discussed trade-offs such as added delay for motor vehicles and the engineering study required for each location. On automated enforcement, Planner (city staff) said the state-level Vision Zero/Drive to Zero guidance has recommended targeted pilots (for school zones and specific commercial districts) and that many states started with narrow pilots to build legislative support. Staff noted Lawrence currently lacks a statutory provision to conduct automated speed or red‑light enforcement broadly and that any program would likely require state authorization or a narrowly tailored local pilot approved through state channels. Ending: staff will refine the signal‑improvement strategy language, identify candidate intersections for LPIs and prioritized signal changes, and return with a proposal that includes engineering criteria and potential pilot locations for automated enforcement aligned with Vision Zero guidance.