Council received an update on the Kirkland Safety Action Plan and a recommended method for setting speed limits on arterials and collectors during the July 1 study session.

Consultant DKS Associates and city transportation staff said the plan is informed by a citywide crash analysis, near‑miss video observations at selected intersections, and public engagement that produced more than 1,000 online comments. The analysis shows a roughly 40 percent drop in total reported crashes over time, but an outsized share of fatal and serious injury collisions involve vulnerable road users: consultants reported pedestrians and bicyclists made up about 6 percent of total reported collisions yet accounted for about 46 percent of fatal or serious injury collisions. The city’s evening commute window (3 p.m.–6 p.m.) was identified as the highest‑occurrence period for crashes (about one‑third of collisions).

DKS described a three‑part approach: (1) analyze crash history and near‑miss recordings (video footage focused on selected intersections to capture “close call” maneuvers), (2) compile a toolbox of engineering countermeasures tied to collision types and evidence‑based crash‑reduction factors, and (3) implement an action plan that prioritizes low‑cost near‑term measures alongside longer‑term infrastructure work. Staff said they had already identified roughly 10 corridor segments and 10 intersections for targeted follow‑up based on collision rate calculations and field knowledge.

On speed policy, staff recommended an expert‑based method that sets speed limits for arterials and collectors by assessing contextual factors — land use, signal density, access density, pedestrian activity and a bicycle level‑of‑stress measure — rather than simply setting limits by observed operating speeds. Under the draft approach, local roads would retain a 25 mph default. Staff said their data collection included operating speeds at roughly 76 locations and that proposed rules would prioritize vulnerable road users and sensitive land uses. The draft plan also includes a countermeasure toolbox with estimated crash reduction rates drawn from the FHWA/CMF clearinghouse and rough cost brackets for near‑term, medium and long‑term installations.

Council feedback and next steps: Councilmembers asked for further detail on several elements, including whether the plan addresses personal electric vehicles (e‑bikes and similar devices), the potential role of automated enforcement cameras, and the comparative safety and cost tradeoffs between roundabouts and signalized intersections. Staff said they will deliver a final plan to the Transportation Commission, then return to council with a recommended speed‑setting ordinance and an implementation schedule; no policy change was adopted at the July 1 meeting.

Ending: The draft plan will return for review after the Transportation Commission and additional staff refinements; at that time council will decide whether to adopt the speed‑setting policy and the plan’s prioritized countermeasure list.