Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vision Zero Safe Streets topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Providence planning staff present Vision Zero update, map 'high priority' streets for safety work
Summary
The city planning department presented a Vision Zero/Safe Streets update outlining a data-driven high-priority network, an infrastructure toolbox of interventions and a roadmap intended to reduce fatal and serious-injury crashes.
City planning staff presented an update to Providence’s Vision Zero and street‑safety work at the March 12 Energy & Resilience Committee meeting, outlining data analysis, community outreach and an action roadmap.
Alex Ellis, principal planner in the Department of Planning and Development, told the committee the update incorporates the federal Safe Streets for All grant and the city’s comprehensive plan and focuses on fatal and serious‑injury crashes rather than all collisions.
“The safe system approach ... really focus[s] on fatal and serious injuries, which is a change from traditional, track engineering, which focuses on all crashes,” Ellis said during the presentation.
What the plan contains - Data analysis and priority mapping: Consultants analyzed five years of crash data to build a “high injury network” and then identified a smaller set of “focus segments” as the highest‑priority corridors. Ellis said the focus segments cover about 7% of the city’s road mileage but are the highest priority for safety investments. - Infrastructure toolbox: The plan assembles engineering measures — raised crosswalks, curb/extension (bump‑outs), leading pedestrian intervals at signals, temporary “quick‑build” devices and other measures — with guidance on where each treatment is appropriate. - Community engagement: The project included an October outreach series, a story map and an online survey that drew roughly 300 responses; staff also said they worked to incorporate recent comprehensive-plan feedback into the streets plan.
Funding and implementation questions Committee members and residents raised funding and staffing concerns, noting the high up‑front cost for infrastructure and the limited city engineering capacity for construction and inspections. Ellis and others said the plan recommends combining safety work with scheduled repaving and pursuing state and federal grants; they also said some “quick‑build” measures — bollards, temporary curb extensions and signal timing changes — can be implemented more rapidly and at lower cost.
Several residents and councilors raised winter sidewalk clearance and enforcement, stop‑sign compliance and traffic‑camera enforcement as priorities. Ellis said the plan explicitly addresses speed and that leading pedestrian intervals and speed‑safety cameras are among the tools recommended for rapid deployment.
Next steps: Ellis said the department will complete the final plan and intended to present it to full council in early April. Staff also invited councilors to participate in neighborhood outreach and said focused, local briefings would be available for ward meetings.
Ending: Planning staff described the update as a tool to guide investments and to prioritize locations for relatively quick, low‑cost improvements as well as larger capital projects. The department urged pairing safety projects with routine road work and pursuing grant funding to stretch limited city resources.
