Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pedestrian Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill to expand leading pedestrian intervals and accessible pedestrian signals
Summary
The House Transportation Committee (joint with Housing) voted March 27 to advance SB 2470 SD2 with amendments directing the Department of Transportation to evaluate intersections for leading pedestrian intervals and accessible pedestrian signals and to set up a community request program; the chair amended the evaluation threshold and asked DOT to clarify costs.
The House Committee on Transportation, sitting jointly with the House Committee on Housing, voted March 27 to pass SB 2470 SD2 with amendments, sending the measure on with instructions for further cost clarification.
SB 2470 SD2 would require the Department of Transportation to evaluate intersections for the installation of leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs) and accessible pedestrian signals (APS) when state-owned pedestrian signal heads are placed or replaced, and to create a program allowing community members to request APS at specific intersections. The measure also directs DOT to evaluate a set number of existing intersections where pedestrian 'rush' has been recorded in the previous five years.
Supporters told the committee the combination of LPIs and APS improves safety and accessibility. "This bill is going to save lives," said Howard Lesser, chair of the advocacy committee for the Hawaii Association of the Blind. Abby Sites of Hawaii Apple Seed pointed to research showing LPIs can cut pedestrian injuries: "In Seattle, where they've implemented LPIs, there's been a 34% reduction in pedestrian injuries and fatalities," she said. Lola Urban of the Department of Health, offering comments, urged a proactive approach and noted recent federal rulemaking (36 CFR part 1190, docket ATBCB) that requires accessible pedestrian signals on new or altered signal heads; she said Hawaii could adopt stronger standards sooner.
Committee members pressed DOT on implementation and jurisdiction. Deputy Shishido clarified island-by-island responsibilities, explaining that some islands (including parts of Oahu and Hawaii Island) have city/county-operated signals while other signals are state-operated; the deputy confirmed the distribution of responsibilities varies by island and asked the committee to request jurisdictional clarity if the bill moves forward.
Chair members adopted several amendments before voting. The chair said the committee would "defect the effective date" and remove a specified appropriation amount from the committee report pending DOT cost clarification. The chair also revised the evaluation requirement so DOT would evaluate not fewer than 10 intersections (replacing the original floor of 25) to give the agency more flexibility given fiscal constraints.
The committee voted to pass SB 2470 SD2 with amendments. Several members voted in the affirmative; Representatives La Chica, Morikawa and Peruskey were recorded as excused. The chair asked DOT to provide cost figures in subsequent testimony.
What happens next: The committee report will request DOT clarification on costs and jurisdictional intersections for the next committee handling the bill. If advanced by subsequent committees, the bill would return to the calendar for further floor action.
