Part 2 - Topics of Interest to State DOT Safety Engineers

1. Part 2 - Topics of Interest to State DOT Safety Engineers CE 552 Monday, April 23, 2007

2. Motorcycle helmet law - • one small victory • opposed to mandatory helmet laws … they've formed powerful state and national lobbies • Nine of the 10 states with the worst motorcycle death rates don't require adults to wear helmets

3. Truck and Bus Safety Enforcement Efforts • number of vehicles placed out of service and "parked" due to serious defects decreased significantly this year from 2005 in all major categories - trucks, buses and hazmat. • All vehicles: 21.7% in 2006, down from 22.5% in 2005; • Buses: 6.9% in 2006, down from 11.7% in 2005; and • Hazmat: 18.2% in 2006, down from 19.3% in 2005

4. unconventional intersection and interchange designs • http://attap.umd.edu/UAID.php

7. GAO Interview on Older Driver Safety with AASHTO • To what extent has the federal government established standards and guidelines for road design and driver assessment practices to promote safety for older drivers, and how are states implementing those standards and guidelines? • What best practices are states implementing to improve the safety of older drivers? Diane, Mississippi doesn’t have a formal plan to address older driver issues, but we have gone to all prismatic sheeting, wider striping, and are experimenting with wet/reflective pavement markings. • To what extent has the federal government provided funding to promote safety for older drivers?

8. Based on our research of the work that AASHTO has done, some of the specific topics of interest to us are: • What changes have been made in the AASHTO Green Book based on the FHWA Highway Design Handbook for Older Pedestrians. • To what extent have states adopted or utilized the FHWA Highway Design Handbook for Older Pedestrians, the NCHRP Synthesis 348 report on Improving the Safety of Older Drivers and the NCHRP Report 500 Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan; Volume 9: A Guide for Reducing Collisions involving Older Drivers. Does AASHTO have any data beyond what is in these reports regarding what states have implemented a portion or all of these guidelines? • Does AASHTO have or know of any studies related to the effectiveness of implementing the Older Driver guidelines? • What affect will SAFETEA-LU have on the awareness of Older Driver Safety, the level of priority within the states of Older Driver Safety and funding made available for road improvements or research related to Older Driver Safety either directly or indirectly. • What options exist for states to reprogram safety funding to road maintenance, rehabilitation, replacement or expansion? • How does the new Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) required by the FHWA as a part of SAFETEA-LU and AASHTO's Strategic/Comprehensive Highway Safety Plan (S/CHSP) interrelate? • Do you have a list of states which have developed a S/CHSP based on AASHTO guidance? • What opportunities exist for the Older Driver Segment of the population to be represented in the development of the individual states SHSP? • What attention could or will Older Driver Safety Improvements receive in the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). • High Risk Rural Road Set Aside • 5% Report on the most severe safety needs • 100% Federal Funding for Older Driver Road Safety Improvements • From AASHTO's viewpoint, what additional work could the federal government do to keep older drivers, driving safely, longer?

9. Older driver issue (cont) • Older-younger driver interaction problem exacerbated during freeway incidents

10. programming HSIP funds • Improvements to safety feature, such as guardrail, that are routinely provided should be funded from the source of the project funds • HSIP reserved for stand-alone safety projects

11. Access Control • minimum distances that driveways should be spaced from median cross overs on a divided four lane • rural arterial connecting a city of approximately 9000 population with Interstate • commercially development

12. -1.30 to zero Zero to 0.83 Expected Fatality Rates (Weighted by Distribution of VMT) Compared to Actual Fatality Rates -0.76 -0.16 -1.26 -0.54 0.64 -0.65 -0.46 -0.39 -0.30 -0.39 0.06 -0.25 0.19 -0.08 -0.23 0.13 -0.07 -0.52 -0.02 -0.17 -0.17 -0.17 -0.57 0.81 -0.02 -0.29 0.02 0.05 0.23 0.29 -0.33 0.10 0.19 0.21 -0.15 0.01 0.29 0.17 DC -0.06 0.79 0.30 0.23 0.44 Georgia’s fatality rate is .18 less than expected Given where its VMT occurs -0.18 0.12 0.46 0.23 0.34 0.19 0.41 -0.10 Puerto Rico Virgin Islands Charles (Tony) Aiken FHWA tony.aiken@fhwa.dot.gov

13. 200 Mile Per Hour Car Wreck • The Boy only had some bruising (seat belt) and 2 small cuts. • Car only had 9 miles on it! ;

21. Be prepared to stop advance flashing beacon • Maryland SHA • six locations • warn motorists of red stopping conditions • where the traffic signal is obscured from the approaching driver's view • "before and after" (no Bayesian) • 63 percent reduction in the overall accident rate • 41 percent reduiction in rear-ends • 65 percent reduction in right-angle collisions

22. Innovative Safety PracticesSubmitted byYou (state safety practitioners) Assembled by Kurt Smith Alaska DOTPF Several slides contributed by Dave Morena, Michigan FHWA

23. Collision Advance Warning System (CAWS)Maine

24. Red Light Enforcement LightsFlorida

25. Dynamic Delineation SystemFlorida

26. Dynamic Delineation System Activated by 50+ MPH Approach Speed

27. Dynamic Delineation System - PlayVideo Submitted by Dave Joneshttp://www.dot.state.ak.us/stwddes/dcstraffic/assets/docs/FL_SpeedStrobe_Jones.mpg

28. Cable Barrier w Hit Lights (soon to be wired into TMC)Florida

29. Iowa

30. Iowa(Arizona also uses 4’ Shoulder policy)

31. Roundabouts in lieu of Traffic SignalsMaryland“Virtually Crash Free”

32. Corridor Safety Impact TeamsNew Jersey (Similar Program in Washington)

33. Texas Safety Bond Program • $600 Million Safety Program • Interchanges • Left Turn Lanes • Widen Narrow two-lanes • Median Barrier • In addition to $40M HE program

34. ClearView Font for all Guide SignsTexas

35. Dynamic Late Lane Merge Maryland • Activated by sensors- 1000’ queue • When activated, PCMSs tell drivers to use both lanes up to merge point • Advantages: • 1) Reduces stress/road rage • 2) Reduces unnecessary lane changes • 5) Reduce queue lengths

36. Fluorescent Orange Construction Signs Texas

37. Fluorescent Yellow Warning Signs Texas

38. Fluorescent Yellow Sheeting Fluorescent Yellow Warning Signs

39. All lines 6-inch State DOT’s that routinely use 6” longitudinal lines: AL, AZ, FL, MI, NH (1980’s), NC, PA (lane lines), TN (Interstate)… Submitted by Arizona

40. All lines 8-inch Nevada DOT - all freeways

41. Work Zone Fatal Crash Review West Virginia • Multidisciplinary team • Within hours of the crash • Can recommend fixes • Provides documentation for lawsuits

42. Median Barrier on Wider Medians California, Maryland

43. Skid Accident Reduction Program (SKARP) New York • Identifies high wet-pavement crash locations • Friction tests them • Treats locations with both high crashes and low friction • Has reduced wet road crashes at treated locations by 72%

44. Summary of Crash Reporting Thresholds • MMUCC recommends $1000 minimum. • $750 is Nevada's current threshold • New jersey's threshold is $500.

45. Guardrail End Treatments • Not going back to turned down ends (Texas twist) • Act as ramps • Vehicles go airborn or flip\ • Some allowed on low speed roads

46. Wider (6”/8”) inch pavement lines • Which helps more …Wider or brighter? • Best synthesis: http://tcd.tamu.edu/Documents/02-0024-1.pdf • "Studies in New Jersey, Florida and Montana which noted crash reductions where wider lines were implemented "(2005,Traffic Engineering Council UPDATE) • No statistical evidence (RTM?) • Drivers “feel” they are better (enough?) • Maine experience: counterintuitive results with 8” lines – drivers “over”drive conditions?

47. Wider (6”/8”) inch pavement lines (cont) Literature Review (Krammes, Ray) • G.P. Balcar, P.R. Macy, and N.D. Nedas, "Road Markings as an Alcohol Countermeasure for Highway Safety: Field Study of Standard and Wide Edgelines," Transportation Research Record 847, 1982, pp. 43-46. This controlled field operational study measured the lateral placement on rural two-lane highways in northern New Jersey that were marked with 4 edgeline width conditions (0, 4, 6, and 8 in). "The 16 male test subjects each drove twice-once after they had consumed placebo drinks (0.00 blood alcohol concentration (BAC)) and the other time after they had consumed either placebo drinks or a controlled alcohol dosage (0.05 or 0.08 BAC). Prior research was corroborated in that the test subjects showed improved driving performance when edgelines were present and reduced performance when they were alcohol impaired. The presence of wider-than-standard edgelines was found to incrementally enhance the benefits derived from standard 4-in. wide edgelines for both unimpaired and alcohol-impaired drivers. When alcohol is present, even at the relatively low BAC levels examined in this research, the visual communications link between the roadway and the driver is interrupted. The improved driving performance of the test subjects in the presence of wide edgelines indicates that strengthening the visual signal at the road edge may compensate to some degree for alcohol impairment and hence reduce the risk of accident." Assessment: A well-designed field operational study.

48. Wider (6”/8”) inch pavement lines (cont) Literature Review (Krammes, Ray) • J.W. Hall, "Evaluation of Wide Edgelines," Transportation Research Record 1114, 1987, pp. 21-30. "The critical rate technique was used to identify approximately 530 mi of rural two-lane highway with unusually high ROR accident rates. In 1984, 100 of these miles were treated with wide edgelines, and the following year, an additional 76 mi were marked. The remaining mileage was used for comparison purposes. The accident experience on the treatment and comparison sections was monitored after the application of this countermeasure. From the research it is concluded that wide edgelines do not have a significant effect on the incidence of ROR accidents. In addition, this treatment does not have a significant effect on the rate of ROR accidents at night or on curves, or on accidents involving the opposing flow of traffic." Assessment: The method used was good for the time when it was performed, and attempts to control for regression-to-the-mean bias. The after period was limited in duration: 17 months for some sites, only 5 months for others.

49. Wider (6”/8”) inch pavement lines (cont) Literature Review (Krammes, Ray) • B.H. Cottrell, "Evaluation of Wide Edgelines on Two-Lane Rural Roads," Transportation Research Record 1160, 1988, pp. 35-44. The study evaluated the effect of wide (nominally 8 in) edgelines on 3 rural two-lane highways in Virginia totaling 60.7 mi. "A before-and-after design with a comparison group and a check for comparability was used to analyze data. Five years of accident data covering the 3 years before wide edgeline installation and the 2 years after installation were used. It was concluded that there is no evidence to indicate that wide edgelines significantly affected the incidence of ROR and related accidents for any individual treatment location or for the locations combined. The related accidents included ROR accidents that involved driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, ROR accidents on curves, ROR accidents during darkness, and opposite-direction accidents." Assessment: A sound methodology, albeit not the best currently available. The sample size was small.

50. Wider (6”/8”) inch pavement lines (cont) Literature Review (Krammes, Ray) • New York State DOT, "1988 Annual Evaluation Report: Highway Safety Improvement Program, 1988. Quoting NCHRP 500, Vol. 6, "...a 1988 study by the New York DOT indicated that sections of curving two-lane rural roads with new 8-inch edgelines resulted in higher crash reductions than similar sections with new 4-inch edgelines. The study indicated greater safety effects for total crashes (a 10-percent decrease for the wider edgelines versus a 5-percent decrease for standard edgelines); for injury crashes (15-percent decrease versus 10-percent decrease, respectively; and for fixed-object crashes (33-percent decrease versus 17-percent decrease, respectively). The study appears to have controlled for the regression to the mean bias by choosing both sets of experimental and control sites from a listing of high-crash locations. It is not clear whether the choice was made randomly.