1 / 30

The Greater Metropolitan Houston Traffic Safety Planning Program

Learn about the Greater Metropolitan Houston Traffic Safety Planning Program aimed at reducing serious crashes, fatalities, and injuries. Data from 1999-2001 highlights the severity of the issue and the costs involved. The program focuses on monitoring safety, mapping crash data, identifying problems, and implementing roadway improvements to enhance traffic safety. Explore the high-risk behaviors and populations contributing to crashes and discover the safety activities involved in making Houston roads safer.

vhawthorne
Download Presentation

The Greater Metropolitan Houston Traffic Safety Planning Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Greater Metropolitan Houston Traffic Safety Planning Program Houston-Galveston Area Council November 9, 2004

  2. Serious Crash • Fatal crash • Injury crash • Serious property damage crash • where one or more vehicles • was towed

  3. Seriousness of Problem • 1999-2001:Houston region • 84,080 serious crashes a year • 627 fatalities a year • 93,971 persons injured a year • The region accounted for: • 26% of all statewide crashes • 27% of all statewide injury crashes • 17% of all statewide fatal crashes • The region has 22% of the statewide population • and, approximately, 21% of the statewide VMT • Likelihood of a fatal or injury crash was: • 36% higher than statewide average • 149% higher than national average

  4. Worsening Trend in Safety

  5. Costs of Motor Vehicle Crashes Human Suffering + Burden on Public Services + Medical Costs + Economic Costs + Congestion Costs = High Costs Using National Safety Council Methodology: Motor Vehicle Crashes Cost for Region = $4.0 Billion/Year for 1999-2001

  6. Annual Cost to Eight County Region • Direct Economic Costs • $1.9 billion in direct medical, property damage, • legal costs, employer costs, and lost productivity • Comprehensive Costs • $4.0 billion in direct and cumulative lifetime costs • Public Sector Costs • Unknown costs for police, EMS, and public works costs • Congestion Costs • Considerable costs in travel delay • TTI estimates 60% of congestion due to incidents, inc. crashes

  7. Purpose of the Program • Monitor Safety • Obtain data annually • Map the crashes • Identify Problems and Solutions • Identify hazardous locations and area • Conduct the necessary preliminary engineering Implement roadway improvements Identify funding sources Leverage local investment with State and Federal funds Support other safety efforts Enforcement Education Safety partnerships

  8. Combines Analytical Methodology With Policy Tools

  9. High-risk Behaviors: 1999-2001 • RegionU.S.* • Speeding 39%13% • Failing to yield 20%19% • Failing to stop 11%9% • Running a red light 8%5% • DUI 7%7% • (However, involved in 37% of fatal crashes/39% nationally) • Following too close 3%3% • Improper turn 2%2% • * National Safety Council. U.S. average for 1999. Fatal and injury crashes only

  10. High-risk Populations • RegionU.S.* • Teenagers 21%16% • (9% of driving age population/ • 5% nationally) • (17% in fatal crashes /14% nationally) • (19% in incapacitating injury crashes) • Elderly (65+) 8% 8% • (9% of driving age population/ • 13% nationally) • (11% in fatal crashes/13% nationally • 9% in incapacitating injury crashes) • Male drivers 79%60% • (Compared to 58% for females • 1.7 times more likely to be in fatal crash/ • 1.4 nationally) • * National Safety Council. U.S. average for 1999. All crashes.

  11. H-GAC Safety Activities

  12. Safety Policy Directions – the 4 “E’s” • Education • Public awareness – reports/outreach/conferences • Technical – staff/elected official/judges • Enforcement • Patrol officers • Technology • Engineering • Fixing minor hot spots – Maintenance • Fixing major hot spots - Construction • Emergency Response • Assessment • Intervention • Coordination

  13. Safety Analysis • Jurisdictional comparisons • Brazoria County / Fort Bend County / Galveston County • Harris County / Montgomery County / Houston • Alvin / Conroe / Old River-Winfree • Corridor analysis • US 59 W / SH 35 / SH 288 • SH 105 / SH 99 / FM 359 • FM 518 / FM 830 / FM 1960 • FM 2232 / FM 2432 / John F. Kennedy Blvd • Kirby Drive / Nichols Sawmill Road / Spring Steubner • SH 99/Proposed Metro North Line • Small area analysis • Texas Medical Center • Houston City Council District D

  14. City Comparisons Serious Crash Risk (Serious Crashes per 100 Million VMT) Serious CityCrash risk Pearland378 Galveston 337 Baytown 334 Rosenberg 320 Pasadena 290 Conroe 247 Houston231 Texas City 211 Sugar Land 192 Region 204 State of Texas 149

  15. Hot Spot Analysis 344 Major Hot Spots Numerous Minor Hot Spots

  16. Safety Projects & Access Management Houston East End City of Pasadena City of Galveston City of Sugar Land FM 518 FM 1960

  17. Other Safety Activities • Safety Meetings • Developing Plans for Safety Courses • Regional Safety Council

  18. Safety Web Page http://www.h-gac.com/safety

More Related