best practices for systemic safety planning
TRANSCRIPT
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 1
Best Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
Hillary Isebrands, PE, PhDFHWA, Resource Center, Safety and Design
National Technical Service Team720-545-4367
Glen Rose Hwy, Granbury, TX
Texas SHSP (2017-2022)
2
Emphasis Areas• Distracted driving• Impaired driving• Intersection safety• Older road users• Pedestrian safety• Roadway and lane
departures• Speeding
3,218, 8%
8,301, 21%
5,467, 14%
3,335, 8%3,490, 9%
10,652, 27%
5,360, 13%
TX Fatalities (2010‐2016)
Distracted Driving Impaired Driving
Intersections Older Road Users
Pedestrians Roadway & Lane Departures
Speeding
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 2
Poll 1
• How many fatalities are in your District, Jurisdiction or Community each year?a) 0
b) Between 1 ‐ 50
c) Between 51 to 100
d) Between 101 – 500
e) Between 501 – 1,000
f) >1,000
g) I do not know
TxDOT - Safety Improvement Program Guidelines – June 2020
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot‐info/trf/hsip/hsip‐guidance‐june‐2020.pdf
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 3
Terminology
• Site‐Specific approach (aka hot‐spot or high crash location):• deploying site‐specific improvements at locations with the highest frequency of crashes• E.g. installing a roundabout at a intersection experiencing a large number of severe crashes
• Systematic Approach (aka system wide or policy‐based):• deploy countermeasures on an entire system
• E.g. installing edgeline pavement markings on all paved routes
• Systemic approach: • deploy cost‐effective countermeasures at locations with the greatest risk
• E.g. installing chevrons and enhanced pavement markings at curves with radii between 500‐1000 ft
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 4
Definition: Systemic Safety
The term "systemic safety improvement" means an improvement that is widely implemented based on high‐risk roadway features that are correlated with particular crash types, rather than crash frequency.‐‐ 23 USC 148 (a)(12) Systemic safety improvement
Source: FHWA
Systemic Safety Explanation Video
https://youtu.be/iGlFGvxmoiQ
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsdp/ddsa_resources/ddsa_systemic_analysis.pdf
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 5
Benefits of a Systemic Safety Planning Approach
• Proactive program to address likelihood of severe crashes• Addresses 'random' nature of severe crashes
• Greater knowledge of severe crashes• Contributing factors and location characteristics• Improve planning, design, and maintenance practices
• Risk management for tort liability
• Focus on low cost proven safety countermeasures
Random Nature of Crashes
20122013201420152016
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 6
Safety Data and Risks to Consider….
Crash
Traffic Volume
MaintenanceLogs
RoadSafetyAudits
Enforcement
Roadway
SafetyData
11
Source: FHWA
Source: FHWA
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 7
FHWA’s Systemic Safety Tool
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/systemic/fhwasa13019/sspst.pdfhttps://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/systemic/pdf/fhwasa17002.pdf
FHWA Local Road Safety Plan – Do it Yourself Websitehttps://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/LRSPDIY/
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 8
Systemic Safety Process
1. Systemic Safety Planning Process
2. Funding‐ Program and Implementation
3. Evaluate Effectiveness
3 Elements:
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
Tasks 1 & 2: Identify Focus Crash Types and Facility Types
16
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 9
Identify Focus Crash Types & Facilities
Fatal and Severe Injury Crashes (5 Years)Percent by Jurisdiction
Emphasis AreaStatewide114,592 mi
State15,486 mi
County19,938 mi
City, Town, Village76,735 mi
Total Fatal/Serious Injury 100% 63,443 31% 19,819 10% 6,572 45% 28,597
Pedestrian 19% 11,786 9% 1,860 6% 421 28% 8,122
Bicycle 5% 3,390 3% 518 3% 187 8% 2,414
Heavy Vehicle 5% 3,123 6% 1,266 4% 234 4% 1,051
Road Departure 26% 16,668 30% 5,985 44% 2,892 18% 5,128
Intersection 41% 25,791 25% 5,033 30% 1,957 64% 18,270
Head‐on and Sideswipe 5% 3,071 7% 1,439 7% 490 3% 887
18
WA Crash Data Comparison for Risks
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 10
19
Crash Tree Diagrams – Statewide/Rural
Crash Tree Diagram - Palm Beach County, FL
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 11
Crash Tree Combinations
Primary
• State / local
• Rural / urban
• Segment / intersection
• Segment type• Freeway, multilane, two‐lane, one‐way
• Intersection control• Signalized
• Unsignalized
• Uncontrolled
Secondary
• Tangent / curve
• High‐speed / low‐speed
• Street lighting
• District or regions
• Traffic volume
• Lane width
• Shoulder type/width
• Alignment
• Land use
FHWA STEP - Pedestrian Countermeasure Matrix
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/step/docs/STEP_Guide_for_Improving_Ped_Safety_at_Unsig_Loc_3‐2018_07_17‐508compliant.pdf
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 12
Crash Data Summary Template & Crash Tree Maker v 2.0 – Coming Soon
Poll 2
Have you used a Crash Decision Tree or Countermeasure Decision Tree before when making decisions for prioritization of projects or countermeasures?
a) Yes
b) No
c) No, but I would like to
d) I do not know
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 13
Task 3: Identify & Evaluate Risk Factors
25
What we mean by “risk factor”
A representation of risk in terms of the observed characteristics associated with the locations where the targeted crash types occurred.
26
Source: FHWA
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 14
Potential Risk Factors
• Number of lanes
• Lane width
• Shoulder width / type
• Median width / type
• Driveway density
• Roadside
• Horizontal curvature• Superelevation• Delineation• Advance warning• Speed differential• Visual trap
2727
• Traffic control device
• Left‐turn or right‐turn lanes
• Skew angle
• Advance warning signs
• Located in or near horizontal curve
• Type of development (e.g., commercial)
• Signals• Left‐turn phasing• Number of signal heads vs. number of lanes
• Backplates• Right‐turn‐on‐red• Overhead versus pedestal mounted
Roadway Dep
arture
Intersections
Potential Risk Factors - Pedestrians
• Ped volumes
• Controlled or uncontrolled• Type (if controlled)
• Marked or unmarked
• Pedestrian signal/type• Sidewalk presence• Lighting• Bus Stops• Adjacent land use type
• Schools• commercial, or alcohol establishments
28
Pedestrians
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 15
Examples of Potential Risk Factors
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
Percent
Curve Radius (ft)
Horizontal Curve Radius
Percent of Severe Crashes Percent of Severe Lane Departure Crashes Percent of Curves 29
62% of Severe Crashes occurred on 41% of the Curves
Examples of Potential Risk Factors
Edge Clearance 1
Edge Clearance 2
Edge Clearance 3
30
17%(45)
64%(170)
19%(52)
24%(54)
45%(102)
31%(70)
22%(8)
42%(15) 36%
(13)
Edge Clearance 1 Edge Clearance 2 Edge Clearance 3
Percent of Curve Inventory (267)Percent Injury (226)Percent Severe (36)
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 16
Qualitative Approach to Risk Factors
Use qualitative ratings when needed:
• Traffic volume: high, medium, or low
• Curves: sharp or flat
• Shoulder width: wide, narrow or none
• Lane width: typical or narrow
• Roadside: good, fair, poor
Poll 3
List some of your biggest risk factors in your jurisdiction or community (select all that apply)
a) Curves
b) Intersections
c) Number of Lanes (peds)
d) 2 lane rural
e) Other
32
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 17
Systemic Safety Planning Process
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
Example - Simple Risk Factor Scoring
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 18
Systemic Safety Planning Process
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
36http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 19
Systemic Safety Planning Process
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
Example of Balancing Programs
Site‐Specific
Systemic
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/planning.cfm
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 20
State DOT Examples of Systemic Benefit Cost Requirements
• Indiana• No Benefit Cost required for Approved Systemic Safety Improvements
• California• A minimum Benefit Cost Ratio may be established in each cycle of the HSIP call for projects. The project selection results from the previous HSIP cycles indicates that the cut‐off BCR can be well above 1.0.
• Minnesota
Summary
• How Healthy is your Road System?
• How can Systemic Safety enhance safety on your roadways?
• Are you deploying proven safety countermeasures on your projects?
• What are some of the Systemic Safety Planning and Analysisresources?
TxDOT Short CourseBest Practices for Systemic Safety Planning
October 2020
FHWA Resource Center 21
Contact Information
• Heather L. Lott, P.E.Traffic Engineering Section Director, Traffic Safety Division, TxDOT512‐416‐[email protected]
• Hillary Isebrands, PE, PhDSenior Safety Engineer/Team LeaderFHWA – Resource Center720‐545‐[email protected]
• Stephen (Steve) J. Ratke, P.E., RSP1Safety and Traffic Operations SpecialistFHWA ‐ Texas Division512‐536‐5924 – [email protected]
• Karen Scurry, PEFHWA Office of Safety 202‐897‐[email protected]
Thank You!
Have a Safe Day!