Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
NATIONAL NCHRP REPORT 617 COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Accident Modification Factors for Traffic Engineering and ITS Improvements
OCR for page R2
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2008 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* OFFICERS CHAIR: Debra L. Miller, Secretary, Kansas DOT, Topeka VICE CHAIR: Adib K. Kanafani, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS J. Barry Barker, Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, KY Allen D. Biehler, Secretary, Pennsylvania DOT, Harrisburg John D. Bowe, President, Americas Region, APL Limited, Oakland, CA Larry L. Brown, Sr., Executive Director, Mississippi DOT, Jackson Deborah H. Butler, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, VA William A.V. Clark, Professor, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles David S. Ekern, Commissioner, Virginia DOT, Richmond Nicholas J. Garber, Henry L. Kinnier Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville Jeffrey W. Hamiel, Executive Director, Metropolitan Airports Commission, Minneapolis, MN Edward A. (Ned) Helme, President, Center for Clean Air Policy, Washington, DC Will Kempton, Director, California DOT, Sacramento Susan Martinovich, Director, Nevada DOT, Carson City Michael D. Meyer, Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Michael R. Morris, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington Neil J. Pedersen, Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore Pete K. Rahn, Director, Missouri DOT, Jefferson City Sandra Rosenbloom, Professor of Planning, University of Arizona, Tucson Tracy L. Rosser, Vice President, Corporate Traffic, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Bentonville, AR Rosa Clausell Rountree, Executive Director, Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority, Atlanta Henry G. (Gerry) Schwartz, Jr., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, MO C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin Linda S. Watson, CEO, LYNXCentral Florida Regional Transportation Authority, Orlando Steve Williams, Chairman and CEO, Maverick Transportation, Inc., Little Rock, AR EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Thad Allen (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC Joseph H. Boardman, Federal Railroad Administrator, U.S.DOT Rebecca M. Brewster, President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, GA Paul R. Brubaker, Research and Innovative Technology Administrator, U.S.DOT George Bugliarello, Chancellor, Polytechnic University of New York, Brooklyn, and Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Engineering, Washington, DC Sean T. Connaughton, Maritime Administrator, U.S.DOT LeRoy Gishi, Chief, Division of Transportation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC Edward R. Hamberger, President and CEO, Association of American Railroads, Washington, DC John H. Hill, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT John C. Horsley, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC Carl T. Johnson, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT J. Edward Johnson, Director, Applied Science Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, John C. Stennis Space Center, MS William W. Millar, President, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC Nicole R. Nason, National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT James Ray, Acting Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.DOT James S. Simpson, Federal Transit Administrator, U.S.DOT Robert A. Sturgell, Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.DOT Robert L. Van Antwerp (Lt. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC *Membership as of May 2008.
OCR for page R3
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP REPORT 617 Accident Modification Factors for Traffic Engineering and ITS Improvements David L. Harkey Raghavan Srinivasan Jongdae Baek THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA HIGHWAY SAFETY RESEARCH CENTER Chapel Hill, NC Forrest M. Council Kimberly Eccles Nancy Lefler Frank Gross VANASSE HANGEN BRUSTLIN, INC. Raleigh, NC Bhagwant Persaud Craig Lyon DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING RYERSON UNIVERSITY Toronto, ON, Canada Ezra Hauer CONSULTANT Toronto, ON, Canada James A. Bonneson TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE College Station, TX Subject Areas Safety and Human Performance Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2008 www.TRB.org
OCR for page R4
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY NCHRP REPORT 617 RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective Project 17-25 approach to the solution of many problems facing highway ISSN 0077-5614 administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local ISBN: 978-0-309-11738-8 interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually Library of Congress Control Number 2008905366 or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the © 2008 Transportation Research Board accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of COPYRIGHT PERMISSION cooperative research. Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials published or copyrighted material used herein. initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission Transportation. from CRP. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board's recognized objectivity and understanding of NOTICE modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval reflects the possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, Governing Board's judgment that the program concerned is of national importance and state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council. relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review this objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due consideration for the specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and conclusions expressed research directly to those who are in a position to use them. or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research, and, while they have been accepted as appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily those of The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, the American by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or the Federal Highway and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical committee according Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State to procedures established and monitored by the Transportation Research Board Executive Committee and the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American Association of State Highway selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and and Transportation Officials, and the individual states participating in the National surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R5
OCR for page R6
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 617 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Charles W. Niessner, Senior Program Officer Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Ellen M. Chafee, Assistant Editor NCHRP PROJECT 17-25 PANEL Field of Traffic--Area of Safety John S. Miller, Virginia DOT, Charlottesville, VA (Chair) Jonathan S. Bray, New York State DOT, Albany, NY (retired) Donald L. Dean, California DOT, Sacramento, CA Keith R. Gates, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, DC Rashad Hanbali, Department of Public Works, Cape Coral, FL Mohammad M. Khan, Ohio DOT, Columbus, Ohio (retired) Douglas McKelvey, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Washington, DC (retired) Do H. Nam, T-CONCEPTS, Madison Heights, MI Eileen Rackers, Missouri DOT, Jefferson City, MO Michael D. Freitas, FHWA Liaison Richard F. Pain, TRB Liaison
OCR for page R7
FOREWORD By Charles W. Niessner Staff Officer Transportation Research Board This report presents the findings of a research project to develop accident modification factors (AMFs) for traffic engineering and ITS improvements. AMFs are a tool for quickly estimating the impact of safety improvements. The report will be of particular interest to safety practitioners responsible for programming and implementing highway safety improvements. Accident modification factors (AMFs), also known as crash reduction factors, provide a computationally simple and quick way of estimating crash reductions. Many states and local agencies have a set of crash reduction factors that are used for estimating the safety impacts of various types of engineering improvements, encompassing the areas of signing, align- ment, channelization, and other traffic engineering solutions. Typically, these factors are computed using before-and-after comparisons, although recent research also has suggested the use of cross-sectional comparisons. Currently, AMFs are often used in program planning to make decisions concerning whether to implement a specific treatment and/or to quickly determine the costs and ben- efits of selected alternatives. AMFs are also used in project development for nonsafety as well as safety-specific projects and could be used by agencies in deciding on policies affecting general project design (e.g., context-sensitive design solutions and traffic calming). AMFs are also key components of the latest safety-estimation tools and procedures, including the Interactive Highway Safety Design Model and the procedures now being developed for the Highway Safety Manual. Even though accurate AMFs are critically important to states and municipalities in their attempts to achieve the greatest return on investment when choosing among alternative safety treatments, there is no accepted standard set of AMFs. This is because the accuracy and reliability of many published AMFs is questionable, and no AMFs exist for many impor- tant safety treatments. The sources of the problem include the lack of AMFs for newer treat- ments and for common combinations of treatments. AMFs also vary with factors such as traffic volume, and in some evaluations, crash migration and spillover effects that result from some treatments are not accounted for in the AMF. However, the major problems with many existing AMFs result from the poor data and poor evaluation methods used in their development. Often, AMFs are based on simple before-after studies of high-crash loca- tions, and the results can be very biased toward overestimating accident reductions. Under NCHRP Project 17-25, "Crash Reduction Factors for Traffic Engineering and ITS Improvements," researchers at the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center developed or modified AMFs for a number of high-priority treatments. The research team reviewed the literature and ongoing research related to AMF development and pre-
OCR for page R8
pared an initial list of treatments deemed to be important in safety decisions. A survey of state DOTs expanded the list to 100 treatments. The determination of which of the many possible AMFs should be developed or improved was based on several factors, including the results of the state survey, the measure of crash-related harm that might be affected by the treatment, and the availability of data needed in AMF development or improvement. Two approaches were used in developing the AMFs. The first approach was the rigorous statistical evaluation of crash data, with priority given to conducting as many empirical Bayes before-after evaluations of the high-priority treatments as possible. The second approach to AMF development/modification involved two analysis-driven expert panels. In summary, this project has verified, modified, or developed 35 AMFs that are deemed to be of high or medium-high quality. These have been documented in formats that are usable by both practitioners and researchers. These AMFs are the primary project outputs. However, the project has also documented both a process that can be used with future analysis-driven expert panels and the detailed discussions of the two expert panels that were part of this effort. This material should be helpful in future efforts to develop or improve AMFs. Finally, the project developed and documented a procedure for ranking needed AMF research that incorporates not only state DOT user and researcher opinions and knowledge of the quality of AMFs in the published literature, but also a method for estimating how crash-related harm might be affected by each treatment. An approach combining these pro- cedures could also be used in more global efforts to prioritize roadway safety research needs in general.
OCR for page R9
CONTENTS 1 Summary 4 Chapter 1 Introduction 4 The Problem 5 Project Objective and Overview 8 Organization of Report 9 Chapter 2 Status of Existing AMFs and Identification of AMF Needs 9 Extracting Information on Existing AMFs and Determining AMF Quality 11 Prioritizing Phase II Efforts to Develop Additional AMFs 17 Summary 18 Chapter 3 Development of New AMFs through Analysis or Reanalysis of Crash Data 18 Introduction 19 Overview of the Empirical Bayes (EB) Methodology 19 Installation of a Rural Traffic Signal 21 Conversion of an Undivided Four-Lane Road to Three Lanes and a Two-Way Left-Turn Lane--a "Road Diet" 22 Increasing Pavement Friction on Roadway Segments and at Intersection Approaches 24 Signalized Intersection Treatments in Urban Areas 26 Speed Change and Crashes 27 Effect of Median Width 30 Chapter 4 Development of New AMFs through Expert Panels 30 Introduction 30 Members of the Panels 30 Procedures Followed 33 Results 34 Chapter 5 Compilation of Recommended AMFs 34 Introduction 34 AMF Summaries 68 Chapter 6 Conclusions 70 References 74 Appendices
OCR for page R10
AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Project 17-25. The University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center (HSRC) was the contractor for this study. Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. (VHB) and Ryerson University were subcontractors. Authors of this report are David Harkey (Director, HSRC), Forrest Council (Senior Research Scientist, VHB), Raghavan Srinivasan (Senior Trans- portation Research Engineer, HSRC), Craig Lyon (Ryerson University), Bhagwant Persaud (Ryerson Uni- versity), Kimberly Eccles (VHB), Nancy Lefler (VHB), Frank Gross (VHB), Jongdae Baek (HSRC), Ezra Hauer (Consultant), and James A. Bonneson (Texas Transportation Institute). Mr. Harkey served as the Principal Investigator for this effort. The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance and support of others who made this project a success. Two expert panels were convened to review current knowledge and develop accident modification factors (AMFs) for both urban/suburban arterials and rural multilane roads. These panels included the following individuals, and the authors express their thanks to them for their efforts before, during and after the actual panel meetings. · Dr. James A. Bonneson, Texas Transportation Institute · Mr. Doug Harwood, Midwest Research Institute · Dr. Ezra Hauer, Independent Consultant · Mr. Loren Hill, Minnesota DOT · Dr. Dominique Lord, Texas A&M University · Mr. Brian Mayhew, North Carolina DOT · Mr. Stan Polanis, City of Winston Salem · Dr. Simon Washington, Arizona State University · Mr. Thomas Welch, Iowa DOT The authors also wish to express additional thanks to Mr. Stan Polanis, Traffic Engineer for the City of Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for his assistance in efforts to improve AMFs for five key urban treat- ments. Mr. Polanis provided the authors with detailed information on the specifics of treatment imple- mentation in Winston-Salem along with before-treatment and after-treatment crash data that had been manually screened by his staff. His efforts were significant and critical to the success of that project task. Finally, because the project involved the assessment and improvement of existing AMFs and the devel- opment of new ones through multiple approaches that could not all be envisioned at the beginning of the effort, there was considerable interaction with both NCHRP staff and the NCHRP project oversight panel. The authors wish to express sincere thanks to NCHRP Senior Program Officer Charles Niessner for his assistance throughout the project and to the individual members of the project panel, who provided extremely helpful feedback on the many documents they were asked to review.