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 45
45 For a number of reasons, the local transit agencies were Collisions by Severity either unwilling or unable to provide collision data in a data- Of the eight datasets provided by the transit agencies, three base format. For example, the Santa Clara Valley Transporta- contained information regarding fatalities and three con- tion Authority declined to provide a database extract due to tained information regarding injuries resulting from LRT privacy concerns. San Francisco MUNI was initially willing to collisions. Table 21 and Table 22 show injuries and fatalities provide a database, but ultimately decided that they did not respectively. Both tables show the manner of collision by local have the authority to release the information. SEPTA was also transit agency. willing to provide a complete database, but was unable due to The high vulnerability of pedestrians is very clear: pedes- a lack of staff resources. Due to the inability of the local transit trians account for 75% of fatalities. They also account for agencies to provide comprehensive collision databases, it was 33% of injuries. The results of Table 21 are similar to those of not possible to conduct a comprehensive, accurate assessment Table 15, which also showed the vulnerability of pedestrians. of the collision data available at the local agency level. Comparison of Databases Analysis of Local Transit Agency Collision Data The purpose of this section is to assess the consistency of collision data across the three levels of transit administration. This section summarizes the main findings of the analy- Despite the limited response to requests for collision data, the sis of the local transit agencies' collision data. As only eight databases obtained provide useful insight into how informa- local transit agencies supplied data, and there were gaps in tion is transferred between the different levels of transit agen- the data provided, the analysis was limited. The analysis of cies. The data provided by the local transit agencies contained the NTD data in the Analysis of the NTD Database section sufficient detail to identify individual incidents that were con- is more comprehensive. tained in multiple databases. The hierarchical structure of data reporting provides the opportunity to assess the consis- Location of Collisions tency of data across the levels of transit administration and determine whether there are significant differences in the Only the SEPTA database provided any detail regarding ROW data recorded in each that might have implications on their classification. The data provided by the other local transit agen- suitability for analysis. cies consistently excluded information on the ROW classifica- The purpose of data collection differs for the NTD, the tion of the LRT alignment, and indicated only whether each SSOs, and the local transit agencies. As local transit agencies collision occurred on an exclusive ROW or in mixed-traffic con- may have their own specific reasons for collecting certain col- ditions. Table 20 shows the number of collisions by ROW clas- lision data, and are only required to report collisions meeting sification for SEPTA between the years 2002 and 2007. specific criteria to the NTD and SSO agencies, it is likely that Table 20 shows that the vast majority of LRT collisions on some of their collisions are not included in the SSO of NTD the SEPTA transit system occurred in mixed traffic. This is database. All the collision data in the NTD and SSO agency consistent with the findings of the NTD analysis outlined in database should, however, be found in the applicable local the Location of Collisions section. agency databases. Table 20. SEPTA collisions by alignment type (ROW classification), 20022007. Route Classification SEPTA Route Exclusive ROW Mixed Traffic Unknown Interurban RT Route 100 14 Suburban Trolley Route 101 66 41 1 Route 102 72 33 1 Subway-Surface Trolley Route 10 3 486 1 Route 11 287 1 Route 13 4 277 2 Route 34 3 131 Route 36 36 236 1 Surface Trolley Route 15 406 Total 198 1897 7