State Practices for Local Road Safety (2016)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

C-1 APPENDIX C REPoRtED SAfEty PRogRAmS AND PRACtICES AImED At LoCAL RoAD SAfEty of tEN SELECtED StAtES Each of the ten states interviewed as part of this synthesis, along with a number of local agency or other organizational counter- parts within that state, described state-coordinated safety pro- grams and/or initiatives aimed at improving local road safety. Specific local road safety programs and practices that address challenges in reducing fatal and injury crashes are included within each of the sections listed in this Appendix C. CoNNECtICUt StAtE SAfEty PRogRAmS AImED At LoCAL AgENCIES Background The state of Connecticut has approximately 21,470 miles of roadway of which 17,700 miles are maintained by local agen- cies. In Connecticut, there is no county government system but rather 169 municipalities. Local road programs and projects are handled by the central office, Highway Design-Local Roads that oversees various programs, including small safety projects, for local road improvement with a current staff of nine to handle a variety of consultant designed improvements. Safety-related local road programs are run by the Safety Engineering Unit in Traffic Engineering with a staff size of five. The Connecticut Department of Transportation (CT DOT) has the responsibility to oversee capital improvement projects of local roads, while the local jurisdictions maintain their own roads. As traffic vol- ume and roadway inventory data for the majority of local roads are not available, CT DOT annually solicits the Rural Planning Organization (RPO) for inputs on potential improvements on behalf of their member towns to address local roads safety con- cerns. According to 2014 Highway Safety Improvement Program (HISP) report, approximately $1.8 million is programmed from HSIP Section 148 and Section 154 funds, of which approximately $1.5 million is programmed to local safety projects. In 1985, to address local roads safety issues, CT DOT estab- lished the Local Road Accident Reduction Program (LRARP) in accordance with revisions made to the Hazard Elimination Program in the 1982 Surface Transportation Assistance Act 49 U.S.C. § 31105. With MAP-21, CT DOT is currently updating its Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) by involving various stakeholders [e.g., RPO representatives, municipal police office, and members from the Connecticut Technology Transfer Center (CT T2 Center, Connecticut’s Local Technical Assistance Pro- gram, LTAP)]. As a result, roadway departure crashes will likely continue to be an emphasis area and local roads will be a target area for crash reductions. Information gathered from an inter- view with CT DOT indicated that with the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), CT DOT has begun spending safety funds on its local roads. With this change, CT DOT is collaborating on three initiatives with the University of Connecticut and the CT T2 Center to develop a comprehensive safety analysis strategic plan and to promote local roads safety. Safety Program/Initiative Safety Circuit Rider Program The Safety Circuit Rider (SCR) program aims to provide safety information, training, and field technical assistance for local governments that was previously lacking. According to the inter- view with the CT T2 Center Director, the LTAP identified the need for the SCR program 15 years ago. In 2013, funding approval was received through the HSIP, which formed the establishment of SCR program in March 2014. The annual cost of the program is $200,000, which includes one full-time Safety Circuit Rider. The services of the SRC program, including technical assis- tance and training through the new Safety Academy program, are provided at no cost to local agencies. The close teamwork between the CT DOT Safety Engineer and Safety Circuit Rider has advanced a statewide safety program that covers 169 munic- ipalities. At the time of this synthesis, the SCR program was in the second year of the initial two-year program. Program goals include, but are not limited to, coordination of Road Safety Audits (RSAs), identification of low-cost safety improvements, and assistance to local agencies in the development of local road safety plans. Traffic Signal Systems Circuit Rider Program There are approximately 3,200 traffic signal systems in Con- necticut of which 80% are owned and maintained by state DOT. A FHWA program review, conducted in 2011 (FHWA 2012), addressed the challenges that municipal agencies face in effec- tively managing their traffic signal systems. In November 2014, the CT T2 Center, through program funding from CT DOT [Con- gestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) fund], implemented Connecticut’s first Traffic Signal Systems Circuit Rider. Using a model based on the SCR program, the Traffic Signal Systems Circuit Rider program provides no-cost technical assistance and training to local agency representative’s responsible for municipal traffic signals. Similar to the SCR program, one full-time Traffic Signal Systems Circuit Rider delivers services associated with traffic signals from field assistance with traffic signal system retiming projects to working with Connecticut regional planning agencies to promote opportunities for municipalities to consider federal-aid funding for traffic signal operations. Crash Data Repository System Data-driven approaches to safety analysis provided support for the development of Connecticut’s first Crash Data Repository (CT CDR; www.ctcrash.uconn.edu). Based on the crash information collected by state and local polices, the CT CDR is a web-based tool designed to provide access to the crash database. With these data repository, users are able to query, analyze and print/export the data for research and informational purposes. The purpose of the CT CDR is to provide members of the traffic-safety community with timely, accurate, complete and uniform crash data. Users can assign complex queries of datasets such as, by route, route class, collision type, and injury severity. An interview with CT T2 Center indicated that this centralized crash data repository will help access to local roads data and make informed safety decisions. Figures C1 and C2 present sample query options of CT CDR. Local Road System Safety and Performance CT DOT applies a combined reactive and proactive method in identifying and prioritizing local road projects. Based on

C-2 the latest crash data repository system, the four-year-moving average of serious injury and fatal crashes shows a consistent decrease for both state and local roadway systems (Figure C3). Town of South Windsor The Town of South Windsor has a population of 25,700 with 140 roadway miles and is participating in the SCR program. An interview with the Town of South Windsor reported that the CT DOT staffs’ effort to connect and partner with the municipalities has helped identify its local roads safety issues. As a result of the partnership between the state and town, an RSA was performed for a couple of problem areas and an example is presented in web-only Appendix D. The Safety Circuit Rider’s outreach brought many municipalities’ awareness of the corresponding program. For specific impacts of the SCR program, the town reported that it has been placing the reflective inserts in the poles on various stop, curve, and island signs with very positive feed- back from residents. The Town of South Windsor is also work- ing on updating its sign inventory, street tree clearing, and sign replacement program. FIGURE C1 Sample CT CDR town and route class query. FIGURE C2 Sample CT CDR advanced summary query.

C-3 After experiencing the benefits from the SCR Program, the town has established its own Local Road Safety Committee in January 2015 as presented in web-only Appendix D. Though early to present the SCR program’s effectiveness, information collected from the interview pointed a positive impact of CT T2 Center and CT DOT’s continuous outreach effort. The Town of South Windsor also reported that CT T2 Center built bridges between all the transportation stakeholders in Connecticut with noticeable positive attitudes on how local roads safety projects are conducted. Town of Wethersfield The Town of Wethersfield, an urban town, has a population of approximately 26,670. The town reported that the no-cost initial consultation through the SCR program was one of the incentives to contact Safety Circuit Rider. The interview with the Town of Wethersfield indicated that the SCR program was exceptionally helpful as it offered various “out-of-the-box” problem solving aspects by a safety professional who was not from the same town. When asked about the main barriers in developing local road safety plan, the town noted lack of resources and an incompre- hensive traffic data that did not show roads that are safety hazards. Addressing Challenges Both the SCR Program and Traffic Signal Systems Circuit Rider Program are at an initial phase of program full development. Inter- views with Safety Circuit Rider, state DOT, CT T2 Center, and local agencies reported that identifying the right contact person, getting all the stakeholders in one table, and limitation of local agency resources are major challenges in enhancing local roads safety. To address these challenges, a majority of interviewees identified integration of field personnel and CT T2 Center mem- bers into different CT DOT safety committees to keep involved with current policies and issues and continuous outreach to dis- seminate and raise programs awareness to local agencies. Also mentioned is the importance of the collaboration between the LTAP, the Safety Engineer at CT DOT, and the Safety Engineer at the Connecticut FHWA Division office. To address issues with limited roadway data inventory on local roads, particularly traffic counts, the Connecticut Cooper- ative Transportation Research Program (CCTRP) is sponsoring a research effort developing local road crash prediction mod- els that do not require traffic counts. The approach is to apply already-available planning level data (e.g., population, employ- ment, land use, etc.) in evaluating local road safety issues where a local roadway traffic and physical inventory database is not available or limited. Summary The state of Connecticut showed a good example of a well- coordinated effort between its DOT, LTAP, and local agencies to improve local road safety. With the MAP-21 requirement that led to the SHSP update, CT DOT has actively launched two major safety initiatives: Safety Circuit Rider Program and Traffic Sig- nal Systems Circuit Program. The interviews with various parties showed positive feedback of both initiatives though they are still in an early stage. Limitations of local agency resources, bring- ing together various stakeholders, and identifying correct contact persons at both local and state levels remain primary challenges. To address these challenges, a majority of the interviewees iden- tified integration of field personnel and CT T2 Center members into different CT DOT safety committees to keep involved with current policies and issues. This collaboration would provide FIGURE C3 Yearly number of fatal and serious injury (Source: CT DOT Crash Data Repository System). 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 N um be r of F at al C ra sh N um be r of S er io us I nj ur y C ra sh Statewide Serious Injury Crash StatewideFatal Crash State Routes Serious Injury Crash State Routes Fatal Crash Local Routes Serious Injury Crash Local Routes Fatal Crash

C-4 continuous outreach to disseminate and raise program awareness to local agencies. The interview with CT DOT and LTAP staffs also reported the importance of the collaboration between the LTAP, the Safety Engineer at CT DOT, and the Safety Engineer at the Connecticut FHWA Division office. fLoRIDA StAtE SAfEty PRogRAmS AImED At LoCAL AgENCIES Background In the state of Florida, 107,760 miles of roadway, 88% of all public roads, are locally owned and maintained. Florida Depart- ment of Transportation (FDOT) is decentralized in accordance with legislative mandates and, therefore, each of the districts is managed by a District Secretary. Local road programs and proj- ects are handled by both the central (planning and programming) and district offices (implementation) with a staff of about five to ten persons at district level. FDOT reported that in the past five years, out of an approximate annual $100 million HSIP fund, an annual average of $20 million is allocated to local road proj- ects. The Community Traffic Safety Team (CTST) program and District 7 Local Agency Safety Program that integrates various strategies are noteworthy practices in the state of Florida. Safety Program/Initiative Community Traffic Safety Team Created in response to the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1990, the CTST Program is a multi-disciplined Federal, State and Local Government program established to enhance roadway safety funded through Section 402 Highway Safety Grants. Each district differs in number of CTSTs and has a full-time CTST coordinator who interacts closely with Cen- tral FDOT Safety Office. An interview with a county engineer identified that in District 1, the CTST is the main channel for the state DOT to work with local agencies for RSAs and other safety concerns. Though not formally assessed, a reduction in crashes or “near misses” is observed in locations where roadside safety audits have occurred. Another interview with a local agency in District 7 also identified CTST regular meetings as an avenue for local agencies to share safety information where district DOT staffs invite local agencies to learn about available safety programs, ultimately resulting in local safety projects funding. Additionally, in District 7, as part of the application process for funding through FDOT District 7 and the HSIP, applicants are required to attend four CTST meetings per year and, at one of those meeting, the applicant is required to present their organiza- tion’s safety project. District 7 Local Agency Safety Program District 7 has proven success in streamlining federal funds to sup- port local road safety and in bringing efficient communication with local agencies through a Local Agency Project Safety Program and the dedicated efforts of district safety engineers. District 7 includes five counties (Citrus, Hernando, Hillsborough, Pasco and Pinellas) in the Tampa Bay area and has shown higher fatalities and seri- ous injuries compared with other districts. The interview with the District Safety Engineer showed that the use of a layered approach to access and use federal funds for local roads safety has not only resulted in positive impacts such as crash reduction, but also pro- vided an awareness of local funding opportunities. Figure C4 describes a five-layered approach with each layer’s key components. Each layer can be applied individually or com- FIGURE C4 FDOT District 7 five-layered approach.

C-5 bined, depending on the local agency’s needs. The first layer focuses on the use of HSIP funds for low-cost safety improve- ments on local roads where neither additional funding from local agencies nor a formal contracting process is required. Through an informal solicitation process, local agencies submit an online application. An annual budget of $350,000 is allot- ted to District 7 for such improvements. Local agencies install and maintain purchased safety equipment through this process. While the second layer provides technical assistance for local agencies, the third layer introduces a contract template that covers the project process from design to construction, named design-build push button. The design-build push button is a project delivery method developed from a 2007 pilot program and details of the design-build push button are presented on the link provided in Appendix E. The local agency program (LAP) procurement process for local agencies and local force account agreement are fourth and fifth layers main elements respectively (Merrefield et al. 2015). The LAP agreement is waived for the first three layers, which also allowed many local agencies’ safety project participation. The following elements are the initiatives the District 7 uses to achieve the five-layered approach. Design-Build Push Button First executed in 2009, the design-build push button is a contract template that allows state DOT to implement safety projects in a more streamlined process for state or local roads using federal safety fund. This process addresses urgent safety issues more expediently than the traditional design-bid-build process. By pre-selecting and pre-qualifying contract teams with already- negotiated project item prices, the design-build push button ultimately saves time and money. Safety projects to be con- sidered through the design-build push button process should not require additional or new right-of-way acquisition with minimal impacts to utility systems. The primary benefits of design-build push button contracts are: reduced project schedule and fund; creation of construction jobs; and primarily, fast safety improvements through a streamlined process that ultimately save lives. FDOT District 7 reported that as of November 2014, more than 150 miles of roadway were equipped with audible vibratory pavement markings and approximately 550 inter- sections designed with high-emphasis crossing markings. Over the past four years (2011–2014), a total of $4.8 million has been awarded through design-build push button contracts. Details of the design-build push button are provided on the link in Appendix E. Safety Summit and Local Agency Traffic Safety Academy Established in 2010, the District 7 annual Safety Summit is a fully-funded (federal and/or state) forum where all parties involved in local road safety exchange information to address local roads safety concerns. The most recent summit was held in January 2015. A range of topics, from a federal safety fund application process to implemented project evaluation, are covered during the Safety Summit. Safety ambassadors, usu- ally selected from professionals who worked in public and private sectors, are also introduced during the summit to assist local agencies in answering every aspect of local road safety project. Interviews with local agencies in District 7 reported that through the Safety Summit, the presentation of an overall HSIP fund application process with specific timeline tables led their agencies to engage in applying HSIP funds. First offered in October 2013, the Local Agency Traf- fic Safety Academy (LATSA) is a free webinar series focused on information regarding safety-related issues. Open to the public interested in promoting local roads safety, LATSA is funded by HSIP to support and enhance local agency safety programs. Local Agency Safety Funding Guide for Off-System Roadways Manual and Design Contract Developed in 2012, the Local Agency Safety Funding Guide for Off-System Roadways provides a detailed explanation of the HSIP process and guides local agencies through the application process. The manual has been updated annually to reflect all rules and policy changes. The most recent ver- sion was published in April 2015 and the website link is pro- vided in Appendix E. There is also a dedicated districtwide design contract for off-system safety projects. Approximately a $500,000 annual fund is assigned and while FDOT District 7 provides design service, local agencies are in charge of con- struction and maintenance. Signal Four Analytics Signal Four Analytics is a statewide interactive, web-based geospatial crash analytical tool that allows visualization and anal ysis of crash information. Funded by the Florida Traffic Records Coordinating Committee to improve accessibility and utilization of traffic records in the state, Signal Four Analytics presents a new concept for crash intersection diagrams that integrates GIS maps, crash features (e.g., crash injury level, crash type, driver’s behavioral information etc.), and two- dimensional bubble charts that can be interactively explored. The system hosts a crash database that is updated daily and contains more than four million crash records from all state and local roads since the year 2006. Open to any state of Flor- ida’s public agencies, the system is designed to support the crash mapping and analysis needs of law enforcement, traffic engineering, and transportation planning agencies. Local agen- cies have direct access to the system after registering online. Currently more than 2,000 users across 300 state, regional, and local agencies are using this system. Figure C5 presents a screen shot of Signal Four Analytics that displays detailed crash information together with the corresponding roadway map and summary charts. Local Road System Safety and Performance FDOT has initiated efforts to combine reactive and proactive methods in identifying and prioritizing local road projects through District 7’s Local Agency Safety Program and Inter- section Safety Implementation efforts in Districts 2 and 3. As presented during Strategic Highway Safety Plan Performance Review Summary meeting in November 2014, a consistent decreasing pattern of five-year average fatalities and serious injuries was observed across all the districts. Figure C6 illus- trates average count of serious injuries and fatalities associ- ated with lane departure and young driver crashes, FDOT’s SHSP focus areas. Compared to other districts, District 7 showed a significant decrease in serious injuries and fatalities number and exceeded its target. In Figure C7, the number of fatalities and serious injuries related to lane departure crash is presented per road ownership.

C-6 District 7 also noticed an increase in the application number of local agencies for HSIP safety funds as well as the awarded HSIP fund amount. For example, in 2012 and 2013, there were $13–16 million project fund requests from six to ten local agen- cies, resulting in an annual average of total $4.5 million approved project fund. In 2014, there was an increase to more than 25 local agencies, requesting a total of $11.3 million in project funds. A total of 55 projects valuing at $8.5 million have been awarded—almost double the awards from the previous years. Applications submitted in years 2013 and 2014 for local cor- ridor signal timing projects have all been approved for HSIP funding amounting to approximately $1 million. According to the recent FDOT District 7’s safety fund summary, a total of 118 projects totaling to approximately $23 million were funded through HISP over the past four years (2011–2014). District 7 also focused on educational program, especially for high school students in its five counties that demonstrated positive results as presented in Figure C7. Pasco County Pasco County, one of District 7’s counties, has a population of more than 475,200 and includes five major cities and one town. Pasco County participated in the safety equipment purchase program, part of the D7 Local Agency Safety Program, for more than four years from year 2010. Details of safety equip- ment program are presented in Appendix D, District 7 Local Agency Safety Program slides. Britesticks, retroreflective strips on the sign support posts, were installed at several locations on FIGURE C5 Screenshot of the Signal Four Analytics. FIGURE C6 FDOT lane departure and young driver crash statistics (Source: Strategic Highway Safety Plan Performance Review Summary meeting, Nov. 2014).

C-7 FIGURE C7 FDOT state highway system and local roads crash statistics (Source: Strategic Highway Safety Plan Performance Review Summary meeting, Nov. 2014). the curved roadway to enhance the visibility of traffic control signs. A before/after study showed approximately a 41% reduc- tion in departure curve lane crashes, which is more than double the national average crash modification factor of 20%. Details of the corresponding project and a before/after study are pre- sented as part of web-only Appendix D. In June 2013, Pasco County was awarded with a $1.9 million construction fund to correct a substandard horizontal curve that had critical run-off- the-road crash problems. The design was provided by a FDOT safety consultant and is currently under construction through LAP approach. Hillsborough County Hillsborough County is the fourth largest county in the state of Florida with a population more than 1.2 million. Informa- tion from interviews indicated that Hillsborough County had a long and high level partnership with District 7 in conduct- ing various successful local roads safety projects. District 7’s leadership in notification of local agencies regarding funding programs and providing assistance to prepare the necessary applications and agreements has significantly benefited Hills- borough County. Started in 2012 and recently completed in 2014, the Fletcher Avenue Complete Streets project aims to address a high number of pedestrian crashes. The $5 million project was partially funded with $3 million from federal funding. FDOT decided to adopt few of the innovation used in this local road safety project— as one of the statewide pedestrian/bike safety engineering tools. The 1.5-mile segment involved the installation of additional mid- crossings with Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) and a full pedestrian signal at one location in addition to existing signal at intersection. The project also included pedestrian mid- block crossing at installed median islands with light-emitting diode (LED) lighting which activated simultaneously with the pushing of the button for the RRFBs. The speed limit was lowered from 45 miles per hour (mph) to 35 mph. Though still under evalu- ation, an early crash analysis shows a clear decrease in the number of pedestrian and vehicle crashes (e.g., drop from an annual aver- age 6 crashes to 1 crash in the case of pedestrian related crash). Appendix E provides link to the corresponding project. Local Curve Safety Improvement for Various Counties During the FDOT fiscal year 2013–2014, approximately $2.7 million was awarded to address 230 rural and suburban local highway curve segments to three counties (Citrus, Hernando, and Pinellas) in District 7. This award was accomplished through design-build push button with the agreement of local being in charge of maintenance. Addressing Challenges In the synthesis survey, limitations of local agency and FDOT resources as well as local and state agency turnoff were stated as major challenges in addressing local roads safety. When asked about the replication of District 7’s various strategies at other districts, the interview with District 2 and 4 Safety Engineers reported that the main barriers were the overall geographic and district level safety interests differences. Different districts have different structures in managing project fund aiming at different objectives. Information gathered from an interview with FDOT Dis- trict 2 indicated that District 2 is planning to implement the Safety Summit after attending District 7’s annual Safety Sum- mit in early 2014. There are a total of 18 counties in District 2, which include approximately 65 different local governments. District 2, therefore, presents a significantly larger scale than District 7. The main challenge for District 2 is distributing funds throughout its high number of local agencies. The question posed is whether there is a mechanism to fairly distribute lim- ited funds to local agencies which lack resources. With a large number of local groups, it is difficult to provide funding for all of them which ultimately may discourage local agencies from

C-8 attending yearly safety summit and applying for funding. Divid- ing up District 2 and focusing on certain sections each year is one method that District 2 is trying to address this challenge. District 2 has adopted the design-build push button approach but not directed to local road system at the moment of this synthesis. Interviews with District 7 reported that official face-to-face meetings with local agencies to go through the HSIP applica- tion process and numerous unofficial meetings between safety ambassadors and local agencies helped increase local agen- cies’ participation in overall safety projects. This approach is also aimed to bring all FDOT District 7 offices (e.g., Design, Utilities, Operation, etc.) on board to understand local roads system. Summary The state of Florida demonstrated the importance of a safety champion who brought a great success in enhancing local road safety with a structured layer approach that could be imple- mented tailored to local agency’s needs. Crash statistics on Florida’s latest SHSP present a continuous crash reduction in the majority of emphasis areas. District 7’s innovative layered approach in addressing local roads safety issues have proven to be successful. In Florida, CTST’s major role in coordinating the safety efforts of the local agencies and the state was instru- mental in crash reductions. An interview with a county engineer in District 1 revealed that the biggest challenge local agencies face is the administration and delivery of federal-aid projects. Interviews with District 7’s local agencies attributed District 7’s outreach and training in resolving these issues. Continuous out- reach efforts by DOTs and smart use of resources (e.g., safety ambassadors) coupled with streamlined project delivery method (e.g., design-build push button) are reported as major factors of achieving successful local roads safety projects. IoWA StAtE SAfEty PRogRAmS AImED At LoCAL AgENCIES Background The state of Iowa has approximately 105,500 miles of roadway (92% of all public roads) that are locally-owned and maintained. Local road programs and projects are handled by both the cen- tral (planning and programming) and district offices (implemen- tation) of the Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT). Many of these projects are coordinated by the Office of Local Systems, which has a staff of nine persons. Safety programs and safety-funded projects are coordinated by the five-person Safety Section in the Office of Traffic & Safety. According to the 2014 HSIP annual report, HSIP funds are primarily allocated to the state-owned and primary road systems, while a portion of state funds are available to the secondary-road and local road systems via the state’s Traffic Safety Improvement Program (TSIP). Per the Governor’s Traffic Safety Bureau (GTSB) Iowa High- way Safety Plan, local roads are identified as one of ten emphasis areas for traffic safety based on crash data analysis (Iowa DPS 2015). The state of Iowa has embraced a vision of zero traffic fatalities and launched its Zero Fatalities Campaign in 2013. The Zero Fatalities Program is a partnership with Iowa DOT, Iowa Department of Public Health and Iowa DPS. Iowa DOT’s Office of Traffic and Safety administers several programs that encom- pass a wide range of safety topic areas. Table C1 outlines safety programs associated with local agencies. Safety Program/Initiative Based on interviews with Iowa DOT staff and County Engi- neers, there are three safety programs and two initiatives that the state of Iowa is most actively pursuing regarding local roads safety. Traffic Safety Improvement Program As defined in Iowa Administrative Code, Section § 761, Chap- ter 164, presented in web-only Appendix D, the Traffic Safety Improvement Program (TSIP, also known as Traffic Safety Fund) has three project categories for funding eligibility: (1) a site-specific safety project, (2) traffic control devices installation-related project, and (3) research, studies, and public information-associated project. An applicant’s maximum fund level depends on the project types. The program fund is from the Iowa Road User’s Tax and is therefore a solely state-funded program. Interviews with county engineers reported that easy access to TSIP funds without undergoing federal fund documen- tation process facilitates and encourages many local agencies’ participation. Also noted is the unique relationship between Traffic Engi- neering Assistance Program (TEAP) and TSIP. Information gathered from the Iowa DOT interview showed several TEAP studies led to local agency’s application of TSIP and ulti- mately resulted in funded projects. The following three proj- ects present an example of TEAP studies resulting in funded TSIP projects. As many local agencies are facing limited staff resources, Iowa DOT’s engineering service through TEAP is identified as a way to enhance local roads safety of these agencies. • City of Ankeny: Intersection of 1st Street and State Street; TEAP study completed on May 2013; Funded with TSIP for Fiscal Year 2015 (widen pavement to provide a dedicated left turning lane and improve traffic signals, $500,000). • City of Carroll: Intersection of U.S. 30 and Grant Road; TEAP study completed on May 2013; Funded with TSIP for Fiscal Year 2015 (improve intersection radii and pro- vide left turning lanes, replace traffic signal installation, $500,000). • City of Bondurant: Intersection of U.S. 65 and 32nd Street; TEAP study completed on September 2012; Funded with TSIP for Fiscal Year 2014 (install traffic signals, install off- set left turns on U.S. 65, add left turn lanes on 32nd Street SW, $500,000). HSIP-Secondary Program Iowa DOT initiated the HSIP-Secondary Program to replace the High Risk Rural Road program and to continue supporting safety enhancement in rural roadways. Collaboration with the Iowa County Engineers Association was noted as a key element in initiating this program. A total of $2 million from the HSIP fund is set aside specifically for this program. Approved projects are funded 90% from federal funds while a 10% local match is required, which Iowa DOT then contributes from TSIP fund. Local agencies are responsible for project delivery and comple- tion. Local agencies submit the Letter of Interest as presented in web-only Appendix D and the Iowa DOT HSIP-Secondary Team will review and analyze crash data with the County Engi-

C-9 neer and other stakeholders to identify potential projects. Low- cost systemic implementation of safety measures is a focal point of this program. At the time of this synthesis, applications are accepted on a first-come, first-awarded basis without a specific deadline for applications. Horizontal Curve Sign Program Through interviews with county engineers, the horizontal curve sign program, a sub-program of TSIP, was also identified as one of the safety programs where local agencies’ participation was high. With no specific program application deadline, local agencies have a year-round application time window. The only restriction to a local agency is that an applicant must not have applied for funding under this program in the prior 12 months. The program application/agreement form is presented in web- only Appendix D. A link to an excel spreadsheet that assist local agencies to determine appropriate sign type based on the curve features is also provided in Appendix E. Figure C8 describes the overall fund flow between safety programs. Workshop and Database An annual Local Road Safety Workshop is the venue where a multidisciplinary team consisting of staff from Iowa DOT, Iowa Department of Public Safety, FHWA, and LTAP discuss traffic safety issues with local agencies. Iowa DOT staff from Traffic & Safety, Local Systems, Traffic Operations, Systems Planning, Motor Vehicle Enforcement, and each of the six District Offices tra- ditionally participates. Iowa DPS staff from the Governor’s Traffic Safety Bureau (GTSB) and Iowa State Patrol has also traditionally participated. Six workshops are arranged across the state to pro- vide local agencies with the opportunity to attend without having to spend an overnight away from their busy workplaces. Presen- tations cover various topics including engineering, enforcement, and education to appeal to traffic safety professionals from across disciplines. An interview with the Iowa DOT staff reported that this workshop is where many connections and communications among various parties are made, which ultimately builds trust. The Iowa County Engineer’s Meeting is also another venue where DOT staff attends to gather local agencies’ issues related to local roads safety. The Statewide Traffic Records Coordinating Committee (STRCC) is a multidisciplinary team whose responsibility is to Safety Program Description Program Fund Level Applicant Fund Level Traffic Engineering Assistance Program (TEAP) Program aims to provide traffic engineering expertise to local governments without the resources of a staff traffic engineer. Typically serves cities with populations less than 35,000. $125,000.00 TEAP is funded by a combination of a Federal NHTSA grant and state funds. Maximum of 100 consulting hours per applicant Traffic Safety Improvement Program (TSIP) Program provides funding for traffic safety improvements or studies on public roads under state, county or city jurisdiction. ½% of Iowa’s Road Use Tax Fund which is approximately $6 million/year Maximum of $500,000 per project Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) – Secondary Program Program focuses on Secondary Road System projects by investigating applicable low cost, systemic safety improvements HSIP set aside amount of $2 million 90% federal reimbursement and 10% required local match Horizontal Curve Sign Program This program, which is a sub- program under TSIP, provides funding to counties for the purchase of curve warning and chevron signs. Funds can be used to reimburse counties for purchases of advance warning signs, advisory speed plaques, chevrons and arrows. Beginning January 2013, posts and hardware are eligible to be reimbursed. Program funded from TSIP Maximum $10,000 per applicant, per year. Sign Replacement Program Started around year 2000, a sub- program under TSIP, the primary purposes included updating regulatory/warning signs to current retroreflectivity requirements and establishing a sign inventory program for the city to manage their signs. Program funded from TSIP Approximately total of $120,000/year. Approximately 50 cities receive grants each year. Overhead Flashing Beacon Replacement Program This program, which is a sub- program under TSIP, replaces overhead flashing beacons at intersections with a two-way stop condition with post mounted flashing beacons. Program funded from TSIP Funds material costs only. Labor for removal and installation is applicants’ responsibility. Source: Adapted from Iowa DOT’s Office of Traffic and Safety (http://www.iowadot.gov/traffic/index.htm). TABLE C1 IOWA DOT’S SAFETY PROGRAMS

C-10 promote and maintain a complete, accurate traffic records program. Based on federal funding from Section § 408 of SAFETEA-LU and Section § 405 of MAP-21, STRCC supports the develop- ment of data programs applied for traffic safety analysis and special projects. For example, to assist local agencies in analyz- ing crash histories, Iowa DOT provides a computer-aided crash mapping analysis tool (CMAT) that offers crash location and severity information. Crash maps are also provided in the form of hard copy or electronic files (pdf format) to local agencies at Local Road Safety Workshop or via email as requested. Iowa DOT is currently working to develop a web-based analysis tool that would include GIS compatibility and be directly accessible to local agencies as well as many other safety partners. Figure C9 depicts a sample CMAT screenshot. Initiatives The GTSB’s High Five Rural Traffic Safety Project Initiative, initiated on April 1, 2014, aims to increase seatbelt use on rural roads and reduce the occurrence/severity of rural road crashes. Five counties (Allamakee, Marion, Webster, Fremont, and Palo Alto) are currently participating. The proposed initiative encom- passes a three-tier approach to include enforcement, engineering, and education with the ultimate goal of building a safer commu- nity. Identification of low-cost safety improvements across the county is an example of an engineering focus area. The initiative will continue with a new set of five additional counties in 2015. This initiative is in line with Iowa’s Zero Fatalities program that also aims at enhancing traffic safety through the behavior change of drivers. Another initiative the state of Iowa has launched is the Local Road Safety Plan Initiative. Iowa is piloting local road safety plan development in 12 counties starting in 2015. The pilot study begins with developing crash maps and crash trees to identify crash patterns using analysis tools developed by Iowa DOT and the Institute for Transportation at Iowa State University. A survey questionnaire has been sent to the participating 12 counties to further explore safety countermeasures. Specifically, identifica- tion of countermeasures the county leadership has tried or may be interested in is a focal point of the survey. Starting in June 2015, a meeting with stakeholders in each county is planned. The intention of this initiative is to offer local safety plan devel- opment to all 99 counties in Iowa over the next six years. This initiative has been influenced by Iowa’s neighboring state, Min- nesota. It is anticipated that this initiative will identify projects FIGURE C8 State of Iowa’s safety programs fund flow. FIGURE C9 State of Iowa’s CMAT sample screen shot.

C-11 which would address existing safety-related needs (e.g., signing, pavement section, localized geometric or road characteristics, clear zones issues, etc. A total of $600,000 of safety funds (90% federal and 10% state) is assigned for this initiative. Both Clin- ton and Montgomery Counties are participating in Iowa DOT’s Local Roads Safety Program (LRSP) pilot study. Interviews with county engineers indicated positive expectations from the corresponding pilot study. More specifically, expectations include having a list of projects beyond what counties might have initially envisioned, evaluating project effectiveness based on local resources, and facilitating local agencies’ outreach pro- grams like HSIP and TSIP to supplement efforts and work toward the safest possible road system. Local Road System Safety and Performance Iowa DOT applies proactive and reactive approaches in prob- lem identification on the local roads system. Iowa’s crash trend as described in the SHSP and HSIP reports indicate a consistent decrease of the five-year average of fatalities and major injuries (Figure C10). Iowa’s SHSP and GTSB’s Highway Safety Plan also project a 15% reduction in fatalities and major injuries by year 2020 across the state highways with a long term vision of the zero deaths. Clinton County Clinton County is comprised of 18 townships and 14 cities with a population more than 48,000. The secondary road depart- ment of Clinton County maintains 200 miles of paved roads and 800 miles of gravel roads. An interview with the Clinton County engineer reported that the use of state fund through TSIP is the Iowa DOT’s notable practice in bringing local agencies’ participation to improve safety issues on roadways. Local agen- cies are using exclusively state funds and they are not required to go through the federal-aid process. In 2006, the county imple- mented a 1,000-foot curve realignment project using TSIP funds. No fatal or major injury crashes were observed since the project’s completion. A sample project fund request document is presented in web-only Appendix D. At the time of this synthesis interview, the county completed a $70,000 intersection realignment project from the fiscal year 2012 TSIP. Furthermore, in the past four years, the County also received funding to correct horizontal alignment sign issues through the Horizontal Curve Sign Program. Montgomery County Montgomery County has a population of more than 10,740 and includes six cities and 12 townships. Recently awarded projects include: (1) a $500,000 TSIP funded project on County Road H34 that covers various tasks such as adding pave- ment and rumble strips as well as widening painted edges and (2) a HSIP-secondary program funded project that covers mill- ing in traffic markings for more than 25% of paved system, which will lead to significant cost savings (more than $50,000 per year). An interview with the county engineer reported that Iowa DOT’s currently providing up to 100% of costs on many safety studies and improvement projects is a unique feature that helps local agencies’ involvement in safety projects. The County Engineer also noted Iowa DOT hosting of the work- shop is significantly informative and allows the chance to learn about various programs and funding opportunities. One problem the local agency is facing is related to the difficulty in capturing local roadway crash statistics due to low traffic volume. Addressing Challenges In the synthesis survey, Iowa DOT stated resource limitations of local agencies and state DOT staffing as a primary challenge in addressing local road safety with local agencies. To encourage local agency participation, the Iowa DOT provides state funds to match federal funds that alleviates the burden of federal-aid project requirements for local agencies and currently allows a year-round funding application submission. Interviews with county engineers reported that the increased outreach by DOT safety staff and coordination between state DOT safety and local systems staff to connect with more county engineers helped local agencies identify available safety programs. The importance of a multi-disciplinary collaboration approach is emphasized in Iowa’s Highway Safety Plan and its SHSP, which would con- tribute significantly to strengthen its state-coordinated safety programs. Summary In Iowa, the state fund, as described in Iowa Administrative Code, Section § 761, Chapter 164, supports all of the local road safety programs so that local agencies only need to contribute their own staffing to complete the projects. Based on interviews with Iowa DOT and County Engineers, there are two safety programs (Traffic Safety Improvement Program that includes Horizontal Curve Sign Program and HSIP-Secondary Program) providing local road safety funding and two relatively new ini- tiatives (High Five Rural Traffic Safety Project and Local Road Safety Plan) that the state of Iowa is actively pursuing regarding local roads safety. FIGURE C10 Crash trend of fatalities and serious injuries (Source: Iowa Highway Safety Plan 2014).

C-12 LoUISIANA StAtE SAfEty PRogRAmS AImED At LoCAL AgENCIES The state of Louisiana has 16,698 miles of state highways and 44,691 miles of locally owned roads. Louisiana’s state system carries 83% of the traffic volume where 72% of the public roads are owned by local agencies. Overall, about $60 million is allotted to highway safety, with $3–5 million of the HSIP program bud- geted for local roads. Safety projects are funded from Section §154 (Open Container laws), Section § 164 (Repeat Intoxicated Driver laws), HSIP and high risk rural road program (HRRRP) and funding levels are projected to increase as the capacity to implement projects by local jurisdictions increase. The Depart- ment of Transportation and Development (DOTD) has two suc- cessful programs addressing safety on local roads in Louisiana: (1) LRSP and (2) the Regional Safety Coalitions, which are focused on implementing the Destination Zero Deaths vision of the State’s SHSP. Safety Program/Initiative Local Road Safety Program In 2006, the DOTD initiated a LRSP to improve highway safety for Louisiana’s local road system. Eligible projects include those for roadways and transportation systems owned and operated by parish and/or municipal road agencies. Parish or municipal jurisdictions may apply for funding and projects are limited to $500,000 per project. For 8 years, the Louisiana LTAP, sponsored by the DOTD and Louisiana State University (LSU’s) Louisiana Transportation Research Center (LTRC), administered the LRSP in cooperation with the DOTD. Within DOTD, no unit or depart- ment is responsible for administering local public road safety projects, which is one of the main reasons for the partnership with LTAP and the new Louisiana Center for Transportation Safety (LCTS). When the LRSP was moved by the DOTD to the LCTS in January 2015, the program manager also transferred to this office. The DOTD Office of Safety pays a portion of the LTAP director’s salary, the LCTS Director’s and LRSP Manager’s salaries, and a portion of administrative costs. LTAP has been working with the Louisiana Highway Safety Research Group (LHSRG) which is a separate entity at LSU to access more crash data assistance. The LHSRG has been working on crash data locations on the local roads as well as developing analytical tools for use by LTAP and the locals in the future. Prior to LRSP’s transfer to LCTS, LTAP administered the local road safety improvement projects through an annual solicitation process as well as a statewide analysis to identify locations for improvement as part of the State’s SHSP Intersection and Roadway Departure Action Plans. Now, solicita- tion of projects is year-round but proposals are evaluated on a quarterly basis with cutoff dates. The LRSP utilizes a Technical Review and Selection committee to assist in selecting projects for funding. DOTD safety staff, FHWA, and local representatives are active participants. The LRSP is a cost disbursement program that allows local governments to apply federal-aid funds for safety enhancement of locally-owned and maintained roads. Since its inception, more than 120 projects such as curve delineation and intersection improvements have been funded. For funding eli- gibility, LRSP requires Local Public Agency program training. Complete information for the application process and application form can be reviewed in web-only Appendix D. According to the DOTD, 17% of fatal crashes and 36% of serious injuries occurred on city and parish roads. Table C2 sum- marizes Louisiana’s progress in implementing a reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on state and local roads. Since the program’s inception, there has been a reduction in fatalities and injuries. However, over the last few years the number of crashes has leveled off with no further reductions. As a result, the pro- gram administrators have begun to evaluate further steps neces- sary to expand the LRSP and safety-related programs. The LCTS is separate from the LTAP but still organized under the LTRC of LSU. Both LTAP and LCTS continue to collaborate in reviewing LRSP projects submittals and providing assistance for SHSP activities. DOTD/LTRC is funding a full time program manager and center director, one part time staff, 20 hour a week, on data analysis and planning and technical assistance. Previ- ously, there were not enough resources in staff to get all of the work done. Besides a more coordinated organizational structure, two additional staff members are being hired by LCTS: one will concentrate on highway safety workforce development and assist LTAP and LCTS program efforts; the other one will manage con- tracts and research. It is planned by the DOTD to contract out the development of parish level safety plans for the top 20 parishes with the highest number of crashes. With the completion of these local safety plans, the local public agency can then focus on sub- mitting identified projects for funding and implementation. Local Public Assistance (LPA) programs are the responsibility of one office within the DOTD. Extensive training has been provided across the state to local agencies who wish to participate in the LPA program including safety. A noteworthy practice from DOTD was to bring in a Law Enforcement Expert to improve crash data collection. Being able to train law enforcement agencies on data collection has allowed for better accuracy and completeness in Year State Fatalities All Local Road Fatalities State Road Injuries All Local Road Injuries All Fatalities All Injuries 2005 753 205 55,780 26,709 958 82,489 2006 801 184 54,198 25,777 985 79,975 2007 807 186 54,094 24,808 993 78,900 2008 748 164 52,332 23,551 912 75,883 2009 663 162 50,420 23,436 824 73,856 2010 608 112 48,405 20,342 720 68,747 2011 533 143 49,190 21,054 676 70,244 2012 605 117 49,917 22,533 722 72,450 2013 562 141 49,189 21,456 703 70,645 2014 563 163 49,775 22,771 726 72,546 Source: Louisiana DOTD Highway Safety Administrator. TABLE C2 TOTAL STATE AND LOCAL ROAD CRASHES IN LOUISIANA

C-13 statewide crash data, which in turn resulted in informed decision- making and an overall improvement in safety. Finally, Louisiana was noted for their participation in the Distracted Task Force and the Aggressive Driving Task Force. The intent of the task forces was to analyze the data to identify the problem and then enact effective countermeasures to correct the problem. The DOTD is also exploring systemic safety analysis for local roads as a new focus. In the past, the DOTD did not have specific location information for local crash data. A project has been completed to locate all local crash data from 2010 to the present. A three-year project is currently underway to gather the Fundamental Data Elements (FDE) on the local network with its goal to establish a foundation for better data analysis in crashes and traffic volume. A new initiative is underway to identify high risk horizontal curves on the local road system and program low-cost projects to improve safety at these locations. In 2010, FHWA highlighted the Louisiana LRSP as a noteworthy practice (FHWA 2010). The DOTD/LTAP and newly added LTRC/LCTS partnership continues to be a successful endeavor in implement- ing the LRSP. Its initial success in reducing crashes continues to evolve, expand, and be enhanced in an effort to empower local agencies to improve the safety on local roads in Louisiana. Destination Zero Deaths (DZD) Initiative of the SHSP and Regional Safety Coalitions The state of Louisiana seeks zero deaths on its roads and highways through its DZD initiative and SHSP. The DOTD, the Louisiana State Police (LSP) and the Louisiana Highway Safety Commis- sion (LHSC) jointly lead this effort. Its strategies include, discour- aging impaired driving, encouraging seatbelt use and educating young and new drivers. The program also aims to improve road safety through improved roadway infrastructure and operations that can be implemented at the state, regional and local level. The 2011 SHSP is currently being updated and the 2015 DZD highway safety summit is scheduled for the fall. To accomplish the DZD goals and strategies, in 2011, the DOTD divided the state into nine regions and required that each develop a regional safety coalition and safety plan to assist with the implementation of the Louisiana SHSP. As of 2015, as reported by the DOTD, eight active coalitions have been established. Each coalition reviews regional crash data to identify projects to reduce fatali- ties and serious injuries for impaired drivers, unsecured and young drivers and crashes due to infrastructure safety issues. Several regional coalitions have also identified bicycles and pedestrians as an additional emphasis area. To identify and implement local infrastructure improvements, the LRSP team works with regional safety coalitions in coordina- tion with those activities being accomplished on the state system. To assist, the LRSP Technical Assistance Engineer analyzes the available crash data on the local system to help coalition mem- bers identify and prioritize road segments and intersections for future analysis. Once priorities are agreed upon, RSAs are con- ducted and solutions are developed. The regional coalitions are then able to apply for LRSP funding for improvements. Typical projects include sign improvements, minor geometric improve- ments, and other low-cost safety improvements. A sample SHSP funding application form is presented in web-only Appendix D. An example of a regional SHSP is the South Central Regional Transportation Safety Plan (SCRTSP), the recipient of the FHWA 2013 National Roadway Safety Award (FHWA 2013). As the first regional, data-driven action plan developed in Louisiana as part of the State’s efforts to implement its SHSP, SCRTSP showed a strong partnership among Federal, State and local agencies from six parishes in the region—including the South Central Planning & Development Commission), the Louisiana DOTD and the Houma-Thibodaux Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Included in the SCRTSP are action plans regarding four emphasis areas (occupant protection, alcohol-related driving, crashes involving young drivers, and infrastructure) by integ rating the approaches of safety 4Es. As of August 2013, 70 % of the plans have been implemented with the fund sources from HSIP, the Louisiana Highway Safety Commission and the DOTD. Accord- ing to the South Central Safe Community Partnership coalition’s, there has been a decline in the South Central Region’s 3-year- average of fatalities and serious injuries where lack of seatbelt use or driving under the influence of alcohol are causal factors. The ultimate goal of SCRTSP is to have 50% fatality reduction by 2030. Moving forward, the LTAP and DOTD are partnering on a three-year program to collect and compile roadway and traffic data on the local road systems. This program will collect road- way characteristic and traffic data on all public roads. The pro- gram will continue to enhance LTAP’s capability to work with the local agencies, share data and collaborate on infrastructure improvements. The LTAP is facilitating the development of a research project to develop better estimates of local road Aver- age Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) that is necessary for many of the safety analytical tools currently being used. Local Road System Safety and Performance Both reactive and proactive methods are used to identify and priori- tize local roads projects. Since 2006, with the initiation of DOTD’s local road safety program, approximately 25% of the state fatalities occur on locally-owned roadways each year. For local road safety projects, parishes must submit a minimal match in funds—typically 0–10%. Some local agencies accomplish their own project design by using local funds, which can count as a match. To supplement the local road data collection, an Interagency Agreement with the LHSRG, a separate entity at LSU, has been executed to provide more historical crash data. The group is currently using geo- coding to identify local road crashes. This geo-coding system allows the DOTD and local agencies to query the local road sys- tem and identify both spot and systemic improvements projects. Interviews with the Chief Administrative Officer, city of Central, the Parish Engineer of Tangipahoa Parish and the Public Works Director/Engineer of Rapides Parish reported on specific safety projects where positive safety improvements were noted with reductions in crashes. City of Central With a population of about 27,000, the city of Central, the sec- ond largest city in East Baton Rouge Parish, has approximately 160 miles of road under their jurisdiction. Central City had a proj- ect that addressed four local roads with high numbers of head-on and run off the road crashes by installing centerline rumble strips, chevrons, and advance curve warning signs. An improvement in traffic safety occurred on these roads with a 50% reduction of crashes and roadway departures. In 2012, another project for signage produced similar reductions in crashes. The city did not keep crash data records. The Chief Administrative Officer coor- dinates all safety projects while the DOTD prepares, funds, and manages the contracts. A sample funding commitment letter on the projects is presented in web-only Appendix D.

C-14 The success of centerline rumble strips as a countermeasure resulted in a DOTD specification for use in state highway proj- ects. The city of Central has been a member of the Capital Region Transportation Safety Coalition for the past two years. The coali- tion is currently working on establishing performance goals, objectives and identifying the types of projects such as those which reduce pedestrian crashes and the collection of crash data. The biggest challenge is driver distraction including the use of cell phones and radios and speeding. Tangipahoa Parish One noteworthy example of emphasizing safety programs, iden- tified by the DOTD/LA LTAP, is Tangipahoa Parish. The Parish Engineer, a former DOTD District Engineer, is a champion in enhancing local roads safety. Tangipahoa Parish has participated in several LSRP projects. In 2003, ten intersections were identified as high crash locations and an initial pilot project installing stop bars at intersections, new stop signs, and about 46 advance warning flashing beacons was completed in 2004. As a result, a reduction in crashes was witnessed at those intersections. One area, with a 5,500 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and with two 10-foot lanes without shoulders, had a previous accident rate of 12 crashes at four intersections per year. After the completion of the project, only two crashes per year have been recorded. In 2013, Tangipahoa Parish instituted another project incorporating advance flashing beacons at 15 intersections. While the data are still being evalu- ated over a three-year period, there has been a reduction in crashes. Another project, completed in 2012, with a double reverse hori- zontal curve on an access road, had one to two crashes a week on the road prior to the project’s completion. It currently averages one crash a year. Another project, valued at $350,000, installed in 2006, included centerline marking and raised pavement markings, striping and rumble strips at critical locations at intersections. The result was improved visibility and a reduction of crashes. Tangipahoa Parish has one of the highest crashes on railroad crossings in the state. A major railroad-crossing project address- ing 25 unsignalized rail crossings is now underway and expected to improve crossing safety with new signs, advance warning and pavement markings. This project was 90% funded by the state with 10% of local government share. The Parish Engineer noted the total crash numbers remained the same even though the parish did see an increase in population from 96,000 to 120,000. In areas where safety improvements have been made, the parish has witnessed a significant reduction in crashes. An interview with the Parish Engineer indicated that while the Parish does not keep crash records, the sheriff’s office has detailed GIS records of crash locations. The Parish Engi- neer participates in the regional safety coalition meetings, which meets monthly, when infrastructure issues are raised. Besides the infrastructure needs of Tangipahoa Parish, there is a considerable need to focus on seat belt use, distracted and inattentive driving, speeding and other behavior issues. Rapides Parish The Rapides Parish Public Works Director reported two LRSP projects, fully funded by the DOTD, completed in the 2012-2013 period yielding a reduction in crashes on these routes. Similar to the Tangipahoa Parish case, the Parish Engineer does not moni- tor total crashes on Rapides Parish roads but crash information is available through Sheriff’s office. In an interview with the Par- ish Engineer he reported that the biggest challenge is address- ing distracted driving. The Parish does participate in the regional Toward Zero Deaths (TZD) safety coalition. Addressing Safety Challenges The DOTD and LA LTAP reported that communications with the local agencies on safety programs is a continuing challenge pri- marily due to differing priorities, in understanding available traf- fic data and in submitting projects to install countermeasures. Of the 64 parishes, approximately 25% have an engineer overseeing the road system. To improve the effectiveness in communications and coordination of the DZD regional coalitions, the DOTD has hired full-time coordinators in most of its regions. A key goal is to create a traffic safety culture among local government agen- cies, which in turn, can address driver behavior in outreach pro- grams. One key element in the success of promoting an improved safety culture is the identification of safety champions in every agency. While the availability of funding safety projects is not a current concern, project delivery is an issue. The DOTD districts do not have assigned safety engineers to coordinate and monitor safety projects and, as a result, the state’s LTAP provides technical engineering support through the central DOTD office. Behavior issues, such as driver distraction, remain the biggest challenge. Additionally, alcohol-impaired driving factored into 30% to 40% of crashes. While slowly improving each year, the state has a low seat belt compliance rate of about 79.3% in 2012 (DOTD reports improved to 82.5% in 2013) (U.S. DOT Bureau of Transportation statistics 2014). Additionally, the DOTD Highway Safety Administrator sum- marized that challenges in implementing programs include: local agency resource limitations including funding and staff; local agency staff turnover; and slow project delivery. Accordingly, the DOTD has emphasized in the LRSP a need for increased technical assistance, data analysis and project delivery training to local agencies. According to the Highway Safety Administrator the reduction of fatalities and serious injuries over the initial years of these pro- grams can be attributed to the initiation and expansion of state- coordinated programs and partnerships, the increase in HSIP funding, the promotion of systemic low cost safety improvements and other non-State DOT programs. However, in recent years the number of crashes on local and state roads has remained the same and, as a result, an evaluation of the current programs is under- way. One action, in early 2015, was the reorganization and estab- lishment of the LCTS at LSU, which expands the staffing to assist local agencies in identifying and submitting safety projects for funding. In interviews with the DOTD Highway Safety Adminis- trator, the LTAP Director, two Parish Engineers, and a City Chief Administrative Officer, behavior issues, such as distracted driv- ing, alcohol use and speeding remain key challenges in reducing crashes on Louisiana’s state and local roads. The DOTD High- way Safety Administrator is optimistic that the Regional Safety Coalitions will begin addressing both behavior and infrastructure issues proactively as it continues to expand and improve. Summary The Louisiana DOTD has two noteworthy programs aimed at reducing crashes on local roads: the LRSP and DZD initiative. • Since 2006 the LRSP has improved local road safety by reducing crashes at those sites where projects have been completed. The DOTD has partnered with the Louisiana

C-15 State University’s LTRC through their LTAP to administer the LRSP. The LRSP has been transferred to the Louisiana Center for Transportation Safety (LCTS) in January 2015 with additional resources and now works in collaboration with the LTAP Center. • Initiated in 2011 the Regional Safety Coalitions are begin- ning to address the goals of the Destination Zero Deaths (DZD) initiative of the SHSP and as they expand and mature, according to the Highway Safety Administrator, will have a positive effect on the reduction of local road crashes and in improving the safety culture in local agencies as they address local road safety. The availability and analysis of local road inventory and crash data remains a challenge. It is being addressed in ongoing programs to collect the FDE on all public roads and improve- ments to the collection and compilation of crash data through the LHSRG and the recently established LCTS. The Louisiana DOTD and local agencies report that behavior issues such as distracted driving, alcohol use and speeding are key challenges in reducing crashes. mICHIgAN StAtE SAfEty PRogRAmS AImED At LoCAL AgENCIES Background The state of Michigan’s safety efforts start with the Governor’s Traffic Safety Advisory Commission (GTSAC). The GTSAC is in charge of implementing Michigan’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) and it is the SHSP that drives Michigan’s safety program. The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) has two different groups in its safety program. MDOT adminis- ters Local Agency Programs (LAP) which is under its Develop- ment Services Division. Traffic and Safety administers the Local Safety Initiative (LSI) and is under the Design Division. Both the Development Services Division and the Design Division are under the Bureau of Development. The LAP administers the safety program for the local agencies, while the LSI provides technical assistance. LAP administers federal safety funds from the HSIP through a competitive grants program. A key part of the MDOT’s safety program effort is the GTSAC, which is charged with implementing Michigan’s SHSP. Three of the eleven rep- resentatives on the GTSAC, which consists of the representa- tives of key state agencies and the Governor’s office, are from local government. In 2002, the Governor of Michigan formed the GTSAC to be Michigan’s major program to identify key traffic safety challenges and create approaches to resolve these chal- lenges. Statewide statistics from the State of Michigan Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2013–2016 published in December 2012 showed significant progress toward the reduction of annual traf- fic fatalities from 1,084 to 889 and serious injuries from 7,485 to 5,706 over a period from 2007 through 2011. Safety Program/Initiative Local Safety Initiative and Local Agency Program Through partnerships and years of working with local agencies, MDOT has built a solid foundation of trust with the local agen- cies. With its LSI program, MDOT helps local agencies analyze their crash data and suggests countermeasures to support the SHSP. The LSI works with local agencies on a first-come, first- served basis to identify locations of concern. LSI is a voluntary program that emphasizes low-cost fixes to improve the safety of local roads. The LSI is staffed by three full-time engineers and a data analyst and is managed by the Safety Programs Units Manager, and LAP is staffed on the safety side by one individual. Once the local agency is enrolled in the program, MDOT periodically works through its LSI program to assist them with a complete crash analysis of their local road system, using tools such as RoadSoft a graphically designed, integrated roadway management system developed for Michigan’s local agency engineers and managers to use in the analysis and report- ing of roadway inventory, safety, and conditional data. Upon completion of crash data review, the LSI program will conduct site visits and review with local agencies at key intersections or roadway segments. Finally, the LSI will conduct an appropriate engineering analysis and make suggestions for low-cost solu- tions. After the local agencies identify proper countermeasures, they can submit an application for funding based on the LSI review or can submit their own project application directly to the LAP office. LAP is divided into five program areas, which includes a safety programs. MDOT issued the call for local safety projects for the fiscal year 2017 in May 2015 as presented in web-only Appendix D. MDOT dedicates approximately $15 million of HSIP annu- ally for safety improvements on the local roadway system and all locally-controlled roadways are eligible for the federal fund- ing. Projects are funded 80% federal/20% local funding unless the project scope fixes a roadway deficiency related to a fatal- ity (K) or incapacitating injury (A) within the limits of pro- posed work or is an improved systemic project (that supports the state’s SHSP) where the 90% federal/10% local funding. Federal safety funds cannot exceed $600,000 per project or a maximum of $2,000,000 per local agency per fiscal year. When calculating time of return for the project application, a time of return and/or a Highway Safety Manual (HSM) is a required part of the application. A HSM spreadsheet is provided to the local agency. A sample LAP safety project submittal form is attached in web-only Appendix D. Local Agency Safety Peer Exchange In 2014, MDOT and LTAP and the Michigan Division of the FHWA hosted a successful Local Agency Safety Peer Exchange, which nearly 50 people attended. The peer exchange agenda is presented in web-only Appendix D. The exchange allowed MDOT to gather information on specific needs of local agencies related to the delivery of safety program sand the opportunity for local agencies to discuss their programs’ successes and chal- lenges with other local agencies. Based on positive feedback, MDOT decided to host a similar peer exchange every other year. This peer exchange was successful because this was offered to all local agencies’ representatives in the state of Michigan. The peer exchange in 2014 consisted of discussion items such as quick systemic fixes, case studies, funding, lesser known fixes, and the overall change of the safety culture. Participants included representatives from cities, counties and towns, MPOs, tribes in Michigan and the Michigan Division of FHWA, and private consultants. Toward Zero Deaths In Michigan, Toward Zero Deaths (TZD) “Effectively Engaging Locals Toward Zero Deaths on Michigan Roadways” is a commu- nication effort to reduce roadway fatalities. MDOT has now listed the TZD name on its safety program and is moving toward a goal of “Zero Deaths.” MDOT is currently seeking partners in the state

C-16 of Michigan to participate on the TZD program and sign a national partnership agreement. MDOT has created its own website for TZD and has established these partnerships through a number of presentations and have developed promotional visuals such as videos, posters, brochures, and flyers. MDOT has been pre- senting the national strategy to safety stakeholders, including the County Road Association Council consisting of local elected officials, across the state to encourage their participation. Sample presentation is provided in web-only Appendix D. Local Road System Safety and Performance Michigan’s safety program stands out due to the hands-on assis- tance it provides to the local agencies through the LSI. In addi- tion to LSI’s partnering with LAP to deliver and fund safety projects, the partnership provides safety training and software development. MDOT has accomplished a lot in the past few years to build a trust with local agencies. LSI is a voluntary pro- gram in which local agencies decide the level of assistance they receive from the program. Huron County Through the LSI program, Huron County installed reflective sheeting on stop and stop ahead signs across the county. MDOT LAP administered funding for this project, implemented from 2008 to 2009. The county road commission and MDOT identi- fied key intersections to add reflective strips to stop and stop ahead signs. The interview with the County engineer reported that the public response to the projects was overwhelmingly positive. Additionally, the project was relatively inexpensive and the subsequent public relations were successful, resulting in a win-win situation. Another successful project with assistance from the MDOT LSI and LAP programs included improvements to an inter- section consisting of a throughway road and another road with a stop sign. At the project site, motorists were required to stop at the stop sign and then pull into traffic on the through roadway which had a guardrail running along the road for a significant stretch. The guardrail also had vegetation growing in it which blocked the motorist’s vision to see oncoming cars. The County worked with MDOT LSI to identify the project as a priority and utilized the LAP program to obtain a grant for the project. Simultaneously, the County secured some right-of-way and cre- ated a clear zone by using fill material to construct a gradual slope from the road and then removed the guardrail. The crash rate has decreased at the intersection and maintenance is much easier since the County does not have to negotiate the guardrail when mowing. Lapeer County Lapeer County participates in the LSI program through which it has completed a number of safety projects. The County was selected through LAP a series of roadway and intersection improvement projects (three intersection projects and one road segment project) in 2009 where a number of cross-over and road departure crashes occurred. The County decided to use centerline rumble strips to help reduce centerline cross-over especially with a road contain rolling hills. Since the project sites were on the low-volume road- ways, the County Engineer investigated crash rates over a ten-year period, five years before the safety projects were implemented and five years after that. The road segment project involved a half-mile section with a few horizontal and reverse curves. The county road commission cleared trees, installed guardrails, and installed centerline rum- ble strips. The County had 14 crashes over the five-year period before the improvements. These crashes included 12 fixed-object crashes, one vehicle over-turn and one side swipe). One crash resulted in a fatality and one motorist was injured. Five years after the project, from 2010 to 2014, the County had two fixed object crashes with no resulting injuries at the corresponding site. The three intersection projects were different sites and varied somewhat in the treatment. The treatments for the intersections, implemented in 2009, included the installation of rumble strips, a flashing beacon and a “cross traffic does not stop” signs. For the first intersection there were 14 crashes with seven injuries before the improvements and 14 crashes with eight injuries afterwards. Unfortunately, statistics showed limited success in the first inter- section. However, at another intersection, the number of crashes dropped from 11 to eight, and crash-related injuries dropped from six to three though using the same approaches. A third intersection was designed as a T-intersection after a horizontal curve where the County installed signage and rumble strips. There were four crashes with one fatality and one injury prior to the project while there were two crashes with no injuries after the project imple- mentation. For all the projects, MDOT assisted the county in iden- tifying the priority areas for safety improvement and assisted the county in identifying the appropriate countermeasures. At the end of 2013, the County had one road segment that con- sisted of a 90 degree, tree-lined curve adjacent to a ditch contain- ing a number of car parts from past crashes. The County cleared the trees, fixed elevations and installed shoulder rumble strips. Results from these improvements have yet to be measured but the improvements are evident in that there has been no damage to the current infrastructure, (signage) since the improvements were implemented. The improvements are further evident in the before and after pictures presented in web-only Appendix D. Future safety projects will involve adding pavement to sharp horizontal curves such that shoulder and centerline rumble strips can be installed. South-Eastern Michigan Council of Governments South-Eastern Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) supports local planning for the seven counties in the region and the city of Detroit. Half of the state’s population and jobs are in this seven county region. With 4.7 million people living in the region, the highest regional population in the state, approximately 45% of the crashes in the state occur in the region, mostly in the Tri-county area surrounding the city of Detroit. SEMCOG coordinates the development of the region’s long range plan (2040), the Transpor- tation Improvements Program (TIP) and the Transportation Alter- native Program. The MPO has one full time person (Transportation Safety Engineer) who works exclusively on safety. Through the strong partnership with MDOT, SEMCOG provides data analysis for the local agencies, conducts road safety audits with the local agencies, and provides direct technical assistance. SEMCOG’s safety program addresses several prominent issues including, safe routes to schools, bicycle and pedestrian safety, red-light-running, lane departure, etc. SEMCOG works with MDOT and conducts in-house train- ings and regional peer exchange forums. Through these forums, representatives from the cities and counties in the area share their experiences and approaches to improve safety. Usually, SEMCOG hold these sessions once a year and it usually follows the annual release of the state’s crash data. The state is in the process of devel-

C-17 oping regional road safety plans, at the county and/or MPO level. SEMCOG was selected as one of the MPOs to develop two plans as pilot projects; one for rural areas and one for urban areas. The state is in the process of developing local regional road safety plans at the State Planning and Development region level. SEMCOG was selected as one of the MPOs to develop two plans as pilot projects; one for rural areas and one for urban areas. These safety plans address emphasis areas specific to the region, such as lane departure, intersections, pedestrian, young drivers and older drivers. The first two pilot plans should be completed by early 2016. The strategies from these plans will include both infrastructure and behavior based strategies. By the end of 2017, it is anticipated that all the State Planning and Development Regions will have local road safety action plans in place. The plans will help address MAP-21 performance measure driven safety requirements. Addressing Challenges It is important for state DOTs and local and regional agencies to be able to justify the allocation of funds to safety projects and pro- grams. For federally funded projects, it important that the DOTs are able to provide hard evidence to FHWA, as well as the gen- eral public, the benefit and success of safety projects. To address this issue, MDOT conducts before and after studies on federally- funded local safety projects every year. MDOT categorizes the projects and evaluates the results for each of the project catego- ries. MDOT conducted an analysis in 2014 for the 2010 safety program and the full report link is provided in Appendix E. The 2010 report showed an overall reduction in fatalities and inca- pacitating injuries (MDOT 2010). Projects that involved guard- rail installation, tree and object removal in the right-of-way, and surface treatments were grouped under roadway departure and clear-zone improvements. Twenty-eight projects from the 2010 Safety Program and HRRR funding programs included these approaches. Results from the before and after study showed a 36.9% reduction of roadway departure crashes and a 51.5% reduc- tion of fatalities and injury target crashes. Safety projects that are targeted to specific high-risk/priority areas have shown posi- tive results also. Results show a 42% reduction of injuries and a 65% reduction in fatalities, at improved high-risk sites. Many of these sites were urban projects focusing on signals and round- abouts as counter-measures. There are many challenges in moving safety programs forward, the major one being the ability to request funding to support local safety programs. Barriers to this goal may include meeting the funding application requirements and addressing the lead time for project delivery. Michigan has built strong partnerships both internally within departments and externally with LTAP, the MPOs and local agencies. The communication and coordination between MDOT and its partners goes a long way in addressing these barriers whether through the peer exchange program or working directly with the local agencies. SEMCOG participated in the 2014 Local Agency Safety Peer Exchange referenced earlier. They indicated that the discussions centered on what was working, how to strengthen partnerships and evaluate various treatments that apply more for rural or urban areas. Local and regional transportation professionals came together to share their experiences. The peer exchange along with the action teams is a way for the state to engage the MPOs and local agencies in establishing safety priorities across the state. Additionally, Michigan has important goals for TZD regard- ing its research programs. MDOT will be conducting research to improve its safety program as a way to implement TZD and accelerate the reduction in fatalities. It is one of many initiatives to implement TZD. Summary Michigan’s safety program is oriented toward a close working relationship with the local and regional transportation agencies. MDOT provides technical and financial assistance and the agen- cies decide the level of assistance they receive. The examples displayed a partnership between the MDOT and the agencies in which MDOT provided funding and recommendations in iden- tifying priority areas for safety countermeasures while the agen- cies planned and implemented the safety projects. MDOT is also making a concerted effort to engage local and regional agencies to participate in the TZD initiative. mINNESotA StAtE SAfEty PRogRAmS AImED At LoCAL AgENCIES Background The Minnesota State Department of Transportation (MnDOT) administers local agency programs under the State Aid for Local Transportation (SALT) Division. One program in the SALT Divi- sion is a traffic safety program called the “Local Highway Safety Improvement Program.” Under this umbrella, several initiatives addressing local road safety include the County Road Safety Plans (CRSP); Road Safety Audits (RSA); Township Sign Inventory and Replacement Program, Community Toward Zero Deaths Safety Meetings; and simplified financial application procedures to apply for specific projects. The success of these programs has been note- worthy as seen in the summary of fatal crashes shown in Table C3. Year Statewide State Roads County Roads City, Township, Other 2004 567 292 207 68 2005 559 294 186 79 2006 494 239 185 70 2007 498 253 182 63 2008 455 238 154 63 2009 421 192 165 64 2010 411 190 162 59 2011 368 173 144 51 2012 395 168 160 67 2013 387 193 151 43 2014 361 196 127 38 TABLE C3 MINNESOTA FATALITIES ON MINNESOTA ROADS 2004–2014 (PRELIMINARY)

C-18 Safety Program/Initiative Local Road Improvement Program Created in 2002, the Local Road Improvement Program (LRIP) provides funding assistance to local agencies for constructing or reconstructing local roads. Initially, it began with two types of funding: Truck Highway Corridor Account and Routes of Regional Significance Account. In 2005, a fund from the Rural Road Safety Account was added. Counties, townships and cities are eligible for funding, except for cities with a population less than 5,000. Additionally, for the townships, the county’s spon- sorship must be obtained for the application eligibility. County Roadway Safety Plans With the main objective to establish a specific set of low-cost systematic safety projects, CRSP were built on the foundation established by Minnesota’s SHSP. MnDOT completed CRSPs for all eight MnDOT districts and 87 counties. Each CRSP pro- vides the basis for systemic implementation of safety measures across the entire jurisdiction by developing a comprehensive list of proactive measures and prioritized safety improvements, based on current crash trends. The link to a sample CRSP for Otter Tail County can be reviewed in Appendix E. The primary objectives of CRSP are to: • Develop a document, which will list safety projects in a prioritized manner by route and location(s). • Analyze the jurisdictions crash data to determine patterns by location, type of crash, and any circumstance of the crash, which would lead to effective countermeasures. • Develop projects by a consensus building exercise with key stakeholders of each jurisdiction. These should include but not be limited to representatives of the 4 Es services. Consideration should be given to representation from different modes of transportation—bike, pedestrian, commercial vehicles, motorcycles, etc. • Educate stakeholders on the magnitude of the issues and the effectiveness of possible solutions. Township Sign Inventory and Replacement Program In 2011, the Minnesota Association of Townships (MAT) estab- lished the Township Sign Inventory and Replacement pilot pro- gram, a pilot version of the current Township Sign Program, with the assistance of MnDOT. Funded by Federal HSIP and State funds, the Township Sign Program is administered by the SALT division of MnDOT in coordination with MAT. The primary goal of the program is to develop and upgrade the requirements for sign removal and reduction that would assist local agencies’ conformity with the Manual Uniform Traffic Control Devices retroreflectivity standards. The completed pilot program, which began with townships located within six counties, was divided into two phases: (1) the inventory and design and (2) construc- tion phases. The pilot program upgraded old signage and reduced signage clutter on roadway segments while MnDOT developed a Sign Reduction Manual to help local agencies comply with the MUTCD guidelines. A summary of a completed pilot program is presented in web-only Appendix D. MnDOT is conducting a second round of the program with Steven and Wright counties. During this second round, a study on estimating accurate traffic volumes on low-volume roads was conducted. Results of accu- rate volume estimation are expected to assist sign installation and removal activities where reliable traffic counts are limited. The township sign replacement program is considered very successful. Since MnDOT funded up to 95% of the project costs, the townships believed more signs was an improvement and therefore, installed more signs than necessary. There is a federal match requirement, which the state primarily covered with bonds and funds from the state general obligation fund. Minnesota therefore, reduced its local match to an estimated 5%. MnDOT spent considerable time from 2013–2014 working with the state association of townships in developing materials to educate local officials that fewer signs properly placed, the right sign in the right place, was more effective. As a result, crashes on the local system were reduced by 28%. The first round of the program also produced a significant backlog of projects, which will be consid- ered in the next round. This program is being continued state- wide although not as robust with funding limitations due to other safety priorities. Additionally, in early 2015, MnDOT developed an on-line, ten-module sign maintenance and management train- ing courses for local agencies administered by the LTAP center. The link to these modules is provided in Appendix E. Toward Zero Deaths Initiative In 2015, the Minnesota TZD is in its 12th year as the state’s cornerstone traffic safety program. It employs an interdisciplin- ary approach to reducing traffic crashes, injuries and deaths on Minnesota roads. TZD aims to unite separate interdisciplinary visions toward a greater success. The TZD program looks at target areas for improvement, evaluates data and utilizes proven counter- measures. The TZD philosophy is an integral part of the SHSP and includes several initiatives, such as TZD Regional Partner- ships, TZD Safe Roads Grant Program, TZD Enforcement Grant Program, Statewide Trauma System, Minnesota SHSP, County and District Safety Plans, Crash Records System, Crash Help Demonstration and Highway Enforcement of Aggressive Traffic (HEAT). Along with the statewide TZD effort, partnerships have been formed in eight geographic areas of Minnesota for a coordi- nated regional effort. The eight regions, divided geographically, are tasked to investigate crash data and identify factors lead- ing to fatal and serious injury crashes and ultimately to imple- ment proven countermeasures. A local steering committee, led by MnDOT and the State Patrol, is comprised of local traffic safety stakeholders. The TZD program team works in partnership with community and corridor groups to improve the traffic safety of a designated area. The team provides technical assistance, materi- als and guidance to local groups that are committed to reducing crashes and the fatalities and severe injuries. The TZD program co-chairs are the Director of the Office of Traffic Safety, Minne- sota Department of Public Safety and the Director of the Office of Traffic, Safety, and Technology, MnDOT. Over the years MnDOT has been fortunate to have safety champions in leadership roles in the organization. The impor- tance of these champions at each level is critically important to ensure a consistent priority on transportation safety. Over time, as witnessed in MnDOT, the institutionalizing of a safety philos- ophy has resulted in a continuance of both state and local road safety programs as well as the fostering of the TZD philosophy. TZD coalitions exist in each of the eight regions, which cor- respond to the MnDOT district boundaries, and are focused on driver behavior issues. TZD coordinators, which are assigned to each coalition, facilitate and provide focus for the coalition stake- holders, which may include fatality review committees, education

C-19 campaigns, and public safety enforcement grants. MnDOT and local agencies use a crash mapping analysis tool of the crashes collected by the Department of Public Safety. Tribes are often reluctant to use this tool due to privacy concerns. MnDOT funds TZD coordinators in the state and seat belt surveys that are com- pleted every spring. The state had a 94.7% compliance in seat belt use in 2014, up from 87.8% in 2007, but regions in the state do differ in accordance with local culture (U.S. DOT 2015). Local Road System Safety and Performance MnDOT’s Principal Engineer oversees local roads safety pro- grams at the MnDOT SALT Division office. The TZD serves as the umbrella for other programs such as the CRSP. MnDOT allocates HSIP funds according to the number of crashes on spe- cific roads. This amounts to about 60% of HSIP funds for local roads. The latest 2014–2019 SHSP outlines the success of these programs as demonstrated by the steady reduction of fatal and serious injury crashes since 2004. In Minnesota, traffic fatali- ties and serious injuries are the prime performance measures. While developing performance measures for plans are difficult, MnDOT is considering other unique measures, entitled Min- nesota’s Traffic Safety Tracking Indicators by Focus Area— discussed in the SHSP and presented in web-only Appendix D. Additionally, the Minnesota Crash Mapping Analysis Tool (MnCMAT) was developed to assist local agencies in analyzing crash data. The Minnesota Local Road Research Board and Min- nesota County Engineers Association have made the MnCMAT tool available for use to all counties. It is a map-based computer application that provides ten years of crash data for every roadway in Minnesota. Analysts can select specific intersections or roadway segments for study. St. Louis County St. Louis County has a population of more than 200,000 and maintains 3,000 miles of roadway. The annual capital budget averages $40–$50 million per year. The St. Louis County Engi- neer reported reductions in crashes since the inception of TZD. Between 2000 and 2007, the County averaged nine fatal crashes per year, while from 2008 to 2014 its average was five fatal crashes per year, close to a 50% reduction. The biggest improve- ment was the reduction in serious injury crashes. From 2000 to 2007, 28 serious injuries per year were recorded, while from 2008 to 2012, 12 serious crashes per year were observed. From 2008 to 2012, the county safety program improved significantly following MnDOT recommendations to focus on wider edge lines and rumble strips countermeasures. The CRSP was developed in 2012 and the county contin- ued those programs but expanded to intersection improvement strategies, which were identified as high risk, and primary road dynamic warning systems. The ALERT system was sponsored and piloted in St. Louis County as a research project, funded by the Minnesota Local Road Research Board (LRRB). A summary of this research project is attached in web-only Appendix D. The second phase of the county’s project is the development of a less-expensive intersection conflict warning system for use by local agencies. http://www.lrrb.org/media/reports/201410.pdf The three challenges of these advance-warning systems are the capability to operate and maintain these systems, the power cost for operation, and the general installation costs. The goal in this ongoing research is to develop an alternate, non-competing sys- tem with the state, which the county can afford to build, operate and maintain. A comparison of the ALERT systems before and after data showed positive results. The county used a surrogate measure, the reduction in speed on the primary (main) road. On the minor roads, the use of two metrics: roll through incidents and time waiting at stop signs, were employed. The reduction in speed observed on the primary road was 3.5 mph. On the minor road, roll through were reduced from 25% to zero and the time waiting at stop signs increased by 2 seconds. The drivers knew there was an upcoming conflict and more than likely waited to make their movements at the intersection. MnDOT, the LRRB and the local agency jointly funded this pilot program. A follow on project is planned in late 2015, to conduct a primary road dynamic warning system. The County Engineer estimates about one-third of the County’s intersections will employ this feature. St. Louis County participates in the Area Transportation Part- nership, which reviews, coordinates and approves projects and then, determines priorities for the distribution and programming of federal funding. In St. Louis County, the TZD coalition operates as the umbrella organization for the district and over sees and coordinates all safety activities incorporating the 4Es. The Driving for Safety Coalition in St. Louis County, funded by the Department of Pub- lic Safety, is a subset of TZD. One of its accomplishments is the development of the Drive to Survive education program, which educates companies and agencies about safe driving techniques. The program incorporates all 4Es. Another area addressed is a seat belt survey which arranges competitions among schools for safe driving awards. Performance measurement is difficult, but surveys and quizzes are administered to determine the knowl- edge retained after training. The direct impact on crash reduc- tion is unknown; however, these safety-directed programs do enhance awareness of safe driving. Otter Tail County Otter Tail County has a population of more than 57,000 and 1,060 road miles, all of which are paved. The Otter Tail County Engineer and Public Works Director reported that they have seen a reduction in crashes on local roads where fatalities were reduced from 15 per year in 2008 to eight per year in 2014, close to a 50% reduction. The interview discussed two safety improvements helped to reduce fatalities. A six-inch wide pave- ment edge line countywide was installed starting in 2009. The second project was installing intersection lighting at 21 inter- sections in 2015, totaling 60 intersections since inception of the program. This project will complete one of Otter Tail County’s safety plan goals. Citizens responded favorably, four to one, on this improvement. Additionally, a new project has just been awarded to improve 180 curves with treatments, which pave the inside and outside shoulders, and add rumble strips. The County’s next steps are to address townships roads where one half of the fatal crashes occur. Each township has its own funding determined through distribu- tion formulas based on mileage. Townships work with Otter Tail County for technical assistance and the county performs the work on township roads on a reimbursable basis. Receiving public sup- port of the safety plan is a continuing effort and very important to maintain public funding. The Otter Tail county safety plan was enacted in 2011, but the county had already been pursuing safety improvements through proven countermeasures. The dollar value of its safety plan is about $7.2 million in construction dollars. Through HSIP, the county is applying for about $500,000 in new projects in 2015 and hopes to complete the 2011 projects identified in the safety

C-20 plan by 2018. The next step is updating the CRSP and pursuing other initiatives. Prior to the TZD initiative, there existed the Otter Tail Safe Communities Association—now called Otter Tail County Safe Roads—which addresses 4E projects and programs. Portions of its funding are from public safety grants with a focus on enforcement. With the establishment of regional TZD coalitions by MnDOT in 2013 Otter Tail County is within the West Cen- tral TZD area, which includes 20 counties. There is an annual regional TZD conference to receive briefings including a review of fatal and serious injury crashes. Members include public safety, emergency management services, and Sheriff’s depart- ments. Otter Tail recently participated in a LRRB project doing digital imaging to record the road edge lines in a GIS format. Otter Tail participates in LTAP training and includes the sign technician program. Washington County Washington County has a population of 250,000 and 2,046 miles of state, county, and local roads, of which the county main- tains 303 centerline miles. The Washington County Engineer/ Deputy Public Works Director reported major improvements, which resulted in the reduction of crashes on county roads. Specifically the CRSP and MnCMAT have identified local cost safety projects in the form of horizontal curve enhancements, paved shoulders, edge line rumble stripes, intersection signing enhancement, rural intersection lighting and enhanced pave- ment markings. The strong and positive relationship with the State Safety Engineer and SALT Division, the TZD statewide focus, dedicated local funding and the development of a safety culture have proved critical in the success of the safety pro- grams. Web-only Appendix D provides a power point summary of the success of the CRSP program. The Washington County Engineer presented the report on April 22, 2015 at the NACE annual conference. Addressing Safety Challenges While challenges remain to sustain the many programs and to foster a continuing safety focus, the reduction of fatalities and serious injuries over the years of these focused programs can be attributed to the initiation and expansion of state-coordinated programs and partnerships; the increase in HSIP funding; the promotion of systemic low cost safety improvements; and other non-state DOT programs. Summary MnDOT has actively pursued safety programs on state and local roads since the early 2000s and currently has multiple programs addressing the 4E’s. Under the SHSP framework its TZD ini- tiative is comprehensive in its approach and involves state and local agencies in several noteworthy programs aimed at reducing crashes on local roads. Over the years MnDOT has been fortu- nate to have safety champions in leadership roles in the organiza- tion. The importance of these champions at each level is critically important to ensure a consistent priority placed on transportation safety. Over time, as witnessed in MnDOT, the institutionaliz- ing of a safety philosophy has resulted in a continuance of both state and local road safety programs and the fostering of the TZD philosophy. In Minnesota the Toward Zero Deaths safety focus, County Road Safety Plans, the Minnesota Crash Mapping Analysis Tool (MnCMAT), and the Township Sign Inventory and Replacement program provide noteworthy examples for use by other states and local agencies. Additionally the Minnesota LRRB has focused safety funding toward innovative technol- ogies such as the ALERT pilot, which can improve safety on the state’s local roads. oHIo StAtE SAfEty PRogRAmS AImED At LoCAL AgENCIES Background The Ohio State Department of Transportation (ODOT) adminis- ters a Highway Safety Program that consists of coordination with various local, regional and state agencies to establish safety prior- ities across the state of Ohio. ODOT dedicates about $102 million annually, one of the largest state investments in the United States, for engineering improvements at high-crash and severe-crash locations. This funding is available to ODOT District Offices and local governments and can be used on any public roadway. The structure of the safety office is a combination of Central Office, District and LTAP Staff. The LTAP and Highway Safety Pro- gram are in a separate office, but are under ODOT’s Division of Planning. The Highway Safety Program consists of a staff of six, which includes the Highway Safety Program Manager and a number of data analysts, three of whom are engineers. Addi- tionally, there are safety coordinators in each of the 12 Safety District Offices who oversee a multi-disciplinary team called the District Safety Review Team. They review safety locations and work with local governments to make recommendations relative to safety approaches in key areas. ODOT has a relatively large staff related to safety infrastructure and planning. Safety Program/Initiative A key and innovative part of ODOT’s safety program is the strong partnership established with important stakeholders within the state. This collaboration provides technical and financial assistance to local agencies for the following complementary programs: ODOT and MPO Priority Lists Ohio’s Highway Safety Program encourages the state to work with many of the local, regional and state agencies to define and address areas for safety improvements throughout the state of Ohio. In addition to ODOT’s 12 district offices that identify and address priority locations on the state highway system, ODOT commissions many MPOs to develop a safety project list, to work with local agencies to plan and implement safety improve- ments, and to apply for federal and state safety funding on the behalf of local agencies County Engineers Association Safety Set Aside Annually ODOT allocates $12 million to the County Engineers Association of Ohio to make safety improvements on the county road network. Additionally, ODOT and the LTAP work with Ohio county engineers to perform roadway safety audits on corridors with serious injury and fatality rates that exceed Ohio’s statewide

C-21 average. Recommendations are funded through ODOT’s Highway Safety Improvement Program. Ohio LTAP Program More than 70% of the LTAP training is safety focused and specifi- cally oriented to more than 2,300 local and regional agencies in Ohio. The primary reason for its success is the LTAP being part of ODOT through which it can easily facilitate training and techni- cal assistance to local and regional agencies. ODOT leadership recognized an opportunity to coordinate provisions of technical and financial assistance to regional and local agencies across the state of Ohio. The direct coordination of the LTAP and ODOT is a benefit to the state in providing assistance to local safety programs. Township Sign Safety Program In 2013, ODOT launched its Township Sign Safety Program, which is administered through Ohio LTAP using $1 million annually from HSIP program. This funding is allocated based on two criteria: (1) the township’s ranking based on the previ- ous five years’ crash history, and (2) its previous year’s pro- gram grant status. Through this program, townships can upgrade existing or install additional safety signage by applying a systemic approach throughout the township’s roadway system. In three years, 152 townships have received $3 million to install about 48,000 new safety signs on locally–maintained rural roads. Web- only Appendix D presents sample roadway enhancement through this program. ODOT Research Initiatives for Locals The Ohio Department of Transportation’s (ODOT) Research Initiatives for Locals (ORIL) was established to develop a struc- ture to allow for a funding match, create a self-sustaining local research program, and a permanent funding stream outside of ODOT. The initiative will help assist local agencies with research, as well as answer questions about the funding process. The Board will select and recommend projects for funding, as well as assign liaisons to projects. Safety Conscious Planning forums are available for MPOs to identify safety needs. Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission Pilot Program In 2013, ODOT and the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commis- sion (MORPC) launched an MPO-led pilot program to advance low-cost systemic, safety improvements on locally-maintained roads. The two-year, $2 million program will be funded with HSIP and Regional Surface Transportation Program funds, and will be used to develop a template for other MPO regions across the state. Because local roadway inventory data are incomplete, ODOT and MORPC are using a modified, systemic safety pro- cess that identifies serious crash types and high-risk roadway features; selects low-cost safety improvements; then screens and prioritizes locations for improvements. In Phase 1 of the pilot program, MORPC and 11 member gov- ernments (municipal and county) are focusing on intersection angle crashes. Many of the intersections will be upgraded with reflective signalized back plates, LED bulbs and battery backups. Other locations will receive LED-enhanced stop signs or new signage templates to improve signage visibility at intersections. MORPC selected final project locations and allocated funding for improvements based on safety need (crash severity) and geographic equity, which allocated a minimum amount of fund- ing to each jurisdiction. As of the spring 2015, contractors are scheduled to install safety improvements at 67 locations across Central Ohio. Phase 2 of the pilot program will focus on pedes- trian crashes. Currently, MORPC is in its planning phase and working with local jurisdictions to find high-risk locations for pedestrian incidents. MORPC’s goal is to implement counter- measures including, high-visibility crosswalk markings, pedes- trian countdown timers, signalized intersections and rectangular rapid flashing beacons. The MPO serves as the project manager, working with local jurisdictions to identify areas to remediate and research, while ODOT assists by providing financial and labor resources, as well as drafting the required contracts with local jurisdictions. ODOT also contracted a consultant to assist local jurisdictions to conduct signal evaluations. ODOT’s involvement alleviated local jurisdictions’ concerns over these projects, specifi- cally regarding the project completion. ODOT recognized that the serious crashes were occurring on the local roads where jurisdic- tion had minimal resources for maintenance over these roads. As a result, ODOT partnered with local agencies and MPOs for a coor- dinated effort. Geographic Information Systems Crash Analysis Tool ODOT has also developed a user-friendly tool that allows organi- zations, such as ODOT, MPOs, and county engineers, to retrieve and analyze crash data, GIS Crash Analysis Tool (GCAT). GCAT is a GIS crash analysis system in which a user can obtain maps of certain road sections or intersections, which ultimately allows the user to download the crash attributes for the particular sec- tion of interest to that user. Also, the data are available in a for- matted Excel spreadsheet that automatically analyzes all crash data information. Appendix E provides website link to GCAT. Local Road System Safety and Performance Since 2003, ODOT has been working with the LTAP and the MORPC on pilot programs that educate and coach local govern- ments through the systematic safety process. These organizations are helping ODOT analyze the crash data, identify appropriate counter measures and help with the administering the safety funding and project implementation. Violet Township, Fairfield County One of the earliest participants in the township sign safety pro- gram was Violet Township located in Fairfield County, Ohio. According to the Township Engineer, when ODOT established Township Sign Safety Program in 2013, ODOT identified Violet Township in the top one-third of the townships requiring assistance based on the traffic crash rates which was the basis of the township signage program implementation. ODOT established the process to help townships and local governments meet regulatory require- ments on warning signs assisting in installation of new signs that meet the new reflectivity standard. The program was capped at $50,000 per jurisdictions and to streamline the process, the state processed all of the purchase orders once the township identified the number of signs by type to be replaced. Sign installation was done by the township.

C-22 The township used social media and twice held public meet- ings to explain the need for the infrastructure improvements and the merits of the program. The Township Engineer reported that the public response was positive since the program allowed the township to touch a majority of the residents. Moreover, given that many jurisdictions across the state of Ohio are contending with budget cuts, the program was viewed as timely. Since the govern- ment process can be difficult and arduous, ODOT streamlining the process made the program more efficient and results oriented. The Township Engineer also noted that, LTAP and ODOT plan to randomly select townships for a future field review to ensure that signs are being installed properly. Madison County Madison County participated in an early phase of Township Sign Safety Program The program started with counties and MPOs, but has now expanded to include townships and smaller munici- palities. The County Engineer reported that Madison County was one of the first counties to participate in a sign safety program at the county level. Similar to the townships, the county was not required to perform any paperwork but submitted to ODOT the number of signs needed. Sign were provided by ODOT and in some cases, ODOT assisted with a safety study which identi- fied how many signs replacements were needed and the neces- sary locations. Typically in the first half of the program, ODOT works with the locals to determine what the safety needs are. This is accomplished either through existing signage inventory or through a safety signage upgrade/evaluation. In the second half of the program ODOT provides the materials and the juris- diction install the signs. The County Engineer also reported that since LTAP became a part of the ODOT, it functionally became the local projects’ champion for the past 4 to 5 years. As a result, LTAP has estab- lished a number of programs which are better suited for outreach programs to the local agencies, especially townships, villages and small municipalities. Though LTAP provided support to the coun- ties in the past, now LTAP’s focus is now primarily on the town- ships. The key advantage to the program is that ODOT provides the materials and the locals install them. Since ODOT works directly with the Federal Highway Administration to administer the grant program, local agencies are alleviated of such respon- sibility, which encourages more local agencies to participate in the sign safety program. Addressing Challenges Since local governments have limited resources, they look to low- cost safety improvements to enhance safety on all roads. Though the one million dollars in the township sign safety program is 1% of ODOT’s entire budget, this allows ODOT to assist at least 10% of Ohio’s townships and in the last three years (2011–2014), at least 48,000 signs have been installed in the local system. Further- more, funds spent on local roads and the benefits from these local road safety programs go a long way improving safety in comparison to state road improvements. Related to the MORPC pilot program, ODOT is one of the state agencies that are allocating significant resources toward advancing systemic safety education and improvements on local road systems in comparison to other states across the country. To date, Ohio has invested $5 million in HSIP funds to support locally-focused, systemic safety programs and is partnering with MPOs and LTAP to implement the program. Both partners are investing significant time to educate and train local governments on the importance of systemic and low-cost safety improvements. These efforts help ODOT to develop a safety culture throughout the state Summary ODOT seeks to continue the process of funding local safety pro- grams in Ohio. MAP-21 encouraged ODOT to place greater emphasis on multi-agency collaboration. It encouraged the state to further look to local and regional agencies to direct technical and financial assistance. Approximately 54% of the crashes occur on local roads in Ohio. In 2014, approximately half of Ohio’s distribution funding was allocated to local governments or other DOTs looking to advance their safety priorities, ODOT suggests there is no need to implement multiple plans at once, but rather establish pilot programs to help get safety programs started and after implementation, encourage participants to record results in certain areas. ODOT demonstrated that investments in local programs does not equate to a large financial commitment. For instance, its own township sign safety program, one of the most successful safety programs in the state, required only 1% of total safety enhancement budget. As of 2015, ODOT is in its third year of its township sign safety program and is proceeding to review the program’s success. ODOT plans to conduct and evaluate a before/after crash analysis at a much larger scale as part of the next phase of the township sign safety project. oREgoN StAtE SAfEty PRogRAmS AImED At LoCAL AgENCIES Background The state of Oregon has 44,550 miles of roadway that are owned and maintained by local jurisdictions. The Oregon Department of Transportation (Oregon DOT) administers local agency pro- grams. Oregon DOT’s Local Agency Program (LAP) provides federally-supported assistance to the local agency delivery of its federally-aided transportation projects. LAP consists of sev- eral positions that include a central Local Program Coordinator, a Certification Program Manager, and Regional Local Agency Liaisons (LALs) oversee five regional Local Program Units for the five geographical areas in Oregon. LAP oversees adher- ence with state and federal requirements related to successfully accomplishing and documenting local agencies’ project work involving federal funds. The LALs serve as the local agencies’ primary Oregon DOT contact for processing projects, providing assistance for local project delivery and answering questions. Oregon DOT has five regions and, for the short-term (2014– 2016), Oregon DOT is delivering safety projects on local roads based on a priority–ranked list prepared by a consultant. From 2017, safety projects on all roads including local roads will be delivered under newly launched (in 2012) All Roads Transpor- tation Safety (ARTS) program, which has two components–hot spot and systemic. During the transitional period to the ARTS program, Oregon DOT hired a consultant to create a draft list of potential hotspot projects for all roads in each region. The list will include locations, recommend appropriate countermeasures and then prioritize the locations based on cost/benefit analysis. Each region is required to spend a minimum of 50% of their funding on systemic approaches to safety. Each year, Oregon DOT prepares performance plans and annual evaluation reports that summarize one-year safety pro-

C-23 gram outcomes (link provided in Appendix E). The perfor- mance plan report of 2014 statewide data (Oregon Department of Transportation 2014) showed that annual fatalities on Oregon roads dropped from 106 fatalities in 2007 to 79 fatalities in 2011, while serious traffic crashes over the same period dropped from 1,889 crashes to 1,541. MAP21 also requires states to prepare a SHSP that provides a comprehensive framework for reducing highway fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. In Oregon, the Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP, link pro- vided in Appendix E) serves as the state’s SHSP and according to the latest TSAP, a total of seven HSIP local and regional based projects were completed between 2010 and 2011 resulting in a 60% decrease in fatal crashes, a 7% increase in injury crashes and a 8% decrease in property-damage-only crashes from 2007 to 2014. Safety Program/Initiative Oregon DOT’s ARTS program is an innovative program in many ways. Supported by a signed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Oregon DOT and the local government orga- nizations in 2012, the objective is to improve safety approaches on all public roads regardless of specific jurisdictional boundar- ies. The MOU is presented in web-only Appendix D. This MOU helped pave the way for funding to be allocated to safety projects on locally owned roads, not solely state highways. As a result, local agencies are included in the implementation of the ARTS program. The key part about the ARTS program is that its objec- tive is selecting the most effective projects to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads and does not use a pre-set allo- cation of funds to every jurisdiction within the state of Oregon. Oregon DOT’s Safe Communities program is another holistic and process based system to address traffic safety problems through a continuous loop of data gathering, planning, activity/ projects, and evaluation. Through this program, Oregon DOT aims to focus not only on engineering improvements related to safety, but also address problems with driver operation and use of the vehicle and infrastructure. Link to the Safe Communities program is presented in Appendix E. The state of Oregon combines systemic and hot spot approaches to safety. It has been developing the systemic program for about five years to address roadway departure crashes as part of the state highway strategic safety plan. Currently, state of Oregon has three emphasis areas: roadway departure, intersections, and bike/ pedestrian. Oregon DOT indicated that the systemic approach is beginning to be more defined by risk factors than crash history, which is how Oregon DOT is currently operating with a mix of hot spot and systemic/approaches. The systemic approach is recommended when using low-cost countermeasures and apply- ing them to target crashes resulting in a high benefit/cost ratio. The program requires a reactionary approach, which is why it is sensible not to allocate all safety funding in systemic approach. A reactive approach is important to have so that when serious crashes occur, a well-established program can respond. Oregon DOT found that it has been more difficult to engage local agencies in Oregon’s rural areas. This upcoming round of the ARTS program will select priority safety projects for the years 2017 thru 2021. With the data-driven approach of the ARTS pro- gram, it is Oregon DOT’s intention that the ARTS program will better serve rural areas of the state. The process for hot spot and systemic projects consists of developing a draft “300%” list of potential projects for all high- ways, both state and non-state highways, for each Oregon DOT region. The 300% list is a list of projects in case new funds are made available, similar to an unconstrained projects list. An Oregon DOT consultant developed the hot spot project list, while an application process was used for the systemic project. The project lists were shared with local agencies for feedback regard- ing missing potential projects. The agencies have the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed countermeasures and sub- mit additional projects that did not make the draft list, with justi- fication that it meets the program purpose. The agencies must use the same criteria and analysis method that the consultant used for preparing the draft lists. The consultant will refine the list based on feedback and ultimately develop a finalized 300% list for prioritizing. Oregon DOT regions are responsible for screening applications and developing a potential list of systemic projects. The intent of this approach is to allow Oregon DOT regions to refine the list of submitted projects and scope out a 150% list. The Oregon DOT regions will prioritize the project list based on program purpose of reducing fatal and serious injuries and benefit cost/cost-effectiveness index, in order to finalize a draft list Once the refined lists are completed, all projects, both hot spot and systemic, will go through a multi-discipline assessment to verify a solution. A multi-disciplinary team, including the owner of the roadway facility, will assure the best countermeasure is chosen to mitigate fatal and serious injury crashes and at the best cost. Once the list is prioritized and a final 100% list is produced, Oregon DOT regions will work with jurisdictions to determine the delivery methods, delivering agency and timelines (appli- cable funding year). For projects involving local agencies, the Oregon DOT regions will work with jurisdictions to develop an Intergovernmental Agreement. The delivering agency is accountable for timely and fiscally responsible delivery. Starting in 2017, project selection will be statewide. The earliest quantifi- able results for the ARTS program would be for roadway depar- ture. Oregon DOT is currently focusing on the project delivery process to get projects into its current Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Local Road System Safety and Performance For the project delivery, some projects are implemented by Oregon DOT staff while others are implemented by the local agencies. The decision is collaboratively made based on which agency has the capacity and resources to deliver on the projects and meet the particular federal requirements. With a mix of systemic and hot spot approaches to safety, the ARTS program is changing the philosophy of safety by focusing more on the prevention of crashes since the human element is the major cause of crashes, in addition to the engineering causes such as tight curves and minimal signage. It is apparent that the local transportation agen- cies are accepting this new philosophy as demonstrated in the examples below. Clackamas County Clackamas County has been taking a different approach when instituting engineering practices for safety improvements. As a result, Clackamas County believes ODOT’s ARTS program par- allels its own its safety initiatives. The County has been invoking systemic approaches for a while now. This is evident in the con- ducting of RSAs to identify areas in need of signing and strip- ping. In 2012, Clackamas County developed its Transportation Safety Action Plan with assistance from Oregon DOT’s Safe Communities program. The County was successful in getting the Board to adopt the action plan in that same year. The County will incorporate the principles of the ARTS program as part of its

C-24 action plan which has the same data-driven/systemic approach to safety projects. The action plan has helped the County take a much broader approach to safety. In addition to the standard engineering approaches, the County has incorporated new per- formance standards that include personal health, when evaluat- ing safety needs through the regular RSA process. An example of this approach is presented in web-only Appendix D. With an ulti- mate goal of zero crashes, the plan sets a goal to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes by 50% by 2022. Additionally, the ARTS program significantly benefits the County and its citizens in rural areas because 70% of fatalities in the County take place on roads in the rural system. With its data-driven approach, ARTS will assist the county in focusing on some of the high-priority roads in rural areas. With its limited budget, the County focuses on small expenditures, low-cost approaches to improve safety on county-owned roads. Clackamas County used such a data-driven approach for a proj- ect on Wilsonville Road, a long and winding road running between Interstate 5 and Highway 219 in Newberg, Oregon. With Oregon DOT assistance, the County conducted a corridor-based RSA and implemented countermeasures focusing on signing and striping. Oregon DOT also provided financial assistance through HSIP funds. Since then, the County has periodically conducted RSAs and made additional safety improvements along the cor- ridor which include changes to signage, improved guardrails, and striping. The RSA is presented in web-only Appendix D in poster format. According to the County Engineer, the County observed a significant reduction in crashes and considers the project a good example of how the ARTS approach can suc- cessfully work statewide. Oregon DOT has also funded many of the County’s projects and initiatives and continues to support the County with grants for their Safe Communities program, much of the funding allocated to education and public outreach in the Oregon’s schools. The program coordinates with a num- ber of non-profit organizations to broaden the outreach to a greater audience. City of Bend The city of Bend started its safety improvement efforts in 2012 in parallel with the start of the ARTS program. The City Engineer reported that because of the ARTS program, the City is exam- ining the behavior of those injured in crashes, especially those involving cyclists and pedestrians. With the help of ODOT, The city of Bend developed a Road Safety Task Force, which devel- oped campaigns and promotional materials focusing on pedestri- ans and cyclists safety, especially at night. This approach has also changed how the city of Bend addresses roadway departures. In addition to completing two projects focused on improving guard- rail placement, the City Engineers looked to preventing accidents by implementing standards and specifications recommended by ODOT related to corridor curves and their relationship to other curves, including the addition of appropriate signage and striping necessary to minimize crashes. This is an important approach because the city has a number of long roads that consist of very tight curves. Before the ARTS program, Oregon DOT never worked with its cities to address safety and the city of Bend did not have a safety program in place. With the implementation of the ARTS program, however, the city of Bend has held a series of meetings focused on safety with Oregon DOT, leading to safety improve- ments at its key intersections. Currently, Oregon DOT works closely with the city of Bend on safety issues and the city now has a dedicated funding source for safety. Addressing Challenges The ARTS program has been fully operational since 2012. Accord- ing to Oregon DOT, in addition to peer exchange forum discus- sions and an abundance of research, an impetus for Oregon DOT moving to the ARTS approach for safety was MAP-21, the reau- thorization that changed the priority of spending resources on state highway system to a more “all roads data-driven process.” One noted challenge in addressing local roads safety is engaging local agencies in the development and implementation of the ARTS pro- gram. One particular innovation of the ARTS program is its 2012 inception of an MOU between Oregon DOT, the League of Ore- gon Cities (LOC) and the Association of Oregon Counties (AOC). The MOU documents the understanding between these three enti- ties related to the allocation of funding from the federal safety program. The MOU focuses on funding only for roads managed by counties and cities across the state of Oregon. Interviews with Oregon DOT and AOC indicated that Oregon DOT has worked closely with the AOC and Oregon DOT developed the MOU with input from AOC and county members. Additionally, Oregon DOT conducted a series of meetings with AOC and county representa- tives in which they discussed details of the ARTS safety program including its contents, funding structure, and project selection pro- cess. Since the MOU was signed, Oregon DOT officials periodi- cally update AOC about the ARTS program’s progress including its new funding opportunities and initiatives. Summary Through the upcoming round of the ARTS program, Oregon DOT will select priority safety projects for the years 2017 through 2021. With the data-driven approach of the ARTS program, it is Oregon DOT’s intention to better serve local and regional agen- cies by selecting priority projects in key areas rather than simply allocating a pre-set distribution of funds to every jurisdiction within the state of Oregon. The state of Oregon combines sys- temic and hot spot approaches to safety. The process for hot spot and systemic projects consists of developing a draft 300% list of potential projects for all highways, both state and non-state high- ways, for each Oregon DOT region. An Oregon DOT consultant developed the hot spot project list, while an application process was used for the systemic projects. Currently, Oregon DOT is delivering projects on local roads for systemic improvement including sign upgrades, rumble strips, pavement markings and other low-cost countermeasures. Starting in 2017, project selection will be statewide. The earliest quantifiable results for the ARTS program would be for roadway departure. Oregon DOT is currently focusing on the project deliv- ery process to get projects into its STIP. Past evaluations have been done through the evaluation report and NHTSA yearly per- formance plan. For evaluating specific road improvement types generated through the data-driven/systemic process, Oregon DOT will need to collect further data for a complete assessment. Oregon DOT plans to provide technical assistance related to the ARTS program by teaming up with the LTAP. Currently, LTAP is developing a full-time position to assist and work extensively with local agencies in obtaining and analyzing crash data and help them implement data-driven approaches to identify safety needs on locally owned roads. In addition to the implementation of engineering safety improvements, Oregon DOT expects its ARTS program to help change the overall safety culture with a major emphasis on edu- cation. Oregon DOT already has a history of success with its campaign on seat belt usage; the state of Oregon has one of the

C-25 highest usages of seat belts in the country. However, improve- ments in driver behavior would not continue unless the education and the campaigns evolve as driver behavior change and tech- nologies change, whether in the automobile itself or with mobile devices that cause driver distractions. The ARTS program will provide an avenue for the state, regional and local agencies, to address safety through a broader perspective. UtAH StAtE SAfEty PRogRAmS AImED At LoCAL AgENCIES Background There are approximately 46,250 miles of roadway of which 35,850 miles are non-state owned and maintained. In the state of Utah, local road programs are managed differently than safety programs that include local roads. Local road programs and proj- ects are managed by both the Central (planning and program- ming) and Region offices (implementation) with a staff of about five under a Local Government Assistance program. Safety pro- grams reside in the Central Traffic & Safety Division, part of the Operations group. With MAP-21, the fund level of the HSIP has doubled to approximately $28.5 million compared to when SAFETEA-LU was in effect. According to the 2014 HSIP annual report, approximately $1.7 million is programmed to local safety projects. Additional funding will be allocated on educational and behavioral programs such as the Zero Fatalities Program. An inter- view with the Utah DOT indicated that with MAP-21, the overall emphasis on the systemic safety approach, comprehensive crash data collection, and coordination with local agencies has increased. In Utah, an overall concerted effort to reach out to local gov- ernments and focus on low cost safety enhancements exists among various agencies. The formation of the Utah Safety Leadership Executive Committee (USLEC) in 2003 increased support for local road safety projects that had been an important focus even before SAFETEA-LU instituted the High Risk Rural Roads pro- gram. The Utah DOT and Utah Department of Public Safety (DPS) are two major partners in developing and managing comprehen- sive multi-disciplined safety programs. A consistent coordination of all engineering, education, and enforcement activities related to highway safety between agencies (Utah DOT, DPS, and Utah highway Patrol) is one of the success factors in Utah’s local roads safety. Proven low-cost safety countermeasures with the SHSP emphasis areas are the selection criteria of local safety projects. Safety Program/Initiative Zero Fatalities Program Utah’s Zero Fatalities program, an education campaign focused on changing driver behavior, began in 2006 and is marking its 9th year. SAFETEA-LU allowed federal safety funds (10% flex fund) to be spent on education and enforcement activities, which was the impetus for Utah to begin the program. Funding for the program has increased since MAP-21 with a current annual expense of $2.5 million. Mainly administered through a central contract with a consultant marketing firm, Utah DOT members in the Central Traffic & Safety Division allocate their time working on the Zero Fatalities-related tasks. The Zero Fatalities program emphasis areas are impaired, drowsy, distracted and aggressive driving as well as use of safety restraints, all of which are also noted as emphasis areas in Utah’s SHSP. Utah’s SHSP report stated that survey results to capture Zero Fatalities program aware- ness showed a continuous increase of program awareness rate resulting in 72% of survey respondents in 2011 compared with 35% of survey respondents in year 2006. Survey results also indi- cated that 56% of people attributed the Zero Fatalities campaign to “definitely” or “probably” having an impact in avoiding behav- iors causing fatal crashes. A recent change in Utah’s seat belt law becoming a primary law effective May 12th, 2015 is associated with one of the emphasis areas in the Zero Fatalities program. An interview with DPS revealed the department’s ongoing effort with seat belt and drunk driving-related safety enhance- ments, which are all related to driver’s behavior emphasized in the Zero Fatalities program and SHSP emphasis areas. Work- ing together with MPOs and the Utah DOT, the DPS Highway Safety division also focuses on educating local government offi- cers about law enforcement regarding seat belts, drunk driving, and pedestrian/bicycle safety. Sponsored by the Utah DOT and DPS, starting 2007, the state of Utah launched the Zero Fatalities Safety Summit. The Zero Fatalities Safety Summit is an opportunity for law enforcement personnel, city, county and state government officials, educa- tors and counselors, traffic safety engineers, child passenger safety technicians, emergency responders, and all other traffic safety advocates to share and gain ideas, experiences, opportuni- ties, and successes to improve traffic safety in Utah. The summit is designed to foster discussion and interaction between present- ers and participants on a variety of topics, including the state’s comprehensive safety plan, crash data usage, safety education pro- grams, impaired driving, teen driving, engineering, safety restraint systems and enforcement opportunities, among others. Federal-Aid Projects and Utah DOT Interviews with the Utah DOT reported that the state DOT coor- dinates with local governments the most through the HSIP. To encourage local governments’ active participation, after Utah DOT completes their crash analysis and identifies potential proj- ects, they approach each local government regarding their partic- ipation. Utah DOT then handles all project delivery activities to ensure all Federal requirements are met. One challenge the Utah DOT noted is making sure that the local government is actually ready to participate in the project as indicated by their willing- ness to contribute the 6.7% local match that is required per the Federal-aid process. Another challenge is the local governments’ willingness to acquire necessary right-of-way. Data Collection and Analysis Initiative Interviews with the Utah DOT reported that it has been working continuously for many years to improve crash data availability and accessibility. Historically, crashes on state and Federal-aid eligible roads have been located by a linear referencing system (LRS). Since 2012, all crashes on every public road are being geospatially identified and located. This facilitates hot spot analysis on both the local and state highway systems. Further- more, this comprehensive crash mapping system will support the more structured systemic approach that was adopted in 2012. The importance of a comprehensive database was also discussed during the Systemic Safety Implementation Peer Exchange held in September 2014 (FHWA 2014). In the context of a data collection and analysis system, the Utah DOT has two initiatives: the usRAP and the LiDAR asset management approach. usRAP is a software tool that does not

C-26 require detailed, site-specific crash data. Especially suitable for agencies lacking a rich crash database or that have low-volume road networks with sparse crash data, usRAP applies a risk based approach that relies on roadway design features and traffic control characteristics. usRAP generates maps with features representing roadway risk and safety level. The Utah DOT is at a pilot study stage with implementing usRAP to systemically identify safety improvements across the State. This pilot study is focused on identifying a range of safety problems on the state roadway sys- tem. The Utah DOT is planning to initiate pilot projects to apply the usRAP safety protocol to local roads in a few counties in 2015. It is envisioned that usRAP would assist in developing a Safer Roads Investment Plan and in prioritizing safety projects that will utilize HSIP funds. Some of the noteworthy points of the usRAP initiative are (1) data for usRAP can be collected on local roads using available tools such as Google Street View without a large financial investment on the part of the local governments and (2) the Safer Roads Investment Plan created through usRAP can be a very useful safety prioritization tool for the locals to use. In 2012, the Utah DOT established a roadway asset col- lection program with a comprehensive LiDAR mobile survey of the entire state system of roadways. With an approximate $2.5 million biannual budget, the Utah DOT is the first state to implement a statewide LiDAR data inventory. The second com- prehensive round of data was collected in 2014. The data col- lected is integral to the usRAP safety model as LiDAR mobile survey allows for a more systemic safety analysis based on road- way attributes. The LiDAR system is currently focused on the state highway system with plans to expand to local roads as the program develops. Utah’s LiDAR data collection project expands Utah DOT’s asset and roadway feature inventory, allows for bet- ter planning and budgeting, improves coordination among divi- sions, and greatly improves the Traffic and Safety Division’s data analysis capabilities. Utah’s LiDAR project was featured in the FHWA-SA-14-078 Case Study: Collection and Use of Roadway Asset Data in Utah Roadway Safety Data and Analysis (website link provided in Appendix E.) Local Road System Safety and Performance The Utah DOT applies both proactive and reactive approaches in problem identification on local roads systems. More spe- cifically, identification of crash hot spots and systemic inven- tory of rural county road networks to recommend low-cost safety improvements are applied in problem identification. Regarding the overall safety aspect, Utah statewide crash sta- tistics show an overall decrease in fatalities despite increases in population and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as shown in Figure C11. Figure C12 presents the latest four-year moving average crash statistics on Utah’s state and local roadway systems for fatalities and serious injuries that demonstrate a steady decreasing pat- tern. Before/after crash statistics showed that the counties with HRRR projects experienced an average 38% reduction in fatal and serious injury crashes with a maximum reduction of 70% in one county while all of Utah’s counties had an average of 34% reduction. When considering all types of injury levels (e.g., property damage only and non-incapacitating injury) and fatali- ties, counties with HRRR projects reported a higher reduction rate (7%) compared with all counties (5%). While the before/ after crash statistics show the HRRR project effectiveness, the interview with the Utah DOT indicated LTAP’s important role in conducting HRRR projects with local governments. LTAP pro- vided a suite of software tools to inventory signing and create a sign management system, attended the field reviews and helped with ball bank analysis to determine whether curve signage was warranted. City of Provo The city of Provo, Utah, has a population of more than 116,290 and is the third largest city in the state of Utah. The interviews with the city of Provo reported that Utah DOT’s assistance with conducting crash analysis and identifying problematic sites and corridors helped the city, which has limited skills and resources in such analyses. Because the Utah DOT personnel have undertaken some of this burden, the city has shown increased involvement in many safety projects. Recently, the city received HSIP funds to upgrade signal timing to enhance corridor safety, including pedes- trian and bike safety. The corresponding corridor safety issues were assessed and identified by Utah DOT personnel who then reported to the city with specific HSIP funding opportunities. The city of Provo plans to apply for additional HSIP funds to address different safety issues, including angled crashes, in the same corridor. FIGURE C11 Statistics of fatalities, population and vehicle miles traveled (Source: 2014 Strategic Direction and Performance Measures).

C-27 Addressing Challenges In the synthesis survey, the Utah DOT noted limitations of local government resources as well as local governments’ willingness to accept direction from state and federal agencies as major chal- lenges in a state-local partnership. To address these issues, the Utah DOT is continuing its efforts to foster communication and build a positive-working relationship with local governments. Summary In Utah, there were two noteworthy practices/initiatives: Zero Fatalities Program and innovative initiatives in data collection and analysis (the usRAP and the LiDAR asset management approach). An interview with the Utah DOT indicated that with MAP-21, the overall emphasis on the systemic safety approach, comprehensive crash data collection, and coordination with local agencies has increased. In the synthesis survey, the Utah DOT noted limitations of local government resources as well as local governments’ will- ingness to accept direction from state and federal agencies as major challenges in a state-local partnership. To address these issues, the Utah DOT is continuing its efforts to foster communication and build a positive-working relationship with local governments. WASHINgtoN StAtE SAfEty PRogRAmS AImED At LoCAL AgENCIES Background The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) administers local agency programs. WSDOT Local Programs Division provides federal safety funds from the HSIP to jurisdic- tions in Washington State to use engineering countermeasures to reduce fatal and serious injury collisions. Fatal and serious injury collision data are analyzed and jurisdictions apply for funding that meet specific crash criteria. The HSIP program requires that state programs and spends safety funds according to the SHSP. Wash- ington State’s SHSP plan is called Target Zero. Target Zero pres- ents strategies to reduce fatal and serious injury collisions to zero by the year 2030. Local road programs and projects are handled by both the central (planning and programming) and district offices (implementation) employing a staff of about 50. More than 80% of the public roads in Washington are owned by local agencies. Safety Program/Initiative Four Safety Programs under Local Programs Division The Local Programs Division has four funding programs: (1) City Safety Program, (2) County Safety Program, (3) Quick Response Safety Program, and (4) City/County Corridor Pro- gram. According to the Washington State 2014 HSIP report, oversight for the 70% of the HSIP funds that are directed to local agencies is assigned to the Local Programs Division for man- agement (e.g., identifying local agency priorities, distribution of funds to counties and cities, individual project selection, federal oversight, project delivery, etc.). The following section provides information about the scope and number of projects that were funded in 2014. • City Safety Program: This program, started in 2012, funds the design/preliminary engineering, right-of-way and construction phases of projects that apply engineering 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 N um be r of F at al C ra sh N um be r of S er io us I nj ur y C ra sh Statewide Serious Injury Crash Statewide Fatal Crash State Routes Serious Injury Crash State Routes Fatal Crash Local Routes Serious Injury Crash Local Routes Fatal Crash FIGURE C12 Four-year moving average crash statistics on Utah’s state and local roadway systems.

C-28 countermeasures to reduce fatal and serious injury colli- sions. The eligible project sites include streets in cities of any population and state highways that serve as arterials for cities with population above 25,000. In 2014, 29 proj- ects in 17 cities, totaling $23.1 million were funded. • County Safety Program: Initiated in 2009, similar to the City Safety Program, County Safety Program fund the design/preliminary engineering, right-of-way and con- struction phases of projects that will use engineering coun- termeasures to reduce fatal and serious injury collisions. Project sites are selected from county roads in counties with a prioritized local road safety plan. In 2014, 87 projects in 29 counties totaling $25.8 million were funded. • Quick Response Safety Program: Focusing on construc- tion phase projects, the goal of this one time program was to fund projects that met two criteria: (1) using engineer- ing countermeasures, reduce fatal and serious collisions on local roads and streets and state highways that serve as city arterials within any local jurisdiction; and (2) get safety projects on the ground quickly. WSDOT and the FHWA were required to obligate construction funds by a certain date. In 2013, 54 projects in 25 cities and 14 counties total- ing $26.7 million were funded. It was a short-term program to expend available safety funds. • City/County Corridor Safety Program: Initiated in 2000, the program aims to reduce fatal and serious injury colli- sions in local communities in Washington State. The pro- gram uses low-cost, near term solutions to improve traffic safety through engineering, enforcement, education, and emergency services approaches. Local Programs provides funding for engineering solutions while the Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) and Local Programs Division administer the program by providing grants and resources for: enforcement, education, and emergency ser- vices solutions. According to the 2013 Washington State Annual Collision Summary, 54% of the fatal crashes and 59% of the serious inju- ries occurred on city and county roads (WTSC 2014). Table C4 shows the progress Washington State is achieving in the reduc- tion of fatalities and serious injury crashes, and in meeting safety performance targets. Washington Traffic Safety Commission The Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) is the state’s designated highway safety office and shares a vision with numer- ous other state and local agencies, which is reducing traffic fatali- ties and serious injuries to zero by 2030. The WTSC Director serves as the Governor’s Highway Safety Representative, which is a designated position each state is required to have in order to qualify for federal traffic safety funding. In its 2014 Annual Report, the WTSC reported the Rural Road Traffic Fatalities from 2004 to 2014 decreased from 355 to 226 (WTSC 2014). Local Road System Safety and Performance Both reactive and proactive methods are used in identifying and prioritizing local roads projects. Spot locations are primarily addressed through the City Safety Program (reactive approach), while risk locations over widespread areas (systemic safety) are reviewed by both the City and County Safety programs (pro- active approach). A benefit-cost analysis is used for high-cost and spot location projects in the City Safety Program. A ranking using a technical formula is used to prioritize low-cost system- atic safety projects in the City Safety Program. Crash history is the basis for the County Safety Program but this program is implemented using the systemic safety approach. Crash his- tory defines funding levels among the counties. Overall trends in fatalities and serious injuries in emphasis areas are used in evaluating performance of both state and local road safety. However, the systemic safety projects are too recent to measure performance. Washington State DOT The WSDOT Local Programs Division reported that the County Safety Program started in 2009, the City Safety Program in 2012, and the Quick Response Safety Program in 2013, although it was intended to be a one-time program to spend available safety funds. The Corridor Safety Program was initiated in 1990 for state routes and local routes were added into the program in 2000. County or city safety plans do not have to be voluminous documents. For the most recent round of safety funding, counties were required to submit safety plans drafted from a WSDOT- structured template. Thirty-one of 39 counties submitted plans in 2013. Each safety plan was different with some ranging from five to 15 pages, while others up to 100 pages. Plans were to outline a process, taking a risk base approach, using basic crash data and roadway factors and produce a list of projects and locations. Specific projects did not have to be supported by data, but were based on crash history of the types of crashes on certain types of roads. A sample plan for Cowlitz County Strategic Risk-Based Assessment using the Systemic Safety Project Selection Tool, Grant County WA Local Road Safety Plan, and a template “Any County Public Works Safety Local Road Safety Plan” for use by other counties are presented in web-only Appendix D. Most of the local road safety programs were in place prior to MAP 21 and the only change was the funding levels, which were doubled. The WTSC receives NHTSA funds. They partner with WSDOT in meeting the goals of the SHSP and the Target Zero program. The corridor safety program is a coordinated joint pro- gram, which addresses all the 4E elements to roadway safety. One product of the WTSC is the Traffic Collision Report. The WTSC is currently completing the 2014 traffic collision report. The primary performance measure in all programs is the reduction of crashes. There is no specific performance measure on individual programs since many are inter-related. Projects funded by the City Safety Performance Measures* 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 No. Fatalities 588.2 573.2 535.4 499.6 474.2 No. Serious injuries 2,779.2 2,747.6 2,670 2,504 2,400.2 Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.05 1.02 0.946 0.882 0.838 Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 4.962 4.89 4.724 4.426 4.25 *Performance measure data are presented using a five-year rolling average. TABLE C4 OVERVIEW OF GENERAL SAFETY TRENDS

C-29 Program are normally higher-cost ones and allow the WSDOT to measure the reduction of crashes of specific projects. The County Safety Program is all risk based with no specific pre-project data and WSDOT will not be able to evaluate impacts for a number of years. The City/County Corridor Safety Program does measure before and after project data, which is trending very positively in the reduction of crashes. Of the 35 corridor projects completed, results show an average 8% decrease in total collisions and a 13% decrease in total injuries. More specifically, alcohol-related colli- sions and fatal and serious injuries collisions showed an average of 13% and 29% reduction respectively. The reported benefit-cost ratio was 34. The Cape Horn Corridor project, a 15.3-mile stretch of State Route 14 in southwest Washington State, is profiled in web-only Appendix D. The project involved a comprehensive 4E approach, including both state and local agencies, and produced a significant reduction in traffic crashes. WSDOT project planning, coordination and funding are accomplished in the central office, while the district offices over- see project construction. The LTAP is a part of the local programs office. WSDOT has limited interaction with the state MPO’s in the safety area and the MPOs defer to WSDOT to implement safety projects. Thurston County Thurston County has a population of 216,000 with approximately 1,040 miles of county roads. The Traffic Engineering & Opera- tions Manager of the Public Works Department reported that the prime safety office contact is always looking for ways to improve the system. The interview also revealed that since MAP-21, proj- ect fund level from the WSDOT has almost doubled. The major challenges to Thurston County are related to project execution, the use of federal dollars and it’s reporting. In 2012, projects were geared toward systemic applications, or a risk-based approach. Since 44%–46% of fatal and serious crashes (177 over a five- year period) occurred on horizontal curves the county’s focus has been on horizontal curves. Due to the recent completion of these projects, an analysis of the impact on safety and the reduction of crashes is not currently available. The county has not seen a county-wide reduction in crashes, although in 2014 it had the lowest number of fatalities (4). The county’s safety plan is the systemic safety study on horizontal curves and the follow on county safety plan, which will be funded with HSIP funds, will be more robust. The county has access of the statewide traffic database, called “Mobility,” which is maintained by the County Road Adminis- tration Board (CRAB). Each county has been able to access five years of crash data, which has proved useful in evaluating and proposing projects. The CRAB is currently developing a systemic safety module for counties. In Washington the challenge is not a lack of data, but a lack of staff to analyze the data. A Run-Off- Road and Intersection Safety Project, which involves improve- ments to traffic signs, pavement markings, guardrails and traffic signals has been instituted in Thurston County and is outlined on its website in Appendix E. Data has not yet been evaluated from the project and thus, it is too early to ascertain its impacts. Generally, however, individual projects are reducing fatalities. Safety projects generally have received 100% funding from the state. In 2015, Thurston County has been required to participate with a 10% match on safety projects. However, WSDOT has an incentive program to accelerate projects in which they forgo the match if the project can be completed within a certain timeframe. In 2014, a unique safety initiative was held where the County hosted a peer-to-peer exchange on high friction pavements, in which the County partnered with the WSDOT, LTAP and the FHWA. The county staff was trained to install a high friction pavement, which was demonstrated at the peer-to-peer exchange. It was highlighted in the WSDOT LTAP Newsletter 3rd Quarter and its link is provided in Appendix E. Thurston County also has had success using the FHWA Systemic Safety Selection Tool which was featured in FHWA’s success story as presented in web-only Appendix D (FHWA 2013). Challenges to the county include the federal reporting requirements when using federal- aid funds. A streamlining of the process, particularly environ- mental reviews, would be helpful to local governments. Most counties in the state are certified to complete contracting using federal funds. Training is available through LTAP. City of Spokane The city of Spokane has a population of almost 211,000. During the interview, the Senior Traffic Planning Engineer and Traffic Operations Engineer—Streets Department, city of Spokane, out- lined the WSDOT City Safety Program. Their focus is on high-cost spot location and low-cost widespread projects. While the Senior Traffic Planning Engineer oversees the grants process, the Traffic and Operations Engineer accomplishes the work. Since it is only a 2012 initiative, they have not evaluated post-project completion statistics. They do, however, have before statistics for ten years and plan to evaluate project effectiveness. Other safety projects include conversion of a wide two-lane roadway into a three-lane road with a center lane for turning movements. According to the interview, crashes such as sideswipes and rear end collisions have been reduced. Prior to the City Safety Program, the city completed other successful projects. One project installed a roundabout, which reduced fatalities from one and a high number of crashes to three crashes and no fatalities over a five-year period. The city also has been active in the Safe Routes to Schools Program and has installed 86 flashing beacons with currently on-going analysis on the impacts of the corresponding project. MAP-21 has resulted in additional safety funds. Under the City Safety Program it submit- ted five projects in 2014, two for lane conversions, which were valued at $500,000–750,000 each; a downtown curb extension and lighting project, valued at $2 million; a five to three lane reduction project, valued at $4 million; and the Avenue four to three lane project, valued at $2 million. All the projects were funded except the downtown curb extension and lighting project. The city also is involved with the Target Zero Program and is a member of the Spokane County Safety Commission, which is addressing Target Zero issues. It has also received staffing funds for the “Click It or Ticket” program and funds for several projects under the Safe Routes to Schools program. Challenges for the city include its political leadership and neighborhood organization involvement. Additionally, the city faces challenges of education, resource needs, such as staffing and funding and timely project delivery. Currently, pedestrian and bicycle safety and distracted driving are its primary focus areas. Skagit County The Skagit County’s Transportation Programs Manager reported progress on several projects. Skagit County is a rural county of about 120,000 population and approximately 800 miles of county-owned roads. The critical type of safety project for its rural county’s needs is intersections. The county’s successes have been the completion of 2 roundabout projects which received

C-30 County Safety Program funds in 2009. One roundabout, with a 3,000 ADT, replaced a four-way intersection which resulted in a crash reduction. Prior to the roundabout’s construction, there were eight deaths whereas statistics shows zero fatalities for seven years after its installation. The county does not trend crashes for the entire county. It can, however, access “Mobility,” the statewide traffic database, which is maintained by the CRAB. Yearly, it meets with the Sheriff’s department to identify hot spots from the Mobility database. Signal improvements were made on several local roads, which resulted in a reduction of crashes. A second roundabout proj- ect using the Quick Response Safety Program funds installed a roundabout consolidating a five-road intersection at which there was an annual average of 16 crashes. The construction was val- ued at $2 million and was completed in 2014. There have been no crashes since its installation. The County completed a prior- ity assessment safety report, which addressed ADT, collisions, road geometry, and assigned a priority to that segment of a road- way. The County also identified future projects and set project priorities. Annual reports are created from the road inventory on crash rates by intersections and road segments. Skagit County Public Works meets with the Sheriff’s department and Emergency Man- agement quarterly to review its roadway safety concerns. A major effort is underway to address railroad-crossing safety. In Skagit County the corridor program was a combination of two differ- ent projects. One project involved State Highway 20, and other, in 2012, involved county roads. The results are still being evalu- ated. Skagit County challenges in implementing safety projects are staffing limitations and providing the county fund match on large- scale safety projects. The funding matches are 13.5% of WSDOT Surface Transportation Program projects, 10% for safety projects and 20% for the federal bridge preservation program. Addressing Safety Challenges According to WSDOT Local Programs, three challenges exist in implementing programs. They include local agency resource limitations such as funding and staff; staff turnover; and slow delivery of projects. WSDOT has instituted funding incentives to address project delivery—a decreased matching fund require- ments for projects awarded by a certain date. Training and tech- nical support is provided to address staff turnover. However, local funding priorities are required to address resource limita- tions. The reduction of fatalities and serious injuries during the past two years can be attributed to the initiation and expansion of state-coordinated programs and partnerships; the increase in HSIP funding, the promotion of systemic, low-cost safety improvements; and other non-state DOT programs. Summary WSDOT has several noteworthy programs, which collectively provide a comprehensive approach in addressing safety and in reducing crashes on local roads. In the 2013 Annual Collision Report, rural road traffic fatalities from 2004 to 2013, decreased from 355 to 226, a 36% decrease in 10 years (WSDOT 2013). These programs include: • The City/County Corridor Safety Program, initiated in 2000, has yielded a reduction of fatal and serious injury collisions by 29%. • The County Safety Program, initiated in 2009, has invested $25.8 million on 87 projects in 29 counties. • The Quick Response Safety Program, initiated in 2011, while aimed at a one-time effort to expend available safety dollars, provided a template of future efforts by focusing on identified priority safety projects through the development of simplified road safety plans. In 2013, 54 projects in 25 cities and 14 counties totaling $26.7 million were funded. • The City Safety Program, initiated in 2012, invested $23.1 million in 2014 on 29 projects for 17 cities. The WSDOT and WTSC, along with other state and local agencies, share a vision to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries to zero by 2030. The Target Zero: SHSP addresses all 4E elements. Available state-provided crash data for local roads, the use of a risk-based approach using the crash history of the types of crashes associated with certain roadway features, and the development and use of a simplified jurisdictional road safety plan have resulted in the development of an effective method to determine the priority for project funding to improve local road safety. In Washington, County Road Safety Plans, a generic Road Safety Plan, and specific uses of the FHWA Systemic Safety Selection Tool provide noteworthy examples for use by other states and local agencies.