Transcript PPT
Minnesota CHSP Update Model Screening Process Howard Preston, PE January 3, 2007 1 2 Technical Overview - UPDATE Model Process – Focus on District 3 Document District 3 Crash Characteristics Disaggregate by Critical Emphasis Area Disaggregate by State vs. Local Road System Disaggregate by Counties With-in District 3 Observations Next Steps 3 Statewide Fatalities (2001-2005) Total Fatalities 3,008 Total Vehicle Occupant Fatalities 2,429 Driver Behavior Based Emphasis Areas Unbelted (Based on Veh. Occ. Fatalities) 1,271 (52%) 1 Alcohol-Related 1,068 (36%) 2 850 (28%) 5 Speeding-Related Involved Drivers Under 21 718 (24%) 6 965 (32%) 4 1,004 (33%) 3 611 (20%) 7 Infrastructure Based Emphasis Areas Single Vehicle ROR Intersection Head-On and Sideswipe Emphasis Area Fatality Rank 4 ATP 3 Fatalities (2001-2005) Driver Behavior Based Emphasis Areas Infrastructure Based Emphasis Areas Total Fatalities Unbelted AlcoholRelated Speeding -Related Young Driver Involved Single Vehicle ROR Intersection Head-on & Sideswipe Statewide 3,008 1,271 (52%) 1,068 (36%) 850 (28%) 718 (24%) 965 (32%) 1,004 (33%) 611 (20%) District 3 Total 581 265 (53%) 232 (40%) 146 (25%) 144 (25%) 221 (38%) 182 (31%) 166 (29%) State Trunk Highway 280 124 (50%) 87 (31%) 63 (23%) 59 (21%) 82 (29%) 88 (31%) 101 (36%) Local Roads 301 141 (57%) 145 (48%) 83 (28%) 85 (28%) 139 (46%) 94 (31%) 65 (22%) 5 Universes of Possible Safety Strategies Model Process ATP 1 State Local - Supplemental Implementation Analysis ATP 8 State Local - Document Primary Contributing Factors State System • Enforcement • Engineering • Education • EMS • Data Systems … Highest Priority Strategies Strategic Planning Process - Data & Partner Driven - Prioritization Driver Behavior - Seat Belts - Impaired - Young Drivers - Aggressive Drivers Local System Infrastructure - Lane Departure - Intersections Mapping Exercise 6 Detailed Model Process (1 of 2) Universes of Possible Safety Strategies Strategic Planning Process - Data & Partner - Driven Prioritization December 31, 2004 7 Detailed Model Process (2 of 2) Primary Contributing Factors Driver Behavior - Seat Belts - Impaired - Young Drivers - Aggressive Drivers Infrastructure - Lane Departure - Intersections Factors ATP 1 ATP 2 ATP 3 ATP 4 ATP M ATP 6 ATP 7 ATP 8 State System Fatal & Serious Injury Crashes October, 2006 Local System Road Categories - Freeway - Expressway - Conventional - Volume Intersection Control - Signal - Stop Location - Rural - Urban Mapping Exercise Strategies … Highest Priority Strategies ATP 1 State Local - ATP 8 State Local - July, 2007 8 Model Surveying Process – ATP 3 PRIORITY STRATEGIES See Handout 9 Priority Facility Types State System - ATP 3 2-Lane Freeway 4-lane Expressway 4-Lane Undivided 4-Lane Divided Conventional (Non expressway) ADT < 1,500 1,500 < ADT < 5,000 5,000 < ADT < 8,000 ADT > 8,000 Sub Total Freeway 4-lane Expressway 4-Lane Undivided 4-Lane Divided Conventional (Non expressway) Three-Lane Five-Lane ADT < 1,500 1,500 < ADT < 5,000 5,000 < ADT < 8,000 ADT > 8,000 Sub Total 2-Lane Urban Rural Facility Type Crashes Miles Fatal Serious Injury 123 16 18 175 24 29 10 0 2 36 5 2 296 8 9 555 23 28 170 12 20 136 18 28 1,501 106 136 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 15 0 31 13 0 4 3 1 1 7 0 1 28 0 6 12 1 1 16 0 6 99 2 51 Crash Rate 0.4 0.8 0.8 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.9 0.9 Severity Rate 0.6 1.2 1.2 1.6 1.9 1.2 1.5 1.4 Fatal Rate 0.6 1.1 0.0 1.3 3.3 2.0 1.5 1.5 Crash Density 4.6 5.0 3.3 5.5 0.4 0.8 2.2 3.7 0.0 2.6 2.8 4.6 3.2 4.6 0.9 2.2 2.6 3.7 0.0 3.3 3.8 7.3 4.3 6.4 1.9 3.5 3.5 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 16.7 3.9 39.6 13.4 22.4 0.3 2.5 5.8 14.9 Priority 10 Priority Facility Types State System - ATP 3 Priority Types Facility Type Crash Data Filter Number Rate Density Freeway Expressway 4-Lane Undivided 4-Lane Conventional Rural 2-Lane ADT < 1,500 1,500 < ADT < 5,000 5,000 < ADT < 8,000 ADT > 8,000 Freeway Expressway 4-Lane Undivided 4-Lane Conventional Urban 3-Lane 5-Lane 2-Lane ADT < 1,500 1,500 < ADT < 5,000 5,000 < ADT < 8,000 ADT > 8,000 11 Priority Strategies by Facility Type State System – ATP 3 See Handout 12 Local System Priorities by County ATP 3 See Handout 13 Local System Priorities by County – ATP 3 Emphasis Area County Benton Crash Data Filter Under 21 Speed Alcohol Unbelted ROR Crow Wing Isanti Mille Lacs Morrison Todd Wadena Wright Sherburne Stearns Head-On Cass Kanabec Intersection 14 Priority Strategies by County Local System – ATP 3 15 Fatal Crashes where the Total EMS Response Time was at Least One Hour 50 40% 47 Frequency Precent 20% of fatal crashes in Minnesota had a total EMS response times of at least one hour. (FARS, 2001-2005) 45 40 32% 32% 37 28% 28% 26% 24% 28 27 26 22% 20% 25 20% 22 20 16% 15% 16 15 12% 10 8% 8% 5 4% 0 0% D1 D2 D3 D4 Metro D6 D7 D8 Percentage 30 Frequency 35 28% 35 36% 16 Observations The crash data supports the previous selection of Critical Emphasis Areas Impaired Driving Safety Belt Usage Young Drivers Aggressive Drivers Lane Departures Intersections Driver Safety Awareness Data Information Systems 17 Observations In ATP 3 Distribution of fatalities among the CEAs is generally similar to statewide averages with the following exceptions Unbelted drivers Alcohol-related Young drivers Head-on crashes For each Emphasis Area, the number of fatalities on the local system exceeds the number on the state system, with one exception – head-on & sideswipe 48% of fatalities occur on the STH system and 52% on the local system. 18 Observations Approximately 60% of the factors contributing to fatal crashes are related to driver behavior. ATP 3 has the highest number of fatal crashes where total EMS response time exceeded 1 hour. These facts suggest the need for a balanced approach to safety – investing in the Other E’s (especially on the local system). 19 Observations Severe crashes are far overrepresented on rural facilities. Severe crashes are overrepresented on 2-lane roads (both state and local) in ATP 3. However, there is no obvious priority based on volume categories. There are fewer severe crashes on multi-lane roads, however, the 10 fatal head-on crashes on the freeway system and 10 fatal road departure crashes on the expressway system are the highest of any ATP in the state. 20 Observations The analysis of the factors contributing to severe crashes in ATP 3 suggest the following high-priority infrastructure based improvements: Rural Freeways & Expressways: Median Barriers Rural Expressways: Street lights, Indirect turn treatments in median cross-overs, Edgeline rumblestrips Rural 2-Lane State Highways: Street lights, Centerline rumblestrips, Edgeline rumblestrips, Shoulder edge treatments Rural Local Highways: Street lights, Enhanced pavement markings, Edgeline rumblestrips, Shoulder edge treatments These types of strategies would be most effectively deployed using a proactive (as opposed to reactive) approach. 21 Next Steps Receive comments and revise the process as necessary. Apply the revised process to the other ATP’s. Prepare a short list of the highest priority strategies for each ATP.