District and County Safety Plans Brad Estochen State Traffic Safety Engineer Minnesota Department of Transportation

Outline Safety, Crashes, MnDOT approach to Safety MnDOTs Risk Assessment Process Intersections Curves Segments Summary of Projects typical projects developed through safety plans

Crashes Crashes are the safety performance measure Historically safety focused on locations with lots of crashes Black spots High Crash Rates SAFETEA-LU (2005) signaled a new direction for traffic safety Reducing fatal and serious injury crashes

Minnesotas SHSP Funds available for local roads (HSIP, HRRR, …) Funding levels varied by ATP Application required to receive funding Priority on proactive (systemic) projects 10/27/20104

MnDOT TZD Initiative tzd.org

Safety Prioritization Fatal and Serious Injury crashes – primary focus Reduction – try to reduce crashes in locations experiencing crashes Prevention – prevent crashes from occurring TZD mission: To create a culture for which traffic fatalities and serious injuries are no longer acceptable through the integrated application of education, engineering, enforcement, and emergency medical and trauma services.educationengineering enforcementemergency medical and trauma services. Reducing other crashes – secondary focus

Traffic Fatalities

Strategic Highway Safety Plan MnDOTs framework for evaluating and selecting safety programs based on the ability to reduce fatal and serious injury crashes Leverages AASHTO emphasis areas Drivers Licensed, aggressive, impaired, belted, Special Users Pedestrians, bicyclists, Vehicles Trucks, motorcycles, passenger car safety systems Roadways Intersections, road/lane departure, safe work zones

Strategic Highway Safety Plan Critical Emphasis Areas Seat Belt Use – 52% Impaired Driving – 36% Intersection crashes – 33% Road Departure – 32% Aggressive Driving – 28% Young Drivers – 24% Head-on Crashes – 20%

Roadway# Killed: 2009% Killed# Rural% Rural Trunk Highway19146%14048% County Highways16940%13245% City Streets4210%52% Other Roads164%165%

Greater Minnesota Crash Data Overview 11/2/ Year Crashes 156,182 4,902 State System 70,808 – 45% 2,000 – 41% CSAH/CR 36,716 – 24% 1,963 – 40% Rural 22,630 – 62% 1,626 – 83% Urban 14,086 – 38% 337 – 17% All Way Stop 445 – 6% 5 – 3% Run off Road 7,891 – 67% 675 – 65% On Curve 3,222 – 40% 339 – 50% Example All – % Severe – % Right Angle – 1,268 (47%), 37 (86%) Other – 252 (9%), 9 (21%) Left Turn – 268 (10%), 4 (9%) Rear End – 333 (12%), 3 (7%) Thru-Stop 2,697 – 37% 65 – 45% Right Angle – 633 (27%), 15 (47%) Rear End – 799 (35%), 5 (16%) Left Turn – 375 (16%), 5 (16%) Head On – 100 (4%), 4 (13%) Signalized 2,308 – 31% 32 – 22% Inters-Related 5,487 – 29% 463 – 30% Source: MnCMAT Crash Data, Severe is fatal and serious injury crashes (K+A). City, Twnshp, Other 48,658 – 31% 939 – 19% Inters-Related 7,332 – 52% 145 – 43% Not Inters-Related 5,177 – 37% 175 – 52% Run Off Road – 1,202 (23%), 69 (39%) Head On – 366 (7%), 27 (15%) Other – 540 (10%), 25 (14%) Rear End – 1,336 (26%), 17 (10%) Animal 4,009 – 18% 60 – 4% Not Inters-Related 11,849 – 64% 1,042 –66% Head On, SS Opp. 751 – 6% 132 – 13% On Curve 247 – 33% 46 – 35% Unknown/Other 1,577 – 11% 17 – 5% Unknown/Other 1,276 – 7% 61 – 4% Other/Unknown 1,881 – 26% 43 – 30% Right Angle – 849 (34%), 122 (56%) Other – 464 (18%), 33 (15%) Run Off Road – 342 (14%), 21 (10%) Left Turn – 184 (7%), 10 (5%) Thru-Stop 2,511 – 46% 216 – 47% Run Off Road – 999 (38%), 95 (42%) Right Angle – 268 (10%), 39 (17%) Other – 303 (12%), 29 (13%) Head On – 112 (4%), 21 (9%) Other/Unknown 2,600 – 47% 228 – 49% Not Animal 18,616 – 82% 1,566 – 96% All Way Stop 164 – 3% 15 – 3% Signalized 209 – 4% 4 – 1% -ATPs 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 – NO Metro

Fatal and Serious Injury Crashes Challenge to determine where to focus safety funds Black spots are infrequent on local/low volume roads Fatal and Severe injury crashes are random on local/low volume roads County Roads 2,089 Severe Crashes 45,000 miles of road 0.05 severe crashes per mile Trunk Highway 2,168 Severe Crashes 12,000 miles of road 0.18 severe crashes per mile

Safety Plan Genesis HSIP funds available to local agencies Projects solicited by ATP (District) Technical assistance needed to identify safety projects SHSP has some guidance at local level Safety Plans produce a mini SHSP at the local level 87 counties, 8 MnDOT districts

A Systemic Approach The average county in Minnesota includes: 500 miles of county highway 400 horizontal curves 180 controlled intersections The key questions: Is every element of the county system equally at risk? Where to Start? A new approach to safety planning Old Approach Crashes = Risk & No Crashes = No Risk New Approach No Crashes No Risk Use surrogates of crashes (roadway and traffic characteristics) to identify risk and prioritize – the 5 (or 6) Ranking System

Systemic Approach to Safety Severe Crashes are rare/random Usually not location specific Investigated thousands of intersections, curves, miles of roads No dead mans curve No killer corner Traditional approaches such as crash rates, densities, or severity ratios will not identify infrequent crashes that are spread throughout the network

Systemic Approach Traditional approaches look for locations that have crashes and investigate the root cause MnDOT is looking at the predominant type of crashes causing serious injuries or death and then gathering information on where they are occurring. Leverage AASHTO emphasis areas Intersections, run off road crashes, unbelted, impaired

ATP 4 & 8 – Safety Emphasis Areas

Sample of Safety Emphasis Areas

Rural Paved Segments 47 counties in ATP 3, 4, 6 & 8 13,813 rural paved miles Rural Road Departure Crashes 21,611 total, 1,464 severe, 637 Severe RD Average Density of Sev RD Crashes= crashes/mi/year Risk Rating Criteria Density of Road Departure Crashes Traffic Volume Curve (Critical Radius) Density Access Density Edge Risk Assessment ATPSegmentsMileage Severe RD Crashes ATP , ATP 47473,43499 ATP 66261, ATP 86713,16295 Grand Total3,44813,813637

Segment Traffic Volume 600-1,200 ADT was selected to receive a star in ATP 4, 400-1,000 in ATP 8

Access Density Previous Minnesota research shows a statistically significant relationship between Access Density and Crash Rates – the greater the number of access points the higher the crash rate on Trunk Highways. The County Roadway Safety Plans indicates a similar access effect is present along the County Highway system

Edge Risk Assessment 2 – Usable Shoulder, Roadside with Fixed Obstacles 2 – No Usable Shoulder, Reasonable Clear Zone 1 – Usable Shoulder, Reasonable Clear Zone 3 – No Usable Shoulder, Roadside with Fixed Obstacles

Edge Risk Assessment Rural Segment Prioritization High Priority Phase I and II Segments – 13,290 miles, 589 severe RD crashes

Rural Curves 11,660 total curves in ATP 3, 4, 6 & 8 9,592 (82%) curves with no crashes Crashes 3,061 total, 326 severe crashes 4 curves with multiple fatal crashes (5 years) 33 curves with multiple severe crashes severe crashes/curve/year ATPCurve Count Severe Crashes Total Crashes Chevrons Installed ATP ATP ATP ATP Grand Total

Curve-Related Roadway Departure Risk Rating Criteria : ADT Range Radius Range Severe Crash on curve Intersection on curve Visual Trap on curve ATP 4, 61% of roadway departure crashes are curve related (39% in ATP 8) Are all curves equally at-risk? No

Curve Radius The majority of severe crashes occurred on curves with 500-1,200 radii.

Horizontal Curve Risk Rating Criteria High Priority

Sample Curve Prioritization Complete census of 490 curves 50 High Priority Curves (10%)

Rural Intersections 5,725 rural thru/stop (yield) intersections in ATP 3, 4, 6 & 8 4,794 total crashes 373 Severe Crashes 172 severe right angle Intersections with Multiple Severe Crashes: 28 (8 had 2 Fatals) 0.17 crashes/intersection/year 0.01 severe crashes/intersection/year ATPIntersections Severe Right Angle Crashes Severe Crashes ATP 31, ATP 41, ATP 61, ATP 81, Grand Total5,

Rural Thru STOP Risk Rating Criteria Geometry Skewed minor leg approach Intersection on/near horizontal curve Volume Minor ADT/Major ADT ratio Proximity Previous STOP sign Railroad crossing Intersection Related Crashes Commercial Development in quadrants

Rural Thru STOP Risk Rating Criteria There was a higher severe crash density at intersections where risk factors are present. Phase I and II intersections - 5,725 intersections included in analysis of each risk factor. Minimum of 150 intersections and 16 severe crashes in each category

Intersection Ranking 6 Intersections, 1 Severe Crash Phase I and II intersections - 5,520 intersections, 359 severe crashes

Project Development – High Priority Segments

Project Development – High Priority Curves

Project Development High Priority Intersections

Proactive Project Summary ATP TotalsIntersectionsSegmentsCurvesTotal ATP 3$7,972,400$16,106,107$19,794,813$43,873,320 ATP 4$4,547,000$9,802,628$9,749,702$24,099,330 ATP 6$2,666,800$10,196,428$15,933,618$28,796,846 ATP 8$3,561,850$8,088,124$5,012,430$16,662,404 Total$18,748,050$44,193,287$50,490,563$113,431,900 Average Per CountyIntersectionsSegmentsCurvesTotal ATP 3$664,367$1,342,176$1,649,568$3,656,110 ATP 4$378,917$816,886$812,475$2,008,278 ATP 6$296,311$1,132,936$1,770,402$3,199,650 ATP 8$296,821$674,010$417,703$1,388,534 Average$416,623$982,073$1,122,013$2,520,709

Safety Workshop Objective: Multidisciplinary discussion of a short list of safety strategies Date: December 13 Location: Otter Tail Government Center Agenda 8:30 – Coffee and Registration 9AM – Introductions Presentations – Law Enforcement and/or Local Safety Advocates Background Information/Desired Outcomes Breakout Sessions – Prioritize Strategies 12PM – 1PM - Lunch Report Back/Final Presentation 2:45 – 3PM - Wrap-up 10/27/201037

List of Unsignalized Intersection Strategies

Project Team MnDOT OTST MnDOT State Aid for Local Transportation DPS Office of Traffic Safety CH2M Hill SRF PE Services URS $4 million ($45,000/county and district) 3 year project Received the 2011 Partners for Roadway Safety Award

Highway Safety in Minnesota On an average day: 201 total crashes 1.1 deaths 3.5 serious injuries $4,097,549 estimated cost Questions?