1 September 28, 2011 Safety Strategies Workshop Brown County Faribault County Martin County Watonwan County

9/28/20112 Agenda Safety Planning (Goals and Objectives) Safety Planning Process Data Overview State & ATP Level County level Safety Emphasis Areas Safety Strategies Safety Strategies Workshop Breakout Groups Voting Exercise

9/28/20113 Goals and Objectives Data driven The new National Safety Performance measure = SEVERE crashes 4 E’s Foster safety culture among county stakeholders Development of County Safety Plans Unique safety plan Establish safety emphasis areas High priority safety strategies Safety investment options Identify high priority safety projects, both proactive and reactive. Position counties to Compete for Safety Funds Highway Safety Improvement Program High Risk Rural Roads Program Minnesota Central Safety Funds

Project Approach – Phase III 9/28/20114 Crash Analysis Select Safety Emphasis Areas Identify Short List of Critical Strategies Identify Safety Projects Safety Workshop Develop Comprehensive List of Safety Strategies Project Programming Project Development Implementation Evaluation Refinement & Update SHSP Safety Plan Jun 2011Sept 2011 Aug 2011 Jul 2011 Dec 2011 Feb 2012 Nov 2011 Review Mtg w/ Counties Kick-off Video Meeting Jan 2012 Aug 2011

9/28/20115 Legend 10/yr (50 total) - Severe crashes on any jurisdiction 4/yr (20 total) - Severe crashes on CSAH/CR MnCMAT Crash Data, Severe = K (fatal) + A (life-changing injury) ATP 7 County Severe Crash Numbers Note: Steele county does not have a large enough crash dataset to be analyzed separately. Steele crashes are 62% rural, while other ATP 7 counties are on average 77% rural. Therefore Steele will be included in ATP 7 analysis. No county in ATP 7 has a high number of severe crashes on their highway system. No county has enough severe crashes to support the development of a safety plan through a data driven process. ATP 7 does have enough severe crashes – the ATP totals will be used to identify safety emphasis areas for all of the counties. 10/yr (49) 3/yr (17) 7/yr (34) 3/yr (15) 12/yr (60) 7/yr (35) 7/yr (37) 3/yr (14) 16/yr (79) 5/yr (23) 9/yr (47) 5/yr (25) 22/yr (122) 10/yr (48) 4/yr (22) 3/yr (15) 5/yr (23) 1/yr (4) 7/yr (34) 2/yr (12) 10/yr (49) 4/yr (20) 9/yr (47) 3/yr (16) 11/yr (55) 3/yr (14) 5/yr (23) 1/yr (7)

ATP 7 County Crash Data Overview 9/23/ Year Crashes ATP 7 23, Year Crashes ATP 7 23, State System 10,038 – 43% 265 – 39% State System 10,038 – 43% 265 – 39% CSAH/CR 5,379 – 23% 265 – 40% CSAH/CR 5,379 – 23% 265 – 40% Rural 3,408 – 63% 221 – 83% Rural 3,408 – 63% 221 – 83% Urban 1,971 – 37% 44 – 17% Urban 1,971 – 37% 44 – 17% All Way Stop 73 – 7% 1 – 3% All Way Stop 73 – 7% 1 – 3% Run off Road 1,165 – 67% 98 – 68% Run off Road 1,165 – 67% 98 – 68% On Curve 419 – 24% 45 – 31% On Curve 419 – 24% 45 – 31% Example All – % Severe – % Example All – % Severe – % Right Angle – 219 (50%), 5 (36%) “Other” – 50 (11%), 3 (21%) Left Turn – 34 (8%), 3 (21%) Ran Off Road – 15 (3%), 2 (14%) Right Angle – 219 (50%), 5 (36%) “Other” – 50 (11%), 3 (21%) Left Turn – 34 (8%), 3 (21%) Ran Off Road – 15 (3%), 2 (14%) Thru-Stop 440 – 45% 14 – 48% Thru-Stop 440 – 45% 14 – 48% Right Angle – 95 (38%), 4 (50%) Head On – 11 (4%), 2 (25%) Rear End – 64 (25%), 1 (13%) “Not Applicable” – 4 (2%), 1 (12%) Right Angle – 95 (38%), 4 (50%) Head On – 11 (4%), 2 (25%) Rear End – 64 (25%), 1 (13%) “Not Applicable” – 4 (2%), 1 (12%) Signalized 252 – 26% 8 – 28% Signalized 252 – 26% 8 – 28% Inters-Related 774 – 29% 62 – 28% Inters-Related 774 – 29% 62 – 28% Source: MnCMAT Crash Data, Severe is fatal and serious injury crashes (K+A). Includes Steele County City, Twnshp, Other 8,104 – 34% 141 – 21% City, Twnshp, Other 8,104 – 34% 141 – 21% Inters-Related 985 – 50% 29 – 66% Inters-Related 985 – 50% 29 – 66% Not Inters-Related 684 – 35% 14 – 32% Not Inters-Related 684 – 35% 14 – 32% Run Off Road – 113 (17%), 4 (29%) “Other” – 88 (13%), 4 (29%) Head On – 54 (8%), 4 (29%) Rear End – 157 (23%), 1 (7%) Run Off Road – 113 (17%), 4 (29%) “Other” – 88 (13%), 4 (29%) Head On – 54 (8%), 4 (29%) Rear End – 157 (23%), 1 (7%) Animal 761 – 22% 3 – 1% Animal 761 – 22% 3 – 1% Not Inters-Related 1,734 – 66% 145 –67% Not Inters-Related 1,734 – 66% 145 –67% Head On, SS Opp. 86 – 5% 16 – 11% Head On, SS Opp. 86 – 5% 16 – 11% On Curve 16 – 19% 4 – 25% On Curve 16 – 19% 4 – 25% Unknown/Other 302 – 15% 1 – 2% Unknown/Other 302 – 15% 1 – 2% Unknown/Other 136 – 5% 11 – 5% Unknown/Other 136 – 5% 11 – 5% Other/Unknown 220 – 22% 6 – 21% Other/Unknown 220 – 22% 6 – 21% Right Angle – 111 (31%), 18 (60%) Run Off Road – 61 (17%), 6 (20%) SS Opp – 14 (4%), 2 (7%) Head On – 14 (4%), 2 (7%) Right Angle – 111 (31%), 18 (60%) Run Off Road – 61 (17%), 6 (20%) SS Opp – 14 (4%), 2 (7%) Head On – 14 (4%), 2 (7%) Thru-Stop 360 – 47% 30 – 48% Thru-Stop 360 – 47% 30 – 48% Run Off Road – 145 (38%), 12 (38%) “Other” – 57 (15%), 6 (19%) Right Angle – 45 (12%), 5 (16%) Head On – 21 (6%), 4 (13%) Run Off Road – 145 (38%), 12 (38%) “Other” – 57 (15%), 6 (19%) Right Angle – 45 (12%), 5 (16%) Head On – 21 (6%), 4 (13%) Other/Unknown 381 – 49% 32 – 52% Other/Unknown 381 – 49% 32 – 52% Not Animal 2,645 – 78% 218 – 99% Not Animal 2,645 – 78% 218 – 99% All Way Stop 19 – 2% 0 – 0% All Way Stop 19 – 2% 0 – 0% Signalized 13 – 2% 0 – 0% Signalized 13 – 2% 0 – 0% 6

9/28/20117 Workshop Group 7B Crash Data Overview 5 Year Crashes Group 7B 4, Year Crashes Group 7B 4, State System 1,947 – 42% 50 – 37% State System 1,947 – 42% 50 – 37% CSAH/CR 977 – 21% 58 – 42% CSAH/CR 977 – 21% 58 – 42% Rural 623 – 64% 49 – 84% Rural 623 – 64% 49 – 84% Run off Road 227 – 65% 18 – 58% Run off Road 227 – 65% 18 – 58% On Curve 62 – 27% 5 – 28% On Curve 62 – 27% 5 – 28% Example All – % Severe – % Example All – % Severe – % Inters-Related 151 – 29% 15 – 33% Inters-Related 151 – 29% 15 – 33% Source: MnCMAT Crash Data, Severe is fatal and serious injury crashes (K+A). City, Twnshp, Other 1,720 – 37% 29 – 21% City, Twnshp, Other 1,720 – 37% 29 – 21% Not Inters-Related 351 – 68% 31 – 67% Not Inters-Related 351 – 68% 31 – 67% Right Angle – 23 (36%), 4 (67%) Thru-Stop 64 – 42% 6 – 40% Thru-Stop 64 – 42% 6 – 40% Not Animal 516 – 83% 46 – 94% Not Animal 516 – 83% 46 – 94% Brown, Faribault, Martin, & Watonwan In Brown, Faribault, Martin & Watonwan Counties: 37% of severe crashes are on the state system 42% of severe crashes are on county roadways 84% of the severe crashes on the county roadways are RURAL 67% of rural severe crashes are non- intersection related and 33% occur at intersections 58% of severe non-intersection related crashes are road departure, with 28% of these occurring on a curve 40% of severe intersection related crashes are at Thru-Stop (2-way Stop) intersections and 67% of those are right angle crashes

9/28/20118 Workshop Group 7B Emphasis Areas The idea behind Safety Emphasis Areas is to assist the safety planning process by providing a uniform set of crash types and characteristics that encourages establishing safety priorities – identifying the types of crashes that result in the greatest number of fatalities and severe injuries. County roadways in ATP 7, the Top 5 Safety Emphasis Areas include: Young Drivers, Impaired Drivers, Unbelted Occupants, Road Departure and Intersections In individual counties, the actual number of crashes in each Emphasis Area and the rank order varies slightly, however, because of the low number of severe crashes in each county the differences are no statistically significant.

9/28/20119 Screening - Initial Strategies Enforcement Strategies Education Strategies Engineering Strategies Critical Strategies AASHTO’s SHSP, NCHRP Report 500 Implementation Guidelines, and input from Safety Partners. The strategies will be screened using: - Crash data, - Effectiveness, - Cost, and - Input from Safety Workshop. The Critical Strategies should have the greatest potential to significantly reduce the number of traffic fatalities. Emergency Services Strategies Intersections 77 Strategies Road Departure 13 Strategies Seat Belts 4 Strategies Speeding 2 Strategies Young Drivers 2 Strategies Alcohol/Drug 15 Strategies Head On 7 Strategies

9/28/ Safety Strategies Overview NCHRP Report 500 A series of guides to assist state and local agencies in reducing injuries and fatalities in targeted emphasis areas The guides correspond to the emphasis areas outlined in the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan. Each guide includes a brief introduction, a general description of the problem, the strategies/ countermeasures to address the problem, and a model implementation process.

9/28/ High Priority Reduce the Frequency through Geometric Design Optimize signal operation Use indirect left-turn treatments Improve Driver Awareness of Intersections Enhanced signing and delineation Choose appropriate intersection traffic control Roundabouts 70 + Initial Strategies Reduce the Frequency through Geometric Design Optimize signal operation Indirect Left Turn intersection Right & Left Turn Lanes Improve Driver Awareness of Intersections Enhanced signing and delineation Supplementary stop signs Choose appropriate intersection traffic control Roundabouts Improve access management near intersections Restrict access to properties using driveway closures 5 + Top Voted Reduce the Frequency through Geometric Design Use indirect left-turn treatments Improve Driver Awareness of Intersections Enhanced signing and delineation Choose appropriate intersection traffic control Roundabouts 2 + Critical Strategies Reduce the Frequency through Geometric Design Use indirect left-turn treatments Improve Driver Awareness of Intersections Enhanced signing and delineation … … … Small group discussion and prioritization. Large group discussion and voting. Selection by County Staff. Example: Intersection Strategy Prioritization

9/28/ Example – Typical Intersection Strategies Included Strategies: Change Intersection Type ImproveSightDistance Enhanced Signing and Delineation StreetLighting DynamicWarningSigns

9/28/ Example – Typical Run-Off Road Strategies

9/28/ List of Road Departure Strategies

9/28/ Phase I & II Safety Planning Process Identify Short List of Critical Strategies Identify Safety Projects Safety Workshop Safety Plan Top Infrastructure Voted Strategies Edgeline Rumble Strips/StripEs Street Lights Enhanced Shoulder or Delineation on Curve $114M worth of safety projects 5,400 miles of edge treatment ($41M) 7,600 curves delineation ($52M) 2,100 intersection improvements ($20M) Introduction Initial Crash Analysis Safety Emphasis Areas Safety Strategies Detailed Crash Analysis Safety Projects 12 Workshops Over 500 attendees

9/28/ Today’s Objective Break into 2 groups (11:30am – 2:30pm) Infrastructure & Driver Behavior Discuss & Prioritize the Short List of Strategies Wrap Up (2:30pm – 3:00pm) Review Breakout Discussions Voting Exercise Adjourn For updates on the progress of the Statewide County Road Safety Plans: