1. Quantitative Safety Information and Project Development Session 8 Policy Level Issues Related to Safety Timothy Neuman, PE Chief Highway Engineer CH2M HILL

2. Presentation Overview How will the availability of system- wide quantitative safety information influence agency project development processes? What types of policies are envisioned to be most affected? What organizational and educational barriers need to be overcome? July 29 and 30, 20092

3. Transportation Agency Responsibilities Programming and Prioritization Project Development Operations and Maintenance

4. Project Development Process Problem Definition Decision and Evaluation Framework Design Studies (Alternatives) Screening and selection of preferred Preliminary and Final Design

5. July 29 and 30, 2009 Project Development Risks Abound Costs and impacts must be justified to be acceptable to regulatory agencies (assuming adversarial interests or resource conflicts exist) Some stakeholder opposition must be assumed for essentially every project Purpose and need must be defensible Recommended solutions must be effective and defensible (per proven solutions or industry best practices)

6. Safety Information and Project Development Is safety truly part of the problem or not? If so, what is the specific safety problem? If not, then what is the problem? If the problem is truly a safety one, then what solutions make sense? If it is a congestion or other problem the universe of solutions is different. How important is safety relative to other factors in developing and screening alternatives? Are design exceptions acceptable or not? If so, what types? Where? Under what circumstances? Problem Definition Decision and Evaluation Framework Design Studies (Alternatives) Screening and selection of preferred Preliminary and Final Design

7. Project Development Issues Defining Purpose and Need (problem statement) Project Type and Safety Information – New Construction – Reconstruction – 3R Alternatives development, analysis and decision-making Agency liability and risk management

8. Project ‘purpose and need’ drives the environmental decision- making process Replacement of infrastructure in disrepair Congestion or traffic operational problems Safety (crash prevention and/or severity mitigation)

9. The way things are today Not every project is driven by safety… But most purpose and need statements assert safety as a driver Solutions may or may not specifically deal with safety (other ‘drivers’ generally prevail) Challenges to EISs and EAs are the primary means of stalling or halting otherwise good projects

10. SPIs (and other tools) offer objective, defensible means of characterizing safety problems AADT Crash # SPF observed # at a location expected # from peer group corrected # at this location Potential for Safety Improvement (PSI)

11. Project Type Definitions New construction (projects on new alignment) New construction (projects on new alignment) Reconstruction of existing facility Reconstruction of existing facility Resurfacing, restoration or rehabilitation (‘3R’) Resurfacing, restoration or rehabilitation (‘3R’)

12. The Green Book encourages 3R designation where it is appropriate Specific site investigations and crash history analysis often indicate that the existing design features are performing in a satisfactory manner. The cost of full reconstruction for these facilities, particularly where major realignment is not needed, will often not be justified.’ ‘Specific site investigations and crash history analysis often indicate that the existing design features are performing in a satisfactory manner. The cost of full reconstruction for these facilities, particularly where major realignment is not needed, will often not be justified.’ Green Book Foreword, pg xliii

13. The way things are today – Nominal safety drives project type decisions Nominal Safety is examined in reference to compliance with standards, warrants, guidelines and sanctioned design procedures Nominal Safety is examined in reference to compliance with standards, warrants, guidelines and sanctioned design procedures Substantive Safety is the expected or actual crash frequency and severity for a highway or roadway Substantive Safety is the expected or actual crash frequency and severity for a highway or roadway *Ezra Hauer, ITE Traffic Safety Toolbox Introduction, 1999 Is this road ‘safe’?

14. Project Development Process Problem Definition Decision and Evaluation Framework Design Studies (Alternatives) Screening and selection of preferred Preliminary and Final Design

15. Designers have many choices to make Number and type of lanes; shoulders Number and type of lanes; shoulders Presence, type and width of medians Presence, type and width of medians Accommodation of bicyclists and pedestrians Accommodation of bicyclists and pedestrians Accommodation of transit vehicles Accommodation of transit vehicles Traffic control strategies Traffic control strategies Design level of service Design level of service Intersection types Intersection types Access control Access control

16. Objective Safety Information Supports Project Evaluations and Decisions

17. Objective safety information informs and improves decisions Type of facility Effect of varying cross section dimensions Effect of alignment Access control policies and solutions Roadside design policies Intersection design solutions Traffic control strategies etc.

18. Project Development Process Problem Definition Decision and Evaluation Framework Design Studies (Alternatives) Screening and selection of preferred Preliminary and Final Design

19. Design Exceptions are part of project development Understand objective operational and safety effects of potential design exceptions Understand objective operational and safety effects of potential design exceptions Employ proven, safety-effective mitigation strategies Employ proven, safety-effective mitigation strategies Fully document the design exception and mitigation approach Fully document the design exception and mitigation approach

20. Potential project development policy changes 3R design criteria Identifying safety as a key ‘purpose and need’ element Revisions to agency standard design solutions New tasks or reports integrated with other technical work (e.g., design study reports, interchange justification reports, design exceptions requests)

21. Potential programming policy changes Project scoping (3R vs. reconstruction) to incorporate quantitative safety up front Criteria for considering conversion of two- lane highway to multi-lane facility; or other basic capacity improvements Allocation of funding for safety-driven projects vs. other priorities based on confidence in information and demonstrated paybacks

22. Policy Level Data Issues Acquisition and Maintenance of Safety Data – Not just crashes – Traffic counts (more, intersections) – Geometric (including roadside) – Traffic control Substantive Safety Based Policies

23. Cultural and Educational Barriers to Overcome Exploding the ‘Safety always comes first’ myth Balancing safety against other values is not only ok, it is what we should have been doing all along Recognizing ‘safety’ as a continuum and not an absolute Coming to grips with the fact that some things we do are ‘less safe’ than the alternative that we don’t like for other reasons Understanding design decisions as discretionary in nature

24. Organizational Barriers to Overcome Scientific safety information is too important to be relegated to just your safety program Safety Divisions/Bureaus have roles to play in essentially all projects at all levels Safety asset acquisition and management needs to become a priority (across Divisions/offices) Project development teams must include safety expertise Designers and other problem solvers must enhance their basic understanding of safety science

25. A View to the Future Decisions based on objective information are better decisions; we ought to do a better job Resources spent in the name of safety will actually produce measurable safety benefits Proven successes will lead to re-allocation of limited resources Design standards and criteria will evolve to more closely reflect the science of safety Performance based design processes may eventually supplant standards based approaches

26. Questions and Discussion