Day thomas presentation


Published on

Published in: Technology, Automotive
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Pilot project sponsored by FHWA to help States and localities develop and implement plans.
  • Over 3000 crashes every year; a large proportion – especially of the more severe crashes (the fatal and A (disabling) injury type) are deemed to be speeding-related by the officers investigating the crashes. A large share involve striking fixed objects, other run-off road and lane departure types including sideswipes and head-on; also animals, pedestrians and cyclists.
  • Not just Randolph County. Our culture doesn’t talk about the need to reduce speeding much.
  • Speed has traditionally been thought of as exclusively a behavioral or enforcement problem. We now know that road design and engineering measures profoundly affects the speeds that drivers select and have to be part of the solution. Engineering measures in general should be designed and implemented in consideration of operating speeds, type of traffic, size of roadway, etc. Proactive Incorporate into overall Safety Programs Apply speed management concepts from Planning to Implementation
  • Comprehensive Approach - Most of these partners/stakeholders were present and engaged at the initial stakeholder workshop.
  • The same types of problems we’ve observed here could be observed in any NC county – esp. rural county, but they are esp. spread out over this large rural Co. making treatment targeting especially a challenge.
  • Through screening process – identified quite a few routes – both urban and rural that could potentially benefit from a speed and safety review.
  • Was noted as a problem intersection for pedestrians in the CTP survey – at the high school
  • Thanks to police officer Art Milligan for helping with the review and pointing out some of the issues with this street.
  • Bike lanes
  • Or parking
  • 85 th Percentile for all vehicles = 43 mph (speed limit 35 mph) High level of bike/pedestrian accidents when compared to similar corridors in Charlotte ADT up to 25,000
  • Initiated by community planning to achieve goals of multi-modal comfort, improved uses of the street including economic and social activities all in an historic neighborhood.
  • What would you think the speed limit is on this road?
  • Turning left at sharp skewed angle intersection. What is safe speed of vehicles (PREVIOUS SLIDE) approaching from left around curve given the potentially slow, awkward left turns here?
  • Drop off – dip at intersection if vehicle on Old Liberty goes across that dashed line. Could delineation be improved? Other?
  • On approach, at night, in the rain, esp. if driving too fast, it could be easy to overshoot this intersection and crash into the yard across. Larger stop sign; more reflective treatments across from T?
  • Pedestrians, Motorcyclists to large trucks use the road. Again – speed management – requires either low enough speeds that different weight and speed of users can safety share the road, OR separation of different weight and speed of users if speeds are higher, different mass of users, etc. (saw logging truck, trucks hauling garbage, etc on nearby sections of this road.)
  • Enforcement – backed up by adjudication
  • Rural two-lane roads – curves, grades, junctions (sometimes all three together), skewed angle intersections, animals, roadside hazards – trees, mailboxes, even signs, pavement drop-offs (most of what we saw looked pretty good) Also – weather & slick pavements, nighttime, alcohol & other drugs
  • Improved pavement friction at curves might be another treatment Plastic, collapsible, reflective bollards may be an alternative that is safer for curve treatments – reducing the “fixed object” risk
  • Improved pavement friction at curves might be another treatment Plastic, collapsible, reflective bollards may be an alternative that is safer for curve treatments – reducing the “fixed object” risk
  • Target rumble strips and safety edge to roads with higher proportion of KAB crashes / mi.
  • Target rumble strips and safety edge to roads with higher proportion of KAB crashes / mi.
  • Over 20 new or renovated businesses $250+ million proposed, under construction or completed ($270+ sites just outside the BID) Foot traffic up noticeably Nearly all merchants report improved sales 28%+ food and beverage sales tax revenue increase
  • 1 – 2 mph reduction from 30 mph 17% to 34% reduction in fatal crashes Many other treatments and designs Are part of the speed management tool box – depending on the context and issues. These do not have to be obviously related to speed to be part of effective management – e.g. separation of different weight and speed of users is a ‘speed management’ strategy. So, sidewalks/paths,/ bike lanes for pedestrians and cyclists; climbing lanes for slower vehicles in areas with steep grade, signal control at intersections are examples.
  • There are 30K-35K speeding tickets yearly in Randolph County. Targeted enforcement alone won’t solve the problem, education and the threat of enforcement requires a mulit-proged solution.
  • Day thomas presentation

    1. 1. Speed Management Action Planningfor Randolph County, NCNational Rural Transportation ConferenceRural Transportation SafetyApril 24, 2013
    2. 2. Randolph County• Pop. 142,901 (2011)• 9 Municipalities• Largest: Asheboro - 25,012• Smallest: Seagrove – 228• 10% Hispanic• 82% White Alone• 7% Black
    3. 3. Need for Action - Randolph Crash Trends
    4. 4. Need for Action – Randolph Injury Trends
    5. 5. Need forAction –RandolphCrash Factors
    6. 6. NC Drivers AdmitFrequency of Driving More than 5MPH Over the Limit in a 30 MPH Zone Most of the time 22% About half the time 17% Occasionally 46% Never 15% Don’t know/Not sure 1%Yet, a majority, 55%, did not recall having read, seen or heardspecific messages or information related to speed enforcementprogramsFINAL REPORT, NHTSA-GHSASTATEWIDE TELEPHONE SURVEY(July 12 – 21, 2010)
    7. 7. Benefits of Speed ManagementAction Plan – Meeting Safety Goals Use a Systematic Approachto identify and treatproblems Seek solutions throughengineering, enforcement,public information andeducation Use a Proactive Approachto prevent future problems
    8. 8. Benefits – Coordinate and Amplify Efforts
    9. 9. Benefits – Improve Quality of Life Develop sustainableprogram that reflectsthe community Reduce injury andassociated costs tocommunity Improvetransportationoptions and livability
    10. 10. Framework of Action Plan
    11. 11. Some of the County’s differenttypes of Streets with crashproblems and findings
    12. 12. S Church St –Urban fourlane; ~ 3500vehs. / day
    13. 13. Church/Walker St & high school (signal-control)
    14. 14. Church Street
    15. 15. Church and Wainman
    16. 16. Potential Solution: Convert four laneto two lanes + other uses (e.g. bikelanes/parking)Expected crashreductions - 20% –47% in total crashesExpected crashreductions - 20% –47% in total crashesErwin Road conversion, Durham
    17. 17. Edgewater Dr, Orlando conversion
    18. 18. After(41 per yr)(41 per yr)(12 per yr)(12 per yr)Edgewater Dr, Orlando conversion
    19. 19. Edgewater Dr, Orlando conversion15.7%7.5%9.8% 8.9%29.5%19.6%0.0%5.0%10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0%30.0%35.0%PercentofVehiclesTravelingover36MPHBefore AfterBefore BeforeAfterNorth End Middle South EndAfter
    20. 20. SR 2261, Old LibertyRdPredominant Crash chars.Dry surface 78%Wet 14%Daylight 65%Dark, lighted road 25%Clear or cloudy 90%At Curve 29%Predominant Crash typesRear-end 22%Angle 14%Varied other
    21. 21. Liberty Road –Rural to Urban
    22. 22. Old Liberty Road, Ashe. 1500 – 5900vehicles per day
    23. 23. Liberty Road
    24. 24. Solutions? Some short term geometric and signingimprovements at intersections Potential curve treatments Possible gateway treatments at urban limits Longer term – What is the vision of the street’spurposes - plan and design accordingly
    25. 25. US 64, Ramseur - Franklinville8200 – 18,000vehs per day;193 crashes infive years;higher thanaveragepercentage -more severe
    26. 26. US 64 East of RamseurStrategicHighwayCorridor
    27. 27. Jordan Road/ US 64, Ramseur – Whatchanged?
    28. 28. US 64 in Ramseur – whatchanged?What didn’tchange?
    29. 29. Potential SolutionsReview speed limits, signing, length of speedtransitions, zonesDifficult to affect the design speed much withoutmajor re-doMedian refuges, lane width reductions in shortertermEnforce closer to limitEngineering and design improvements atintersectionsLighting
    30. 30. Hoover Hill RdFork Creek Mill RdBull Run Creek RdRural Two-lanes
    31. 31. Enhanced curve delineationExpected crashreductions - ~ 25% infatal and injurycrashes at treatedcurvesExpected crashreductions - ~ 25% infatal and injurycrashes at treatedcurves
    32. 32. Enhanced curve delineationLarger night-timecrash reductionsexpectedLarger night-timecrash reductionsexpected
    33. 33. Stripe wider edge line on rural roadsWider edge lines arebeing tested on ruralNC roads now;Total width of roadmay be aconsiderationWider edge lines arebeing tested on ruralNC roads now;Total width of roadmay be aconsideration
    34. 34. Potential Solutions Review speed limits Safety edge, rumble strips Assess high speed rural intersections Low-cost slowing treatments – rumbles and pavedmedians or Roundabout designs Determine if more extensive upgrades-realignments, paved shoulders are warranted
    35. 35. Use Roundabout and Mini-roundaboutdesigns for intersection controlHillsborough Street BIDControls speeds.Expected crashreductions - ~ 65% -90% dep. onenvironment andwhether convertingfrom two-way stopcontrol or signalControls speeds.Expected crashreductions - ~ 65% -90% dep. onenvironment andwhether convertingfrom two-way stopcontrol or signal
    36. 36. Small Reductions in SpeedsAASHTO, 2010, Highway Safety Manual, p. 3-57Can have a largeImpact on safety
    37. 37. Enforcement, Educational, and PolicySolutionsEnhance enforcement presence and conspicuityLower (default) speed limitLower enforcement toleranceCourt adjudication procedures and revenue
    38. 38. Action Plan1. Review Existing Speed Limits forDifferent Types of Roadway Corridorsand Intersections (Rural v. Urban)• What should be done?2. Prioritize Curves with SevereCrashes for Assessment andSystematic Treatment
    39. 39. Action Plan3. Frame Problem through aPublic Information andEducation Program4. Corridor FocusedEnforcement Program
    40. 40. Challenges/Next Steps1. How to prioritize what and wherespeed management modificationsto roadways should occur andhow much2. Develop resources and politicalwill for targeted enforcement andautomated speed enforcementand consistent penalties3. Public buy-in needed forcomprehensive speedmanagement program
    41. 41. • Sponsored by FederalHighway Administration,Speed Management Program• Randolph County Task Force• Plan Analysis and Support byUniversity of North Carolina,Highway Safety ResearchCenterSpeed Management Action PlanGuan XuGuan.Xu@dot.govJesse Dayjday@ptrc.orgLibby