Mississippi Cable Median Barrier Safety Initiative

Original publication: National Roadway Safety Awards: Noteworthy Practices Guide; 2011

Description of Practice

State DOT recognized certain corridors as having high occurrence of median-crossover crashes. Mississippi launched a cable median barrier safety initiative. Program piloted in early 2000's showed immediate and significant reduction in crash severity and zero cross-median fatalities.

Key Accomplishments and Results:

• Immediate reduction in crash severity on segment with long history of high crash rates
• Widespread public support
• Outstanding return on investment
• Multiple cable median barrier projects have resulted in immediate reduction of fatalities and the severity of crashes.

Contact

Jim Willis
Mississippi Department of Transportation
601-359-1454
JCWillis@mdot.state.ms.us

Using Micro Surfacing to Reduce Wet Weather Crash Rates

Original publication: National Roadway Safety Awards: Noteworthy Practices Guide; 2011

Description of Practice

Bridges in Minnesota were experiencing a higher crash rate than the surrounding highways. Super-elevated curve geometry was suspected in causing intensified icing and wet weather crashes. Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) experimented with using micro surfacing to reduce crash rates.

Key Accomplishments and Results

• Utilized micro surfacing to address wet weather crashes
• 76% reduction in wet weather crashes after placing micro surfacing
• 19% reduction in total crashes after placing micro surfacing
• 14:1 payback ratio at 5 year life, 19.7:1 with 7 year life

Contact

Thomas J. Wood
MnDOT District 3B and Office of Materials and Road Research
651-366-5573
Thomas.Wood@state.mn.us

Design-Build Push Button Contract Significantly Reduces the Time It Takes to Implement Safety Improvements

Original publication: N/A

Describe the roadway safety situation or state before the new practice was implemented. What was the safety issue, problem, or gap?

In the past, Florida DOT (FDOT) has used its traditional Work Program Process to deliver safety improvements using FHWA safety funds; this brought concepts to construction within a 3 to 5 year time frame.

FDOT District 7 (D7; offices located in Tampa) decided that some ‘simple or low cost’ safety concepts did not need to go through the full work program process and could be expedited. In an attempt to reduce the time frame from concept to construction and to simplify the process for safety improvements, Florida DOT District 7 worked with the FHWA Florida Division and developed a push button framework using Federal safety funds. Ultimately, the push button framework allowed the District to reduce the time it takes to deliver simple or low cost safety improvement from 3-5 years to 3-9 months.

By expediting the delivery of safety improvements, FDOT is also able to reduce the number of crashes that could have occurred while the concept is being developed, helping FDOT to achieve the FHWA Every Day Counts (EDC) goal. Furthermore, by achieving a crash reduction within a few months, as opposed to years, the project's Net Present Value (NPV) is increased due to the time, value, money. NPV is the methodology that FDOT uses to select and prioritize safety engineering projects.

What were the key challenges that needed to be addressed before the new practice could be implemented?

The key challenges surrounded developing a framework that allowed FDOT to:

• Meet Federal guidelines to obtain the approval of funds.
• Meet internal requirements related to scheduling, coordination, QA/QC, etc.
• Eliminate internal barriers that had stove-piped the work in order to create a streamlined schedule.

Describe the new practice.

1. D7 put into place a design-build push button contract, which was approved by the FHWA Florida Division & FHWA Headquarters.
2. D7 identifies a need for a simple or low cost safety improvement.
3. D7 generates a task cost estimate using pre-approved contract pay items and corresponding unit prices.
4. D7 submits the cost estimate along with the task's scope of services and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) categorical exclusion certification to the FHWA Florida Division for approval through the Federal Financial Management Information System (FMIS).
5. The FHWA Florida Division reviews the task for eligibility criteria, and if eligible, approves it through FMIS.
6. D7 encumbers Federal safety funds and issues a notice to proceed for the task work order.
7. The design-build team delivers a constructed concept within 3-9 months (depending on difficulty and work load)

List the key accomplishments that resulted from the new practice. Include the roadway safety improvements.

• Much faster delivery/construction of ‘simple or low cost’ safety improvements. Safety improvements delivered through this contract include the installation of:
  • High emphasis crosswalks
  • Bicycle lanes
  • Pavement markings, wet weather audible marking
  • Concrete medians
  • Overhead sign structures
  • Turn lanes or offset left turn lanes
  • Pedestrian safety treatment - Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons (RRFBs)
  • New traffic signal installations
  • High friction surface treatments
• Multiple roads benefited from this contract, in total, the first design-build push button contract had 55 projects for the 24-month contract period.

What technical and/or institutional changes resulted from the new practice?

• Buy-in from FDOT and FHWA management for the need to create this innovative contract
• Approval from FHWA to allow Federal-funded safety projects to be implemented at the District level using this design-build push button contract format
• Contract process changes for FDOT design-build contract to accommodate this innovative approach
• Creation of statewide design-build push button contract task team

What benefits were realized as a result of the practice?

• Reduced the time it takes to implement a safety improvement; at the same time, reduced the potential for fatalities and serious injuries during the shortened implementation period
• Reduced overall costs of the project application process by reducing the turnover rate
• Ensured compliance with Federal guidelines on all submitted project proposals
• Promoted use of these low-cost safety improvements

For more information:

• >FDOT’s Design Build Push Button (DBPB) page, including a video about FDOT District Seven’s DBPB projects.

Contact

Ping (Peter) Hsu, P.E.
FDOT, D7 Assistant District Traffic Operations Engineer (Safety)
(813) 975-6251
Ping.Hsu@dot.state.fl.us

Safety Summit Yields Tenfold Increase in Number of Safety Applications Submitted by Local Agencies

Original publication: N/A

Describe the roadway safety situation or state before the new practice was implemented. What was the safety issue, problem, or gap?

In any given year, between 40 and 50% of the fatalities and serious injuries in Florida occur in local roads. The percentage of safety funds spent on local roads, however, has been at most between 4 and 8% per year. In order to further reduce fatalities and serious injuries, Florida DOT (FDOT) has identified the need to address safety concerns on the local roads.

Lower levels of safety funding on local roads was due to limited knowledge in local agencies of the state and Federal safety programs and their requirements. Local agencies were submitting an average of only three applications for safety improvement projects per year. To increase local-level applications for safety funding, FDOT needed to create a program that increased local-level awareness of programs and application processes. The District 7 (D7 - Tampa) Local Safety Summit was, and continues to be, an ambitious step in the development and implementation of a Local Road Safety Program.

What were the key challenges that the noteworthy practice sought to address?

Key challenges to address include:

• Lack of knowledge on the part of local agencies of Federal and state safety programs and requirements
• Lack of a single point of contact for all local agencies
• Relatively high staff turnover at the local agencies (impacting the safety culture within the organization and the development of a consistent/long-term agency safety program)
• Lack of staff with specialized knowledge of safety at some local agencies
• A mechanism for assisting the local agencies to ensure their safety projects are submitted correctly and complete, and making the submittal process is simple as possible

Describe the new practice.

D7 launched an annual Safety Summit, a one-day seminar where local agencies, law enforcement, FDOT staff and D7 Safety Team members within District 7's jurisdiction discuss roadway safety. During the summit, FDOT and the Federal Highway Administration make presentations about applicable state and Federal safety requirements, programs, and processes for obtaining funding for local safety improvements. FDOT also links local agencies to “safety ambassadors” who help agencies understand options and funding opportunities for implementing roadway safety improvements on local roads.

D7 has also developed a “Local Agency Safety Funding Guide for Off-System Roadways” for local agencies that serves as a guide for the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) application process. The District also maintains a Safety Summit >web site that contains summit information, HSIP resources, and an online application agencies can use to submit their safety projects. (Local agencies continue to have the option of submitting their projects through the paper application process.)

List the key accomplishments that resulted from the new practice. Include the roadway safety improvements.

• Established a framework and venue that fosters the exchange of local roads knowledge. As a result, local agencies have an improved understanding of the application process required to receive project funding.
• As a result of the improved level of understanding regarding the application process, the number of project submissions made by local agencies increased from averaging 3 applications each year to 50+ applications per year.

What technical and/or institutional changes resulted from the new practice?

Institutional changes include:

• Local agencies have a better understanding of how to request funding and submit applications for safety improvement projects.
• Improved communications and coordination between D7 and local agencies has resulted in projects being delivered on-time and within budget.

What benefits were realized as a result of the practice?

Prior to the safety summits, D7 used to receive around three off-system safety project requests per year. Since the safety summit has been held, FDOT D7 has received 50+ applications per year from their local agencies seeking HSIP funding for their safety projects. Local agencies are now more willing and able to address local road safety issues using Federal safety funds.

Contact

Ping (Peter) Hsu, P.E.
FDOT, D7 Assistant District Traffic Operations Engineer (Safety)
(813) 975-6251
Ping.Hsu@dot.state.fl.us

Rotary Conversion to Roundabout Reduces Speed and Crashes

Original publication: 2013 National Roadway Safety Awards Noteworthy Practices Guide; FHWA-SA-14-002; 2013

 

 

Describe the roadway safety situation or state before the new practice was implemented. What was the safety issue, problem, or gap?

Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) searched for ways to reduce intersection crashes in Connecticut. The geometry of an existing rotary, at the intersection of Routes 80 and 81 in Killingworth, allowed higher speeds and conflicts between entering and circulating traffic and could not support vehicles with a larger turning radius. The rotary experienced high crash rates and included numerous deficiencies. The most obvious deficiency was the lack of deflection on the entrances. As with most rotaries, this one was originally configured to give the right of way to the entering traffic, with traffic in the circle having to yield to incoming vehicles. The entrances had little if any deflection, which allowed for high entry speeds and increased the potential for a serious collision.

What were the key challenges that needed to be addressed before the new practice could be implemented?

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety performed a study on the extensive safety benefits of converting signalized and all-way stop-controlled intersections to modern roundabouts. Encouraged by these results, the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) decided to convert some of its old traffic circles to roundabouts.

ConnDOT reviewed several sites and selected three pilot locations based on crash history, volumes, constructability, and the potential for improvement. Due to safety concerns, the rotary at the intersection of Routes 80 and 81 in Killington, Connecticut, was a prime candidate.

Describe the new practice:

The existing rotary facility at the intersection of Routes 80 and 81 in Killington was replaced with a roundabout. To slow traffic on the approaches, ConnDOT created some deflection and added a truck apron around the central island. The overall dimensions of the intersection were not altered, but the east leg was realigned slightly to improve the angle of the intersection. In addition, ConnDOT installed raised splitter islands and raised truck “blisters” (raised truck aprons placed on the outside of the roundabout) on two of the four quadrants. ConnDOT removed some of the existing pavement to create a more circular intersection shape, which helped with deflection and slowed traffic.

List the key accomplishments that resulted from the new practice. Include the roadway safety improvements.

• Reduced Crash rates

What benefits were realized as a result of the practice?

Measurable reductions in crashes, injuries, and fatalities. Speeds are now within the range of 15-20 MPH for all movements, eliminating the significant speed differentials that existed previously. Comparing the latest available 3-year period (2009-2011) crash history to the 2005-2007 data, the total number of crashes was reduced from 20 to 10 (50% reduction), the number of injury crashes was reduced from 6 to 1 (83% reduction), and the number of injuries was reduced from 7 to 1 (86% reduction).

Is the practice you are submitting from a larger report, journal, or other document? Yes

2013 National Roadway Safety Awards Noteworthy Practices Guide
Publication FHWA-SA-14-002

Contact

William Britnell
Connecticut Department of Transportation
860-594-3274
William.Britnell@ct.gov

Inexpensive Nighttime Inspection Kits to Improve Rural Sign Safety

Original publication: 2013 National Roadway Safety Awards Noteworthy Practices Guide; FHWA-SA-14-002; 2013

Attaching inspection panel to target sign.

Viewing sign with inspection panel attached
(done at night during actual use).

Describe the roadway safety situation or state before the new practice was implemented. What was the safety issue, problem, or gap?

Three County Highway Departments in western New York did not have access to the necessary equipment for inspecting local signage for compliance with the new Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) sign retroreflectivity standards. In short, there was not enough equipment to inspect the retroreflectivity of all signing in the region.

What were the key challenges that needed to be addressed before the new practice could be implemented?

Required equipment, such as a retroreflectometer, carries a heavy price tag. Without accurate testing equipment, these local counties had to “guess;” erring on the side of caution, the replaced signs that actually might have complied with MUTCD standards (had they been properly inspected).

Describe the new practice:

In the summer of 2011, the Cornell University Local Roads Program (CLRP) initiated a project with the three County Highway Departments and created a sharing agreement so that each agency had access, at a low cost, to a retroreflectometer for inspecting local signing in support of the new Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) sign retroreflectivity standards. This sharing program included all three counties as well as local jurisdictions in the respective counties (i.e., towns, villages, and one city).

In addition to the retroreflectometer sharing agreement, CLRP developed a total of 50 inexpensive sign inspection kits, costing less than $50 each. The kits use clear “overhead projector” sheets in layers to degrade the retroreflectivity of small comparison panels of different colors to a conservative level above the minimum retroreflective levels identified in Table 2A-3 of the MUTCD. The clear overhead sheets are the same ones used with overhead projectors and are available at office supply stores.

List the key accomplishments that resulted from the new practice. Include the roadway safety improvements.

• Improved availability of accurate retroreflectivity testing tools to three local counties, improving sign retroreflectivity quality (and improving compliance with new MUTCD standards) along rural routes.

What technical and/or institutional changes resulted from the new practice?

• Sharing agreement for the retroreflectometer
• Development of a cost effective inspection kit

What benefits were realized as a result of the practice?

The biggest benefit realized were the savings in the form of time and money. In general, the sharing agreement led to a reductions in overtime costs for nighttime inspections, reductions in the number of signs that need to be replaced annually, and an easily compiled, inexpensive ($50) portable field kit that is available at all times.

More specific benefits were:

• More accurate nighttime sign inspections, virtually eliminating “guessing” about the quality of a particular sign (reducing the number of signs that were replaced unnecessarily).
  • Example: Wyoming County, New York
    • Prior to receiving the kits, sign technicians would err on the side of caution and replace many signs that were actually adequate.
    • With the kits, they replaced 20 percent fewer signs than they had replaced previously due to concerns about retroreflectivity.
• Besides being more accurate, retroreflectivity inspections were faster.
  • Example: Wyoming County, New York
    • Saved a day of overtime, inspecting all the county's signs in only 3 nights.
• From the Wyoming County, New York example: Savings from the reduction of 2 full shifts of overtime work and approximately 30 signs amounts to $3,000 each year.

Is the practice you are submitting from a larger report, journal, or other document? Yes

2013 National Roadway Safety Awards Noteworthy Practices Guide
Publication FHWA-SA-14-002

Contact

David P. Orr, Ph.D.
Cornell Local Roads Program
607-255-8033
David.Orr@cornell.edu

Raised Pavement Markers (RPMs) – A Low-Cost Alternative for Run-off-the-Road Crashes

Original publication: 2013 National Roadway Safety Awards Noteworthy Practices Guide; FHWA-SA-14-002; 2013

Example of 20 feet RPM spacing for a curve.

Example of same location at night.

Describe the roadway safety situation or state before the new practice was implemented. What was the safety issue, problem, or gap?

With help from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT), Mobile County, Alabama determined that 10 rural roadways within the county rated the highest in the State for run-off-the-road crashes. These roadways, totaling more than 68 miles, had experienced 224 run-off-the-road type crashes between 2005-2008, resulting in 7 fatalities and 152 injuries.

What were the key challenges that needed to be addressed before the new practice could be implemented?

The challenge was to determine the most effective low-cost treatment. While rumble strips can reduce run-off-the-road crashes, installing them requires large machinery, manpower with technical skills, and oftentimes additional right of way, making them a cost-prohibitive solution.

Describe the new practice:

To counter these cost concerns, Mobile County and ALDOT implemented a program for the systematic application of raised pavement markers (RPM) to improve sight distance recognition and guidance along the edge of the pavement, especially during wet weather conditions at night. One-directional, white RPMs adjacent to the white edge-line stripe were easily installed using existing traffic maintenance department equipment and manpower.

What technical and/or institutional changes resulted from the new practice?

The program set guidelines for consistent implementation for all roadways within the county. RPMs were placed just outside the existing edge-line stripe.

• Tangent sections of roadways would have RPMs installed at 80 feet spacing.
• At the approach to a curve having an advance warning curve sign, the spacing would be 40 feet apart from sign location to the beginning of the curve.
• In the curve, the spacing would be 20 feet until reaching the tangent section.

What benefits were realized as a result of the practice?

Based on 2009-2012 crash data, crashes on the initial 10 roadways treated dropped from 224 to 33, from 7 fatalities to 0, and from 152 injuries to 10. The average number of crashes for all 10 roadways decreased by 85.3 percent. RPMs give critical guidance to drivers, especially along dark and rainy county roadways. As a result of this pilot project, they are now included in most roadway projects in Alabama.

Is the practice you are submitting from a larger report, journal, or other document? Yes

2013 National Roadway Safety Awards Noteworthy Practices Guide
Publication FHWA-SA-14-002

Contact

James Foster
Mobile County Engineer Office
251-574-8595
JFoster@mobilecounty.net

FHWA Arizona Division Office Uses Technology Transfer (T2) Funds to Create Local Agency Grant Program

Roadway Safety Issue, Problem, or Gap:

Roadway departures account for approximately half of all fatal crashes nationwide. Pavement edge drop-off has been linked to many serious and fatal roadway departure crashes; drivers who leave the roadway may overcompensate by steering too hard, causing a vehicle to fishtail, swerve into another lane, or completely leave the roadway. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) advocates installing Safety Edge™ to mitigate vertical drop-offs. In Arizona, most local agencies did not have the expertise or equipment to include Safety Edge™ on their roadway projects. To address this gap, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) Local Transportation Assistance Program (LTAP) worked with the FHWA Arizona Division Office to create a program to provide the Safety Edge™ equipment and training to local agencies.

Description of Practice

The FHWA Arizona Division Office used Technology Transfer (T2) funds from the Division of Field Service Regional Offices to purchase fifteen Safety Edge™ Shoe Devices exclusively for local agencies, allowing Safety Edge™ to be more broadly implemented throughout the state. Agencies submit an application to receive a Safety Edge™ Shoe Device and training.

The Division Office and the ADOT-LTAP actively promoted Safety Edge™ at industry meetings/conferences and at MPO and Council of Government meetings. ADOT LTAP also built up its internal capacity by participating in Safety Edge™ Train-the-Trainer events.

Key Accomplishments and Results:

• Increased knowledge and awareness about Safety Edge™ at local agencies, including among Tribes.
• Increased use of Safety Edge™ in new paving projects. Contractors are marketing Safety Edge™ to their clients, offering it with paving projects, and support the safety benefits.
• Encouraged innovation applying the technology. Some local agencies have incorporated Safety Edge™ with a thickened edge design detail. One agency, Santa Cruz County, is pursuing a shoulder widening project and adding Safety Edge™ by milling the existing roadway a few feet.

Contact

Brian Hurst
Tennessee Department of Transportation
615-741-2208
Brian.Hurst@tn.gov

Tennessee DOT Establishes Project Safety Office to Expedite the Completion of Intersection Projects

Original publication: N/A

Roadway Safety Issue, Problem, or Gap:

Between 2002 and 2005, Tennessee experienced 777 total fatalities at intersections across the state. In 2005, Tennessee was identified as a Focus State in Intersections by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office of Safety. A focus state in intersection is defined as one of several states that contribute to having the highest number of intersection fatalities nationwide.

Description of Practice

Following a 2007 Intersection Safety Plan Workshop, the FHWA Tennessee Division and the Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) collaborated to develop an Intersection Action Plan. In 2010, TDOT began implementing the plan with the following process improvements:

• Institute no-plans contracts to expedite the award of contracts based on pre-established safety requirements.
• Develop an agreement with TDOT Environmental Division to allow TDOT to submit intersection locations prior to site visits to gain NEPA approval in eight weeks.
• Develop an Intersection Implementation Guide to standardize the steps for completing intersection projects.

Challenges in Implementing the New Practice

After the plan was developed in 2007, TDOT encountered challenges in the implementation of the Intersection Safety Action Plan, including:

• Lack of trust in systemic application: TDOT did not want to deploy the action plan without going to every site and reviewing all crash data to identify issues.
• No true ownership: No TDOT office had the time to implement the plan.

How Challenges Were Overcome

• In November 2009, the FHWA Office of Safety Intersection Team contacted TDOT and the TN Division to develop a strategy to implement the Intersection Safety Action Plan.
• The TDOT Project Safety Office was created in 2010. This office implemented the Intersection Safety Action Plan.

Benefits Realized From the Practice

Tennessee has reduced intersection safety fatalities by at least 26% across the state. Tennessee is no longer a FHWA Focus State for Intersections. Furthermore, Tennessee has become more innovative with intersection designs by implementing alternative intersection designs including roundabouts, J-Turns, and Diverging Diamond Interchanges.

Contact

Brian Hurst
Tennessee Department of Transportation
615-741-2208
Brian.Hurst@tn.gov

South Carolina Addresses Intersection Safety through Low-Cost, Systematic Improvements

Original publication: N/A

Key Accomplishments

The South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) began identifying safety improvements to be deployed systematically at intersections across the State in 2008 as part of the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Office of Safety Intersection Focus State initiative. SCDOT believed these improvements would reduce the number of intersection-related fatalities and serious injuries, which was one of the goals defined in SCDOT's 2007 Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). As part of this process, SCDOT used a 5-year analysis of statewide crash data to identify high-crash intersections and recommend improvements—primarily signing, pavement markings, and signal enhancements. Based on these findings, a list of 2,204 intersections was compiled in the South Carolina Intersection Safety Implementation Plan (ISIP), and SCDOT sought a contracting mechanism to implement the recommended improvements identified in the ISIP within a three-year time frame.

Following the identification of intersections where countermeasures would be applied, SCDOT developed a unique contract vehicle structured to accommodate the systematic approach proposed in the ISIP. The contract was a single, statewide, three-year contract, renewable each year, which allowed for adjustments to be made to improve the quality of the work in subsequent years. The contract was structured to treat approximately one-third of the intersections identified in the plan each year for 3 years.

Throughout the project, the selected contractor and the subcontractor developed a Field Installation Work Book that contained all pertinent information on installation at a particular site, including final approved drawings, installation checklists, and punch list forms. In addition, the contractor and subcontractor developed a reconciliation spreadsheet to manage multiple crews and to document and verify installed quantities for payment during the course of the fast-paced project. The contractor and subcontractor also used a project management website to provide changes to intersection plans to SCDOT on a regular basis and report on the progress of work performed. The contract defined the minimum requirements of the website; however, the website developed ultimately included additional functionality.

Because 23 USC 120(c) allows certain safety improvements such as signing and pavement markings to be eligible for Federal funding, the project was entirely federally funded. The consistency between South Carolina's ISIP and SHSP and the identification of the projects through a systematic, data-driven process allowed for the projects to be implemented using Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds.

Through this project, SCDOT made improvements to more than 2,200 intersections that account for forty four percent of all intersection crashes in South Carolina. In deploying this project, SCDOT employed a statewide, low-bid contract vehicle that allowed for uniform implementation resulted in administrative efficiencies and economies of scale through decreased per-unit prices on bulk purchases.

Results

The project has been successful in terms of its outputs and short timeframe, addressing over 2,200 high-crash-frequency intersections in three years. FHWA plans to evaluate the safety effects of SCDOT's low-cost systematic intersection improvements as part of its Evaluation of Low cost Safety Improvements Pooled Fund Study.

Contact

Joey Riddle
South Carolina DOT
Safety Program Engineer
(803) 737-3582
RiddleJD@dot.state.sc.us

Daniel Hinton
FHWA South Carolina Division
Safety and Operations Engineer
(803) 253-3887
Daniel.Hinton@dot.gov