FINAL DRAFT Traffic Operations and Safety Study for the City of Belpre 2008

Transcription

1 FINAL DRAFT Traffic Operations and Safety Study for the City of Belpre 2008 Tracy A. Higgins Randy L. Durst Fred L. Rader WOOD WASHINGTON WIRT INTERSTATE PLANNING COMMISSION An affiliate agency of the MID-OHIO VALLEY REGIONAL COUNCIL Parkersburg, West Virginia 1-1

2

3 Table of Contents Executive Summary Introduction Purpose and Need Project Background Study Process Intersection Traffic Volumes Accident Rate Severity Index Ranking Process Intersection Survey Level of Service Overview of Possible Causes Recommended Countermeasures and Related Costs Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR Existing Conditions Accident Information and Summary Comments and Probable Cause Implementation Plans Summary of Countermeasures Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive Existing Conditions Accident Information and Summary Comments and Probable Cause Implementation Plans Short Term Countermeasures Long Term Countermeasures Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Existing Conditions Accident Information and Summary Comments and Probable Cause Table of Contents i

4 4.4 Implementation Plans Summary of Countermeasures Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Existing Conditions Accident Information and Summary Comments and Probable Cause Implementation Plans Short Term Countermeasures Long Term Countermeasures Intersection of Middle Street and Washington Boulevard Existing Conditions Accident Information and Summary Comments and Probable Cause Implementation Plans Countermeasures ii Table of Contents

5 List of Tables and Figures Figure 1-1: Traffic Operations and Safety Study Study Intersections Table 1-2: Final List of Intersections Figure 2-1: Conditions at the Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 Prior to December Figure 2-2: Conditions at the Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 after December Figure 2-3: 2006 ADT at the Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR Figure 2-4: Collision Diagram at the US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 Intersection from Figure 2-5: Collision Diagram at the US 50/Main Street, US 50 (SR 32) Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 Intersection from Table 2-6: Crash Summaries for US 50/Main Street, US 50 (SR 32) Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 Intersection Figure 3-1: Existing Conditions at the Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive Figure 3-2: 2006 ADT at the Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive Figure 3-3: Collision Diagram at the Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive Intersection Table 3-4: Crash Summaries for the Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive Intersection Figure 4-1: Existing Conditions at the Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Intersection Figure 4-2: 2006 ADT at the Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Figure 4-3: Collision Diagram at the Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Intersection Table 4-4: Crash Summaries for the Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Intersection Figure 5-1: Existing Conditions at Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Figure 5-2: 2006 ADT at the Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Figure 5-3: Collision Diagram at the Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Intersection Table 5-4: Crash Summaries for the Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Intersection Figure 5-7: Diagram of the Long Term Countermeasures at the Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Intersection ii List of Tables and Figures

6 Figure 6-1: Existing Conditions at the Middle Street and Washington Boulevard Intersection Figure 6-2: 2006 ADT at the Intersection Middle Street and Washington Boulevard Figure 6-3: Collision Diagram at the Middle Street and Washington Boulevard Intersection Table 6-4: Crash Summaries for the Middle Street and Washington Boulevard Intersection List of Tables and Figures iii

7 Executive Summary The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and the subsequent Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA-21) identified the need to preserve existing transportation systems to achieve maximum efficiency from existing facilities. These two bills are endowed by the legislation of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), which secured funding to maintain and grow the transportation infrastructure. In accordance with the goals of the aforementioned legislation, the Wood Washington Wirt Interstate Planning Commission (WWW) has conducted this Traffic Operations and Safety Study (Study) for the City of Belpre, Ohio (City). The City is located in the Mid-Ohio Valley Region along the Ohio River and is included in the transportation network of the WWW. WWW continually studies the existing transportation system to ensure the demands created by the increasing population and traffic volumes are adequately addressed. Conjunctive to prior studies completed by the WWW in 2001 and 2004, this Study identifies high accident locations and supplements recommendations to improve performance, operational efficiency, and safety based on data from Crash records for Washington County from 2004 to 2007 were downloaded from the Ohio Department of Public Safety website. Intersections with ten or greater accidents were identified for further examination. These intersections comprise the long list of intersections. The long list was further analyzed based on the number of injuries, severity index, accident rate, and previous Studies. These criteria were used to rank the intersections from worst to best and establish the short list of intersections. Subsequently, five intersections were identified on the short list of intersections. The intersection of US 50 and Farson Avenue and the intersection of US 50 and Braun Avenue were removed from the short list of intersections because funding for improvements at these locations has already been allocated. Therefore, two more intersections were added to the short list of intersections in their stead: the intersection of Executive Summary 1

8 Lee Street and Washington Boulevard and the intersection of Middle Street and Washington Boulevard. The short list was then finalized for further examination. Traffic volume studies, intersection characteristics (i.e., geometry, driver behavior, and surrounding conditions) were collected for the final of intersections. This information was utilized to construct collision diagrams, intersection sketches, and graphic summaries of vehicle movements. Highway Capacity Software (HCS) was also utilized to develop the Level of Service (LOS) for the final list of intersections. The final list of intersections is shown below and listed in order of priority from highest to lowest: 1. US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 2. Campus Drive, Putnam Howe Drive, Pomeroy Pike, and Lee Street 3. US 50/Main Street, Belpre-Parkersburg Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4. Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5. Middle Street and Washington Boulevard The following sections of this report provide a detailed description of the final list of intersections. This includes the existing conditions, levels of service, accident data and summaries, comments and probable cause, and implementation plans for short, medium, and long term countermeasures. Overall, signalized intersection improvements share a common facet: optimizing signal timing. Some geometric modifications have been recommended, as well as, lane designation changes. Access management strategies should be employed throughout the City to enhance safety, capacity, and efficiency. Traffic calming techniques should also be applied whenever possible to improve these components as well. ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) accessibility guidelines should be incorporated into intersection improvements at the planning stage of project development throughout the City. This should include a detailed survey of the existing pedestrian facilities, origin and destination studies, and pedestrian surveys. Any deficiencies found within the scope 2 Executive Summary

9 of a planned project should be addressed and improvements implemented through the design process. In some instances, this may involve expanding the project boundaries to incorporate pedestrian related improvements. Cost estimates were developed utilizing ODOT s Procedure for Budge Estimating and prior project studies conducted by WWW. Cost estimates were developed for each of the countermeasures recommended in this Study. They are inexact and in need of refinement prior to final design or implementation. Executive Summary 3

10

11 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose and Need The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and the subsequent Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA-21) identified the need to preserve existing transportation systems to achieve maximum efficiency from existing facilities. These two bills are endowed by the legislation of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), which secured funding to maintain and grow the transportation infrastructure. In accordance with the goals of the aforementioned legislation, the Wood Washington Wirt Interstate Planning Commission (WWW) has conducted this Traffic Operations and Safety Study (Study) for the City of Belpre, Ohio. The City is located in the Mid-Ohio Valley Region along the Ohio River and is included in the transportation network of the WWW. WWW continually studies the existing transportation system to ensure the demands created by the increasing population and traffic volumes are adequately addressed. Conjunctive to prior studies completed by the WWW in 2001 and 2004, this Study identifies high accident locations and supplements recommendations to improve performance, operational efficiency, and safety based on data from Information was gathered from various sources including the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), the Ohio Department of Public Safety, previous Studies, the Comprehensive Long Range Multimodal Transportation Plan Update 2007 (WWW, 2007), as well as field observations conducted by WWW staff. 1.2 Project Background Crash records for Washington County from 2004 to 2007 were downloaded from the Ohio Department of Public Safety website. Intersections with ten or greater accidents were identified for further examination. Raw crash data extracts from the website were reviewed in detail for qualifying intersections (>10 accidents). Analysis of this data exposed some discrepancies in crash coding. To clarify those discrepancies, accidents Executive Summary 1-1

12 were analyzed by WWW staff on an individual basis to determine the appropriate signature for each crash. It was difficult to determine the exact location of crashes on Main Street from raw crash data. To determine the location of accidents on Main Street and assign the crash to either the Memorial Bridge intersection or the Belpre-Parkersburg intersection, individual OH-1 forms were obtained from the Ohio Department of Public Safety. The OH-1 forms contained a diagram of each crash to aid in the proper assignment of the recorded crash information. Once this review was complete, the long list of intersections (listed below) was established: 1. US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 2. Campus Drive, Putnam Howe Drive, Pomeroy Pike, and Lee Street 3. US 50/Main Street, Belpre-Parkersburg Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4. US 50 and Farson Avenue 5. US 50 and Braun Avenue 6. Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 7. Middle Street and Washington Boulevard 8. US 50 and Clement Avenue 9. Washington Boulevard and Walnut Street 10. Stone Road and Washington Boulevard 11. Putnam Howe Drive, Washington Boulevard, and Park Street Traffic volume studies, intersection characteristics (i.e., geometry, driver behavior, and surrounding conditions) were collected from field observations at each of the long list locations. Using this information, the long list was further analyzed based on the number of injuries, severity index, accident rate, and previous Studies. These criteria were used to rank the intersections from worst to best and establish the short list of intersections. Subsequently, five intersections were identified on the short list of intersections. The intersection of US 50 and Farson Avenue and the intersection of US 50 and Braun Avenue were removed from the short list of intersections because funding for 1-2 Executive Summary

13 improvements at these locations has already been allocated. Therefore, two more intersections were added to the short list of intersections in their stead: the intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard and the intersection of Middle Street and Washington Boulevard. The short list was then finalized for further examination. A map of the final list of intersections can be found on Figure 1-1. Table 1-2 contains the final ranking, ranking criteria, and previous Study ranking of the final list of intersections. Variations in intersection ranking for this Study compared to the previous Study can be attributed to several factors. They include an increase or decrease in the number of accidents, intermediate intersection improvements between Studies, and increasing or decreasing traffic volume. Correlations between past and present Study rankings are difficult to discern. However, major intersections in need of safety improvements have maintained a constant presence throughout past and present Studies. The progression of safety (or other) improvements at one intersection on a previous Study list may impact another intersection on that list in a positive or negative manner. Therefore, fluctuations between Study years should be anticipated. The traffic counts and intersection characteristics collected as part of the long list evaluation were utilized to construct collision diagrams, intersection sketches, and graphic summaries of vehicle movements for the final list of intersections. Highway Capacity Software (HCS) was also utilized to develop the Level of Service (LOS) for the final list of intersections. This information is provided in Sections of this report. Executive Summary 1-3

14 Figure 1-1: Traffic Operations and Safety Study Study Intersections 1. US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 2. Campus Drive, Putnam Howe Drive, Pomeroy Pike, and Lee Street 3. US 50/Main Street, Belpre-Parkersburg Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4. Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5. Middle Street and Washington Boulevard 1-4 Executive Summary

15 Table 1-2: Final List of Intersections Intersection US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 Campus Drive, Putnam Howe Drive, Pomeroy Pike, and Lee Street US 50/Main Street, Belpre- Parkersburg Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Middle Street and Washington Boulevard Number of Accidents Number of Injuries Severity Index Accident Rate Value Rank Value Rank Value Rank Value Rank TOTALS Overall Rank Previous Rank Executive Summary 1-5

16 1.3 Study Process As mentioned previously in Section 1.2, crash records were collected and reviewed to identify intersections with 10 or greater accidents during the study period. This lead to the establishment of the long list of intersections. The long list was further examined based on the number of injuries, accident rate, and accident severity to develop the short list of intersections. The short list of intersections was then refined to exclude intersections with on-going improvements to comprise the final list of intersections. The following sub-sections describe the process utilized to analyze, rank, and examine Study intersections from the long list to the final list Intersection Traffic Volumes Average daily traffic (ADT) for the long list of intersections was established based on turning movement counts collected in the field by WWW staff. ADT counts and peak hour turning movement counts were required for the detailed analysis of the intersections. Therefore, traffic counts were taken during the morning peak hours (7:00 AM to 11:00 AM) or evening peak hours (2:00 PM to 6:00 PM) at each location. Ideally, a 24-hour ADT count would be desired. However, due to time constraints, 4-hour counts were collected. These counts were doubled to obtain an 8-hour count, which was then adjusted using 24-hour and seasonal factors to estimate ADT. ODOT recommended utilizing the ADT values determined for 2008 as the ADT for 2006, due to the lack of growth along the Washington Boulevard corridor. Accident rates are discussed in Section ADT counts were utilized to calculate accident rates, generate vehicle turning movement diagrams, and to run the Highway Capacity Software (HCS) model for the final list of intersections. Vehicle turning movement diagrams have been provided in this report for the final list of intersections and display the ADT volume of through, left turn, and right turn traffic for all intersection approaches. 1-6 Executive Summary

17 1.3.2 Accident Rate The accident rate of an intersection establishes the number of accidents per million vehicles that pass through the intersection. It is important because it allows a comparison between intersections regardless of size and volume. Accident rates were calculated for each of the intersections using the following formula: where, Accident rate = [(T)(10 6 )] [(ADT)(n)(365)] T = the total number of accidents for the study period ADT = the average daily traffic volume (vehicles per day) n = the number of years studied 365 = the conversion from years to days. Accident rates for each of the long, short, and final lists of intersections were ranked from highest to lowest Severity Index Accident severity compares the number of injuries at an intersection to the total number of accidents at that same intersection. Severity indices were calculated for all of the long list, short list, and final list intersections. Intersections were assigned a ranking from highest to lowest Ranking Process Having determined the number of accidents, number of injuries, accident rate, and severity index for the long list of intersections, a rank was established. The rank value for each measure was totaled. The totals were arranged in order from lowest to highest to determine the priority ranking. The same process was applied to the short list and final list of intersections. However, the short list and final list of intersections took into account the physical conditions, constraints, and intersection specific needs as decisive factors to prioritize improvement locations. Executive Summary 1-7

18 1.3.5 Intersection Survey Rudimentary intersection surveys and field observations were conducted at each of the intersections on the same day that traffic count data was collected. This information was utilized to examine driver behavior for contributing crash factors and determine intersection characteristics for inclusion on the existing conditions diagrams. This information can be found in the following sections of this report Level of Service Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing the operational conditions within a traffic stream and it is generally described in terms of travel speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, and driver comfort, convenience, and safety. Specifically, LOS criteria for unsignalized and signalized intersections are stated in terms of the average stopped delay per vehicle. For this study area, LOS C and above are acceptable values for intersections. LOS was calculated for the final list of intersections and can be found for each intersection in the following sections of this report. WWW operations and safety studies typically use Highway Capacity Software (HCS) to calculate LOS. The Highway Capacity Manual recommends, when possible, using field observations to estimate LOS for unsignalized intersections and to verify conditions on signalized intersections. Due to time constraints, WWW was unable to measure stopdelay conditions at any of the intersections and based LOS solely on the HCS output. LOS can be described in the following manner according to the Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets describes the general operating conditions for each LOS in the following manner: LOS A Free flow of traffic, with low volumes and high speeds. LOS B Reasonably free flow of traffic, but speeds beginning to be restricted by traffic conditions 1-8 Executive Summary

19 LOS C Traffic is still in the stable flow zone but most drivers are restricted in freedom to select their own speed. LOS D Traffic is approaching unstable flow and drivers have little freedom to maneuver. LOS E There is unstable flow. There may be short traffic stoppages. LOS F Unstable flow. Stop and go traffic. 1.4 Overview of Possible Causes Field observations, field surveys, and crash histories were utilized to determine the possible cause of accidents at each of the locations on the final list of intersections. Each intersection has a distinct set of parameters and characteristics that are relative to the type and number of crashes occurring at that location. Overall, signalized intersections need improved signal and intersection visibility. Access management strategies should be employed throughout the City to enhance safety, capacity, and efficiency. Traffic calming techniques should also be applied whenever possible to improve these components as well. Washington Boulevard is a minor arterial that serves as a major thoroughfare and destination for the City and community. Washington Boulevard acts as a business corridor and is designated as US Business Route 50. There are approximately 60 access points along Washington Boulevard from the Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge to 4 th Street. There are approximately 130 access points from 4 th Street and Washington Boulevard to Drag Strip Road and Washington Boulevard. In general, this is a contributing factor in the crash history along the corridor. As an overall safety consideration there are several corridor related safety issues to consider for improvement, as well as, the individually ranked intersections discussed further in the later Sections of this report. Along Washington Boulevard, motorists tend to swerve in and out of travel lanes to avoid the delay caused by turning vehicles. This generates several conflicts. Vehicles switching lanes to avoid the delay of a turning vehicle can sideswipe an unsuspecting vehicle traveling in the adjacent travel lane. An additional conflict can be created when a Executive Summary 1-9

20 motorist behind a vehicle toggling travel lanes is suddenly aware of a stopped vehicle in the path of motion when the sight distance is opened up by the vehicle switching lanes. In concert with accelerated speeds, this instance can have severe repercussions in a rear end crash. As noted previously, the intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard is ranked #4 on the final list of intersections relative to this safety Study. It is individually discussed in more detail in Section 5.0 of this report. Countermeasures will be discussed in the following Sections of this report to address these concerns. ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) accessibility guidelines should be incorporated into intersection improvements at the planning stage of project development throughout the City. This should include a detailed survey of the existing conditions of pedestrian facilities, origin and destination studies, and pedestrian surveys. Any deficiencies found within the scope of a planned project should be addressed and improvements implemented through the design process. In some instances, this may involve expanding the project boundaries to incorporate pedestrian related improvements. Education and enforcement strategies should be developed with the police department to further encourage pedestrian and bicycle safety within and around the City. 1.5 Recommended Countermeasures and Related Costs Cost estimates were developed utilizing ODOT s Procedure for Budge Estimating and prior project studies relevant to this report. Cost estimates were developed for each of the countermeasures recommended in this Study. They are inexact and in need of refinement prior to final design or implementation. Cost estimates do not include right-of-way acquisitions, construction, utility relocation, or engineering. Overall, signalized intersection improvements share a common facet: optimizing signal timing. Some geometric modifications have been recommended, as well as, lane designation changes Executive Summary

21 Consideration should be given to conducting a safety study for Washington Boulevard as a corridor. Alternative improvements should consider the addition of a two way left turn lane (TWLTL) or center exclusive left turn bays from the Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge to 4 th Street to alleviate safety concerns for turning vehicles. Access management strategies should be developed and implemented by the City to mitigate future conflicts and enhance safety, capacity, and efficiency. Education and enforcement strategies should be developed in coordination with the police department to reduce red light running and speeding in the City. The following sections of this report describe the final list of intersections and recommended improvements in detail. Executive Summary 1-11

22

23 2.0 Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 The intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 was realigned during the study period. ODOT records indicate the US 50 ramp realignment was operational near the end of December, Therefore, the discussions in the following subsections of this report will relate to both the old and new configurations of the intersection. Since the time of the realignment and the completion of the Blennerhassett Bridge, Main Street and the US 50 ramps have been re-designated as SR Existing Conditions Prior to December 2005, the intersection of US50/Main Street, the US 50 Ramps, the Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 was two separate signalized intersections. The US 50 eastbound exit ramp formed a T-intersection with Main Street. This intersection was signalized and south of the intersection of US 50 westbound, SR 7, and the Memorial Bridge, which was also signalized. All of the roadways were considered principal Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 2-1

24 arterials, except the Memorial Bridge, which was not classified. The US 50 eastbound off ramp was one way and consisted of an exclusive left turn lane and an exclusive right turn lane. At this location, Main Street had two approach lanes from the south and one approach lane from the north. The US 50 westbound entrance ramp was also one way and had two receiving lanes. The southern approach of Main Street had exclusive left turn, through, and right turn lanes. The Memorial Bridge approach had two departure lanes and one receiving lane. The exiting lanes consisted of a lane for left/through movements and one for through/right movements. SR 7 had one lane for through/right turn movements, and exclusive left turn lane, and one receiving lane. The speed limit on Main Street, SR 7 (at this location) and the Memorial Bridge was 35 MPH. The speed limit on US 50 was 55 MPH. After December 2005, when ODOT s realignment project was completed. The US 50 eastbound ramp and associated T-intersection with Main Street was eliminated. The US 50 eastbound ramp was relocated to the Memorial Bridge, Main Street, US 50, and SR 7 intersection. US 50 is now SR 32. The current configuration is bordered on the northwest by a 7-11 gas station. An auto sales building and parking lot is situated on the northeast corner. A private residence is located on the southeast corner. The southwest corner is an open field. There are numerous access points for businesses and residences along both sides of Main Street to the south of the intersection. 8 th Street is unsignalized and intersects with Main Street approximately 1060 from the subject intersection. The Memorial Bridge is a toll facility with a collection site approximately 4200 from Main Street on the Parkersburg side of the bridge. Clement Avenue is unsignalized and approximately 2600 from Main Street along SR 32. Approximately 500 past the intersection to the north are the SR 7 on and off-ramps. On the northern leg of this approach are driveways for residences located on the east side of SR Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7

25 Pedestrian sidewalks are provided along the east side of Main Street and the east side of SR 7. A sidewalk is also provided on the southern side of the intersection that connects with the pedestrian facility on the Memorial Bridge. There are crosswalks on the northern and eastern legs of the intersection. The crosswalks, sidewalk aprons, pedestrian signal heads (pedheads), and pushbuttons at this intersection are all in excellent condition. The sidewalks, however, are in need of repair and design updates to meet current ADA standards. A diagram of the intersection configuration prior to December 2005 can be found in Figure 2-1. Figure 2-2 illustrates the existing configuration. ADT volumes for 2006 are provided on Figure 2-3. Pictures of this intersection can be found in Appendix A. HCS was utilized to determine the LOS of this intersection, which operates at LOS C with an intersection delay of 33.2 sec/vehicle. The Main Street approach operates at LOS B, the SR 7 and SR 32 approaches operate at LOS C, and the Memorial Bridge approach operates at LOS D. HSC LOS output for this intersection can be found in Appendix B. Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 2-3

26 Figure 2-1: Conditions at the Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 Prior to December Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7

27 Figure 2-2: Conditions at the Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 after December 2005 Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 2-5

28 Figure 2-3: 2006 ADT at the Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 Graphic Summary of Vehicle Movements Intersection: Memorial Bridge, US 50, Main Street, and SR SR Memorial Bridge US ADT = Total Bike/Ped = Main Street 2-6 Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7

29 2.2 Accident Information and Summary The collision diagram for this intersection from can be found in Figure 2-4. The collision diagram from 2006 to 2007 can be found in Figure 2-5. During the entire study period, there were a total of 97 crashes and 40 injuries at this location. Rear end crashes accounted for 67% of the total crashes during the study period. Crash trends appear highest on Fridays and Saturdays during the months of July and September from 6am to 7pm. Poor weather (24%) and poor road conditions (39%) were documented in the crash records at this intersection. From , there were 51 crashes and 16 injuries. Rear end crashes accounted for 73% of accidents during this time frame. As shown in Figure 2-4, a disproportionate number of rear end crashes occurred on Main Street in the northbound direction. 40% of rear end crashes occurred at the Main Street/US 50, US 50 entrance ramp, SR 7 and Memorial Bridge intersection. Thirty percent occurred at the intersection of Main Street and US 50 exit ramp. After the realignment, there were 46 documented crashes and 24 injuries. The number of rear end crashes decreased from 37 in to 28 in However, a disproportionate number of crashes were still occurring on the northbound approach of Main Street. Additionally, when compared to the previous configuration, the number of accidents related to Memorial Bridge traffic conflicts escalated. The severity index at this intersection was and the accident rate was A summary of crash data for the entire study period ( ) can be found in the tables and graphs under Table 2-6. Raw crash data extracts from the Ohio Department of Public Safety website were reviewed in detail for this and the subsequent list of intersections. Analysis of this data exposed some discrepancies in crash coding. To clarify those discrepancies, accidents were analyzed by WWW staff on an individual basis to determine the appropriate Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 2-7

30 signature for the crash. The following crash summaries in Table 2-6 represent the results of analyses performed by WWW. The same is true for the analyses in the later sections of this report. 2-8 Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7

31 Figure 2-4: Collision Diagram at the US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 Intersection from Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7 2-9

32

33 Figure 2-5: Collision Diagram at the US 50/Main Street, US 50 (SR 32) Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 Intersection from Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR

34 Table 2-6: Crash Summaries for US 50/Main Street, US 50 (SR 32) Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 Intersection US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 CRASH TYPE TOTAL % Rear-End % Head-on % Rear-to-rear % Backing % Angle % Left Turn % Right Turn % Sideswipe % Pedestrian/Bicycle Related % Parked Vehicle % Fixed Object % Other % Unknown % TOTAL % US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 - Crashes by Type 2004 Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes 15 Number of Crashes Rear-End Head-on Rear-to-rear Backing Angle Left Turn Right Turn Crash Types Sideswipe Pedestrian/Bicycle Related Parked Vehicle Fixed Object Other Unknown 2-12 Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7

35 US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 ACCIDENT SEVERITY Property Damage Crash Number of Injuries/Fatalities TOTAL US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 - Accident Severity Number of Injuries Number of Property Damage Crashes Number of Crashes Year Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR

36 US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 CONDITIONS % WEATHER CONDITIONS Poor Weather Normal Weather Unknown Weather Poor Road Conditions Normal Road Conditions Unknown Road Conditions ROAD CONDITIONS LIGHTING CONDITIONS Poor Lighting Normal Lighting Unknown Lighting US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 - Crash Conditions 2004 Conditions 2005 Conditions 2006 Conditions 2007 Conditions Number of Crashes Related to Specific Condition Poor Weather Normal Weathe Unknown Weathe Poor Road Conditio Normal Road Conditio Unknown Road Conditi Poor Lighting Normal Lighting Unknown Lighting Condition Type 2-14 Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7

37 US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 DAY OF WEEK TOTAL % Sunday % Monday % Tuesday % Wednesday % Thursday % Friday % Saturday % TOTAL % 14 US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 - Day of Crash Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes 10 Number of Crashes Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Day of Week Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR

38 US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 MONTH TOTAL % January % February % March % April % May % June % July % August % September % October % November % December % TOTAL % 7 6 US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 - Month of Crash 2004 Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes 5 Number of Crashes January February March April May June July August Month of Crash September October November December 2-16 Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7

39 US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 TIME TOTAL % 1A % 2A % 3A % 4A % 5A % 6A % 7A % 8A % 9A % 10A % 11A % 12N % 1P % 2P % 3P % 4P % 5P % 6P % 7P % 8P % 9P % 10P % 11P % 12M % TOTAL % 6 5 US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 - Time of Crash 2004 Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes 4 Number of Crashes A 2A 3A 4A 5A 6A 7A 8A 9A 10A 11A 12N 1P 2P Time of Crash 3P 4P 5P 6P 7P 8P 9P 10P 11P 12M Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR

40 US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 Additional Information TOTAL Pedestrian Bicycle Motorcycle Animal Speed Alcohol Drug US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge and SR 7 - Additional Crash Information 2 Number of Incidents Pedestrian Bicycle Motorcycle Animal Speed Alcohol Drug Crash 2-18 Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7

41 2.3 Comments and Probable Cause Field observations and traffic counts were conducted in July of 2008, after the opening of the Blennerhassett Bridge. The bridge opening marked the completion of the SR 50 corridor through Parkersburg, WV and had the potential to impact traffic volumes and truck percentages through this intersection. During field observations, speeds in excess of the speed limit were noted on the SR 32 exit ramp approach and the Memorial Bridge approach. In addition to speed, motorists on the US 50 exit ramp were also observed running the red light at the intersection. Field observations also indicated that vehicles making a left turn during the red phase from SR 7 onto SR 32 were moving beyond the stop bar to improve sight distance. In general, the safety concerns at this intersection could be attributed to poor Traffic Control Device (TCD) visibility, speed, traffic signal timing, slippery surfaces, restricted sight distances, and intersection geometry. 2.4 Implementation Plans To address the aforementioned safety concerns, the following countermeasures should be considered for this intersection. Improved warning signs should be provided on the SR 32 off ramp approach and the SR 7 approach. Improvements can include flashing lights and radar speed signs to reduce speeds on SR 32. Speeds from the Memorial Bridge approach could be curbed by increasing the width of pavement markings. This traffic calming measure creates the perception that the lane widths are smaller, thus reducing speeds. The signal timing should be optimized to provide adequate green and amber phases for each approach. The SR 7 approach should have signage to reinforce the location of the stop bar. The pavement should be grooved to improve traction during inclement weather. Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR

42 2.4.1 Summary of Countermeasures The following countermeasures are recommended: Add warning signs on the SR 32 approach with flashing lights and radar speed signage. Groove pavement to provide better traction during inclement weather and wet pavement conditions or utilize a frictional surface treatment such as seal coat. Improve stop bar pavement markings and signage on SR 7. Widen pavement markings on Memorial Bridge. Optimize signal timing. Add backplates to signal heads. The Rate of Return (ROR) Analysis Worksheet can be found in Appendix C. The cost estimate to implement these short term improvements is approximately $18,480, the ROR is approximately 3914% Intersection of US 50/Main Street, US 50 Ramp, Memorial Bridge, and SR 7

43 3.0 Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive 3.1 Existing Conditions The intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive is a biased 4-legged intersection with two-way stop control on Lee Street and Pomeroy Pike. The intersection is heavy to the east with two 45 degree approaches. Each approach is comprised of one receiving and one departure lane. Putnam Howe Drive and Pomeroy Pike are classified as collector roads. Lee Street and Campus Drive are classified as local roads and do not have lane demarcations. Lee Street runs primarily north to south and approaches the intersection from the south. Eastbound traffic utilizes Putnam Howe Drive to access the intersection from the west. Pomeroy Pike and Campus Drive are winding roads that reach this intersection from the east. Campus Drive extends primarily to the east and Pomeroy Pike is elongated to the northeast. The speed limit on Lee Street and Putnam Howe Drive is 35 MPH. The speed limit on Campus Drive and Pomeroy Pike is 25 MPH. Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive 3-1

44 This intersection is encircled by residential and commercial development. Cresset Powers Ltd. and Mayle of Belpre are situated on the northern edges of Pomeroy Pike and Putnam Howe Drive. The section of land in-between Pomeroy Pike and Campus Drive contains commercial development. The remaining expanse immediately encompassing the intersection is comprised of single family homes and apartment complexes. A sidewalk is situated along the northern edge of Putnam Howe Drive. It is approximately 3 wide and does not meet current ADA standards. The sidewalk breaks for a distance across the driveway of Cresset Powers Ltd. and then lines up to cross at Pomeroy Pike. The sidewalk continues along the northern edge of Campus Drive. Sidewalk aprons and crosswalks are absent from this intersection. All of the pedestrian facilities need evaluated for ADA concerns A diagram of this intersection can be found in Figure 3-1. Figure 3-2 illustrates the ADT volumes for 2006 at this intersection. Pictures of this intersection can be found in Appendix A. HCS was utilized to determine the LOS of intersection approaches. The Lee Street and Pomeroy Pike approaches operate at LOS B, with approach delays of 11.1 sec/vehicle and 10.4 sec/vehicle, respectively. Campus Drive and Putnam Howe Drive both operate at LOS A with control delays of 7.3 sec/vehicle and 7.4 sec/vehicle, respectively. HCS LOS output for this intersection can be found in Appendix B. 3-2 Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive

45 Figure 3-1: Existing Conditions at the Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive 3-3

46 Figure 3-2: 2006 ADT at the Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive Graphic Summary of Vehicle Movements Intersection: Putnam Howe Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Campus Drive Pomeroy Pike To Lee 1225 Campus Drive To Putnam To Campus 698 Putnam Howe Drive ADT = 4586 Total Bike/Ped = Lee Street 3-4 Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive

47 3.2 Accident Information and Summary The collision diagram for the Acme Street, Pike Street, and Jefferson Street intersection can be found in Figure 3-3. From , there were a total of 20 crashes resulting in 15 injuries at this location. As demonstrated in Figure 3-3, the majority of crashes (30%) were left turn related from conflicts between Pomeroy Pike and Campus Drive. Following the rank of left turn crashes were right turns (20%), sideswipe and rear end (15%), and angle crashes (10%). Approximately 20% of the accident total occurred with poor road and weather conditions. According to the crash data, accidents were frequent on Tuesdays and Fridays during the months of February and December from 7am to 7pm. The severity index at this intersection was and the accident rate was A summary of the crash data can be located in the tables and graphs under Table 3-4. Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive 3-5

48 Figure 3-3: Collision Diagram at the Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive Intersection 3-6 Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive

49 Table 3-4: Crash Summaries for the Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive Intersection Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive CRASH TYPE TOTAL % Rear-End % Head-on % Rear-to-rear % Backing % Angle % Left Turn % Right Turn % Sideswipe % Pedestrian/Bicycle Related % Parked Vehicle % Fixed Object % Other % Unknown % TOTAL % Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive - Crashes by Type 2004 Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes Number of Crashes Rear-End Head-on Rear-to-rear Backing Angle Left Turn Right Turn Crash Types Sideswipe Pedestrian/Bicycle Related Parked Vehicle Fixed Object Other Unknown Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive 3-7

50 Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive ACCIDENT SEVERITY Property Damage Crash Number of Injuries/Fatalities TOTAL Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive - Accident Severity Number of Injuries Number of Property Damage Crashes 6 5 Number of Crashes Year 3-8 Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive

51 Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive CONDITIONS % WEATHER CONDITIONS Poor Weather Normal Weather Unknown Weather ROAD CONDITIONS Poor Road Conditions Normal Road Conditions Unknown Road Conditions LIGHTING CONDITIONS Poor Lighting Normal Lighting Unknown Lighting Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive - Crash Conditions 2004 Conditions 2005 Conditions 2006 Conditions 2007 Conditions Number of Crashes Related to Specific Condition Poor Weather Normal Weather Unknown Weather Poor Road Conditions Normal Road Conditions Unknown Road Conditions Poor Lighting Normal Lighting Unknown Lighting Condition Type Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive 3-9

52 DAY OF WEEK Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive TOTAL % Sunday % Monday % Tuesday % Wednesday % Thursday % Friday % Saturday % TOTAL % Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive - Day of Crash 2004 Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes 2.5 Number of Crashes Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Day of Week 3-10 Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive

53 Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive MONTH TOTAL % January % February % March % April % May % June % July % August % September % October % November % December % TOTAL % 2.5 Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive - Month of Crash 2004 Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes 2 Number of Crashes January February March April May June July August Month of Crash September October November December Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive 3-11

54 Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive TIME TOTAL % 1A % 2A % 3A % 4A % 5A % 6A % 7A % 8A % 9A % 10A % 11A % 12N % 1P % 2P % 3P % 4P % 5P % 6P % 7P % 8P % 9P % 10P % 11P % 12M % TOTAL % Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive - Time of Crash 2004 Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes 0.8 Number of Crashes A 2A 3A 4A 5A 6A 7A 8A 9A 10A 11A 12N 1P 2P Time of Crash 3P 4P 5P 6P 7P 8P 9P 10P 11P 12M 3-12 Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive

55 Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive Additional Information TOTAL Pedestrian Bicycle Motorcycle Animal Speed Alcohol Drug Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive - Additional Crash Information 1 Number of Incidents Pedestrian Bicycle Motorcycle Animal Speed Alcohol Drug Crash Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive 3-13

56 3.3 Comments and Probable Cause This intersection has an expansive opening for traverse maneuvers by approach vehicles. Conflicts with vehicular right of way, speed, intersection geometry, and sight distance constitute the majority of safety concerns at this location. During field investigations, vehicles were frequently observed traveling in excess of the posted speed limit through the intersection, especially on the free moving approaches of Putnam Howe Drive and Campus Drive. Given the roadway classifications and pavement marking on all approaches, the traffic control configuration at this intersection is atypical. The geometry of the intersection is most likely the reasoning behind traffic control assignments. However, this may not correspond to driver expectation. The elevated accident rate and severity index at this intersection implies that there is an increased likelihood that a crash at this location will result in injury. This is further defined by Figure 3-3 where it is evident that nearly half of the accidents that occurred resulted in injury to vehicle occupants. 3.4 Implementation Plans Safety improvements at this intersection will address speed, driver expectation, sight distance, traffic control device (TCD) visibility, and operations. The following short term and long term countermeasures are recommended for this intersection Short Term Countermeasures To address the immediate needs at the intersection, the following short term countermeasures should be activated: Refresh the existing centerline pavement markings on Pomeroy Pike and Putnam Howe Drive. At a minimum, pavement markings should be updated within a 200 radius of the intersection Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive

57 Refresh and widen the existing stop bar pavement markings on Lee Street and Putnam Howe Drive. Change the speed limit on Putnam Howe Drive from 35 MPH to 25 MPH from Roderick Street (west of the intersection) to Lee Street. o Remove Reduced Speed Ahead sign along this stretch of pavement and replace with Stop Ahead sign (MUTCD W-45A). o Replace 35 MPH speed limit sign near Roderick Street with a 25 MPH sign (MUTCD R-10). o Replace 35 MPH speed limit sign on westbound leg of Putnam Howe Drive with 25 MPH sign. Add a 35 MPH speed limit sign on Putnam Howe Drive (westbound) after Roderick Street. o Add a 25 MPH speed limit sign on westbound Pomeroy Pike approximately 600 prior to the intersection. o Add a 25 MPH speed limit sign on westbound Campus Drive approximately 600 prior to the intersection. Utilize short term targeted speed limit and stop sign enforcement near this intersection to address speeds on Putnam Howe Drive and Campus Drive. Replace existing stop signs with new stop signs. Improve lighting at intersection by adding 3 overhead lights to the existing utility poles adjacent to Putnam Howe Drive, Lee Street, and Campus Drive. The Rate of Return (ROR) Analysis Worksheet can be found in Appendix C. The cost estimate to implement these short term improvements is approximately $32,930, the ROR is approximately 181% Long Term Countermeasures The following long term countermeasures address the safety concerns at this intersection by reconfiguring the intersection geometry and operations. The following aerial photograph is a representation of the geometric changes recommended as a part of this long term countermeasure. Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive 3-15

58 Not to Scale It represents a closure of the onerous transverse space at the intersection and the addition of defined travel lanes. The intersection will be all way stop controlled. Campus Drive will be designated one-way in from the intersection by extending the finger portion of land in-between Campus Drive and Pomeroy Pike and by adding a splinter island on Pomeroy Pike. These traffic calming measures will aid in the reduction of speed and increase safety by improving awareness of the intersection and TCD s. To facilitate outbound movements from Campus Drive, a new road will be constructed to connect Campus Drive and Pomeroy Pike. The speed limit on this road should be 25 MPH. Access to residential and commercial businesses on Campus Drive will be maintained by allowing two-way traffic up to the current location of the intersection. A bulb-out type feature will be added here to channel inbound traffic and prohibit outbound movements. This configuration will not impede the existing access points to the industrial/commercial development surrounding the intersection, but it may compel drivers to pursue alternative and safer routes of access. Improvements should also be made as per the short term countermeasures listed in Section of this report. The Rate of Return (ROR) Analysis Worksheet can be found 3-16 Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive

59 in Appendix C. The cost estimate to implement these long term improvements is approximately $150,155, the ROR is approximately 136%. Intersection of Campus Drive, Pomeroy Pike, Lee Street, and Putnam Howe Drive 3-17

60

61 Traffic and Operations Safety Study for the City of Belpre Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4.1 Existing Conditions The intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard is a 4-legged signalized intersection on uneven terrain. The signal encompasses movements from the Bridge, northern Main Street, and Washington Boulevard approaches. There are two overhead signs on southbound Main Street that inform drivers of movement restrictions. One dictates that right turns are prohibited during the red phase from 6am to 6pm. The other advises left turns to yield on green. The southern leg of Main Street is designated as one-way in and is not included in signal operations. The Bridge grade is uphill from the level approaches of Main Street and Washington Boulevard at the intersection. The Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge is classified as a principal arterial. It has two westbound approach lanes for exclusive access to Washington Boulevard and Main Street and two Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4-1

62 receiving lanes. Main Street is classified as a principal arterial to the north and a local road to the south of the intersection. It also has exclusive left and right turn lanes with one receiving lane leading northbound. Washington Boulevard is classified as a minor arterial and carries traffic from the west. It has an exclusive left turn lane and one lane for through/right turn movements and two receiving lanes. Overhead signage is provided on the Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge and aids in proper separation of traffic to and at the signal. However, in conjunction with pole mounted signage and advertisements on the northern side of the bride approach, signage is intrusive and obstructs the sight distance at this approach. The intersection of 3 rd Street and Main Street is unsignalized and approximately 530 to the north of Washington Boulevard. The intersection of the Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge (5 th Street) and Ann Street is situated on the east side of the bridge approximately 2640 from Main Street. This intersection is signalized; however, Bridge traffic is not included in signal operations. To the west is the intersection of Washington Boulevard and Walnut Street. It is unsignalized with stop control on the minor approaches of Walnut Street. The immediate vicinity of the subject intersection consists of a Rite Aid Pharmacy (on the southwest corner), the Wal-Bon s Commissary (on the northeast corner), and a BP Gas Station (on the northwest corner). There are additional commercial operations along Washington Boulevard and Main Street. Beyond the first block of these roads are residential neighborhoods. The speed limit on all approaches of this intersection is 25 MPH. There are sidewalks and sidewalk aprons on both sides of Main Street and Washington Boulevard. There is also a sidewalk on the southern side of the Bridge. There are crosswalks and crosswalk aprons across the southern leg of Main Street and across Washington Boulevard. The Washington Boulevard crosswalk is marked behind the stop bar for eastbound traffic. The crosswalks are extremely worn and need repair. Pedheads 4-2 Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard

63 Traffic and Operations Safety Study for the City of Belpre and pushbuttons are not present at this intersection. All of the pedestrian facilities need evaluated for ADA concerns. A diagram of this intersection can be found in Figure 4-1. Figure 4-2 illustrates the ADT volumes for 2006 at this intersection. Pictures of this intersection can be found in Appendix A. HCS was utilized to determine the LOS of this intersection, which was found to operate at LOS C with an intersection delay of 26.0 sec/vehicle. Westbound Washington Boulevard operates at LOS B with approach delays of 15.1 sec/vehicle. Southbound Main Street operates at LOS C with an approach delay of 27.4 sec/vehicle. The eastbound approach of the Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge operates at LOS D with approach delays of 36.0 sec/vehicle. HCS LOS output for this intersection can be found in Appendix B. Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4-3

64 Figure 4-1: Existing Conditions at the Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Intersection 4-4 Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard

65 Traffic and Operations Safety Study for the City of Belpre Figure 4-2: 2006 ADT at the Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Graphic Summary of Vehicle Movements Intersection: Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Main Street Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge Washington Boulevard 2006 ADT = Total Bike/Ped = Main Street Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4-5

66 4.2 Accident Information and Summary Figure 4-3 is an illustration of the collision diagram for the Main Street, Parkersburg- Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard. To summarize those findings, there were a total of 63 accidents resulting in 22 injuries at this location from Rear-end crashes were the most prevalent type of accident, occurring approximately 46% of the time. Left turn crashes were the second highest incident type affecting approximately 16% of the crash total. Inclement weather was evident for 19% of the crashes, while 35% of the crashes were related to poor road conditions. Crashes transpired most often on Tuesdays and Thursdays during the months of June, July, November, and December and between the hours of 5am and 11pm. The severity index at this intersection was and the accident rate was A summary of crash data can be found in the tables and graphs under Table Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard

67 Traffic and Operations Safety Study for the City of Belpre Figure 4-3: Collision Diagram at the Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Intersection Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4-7

68 Table 4-4: Crash Summaries for the Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Intersection Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard CRASH TYPE TOTAL % Rear-End % Head-on % Rear-to-rear % Backing % Angle % Left Turn % Right Turn % Sideswipe % Pedestrian/Bicycle Related % Parked Vehicle % Fixed Object % Other % Unknown % TOTAL % Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard - Crashes by Type 2004 Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes 6 Number of Crashes Rear-End Head-on Rear-to-rear Backing Angle Left Turn Right Turn Crash Types Sideswipe Pedestrian/Bicycle Related Parked Vehicle Fixed Object Other Unknown 4-8 Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard

69 Traffic and Operations Safety Study for the City of Belpre Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard ACCIDENT SEVERITY Property Damage Crash Number of Injuries/Fatalities TOTAL Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard - Accident Severity Number of Injuries Number of Property Damage Crashes Number of Crashes Year Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4-9

70 Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard CONDITIONS % WEATHER CONDITIONS Poor Weather Normal Weather Unknown Weather ROAD CONDITIONS Poor Road Conditions Normal Road Conditions Unknown Road Conditions LIGHTING CONDITIONS Poor Lighting Normal Lighting Unknown Lighting Number of Crashes Related to Specific Condition Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard - Crash Conditions 2004 Conditions 2005 Conditions 2006 Conditions 2007 Conditions 0 Poor Weather Normal Weather Unknown Weather Poor Road Conditions Normal Road Conditions Unknown Road Conditions Poor Lighting Normal Lighting Unknown Lighting Condition Type 4-10 Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard

71 Traffic and Operations Safety Study for the City of Belpre DAY OF WEEK Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard TOTAL % Sunday % Monday % Tuesday % Wednesday % Thursday % Friday % Saturday % TOTAL % 6 5 Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard - Day of Crash 2004 Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes Number of Crashes Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Day of Week Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4-11

72 Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard MONTH TOTAL % January % February % March % April % May % June % July % August % September % October % November % December % TOTAL % 4.5 Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard - Month of Crash 4 Number of Crashes Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes January February March April May June July Month of Crash August September October November December 4-12 Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard

73 Traffic and Operations Safety Study for the City of Belpre Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard TIME TOTAL % 1A % 2A % 3A % 4A % 5A % 6A % 7A % 8A % 9A % 10A % 11A % 12N % 1P % 2P % 3P % 4P % 5P % 6P % 7P % 8P % 9P % 10P % 11P % 12M % TOTAL % Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard - Time of Crash 2004 Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes 2.5 Number of Crashes A 2A 3A 4A 5A 6A 7A 8A 9A 10A 11A 12N 1P Time of Crash 2P 3P 4P 5P 6P 7P 8P 9P 10P 11P 12M Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4-13

74 Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard Additional Information TOTAL Pedestrian Bicycle Motorcycle Animal Speed Alcohol Drug Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard - Additional Crash Information 3 Number of Incidents Pedestrian Bicycle Motorcycle Animal Speed Alcohol Drug Crash 4-14 Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard

75 Traffic and Operations Safety Study for the City of Belpre Comments and Probable Cause Field observations and crash histories at this intersection exposed safety issues relative to sight distance, speed, driver behavior, pedestrian and bicycle access, and pavement conditions during inclement weather. More detail relative to these topics is provided in the following paragraphs. The geometry of this intersection is peculiar and requires special attention to navigate. Numerous overhead and pole mounted signs on the Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge and along the grassy space on the north end of the approach detract from signal visibility and intersection awareness. These signs are both commercial and traffic control related. To the west, signage and vegetation on the corner of the BP Gas station interferes with the sight distance of motorists making a right turn from Main Street to westbound Washington Boulevard. Drivers can become overwhelmed or distracted by excessive signage and be desensitized to the awareness required to negotiate movements at this intersection. Therefore, commercial signage should be removed and prohibited from this intersection. The placement of existing traffic control signage should be examined to determine ancillary placement or removal. Vegetation should be removed or properly maintained to preclude the probability of accidents due to sight distance. In addition to signage and vegetation, sight distance is impacted by vehicular obstruction at the approaches. This is especially true when large vehicles, including commercial and delivery trucks are involved. Vehicles in the left turn bay on Washington Boulevard block the sight distance of vehicles making the through movement onto the Parkersburg- Belpre Bridge. During field observations, several conflicts were noted between through movements onto the Bridge from Washington Boulevard and left turn movements onto the Bridge from Main Street. While these two movements are channelized by pavement markings, vehicles from Washington Street had a propensity to move directly into the left travel lane beyond the demarcation of the hatched channelization area. Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4-15

76 Relative to driver behavior, accelerated speeds beyond the posted speed limit were noted during field observations. This was accompanied by a failure to stop at the stop bar (if at all) for vehicles traveling eastbound from Washington Boulevard to the bridge. Motorists are permitted to turn right on red at this location, which translates to steady traffic flow for this movement. However, the numerous conflicts described above have resulted. Conflicts were also noted between westbound left turn movements from the Bridge onto Washington Boulevard and through movements from Main Street to the Bridge. Drivers on the bridge that fail to yield to Main Street traffic during the permitted turn phase of the signal create the potential for left turn and angled crashes at the intersection. As seen in Figure 4-3, numerous fixed object crashes occurred on Main Street. WWW examined the individual crash forms to determine the cause of these crashes and the object of interference. In general, accidents resulted from a mixture of inclement weather, poor pavement conditions, and a loss of traction. Consequently, vehicles struck the concrete bridge median barrier. Field observations noted numerous pedestrians and bicycles traversing this intersection to and from all directions. WWW documented the need for education, enforcement, and engineering strategies to bestow improved safety and access to this intersection for pedestrians and bicyclists. 4.4 Implementation Plans Based on the aforementioned safety concerns, the following implementation plan has been designed to address sight distance, speed, operations, drainage, TCD visibility, and pedestrian and bicycle access. Updated and improved pavement markings will aid in the proper channelization of traffic through the intersection. This includes widening the existing stop bars on each approach. Surface mount delineator posts will be added to the channelization island for the corner of the Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge and Washington Boulevard Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard

77 Traffic and Operations Safety Study for the City of Belpre To deter eastbound Washington Boulevard traffic from crossing to the left lane and into Main Street flows, surface mount delineator posts will be added to the centerline of the bridge for a distance of 50. Signage will also be added to direct traffic from Washington Boulevard to utilize the right lane until permissible access is available. Additional pavement markings will be added to channelize Main Street traffic to the left lane of the Bridge. The area to the north of the Bridge abutment (the intersection of Main Street and the Bridge) is congested with traffic control signage and commercial signage. To improve sight distance, signage in this area will be removed or relocated. Commercial signage should be prohibited from this area in the future. Initially, this measure will likely require enforcement by the City. Sight distance is also impacted by the landscaping in front of the BP gas station. The City should coordinate with the owners to develop a maintenance plan that removes or shrinks obtrusive vegetation. Drainage issues will be addressed by re-surfacing the pavement at this location within 200 of the intersection Summary of Countermeasures The following countermeasures are recommended: Optimize signal timing. Install signal backplates. Refresh all pavement markings at this intersection. Widen the pavement marking for the stop bars on each approach. Add channelizing pavement markers for the left turn from Main Street to the Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge to direct traffic through the intersection and highlight awareness of this movement for other approaches. Add surface mount delineator posts to the boundary of the channelizing island at the intersection of Washington Boulevard and the Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge. Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4-17

78 Add surface mount delineator posts for a distance of 50 along the centerline of the eastbound Bridge decking. Change the centerline pavement marking on the eastbound Bridge deck from dashed to solid in conjunction with the previous countermeasure. Add signage prior to the eastbound approach of Washington Boulevard to instruct drivers Right Turn Must Stay in Right Lane thru Intersection (MUTCD W- 145B). Coordinate with the owners of BP to develop a maintenance plan for vegetation on the corner of the intersection. Address obtrusive signage on the northern corner of the Bridge near Main and the bridge abutment. o Prohibit commercial signage and remove. o Remove the Belpre Business Route sign. o Relocate Fasten Safety Belts State Law sign. o Relocate local attraction sign. Add signage to the eastbound approach of Washington Boulevard to highlight the location of the crosswalk (MUTCD W-81). Add signage instructing drivers to Yield to Pedestrians (MUTCD W-145B). Add signage to the westbound travel lane of Washington Boulevard to highlight the location of the crosswalk (MUTCD W-81). Add signage instructing drivers to Yield to Pedestrians (MUTCD W-145B). Add sidewalk aprons, crosswalk, and signage to Main Street. It should be situated behind the stop bar in similar format to the Washington Boulevard crosswalk. Add signage to the northbound travel lane of Main Street to highlight the location of the crosswalk (MUTCD W-81). Add signage instructing drivers to Yield to Pedestrians (MUTCD W-145B). Add signage to the southbound approach of Main Street to highlight the location of the crosswalk (MUTCD W-81). Add signage instructing drivers to Yield to Pedestrians (MUTCD W-145B) Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard

79 Traffic and Operations Safety Study for the City of Belpre Resurface roadway to improve drainage. The resurfacing project shall ensure proper stormwater drainage to the existing stormwater drains in the vicinity of the intersection. Review the existing Traffic Operations Maintenance Plan for the City of Belpre to ensure that snow/ice removal at this location is addressed properly. The ROR Analysis Worksheet can be found on Table 4-5. The cost estimate to implement these short term improvements is approximately $270,680 and the ROR is approximately 148%. Intersection of Main Street, Parkersburg-Belpre Bridge, and Washington Boulevard 4-19

80

81

82

83 5.0 Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5.1 Existing Conditions The Lee Street and Washington Boulevard intersection is signalized with 4 approaches on level terrain. The signal operation on the Lee Street approach is actuated with an 8 second delay. Lee Street a two lane local road that extends from the north to south. Washington Boulevard is classified as a minor arterial that runs from the east to west. It has two travel lanes in each direction. Turning movements are permitted, but not designated. There are numerous mid-block access points for commercial and residential traffic along Washington Boulevard. The speed limit on Washington Boulevard is 35 MPH, while the speed limit on the minor approach is 25 MPH. The four corners of this intersection are comprised of commercial property. On the northern corners are a McDonald s Restaurant to the east and an old 1 st Bank building to the west. To the southwest is State Farm Insurance and to the southeast is a CVS Pharmacy. Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5-1

84 Geographically, this intersection is approximately 430 to the south of Lee Street and 3 rd Street and approximately 530 north of the Lee Street and Ridge Street intersection. Both intersections are unsignalized. Along Washington Boulevard and approximately 1060 to the east is Stone Road and Washington Boulevard, which is signalized. Approximately 1060 to the west is the intersection of 4 th Street and Washington Boulevard, which is unsignalized. There are sidewalks, sidewalk aprons, and crosswalks on all four corners of this intersection. However, continuous sidewalk is only available along Washington Boulevard. It is in poor condition and in need of repair on both the northern and southern sides of the road. All of the pedestrian facilities need evaluated for ADA concerns. A diagram of this intersection can be found in Figure 5-1. Figure 5-2 illustrates the ADT volumes for 2006 at this intersection. Pictures of this intersection can be found in Appendix A. HCS was utilized to determine the LOS of this intersection, which was found to operate at LOS B with an intersection delay of 11.7 sec/vehicle. Washington Boulevard operates at LOS A in the northbound direction and LOS B in the southbound direction with 9.2 sec/vehicle and 11.3 sec/vehicle delays, respectively. Lee Street operates at LOS B in the northbound and southbound directions. HCS LOS output for this intersection can be found in Appendix B. 5-2 Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard

85 Figure 5-1: Existing Conditions at Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5-3

86 Figure 5-2: 2006 ADT at the Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Graphic Summary of Vehicle Movements Intersection: Lee Street and Washington Boulevard ADT = Total Bike/Ped = Lee Street Washington Boulevard Washington Boulevard Lee Street 5-4 Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard

87 5.2 Accident Information and Summary The crash history from is illustrated in Figure 5-3. During the study period, there were a total of 28 crashes resulting in 14 injuries at this intersection. For no apparent reason and as per the data presented in the tables and graphs under Table 5-4, the number of crashes at this intersection has dropped by 50% since The number of injuries has also declined from 8 in 2004 to 1 in Rear-end crashes were the principal type at approximately 43%. This was preceded by angled and left turn crashes at approximately 21% and 18%, respectively. Approximately 21% of the accidents occurred during inclement weather, while approximately 29% of recorded crashes were related to poor road conditions. Crashes occurred most frequently on Mondays and Tuesdays during the months of May, June, and September, from 8am to 6pm. Accident severity was at this intersection with an accident rate of A summary of crash data can be found in the tables and graphs under Table 5-4. Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5-5

88 Figure 5-3: Collision Diagram at the Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Intersection 5-6 Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard

89 Table 5-4: Crash Summaries for the Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Intersection Lee Street and Washington Boulevard CRASH TYPE TOTAL % Rear-End % Head-on % Rear-to-rear % Backing % Angle % Left Turn % Right Turn % Sideswipe % Pedestrian/Bicycle Related % Parked Vehicle % Fixed Object % Other % Unknown % TOTAL % 4.5 Lee Street and Washington Boulevard- Crashes by Type Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes 3 Number of Crashes Rear-End Head-on Rear-to-rear Backing Crash Types Angle Left Turn Right Turn Sideswipe Pedestrian/Bicycle Related Parked Vehicle Fixed Object Other Unknown Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5-7

90 Lee Street and Washington Boulevard ACCIDENT SEVERITY Property Damage Crash Number of Injuries/Fatalities TOTAL Lee Street and Washington Boulevard - Accident Severity Number of Injuries Number of Property Damage Crashes 10 Number of Crashes Year 5-8 Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard

91 Lee Street and Washington Boulevard CONDITIONS % WEATHER CONDITIONS Poor Weather Normal Weather Unknown Weather ROAD CONDITIONS Poor Road Conditions Normal Road Conditions Unknown Road Conditions LIGHTING CONDITIONS Poor Lighting Normal Lighting Unknown Lighting Number of Crashes Related to Specific Condition Poor Weather 2004 Conditions 2005 Conditions 2006 Conditions 2007 Conditions Normal Weather Lee Street and Washington Boulevard - Crash Conditions Unknown Weather Poor Road Conditions Normal Road Conditions Unknown Road Conditions Condition Type Poor Lighting Normal Lighting Unknown Lighting Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5-9

92 DAY OF WEEK Lee Street and Washington Boulevard TOTAL % Sunday % Monday % Tuesday % Wednesday % Thursday % Friday % Saturday % TOTAL % Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes Lee Street and Washington Boulevard - Day of Crash Number of Crashes Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Day of Week 5-10 Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard

93 Lee Street and Washington Boulevard MONTH TOTAL % January % February % March % April % May % June % July % August % September % October % November % December % TOTAL % Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes Lee Street and Washington Boulevard - Month of Crash Number of Crashes January February March April May June July Month of Crash August September October November December Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5-11

94 Lee Street and Washington Boulevard TIME TOTAL % 1A % 2A % 3A % 4A % 5A % 6A % 7A % 8A % 9A % 10A % 11A % 12N % 1P % 2P % 3P % 4P % 5P % 6P % 7P % 8P % 9P % 10P % 11P % 12M % TOTAL % 3.5 Lee Street and Washington Boulevard - Time of Crash Crashes 2005 Crashes 2006 Crashes 2007 Crashes 2.5 Number of Crashes A 2A 3A 4A 5A 6A 7A 8A 9A 10A 11A 12N 1P 2P 3P Time of Crash 4P 5P 6P 7P 8P 9P 10P 11P 12M 5-12 Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard

95 Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Additional Information TOTAL Pedestrian Bicycle Motorcycle Animal Speed Alcohol Drug Lee Street and Washington Boulevard - Additional Crash Information Number of Incidents Pedestrian Bicycle Motorcycle Animal Speed Alcohol Drug Crash Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5-13

96 5.3 Comments and Probable Cause Safety concerns at the Lee Street and Washington Boulevard intersection materialize from speeds in excess of the speed limit, red light running, numerous access points along Washington Boulevard, and drainage. It was noted during field investigations that the pavement markings for vehicular and pedestrian traffic were worn and need refreshed on the major and minor approaches. High speeds and red light running were also indicated as issues at this intersection. Pavement marking improvements can incorporate traffic calming techniques to address these concerns. The specific countermeasures will be discussed in the following Section of this report. Geometric modifications are needed to improve truck access to and from the minor approaches of Lee Street. These modifications can be made in conjunction with roadway resurfacing to improve drainage. There are numerous access points along Washington Boulevard on both sides of this minor arterial. Sporadic driver behavior in response to turning vehicles is a contributing factor in the crash history at this intersection and along Washington Boulevard in general. Drivers will swerve around a vehicle waiting for a left turn gap or slowing to make a right hand turn. This generates several conflicts. Vehicles switching lanes to avoid the delay of a turning vehicle can sideswipe an unsuspecting vehicle traveling in the adjacent travel lane. An additional conflict can be created when a motorist behind a vehicle toggling travel lanes is suddenly aware of a stopped vehicle in the path of motion when the sight distance is opened up by the vehicle switching lanes. In concert with high speeds, this instance can have severe repercussions in a rear end crash. Several countermeasures will be discussed in the following Section of this report to address these concerns Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard

97 5.4 Implementation Plans The following countermeasures should be considered to address the conflicts and safety concerns discovered as a result of historical accident data and field research activities. Traffic calming measures were discussed in the previous Section of this report as an option to reduce speeds and improve intersection awareness. According to the ITE Journal, traffic calming is the combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use, alter driver behavior and improve conditions for non-motorized street users. Some of these techniques are subtle and alter a driver s perception of safe travel speed by reducing the apparent size of the travel lane. For Lee Street and Washington Boulevard, a subtle technique will be applied to pavement markings to alter driver perception and modify driver behavior by widening the width of the centerline and lane delineator pavement markings. By widening pavement marking the available lane width is slightly smaller, but driver perception amplifies this effect. Slower travel speeds will result and the existing pavement markings will be improved. Additionally, the stop bars on Lee Street and Washington Boulevard should also be widened. Red light running can be deterred by targeted stop control enforcement. At this intersection, the installation of red signal indicator lights, also known as rat lights or tattle tale lights, will enable law enforcement to monitor and penalize drivers proceeding through the traffic signal during a red phase. Red signal indicator lights illuminate when a traffic signal is red. They are wired to the traffic signal and installed at a location, which enables law enforcement to sit downstream of a signal and monitor vehicular activity. TCD visibility can also be improved by replacing the existing signal heads with LED lenses and backplates. Officers can combine targeted enforcement for red light running with targeted speed control enforcement. Speed control can also be implemented with radar speed detection devices and radar speed signs. These devices can be post mounted or portable. For the Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5-15

98 purposes of this study, targeted enforcement is recommended in conjunction with targeted stop control enforcement. To address the geometric deficiencies of this intersection, the intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard should be resurfaced. The resurfacing project will properly channelize stormwater drainage away from the intersection and improve curve radii on all corners of the intersection. Turning movements from Washington Boulevard need to be appropriately facilitated to improve safety. Not just at this intersection, but to the east and west of Lee Street along Washington Boulevard. Rear end accidents can be reduced with the addition of left turn lanes and left turn signal heads at the intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard. A left turn lane at this intersection alone will not provide access to the surrounding commercial development. Commercial access roads would be ideal, but costly due to the limited availability of right-of-way along Washington Boulevard. Therefore, a two way left turn lane (TWLTL) or exclusive left turn turning bays should be considered as an alternative. A TWLTL or left turn turning bays should be constructed along Washington Boulevard from 4 th Street to Stone Road. The TWLTL shall be modified at the intersection approaches of Lee Street and Stone Road to provide exclusive left turn lanes with the appropriate queue based storage lengths. At the time of project development, the existing sidewalks, crosswalks, signal heads, pushbuttons, and sidewalk aprons should be re-evaluated to address and ADA deficiencies and include improvements in the final design. The existing pedestrian facilities shall be re-built with the application of any improvements to this intersection or corridor. If shoulder space is available on this section of road, shoulders should be provided and striped. Future conditions may facilitate the designation of a bicycle lane within this space. The following short term and long term countermeasures should be considered for this intersection Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard

99 5.4.1 Short Term Countermeasures The following short term countermeasures are recommended: Optimize signal timing and add actuated pedestrian phase. Add pedestrian pushbuttons and pedheads. Replace the existing signal heads with LED lenses and install signal backplates. Install red signal indicator lights or tattle tale lights. Utilize targeted speed limit enforcement. Refresh and widen existing pavement markings (centerline and lane demarcations). Widen stop bar pavement markings on each intersection approach. Refresh crosswalk pavement markings. Resurface pavement within 200 of the intersection on all approaches and modify curb radii on all four corners of the intersection. Replace existing sidewalk and sidewalk aprons with ADA compliant facilities. Add signage to Lee Street approaches indicating the location to stop to actuate the signal. The ROR Analysis Worksheet can be found on Table 5-5. The cost estimate to implement these short term improvements is approximately $385,184 with a ROR of approximately 28% Long Term Countermeasures The following long term countermeasures are recommended in addition or in lieu of those listed under the short term countermeasures: Add a TWLTL or center left turn bays from the intersection of Washington Boulevard and 4 th Street to the intersection of Washington Boulevard and Stone Road. Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5-17

100 Widen Washington Boulevard from Stone Road to 4th Street to accommodate a TWLTL or center left turn bays. Widening should occur on both sides of the roadway. Provide exclusive left turn lanes at the intersection of Washington Boulevard and Lee Street and the west approach of Washington Boulevard and Stone Road. Add signal heads with LED lenses for protected left turn phasing from Washington Boulevard to Lee Street. Optimize signal timing to include protected-permitted left turn signal phasing. Add overhead signage to direct drivers to yield on green to eastbound and westbound approaches of Washington Boulevard at Lee Street and to the west leg of Washington Boulevard at Stone Road. The ROR Analysis Worksheet can be found on Table 5-6. The cost estimate to implement these long term improvements is approximately $233,172 (based on the application of TWLTL s) with a ROR of approximately 34%. A diagram of the long term countermeasures can be found in Figure 5-7 for the TWLTL alternative Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard

101 Figure 5-7: Diagram of the Long Term Countermeasures at the Lee Street and Washington Boulevard Intersection (TWLTL) NORTH Intersection of Lee Street and Washington Boulevard 5-19

102

103

104

105 Traffic and Operations Safety Study for the City of Belpre Intersection of Middle Street and Washington Boulevard 6.1 Existing Conditions The Middle Street and Washington Boulevard intersection is a signalized 4-way skewed intersection on level terrain. The signal is actuated with a 10 second delay for the minor approaches on Middle Street. Middle Street is classified as a local road that runs primarily north to south. Washington Boulevard extends primarily to the east and west and is classified as a minor arterial. There is a sign on the southbound approach of Middle Street indicating the proper stop location for vehicles to actuate the signal. The speed limit on Washington Boulevard is 35 MPH. The speed limit on Middle Street is 25 MPH. This intersection is surrounded by commercial, government, and residential development. Middle Street serves as an access point to the adjacent residential neighborhoods, while Washington Boulevard serves as a commercial corridor. Intersection of Middle Street and Washington Boulevard 6-1