1200 ZONES AND STUDIES Traffic Engineering Manual

Transcription

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Part 12 - ZONES AND TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STUDIES 1200 GENERAL TRAFFIC CONTROL ZONES SCHOOL ZONES SPEED ZONES General Procedures for Requesting and Authorizing Speed Zones General ODOT-Maintained Highways - General Procedure Local Roads - General Procedure Split Jurisdictions Speed Zone Tracking Application Narrow and Low-Volume Rural Roads (Form ) Unimproved Highways and Residential and Commercial Subdivision Streets (Form ) Freeways and High-Speed Multi-Lane Divided Highways Speed Zones in Temporary Traffic Control Zones Speed Zone Studies General Field Review (Forms and ) Speed Check (Form ) Speed Zone Warrant Sheet (Form ) Additional Information/Considerations Withdrawal of Authorization Documentation PARKING CONTROL ZONES General Procedure for Authorizing Parking Control Zones Engineering Study Withdrawal of Authorization Documentation OTHER ZONES TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STUDIES NON-FREEWAY LOCATION SAFETY STUDY GUIDELINES General Table of Contents Title Page Executive Summary General Purpose and Need Statement Background Possible Causes Recommended Countermeasure and Cost Existing Conditions (October 17, 2008) October 23,

2 Condition Diagram (Required) Roadway Features Required Roadway Features If Applicable Physical Condition Writeup (Optional) Collision Diagrams Crash Data Crash Analysis Recommendations Design Evaluation Rate of Return Photos Other Issues and Data Appendix FREEWAY SAFETY STUDY GUIDELINES General Table of Contents Title Page Definitions Executive Summary Purpose and Need Statement Location Results and Recommendations Existing Conditions Physical Condition Write-up Freeway Schematic Diagram Crash Data Investigation General Crash Data Management Unlogged Data Collector-Distributor Data Crash Summary Crash Analysis General Crash Summaries Crash Rates Severity Index Crash Analysis Diagrams Critical Crash Location Analysis Data Results and Conclusions Countermeasures General Crash Data Existing Conditions Countermeasures Deliverables OTHER TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STUDIES General Ball Banking Studies for Determining Curve Advisory Speeds General The Mechanical Ball Bank Indicator The Digital Ball Bank Indicator Recording the Safe Speed Data Calculation Method to Determine Curve Advisory Speed Delay Studies Speed Studies October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

3 Systematic Signal Timing & Phasing Program (SSTPP) General Benefits Eligibility MPO & Local Documentation Requirements Project Scope MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT CONSTRUCTION RESEARCH REFERENCE RESOURCES FORMS INDEX Form Speed Zone Request for Narrow and Low-Volume Rural Roads Form Speed Zone Warrant Sheet Form Speed Study Data Sheet Form Sample Speed Study Data Sheet Form Speed Check Form Form Speed Limit Revision Form Withdrawal of Issued Speed Zone Authorization Form Field Report on Parking Practices Form Establishment of No-Parking Restrictions Form Withdrawal of Issued No-Parking Restrictions Form Curve Study Form Form Completed Curve Study Form Form Red Flag Summary Form for Safety Projects Form Freeway Speed Zone Evaluation Sheet Form Speed Zone Request for Unimproved Highways and Residential or Commercial Subdivision Streets Form Speed Zone Request for Temporary Traffic Control Zones TABLES INDEX Table Symbols for Use with the Speed Study Data Sheet Table Speed Zone Warrant Analysis - Highway Development Table Speed Zone Warrant Analysis - Roadway Features Table Speed and Parking Zone Revision Number Assignments Table Average: Ohio Interstate Crash Data Table Speed Zone Warrant Analysis - Roadway Characteristics FIGURES INDEX Figure Reserved for Future Use Figure Mechanical Ball Bank Indicator Figure Examples of Type A Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning for Form Figure Examples of Type B Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning for Form Figure Examples of Type C Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning for Form Figure Sample Non-Freeway Safety Study Table of Contents Figure Sample Non-Freeway Safety Study Title Page Figure Sample Condition Diagram - Section Figure Sample Condition Diagram - Intersection Figure Sample Collision Diagram - Intersection Figure Sample Collision Diagram - Section (October 17, 2008) October 23,

4 Figure Sample Collision Diagram - Intersection Figure Sample Crash Analysis Figure Sample Rate of Return Worksheet Figure Sample Photos for a Non-Freeway Safety Study Figure Sample Photos for a Non-Freeway Safety Study Figure Sample Freeway Safety Study Title Page Figure Sample Freeway Safety Study Table of Contents Figure Sample Schematic with HSP Rankings Figure Sample Freeway Safety Study Area Schematic Figure Ramp-Related Crashes Figure Sample Illustration Ramp-Related Crashes Figure Sample Illustration Ramp-Related Crashes Figure Weave Area Crashes Figure Sample of an Area of Influence Map Figure Sample of a Crash Frequency Diagram Figure Sample of a Mainline Crash Summary Figure Sample of a Ramp Crash Summary Figure Sample of Crash Summary Figure Sample of Interchange Crash Information Figure Sample of Interchange Crash Information Figure Sample of Weave Area Crash Information Figure Sample of Weave Area Crash Information Figure Sample of Critical Crash Locations - Segments Figure Sample of Critical Crash Locations - Ramps Figure Sample of Critical Crash Locations Figure Sample of Area of Interest Crash Data Figure Sample of Area of Interest Crash Analysis Figure Sample of Mainline Crash Analysis Figure Sample of Ramp Crash Analysis October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

5 Part 12 ZONES AND TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STUDIES 1200 GENERAL This Part of the TEM addresses ODOT standards, policies, guidelines and procedures for Traffic Control Zones (see Chapter 1201) and traffic engineering studies (see Chapter 1210) TRAFFIC CONTROL ZONES Traffic Control Zones include School Zones, Speed Zones, Parking Control Zones, Pedestrian Safety Zones, Loading Zones, No-Passing Zones and Temporary Traffic Control Zones (Work Zones). ORC Section addresses Speed Zones and School Zones, and Section addresses Slow and Minimum Speeds. For additional information: see Chapter 1202 of this Manual regarding School Zones and School Zone Extensions; Chapter 1203 regarding Speed Zones; and Chapter 1204 regarding Parking Control Zones at locations not covered by existing law (ORC Sections , , and ). Chapter 1205 addresses other zones. No-Passing Zones and Temporary Traffic Control Zones are addressed in OMUTCD Parts 3 and 6, respectively, and additional information may be found in TEM Parts 3 and Part SCHOOL ZONES OMUTCD Part 7B.11 addresses School Zones and School Zone Extensions. Chapter 705 of this Manual describes the procedures for requesting and withdrawing School Zone Extensions. The related forms are shown in Part 7 of this Manual. Full-size copies of the forms are also available for downloading from the Forms page on the Office of Traffic Engineering (OTE) website SPEED ZONES General A Speed Zone is a section of street or highway where, on the basis of a geometric and traffic characteristic study or an engineering and traffic investigation, the prima facie speed limit set forth in ORC (B)(1)(a) to (D) is determined to be greater or less that is reasonable or safe and the Director and/or appropriate local authorities have declared a reasonable and safe prima facie speed limit and erected signs in accordance with ORC This study or investigation is typically referred to as a Speed Zone Study (see Section ). The processes for requesting and authorizing Speed Zones are described in Section It should be noted that Warning Signs and Advisory Speed signs in accordance with the OMUTCD should be considered before speed zoning based solely on roadway characteristics. As noted in OMUTCD Section 2B.11, ORC Section establishes speed limits for all streets and highways within the State. It also provides that the Director may alter speed limits, and that local authorities may request that the Director determine and declare a reasonable and safe speed limit on certain highways under their jurisdiction. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

6 Under ORC Division (K), a Board of Township Trustees may, by resolution and based on an engineering and traffic investigation, declare a prima-facie speed limit on unimproved highways and also on highways under their jurisdiction which are within residential and commercial subdivisions (see Section ). In altering speed limits, the minimum length of a new zone not contiguous to an existing Speed Zone should be greater than or equal to 0.5 miles; however, extensions of existing warranted zones may be shorter. Occasionally, to decrease congestion and increase safety, it may be determined that the speed limit should temporarily be reduced due to a construction work zone (see Section ). Additional regulations on speed limits can be found in ORC Sections (Speed limit on private residential road or driveway), (Speed regulations on bridges) and (Emergency vehicles excepted from speed regulations). Speeds are currently only posted in English units (miles per hour); therefore, all studies related to speed limits shall be conducted and calculated in English units. This will simplify the study process and also eliminate any possibility of errors in the final determined speed caused by either additional calculations or the use of conversion factors Procedures for Requesting and Authorizing Speed Zones General Requests for Speed Zones needing the approval of the Director of Transportation are submitted through the District office using one of the forms described in this Section. All the forms described herein and shown in Chapter 1296 are also available from Forms webpage on the OTE website. For certain situations, short form alternative studies have been developed: for rural roads with a width of 16 feet or less or an ADT of 400 or less, see Section ; for unimproved County Roads and residential or commercial subdivision streets see Section ; for freeways and high-speed multi-lane divided highways see Section ; and for speed zones in temporary traffic control zones, see Section A quick reference guide is provided below as to what situation each of the forms addresses: Form No. Section No. Title Speed Zone Request for Narrow & Low-Volume Rural Roads Speed Zone Warrant Sheet (for situations not covered by the alternative forms) Freeway Speed Zone Evaluation Sheet Speed Zone Request for Unimproved Highways & Residential and Commercial Subdivision Streets Speed Zone Request for Temporary Traffic Control Zones ODOT-Maintained Highways General Procedure All proposals for alterations of speed limits on ODOT-maintained highways shall be documented with the appropriate Speed Zone Study as outlined in Section or using an appropriate alternative form as described in Section Once a determination has been made to alter a speed limit, the District shall forward the proposed speed limit reduction to the appropriate Ohio State Highway Patrol (OSHP) District Office for review and comment. Following resolution of the OSHP comments, if any, the District shall prepare a description of the Speed Zone for the Director s approval using Form (Speed Limit Revision) October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

7 Following approval, the District shall erect the appropriate Speed Limit signs, record the dates of sign erection on Form , and notify the OSHP and other law enforcement agencies as appropriate. A copy of the signed authorization shall be forwarded to the Office of Traffic Engineering (OTE) Local Roads General Procedure As noted in Section , a Board of Township Trustees may, by resolution and based on an engineering and traffic investigation, declare a prima-facie speed limit on unimproved highways and also on highways under their jurisdiction which are within residential and commercial subdivisions. The terms unimproved highway, and residential and commercial subdivision are defined in ORC Division (K). It is recommended that the Townships document the reasons for these Speed Zones and when the Speed Limit signs are erected. Form is an example of a form that can be used for such documentation. Except as provided in ORC (K) for Township Roads, all requests for reduced speed limits on local roads (i.e., roads under the jurisdiction of a highway authority other than ODOT) shall be submitted to the District using one of the forms described herein. The request shall be accompanied by the appropriate resolution or ordinance from the local authorities. The appropriate Speed Zone Study, as outlined in Section , shall be included with all such requests unless the request qualifies for one of the abbreviated forms described in this Section. Concurrence from the appropriate enforcement agency should be included with the study. All requests shall be acknowledged, and the local authorities shall be notified whether additional data will be necessary to substantiate their request. Based on the information received and a field review conducted by ODOT personnel, the District shall determine a reasonable and safe speed limit. If this determination is substantially different from that which was requested, the local authorities may be asked to further substantiate their original request, and a new determination may be made. Following resolution of any comments, the District shall prepare a description of the Speed Zone for the Director s approval using Form (Speed Limit Revision Authorization). The District shall notify the local authorities of ODOT s final action on the proposed Speed Zone. If, based upon the District s final determination, new Speed Limit signs are required, the local authorities shall erect the signs and, upon completion of the work, forward Form (Speed Limit Revision Authorization) to the District. Upon receipt of the completed Form (Speed Limit Revision Authorization), the District shall notify OSHP and other law enforcement agencies as appropriate. A copy of the signed form shall be forwarded to OTE Split Jurisdictions ORC Division (N) addresses situations where the boundary of two local authorities rests on the centerline of a highway and both authorities have jurisdiction over the highway. Aside from Division (N) and the speed zoning process, there is currently no provision to address the inconsistency and confusion caused when responsibility for a section of highway is split between different jurisdictions. The speed limit on the road may differ depending on which side of the road you are traveling. This can be confusing to motorists. When this occurs on ODOT-maintained highways, using the speed zoning process, the District should work with the local jurisdiction(s) to try to address the differences. This may involve: 1. Raising the lower speed limit to match the higher statutory speed. 2. Lowering the higher speed limit to match the lower statutory speed. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

8 3. Determining an altered speed limit in between the existing speed limits that both jurisdictions can agree is appropriate. 4. Leaving the statutory speed limit on each highway section. Although this process will usually involve the District reviewing a speed zoning request submitted by the local jurisdiction, the District should periodically review sections where this split jurisdiction situation occurs on ODOT-maintained highways to consider making a change in the speed limit on the ODOT portion of the highway. The District may also initiate discussions with the local jurisdiction about jointly determining an appropriate altered speed limit for the section of highway. If a local jurisdiction is going to submit a speed zoning request for a roadway section that involves split jurisdictions, the jurisdiction initiating the request shall first contact the adjacent jurisdiction(s) to see if a compromise request can be developed. The speed zone request submitted to the District shall include copies of the related Resolutions (or Ordinances) from all jurisdictions involved Speed Zone Tracking Application When the Speed Zone Study has been properly prepared the review process should take no more than 30 days from receipt of the request in the District to the District notifying the local jurisdiction of ODOT s final determination on the proposed Speed Zone. If the initial request is incomplete or if the District later in the review process requires additional information, this 30-day period begins again when the District receives the information. A software application was implemented in January 2008 to track the status of Speed Zoning requests from local authorities as they are processed by ODOT. Each District enters the required data as requests are received and updates the records as each request is processed. As the 30-day deadline approaches for each request, reminder notices are sent to key District personnel. It is intended that status information from this application will eventually also be accessible to local jurisdictions Narrow and Low-Volume Rural Roads (Form ) For rural roads with a width of 16 feet or less or an ADT of 400 or less, Form may be used to request a reduced speed limit. The data required for a Speed Zone Study for roads in these categories has been reduced and the form has been streamlined. A Speed Check is not required. The form was developed as a Microsoft Excel program; however, it may also be completed by hand. The first sheet of the short form for Narrow and Low-Volume Roads is basically for data input. In the Excel file, when the mouse cursor hovers over the characteristics designations A1, B1, etc. a text description of that category pops up. There are also links to graphic examples of the characteristics categories and crash data samples. The second sheet in the file is a more traditional version of the warrant form: it includes the formulas and makes the calculations, based on the data entered on the first sheet. The third sheet provides a graphic illustration of the roadway characteristics information; and the last sheet provides a sample crash diagram for the roadway section showing which types of crashes should be included when performing a speed study. Table provides additional information about the Roadway Characteristics categories used with this form, and Figures through provide aerial view illustrations to help describe these categories. If the Excel software isn t available, sheet 1 or 2 may be copied, completed by hand and submitted. A Comments section has been provided on the form in case there is additional information the requesting agency wants to bring to the reviewer s attention (see Subsection ) October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

9 Unimproved Highways and Residential and Commercial Subdivision Streets (Form ) As noted in Sections and , the Ohio Revised Code allows Townships (based on an engineering and traffic investigation ) to alter the speed limit on unimproved highways and residential and commercial subdivision streets by Resolution to less than 55 miles per hour, but not less than 25 miles per hour. ODOT has established an abbreviated speed zoning request form to allow the Counties to do the same, by submitting a copy of Form to the ODOT District with a Resolution from the Board of County Commissioners. The definitions for unimproved highway, residential subdivision and commercial subdivision shall be as shown in ORC Division (K), except that they will apply in this case to County Routes. The Comments portion of the form can be used to document information from the study made to support the speed reduction. As noted in Section , it is recommended that the Townships document the reasons for the Speed Zones they establish on unimproved highways and residential and commercial subdivision streets, and when the Speed Limit signs are erected. Form is an example of a form that can be used for such documentation Freeways and High-Speed Multi-Lane Divided Routes Based on ORC Section , the speed limit is generally 65 miles per hour on Interstates, freeways that are Interstate look-alikes, and multi-lane divided NHS Routes in Ohio, unless a speed zone has been established with a lesser speed limit. However, construction, reconstruction and changes in traffic can result in a situation where the current speed limit on a freeway or high-speed multi-lane divided highway may no longer be appropriate. Since the basic Speed Zone Warrant Sheet (Form ) is not set up to address situations involving speed limits over 55 miles per hour, other methods have been developed for reviewing these situations when they arise. For Interstates, freeways that are Interstate look-alikes, Form may be used to submit requests for changes in the speed limit. The ADT/lane is intended to be vehicles per continuous lane. Generally, for multi-lane divided NHS Routes, 65 miles per hour is considered appropriate for expressways with no driveways. For controlled access non-expressways with no driveways, 60 miles per hour is generally considered a more appropriate speed limit; and 55 miles per hour is considered more appropriate when there is no access control and driveways are present. However, this criteria is not intended to be rigid. It is recognized that there may be cases where exceptions are appropriate. For example, a single drive added in a several mile section of an expressway would not be considered sufficient by itself to warrant lowing the speed limit to 60 miles per hour. Also, for a non-expressway section with no driveways between two expressway sections it may be appropriate to consider a 65 miles per hour speed limit. As with other speed zoning situations, there may be a need to go 5 miles per hour one way or the other to address other considerations, such as those noted in Subsection Although developed initially to address multi-lane divided NHS Routes in Ohio, the above criteria may be used as appropriate to address other high-speed multi-lane divided highways Speed Zones in Temporary Traffic Control Zones It has been determined that a 10 mile per hour reduction in the speed limit is appropriate for certain types of temporary traffic control zones. The current guidelines are described in Subsection This process is being reviewed and we expect to develop an abbreviated speed zoning form later this year (2008). (October 17, 2008) October 23,

10 Speed zones in construction work zones are reviewed and approved as part of the plan development process. If a change is needed once the project has begun, a separate request shall be submitted. Also, a record should be kept of when the last Speed Limit sign for the temporary zone was removed, and project files should document the speed limit for each day of the project Speed Zone Studies General Generally, a Speed Zone Study used to support a request for alteration of a speed limit should include Forms (Speed Zone Warrant Sheet), and Form (Speed Check Form) and a scaled area map, sketch, or aerial view to identify the location of the proposed zone. Alternative short form study formats have been developed to address certain situations involving: narrow or low-volume rural roads, unimproved County Roads, residential and commercial County subdivision streets, freeways and high-speed divided highways, and temporary traffic control zones. These are addressed in Sections , , and , respectively. If conditions are not relatively consistent throughout the section under study, consideration should be given to splitting the study area into shorter sections. Turning lanes, or other special lanes, are not normally used in this calculation Field Review A field review of the roadway section shall be made noting various physical conditions along and adjacent to the highway and identifying where crashes have occurred. The Speed Study Data Sheet (Form ) or a similar document may be useful in consolidating this information. (Form provides a completed sample of this form, using symbols from Table ) The field review should consider: 1. Roadway width, width of lanes, width of berm, setbacks of the buildings, distances to any fixed objects within 10 feet of the pavement edge, and type and condition of the pavement surface should also be shown. 2. On ODOT-maintained routes SLM log points shall be used. A 1 inch = 0.1 mile scale should be used along the centerline of the roadway. Lateral dimensions need not be scaled. 3. The review should consider features 500 feet beyond each end of the proposed zone. 4. Pavement marking or restricted sight distances less than 600 feet, signals and flashers, and Warning and Regulatory Signs. 5. The number of, and point at which, more than five pedestrians per hour cross or walk on the pavement. 6. The number and type of crashes that occurred in the last three years. 7. Test runs should be made; however, these will also be conducted by the District personnel reviewing requests submitted to ODOT. a. Test runs should be made by driving as fast as it is comfortably safe. b. Test runs should be made so that other traffic will not delay the test car. c. The speed should be recorded at a range of 0.10 to 0.25 mile interval or more. d. The average speed of three test runs should be determined in each direction October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

11 Speed Check (Form ) Except when using one of the abbreviated study formats described in Sections through , or a summary sheet resulting from a mechanical speed check device and its associated software, a speed check using Form (Speed Check Form) or a similar form, shall be included in the study. 1. Speed checks may be taken with any device that will indicate vehicle speed with an accuracy of +10 percent. 2. Record speeds of 100 vehicles for each direction of travel (observation need not exceed one hour even if less than 100 vehicles are recorded traveling in each direction). 3. Speed checks should be taken at the 1/3 points (total of four checks) for zones mile in length, and at mile intervals for zones over 1 mile in length Speed Zone Warrant Sheet (Form ) This form should be used in analyzing speed reduction requests that do not fall into the categories discussed in Sections through for the abbreviated Speed Zone request forms. The data collected from the field review of the location and the following information are used to complete Form (Speed Zone Warrant Sheet). 1. Highway Development consists of evaluating the extent of building development and classification of intersections. These components are described in Table Intersections at the end of the study area should not be counted. The building development and intersection classification calculations are added and then the total is divided by the length (in miles) of the zone. 2. Roadway Features consists of evaluating the roadway design characteristics including lane width, shoulders curves and grades. Table defines the Roadway Feature components. It is recognized that shoulder features may not be consistent throughout the roadway section under study. A judgment will need to be made to determine the most prominent design, unimproved or improved, and width. The names of the crossroads should be noted in the Comments section th-Percentile Speed is determined by taking spot speed observations during weekday off-peak periods. Spot speed checks should be taken to reflect only free-flowing vehicles. A vehicle is considered free flow if there is a minimum of five seconds gap (headway) from the other vehicle ahead of it, and it is not accelerating or decelerating for other reasons. If it is not possible to observe free-flow conditions, then the 85th-percentile speed of all vehicles should be increased 5 to 10 miles per hour to approximate the freeflow 85th-percentile speed. If the 85th-percentile speed of several speed checks varies considerably and is in more than one range in the warrant analysis, average the speed or select the most representative speed. 4. Pace is the ten mile per hour range of speeds containing the greatest number of observed speeds. If the paces of several speed checks vary considerably and are in more than one range in the warrant analysis, average the pace or select the most representative pace. 5. Crashes/MVM - intersection crashes not on the approach to the section under study should not be included in the evaluation. Crashes at horizontal curves should be considered only after all appropriate Warning and Advisory Speed signs are in place. Caution needs to be exercised in applying the crash experience if there is an over representation of crashes caused by animals, the environment (such as ice), impaired drivers, vehicle defects, construction, etc. It is desirable to consider a review of crashes (October 17, 2008) October 23,

12 over a three-year period; however, crash data for one year is acceptable if more is not available. Copies of the crash reports, or a list documenting the location and type of each crash, shall be submitted with the request. 6. Test Run data is recorded by the District when reviewing the speed zoning request and the information is shown on the form because the average test run speed is beneficial in supporting the spot speed data as reflecting free-flow conditions. Also it is beneficial in comparing or matching the fit of the spot speed data to the full length of the section under study Additional Information/Considerations There may be a need to consider adjusting the speed limit more than normal rounding to the nearest five miles per hour of the calculated speed as reflected in the speed study. Therefore, each Speed Zone request form includes a provision for noting Comments/Additional Information. This space has been provided for the requestor to note any additional information that might be of interest to the reviewer in considering the request. Items to consider or additional information to provide when recommending a speed limit different than the calculated value may include: 1. A study area near or adjacent to an incorporated area or other warranted speed reduction(s). 2. Maintaining uniformity of speed limits within a contiguous section of highway. 3. Truck volumes along with the lane width should be considered, i.e., Volumes: < 5% Low impact/consideration 5% to 10% Moderate impact/consideration > 10% High impact/consideration An effective width of 20 feet is considered adequate only for low-volume roads where meeting and passing are infrequent and the truck volumes are low. 4. Land along the study area is generally fully developed based on local zoning and/or local subdivision regulations. 5. Other conditions: a. A large number of driveways with limited visibility. b. The results of the test runs are not representative of the 85th-percentile or calculated speed. c. Abnormal traffic volume flows. d. A large number of horizontal and vertical curves requiring speed reductions. e. The use of the road as related to access vs. mobility (e.g., functional classification). f. An unincorporated area that looks to the driver the same as an incorporated area. g. Large number of items that affect the assured clear stopping distance of the driver. h. Volume of pedestrian traffic and/or official signed bike routes. i. Proximity to a school October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

13 6. Photographs may also be helpful in describing features of particular concern Withdrawal of Authorization The withdrawal of the authorization for a Speed Zone requires a traffic engineering study/investigation and, insofar as is applicable, shall be accomplished in the same manner in which it was established. Form (Withdrawal of Issued Speed Zone Authorization) is used to document the withdrawal of any Speed Zone approved by ODOT. When an unimproved highway is improved, any Speed Zones established for it based on it being unimproved shall be withdrawn, basically using the same process by which the zone was established. Form can be used, with the explanation noted in the Comments section. If a road is improved so that it no longer qualifies as a narrow road for speed zoning purposes, any Speed Zones established on it as a narrow road shall be withdrawn. The fact that the speed limit had been lowered previously because it was a narrow road, can be noted in the Comments portion of the Speed Zone request form if a speed reduction is requested for the improved highway. This would also apply if the ADT on a road increases to where it would no longer be classified as a low-volume road. For speed zones in construction work zone, a record should be kept of when the last Speed Limit sign for the altered speed limit was removed. Project files should document the speed limit for each day of the project Documentation Table shows the range of Revision Numbers to be used by each District for Speed Zones. These numbers shall be used on Forms and The District shall retain the documentation used in establishing Speed Zones in their permanent files. Originals of the official document authorizing the issuance or withdrawal, as well as any originals of local requests or resolutions, shall also be retained permanently in District files. A copy of the signed authorizations (Forms or Form ), including date of sign erection or removal, as appropriate, shall be forwarded to OTE. For purposes of maintaining a statewide inventory and historical record, an inventory of Speed Zones shall be maintained by OTE. Speed Zone files are available for downloading from the OTE website and the ODOT internal network O drive at O:\Traffic\regulations. The electronic files are updated, depending on current workload, as revisions are received (quarterly as a minimum). (October 17, 2008) October 23,

14 Intentionally blank October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

15 1204 PARKING CONTROL ZONES General As noted in OMUTCD Section 2B.39, ORC Section establishes certain parking prohibitions and ORC Section notes additional provisions related to parking locations and provisions. In addition, Section addresses the prohibition of parking upon the paved or main traveled part of the highway, and addresses the prohibition of parking on private property. Special legal authority is required to establish parking controls at any type of location not covered under existing laws. For rural state highways, these Parking Control Zones must be authorized by the Director. In municipalities, such authority is granted by an Ordinance passed by the Council or by other local legal authority. The adoption of a Resolution by County Commissioners or Township Trustees provides similar authority in rural jurisdictions. Any regulation established other than those specified in ORC Sections , and A through C shall be indicated by the use of signs Procedure for Authorizing Parking Control Zones As noted in Section , ODOT has no responsibility for Parking Control Zones on local roads or private property. Requests for Parking Control Zones on ODOT-maintained highways are submitted through the District office. As noted in Section , an engineering study is conducted to determine if a Parking Control Zone is appropriate. Once a determination has been made to establish a Parking Control Zone, the District shall forward the parking control proposal to the appropriate OSHP District Office for review and comment. Following resolution of the OSHP comments, if any, the District shall prepare a description of the Parking Control Zone for the Director s approval using Form (Establishment of No- Parking Restrictions). Following approval, the District shall erect the appropriate Parking Control signs, record the dates on Form , and notify the OSHP and other law enforcement agencies as appropriate Engineering Study Chapter 1204 (Parking Control Zones) should be reviewed prior to submitting the study. The engineering study used to support a request for a Parking Control Zone shall include a field survey conducted to acquire necessary data to complete Form (Field Report on Parking Practices). It should also include a sketch of the location and/or photographs to document the physical conditions noted in the survey report Withdrawal of Authorization The withdrawal of the authorization for a Parking Control Zone requires an engineering study and, insofar as is applicable, shall be accomplished in the same manner in which it was established. Form (Withdrawal of Issued No-Parking Restrictions) is used to document the withdrawal Documentation Table establishes Revision Numbers to be used by each District for Parking Control Zones. These numbers shall be used on Forms and (October 17, 2008) October 23,

16 The District shall retain the reports used in establishing the Parking Zone in their permanent files. Originals of the official document authorizing the regulation shall also be retained permanently in District files. A copy of the signed authorizations, including date of sign erection, shall be forwarded to the Office of Traffic Engineering (OTE). For purposes of maintaining a statewide inventory and historical record, an inventory of Parking Zones shall be maintained by OTE. No Passing Zone files are available for downloading from the ODOT internal network O drive at O:\Traffic\regulations. The electronic files are updated, depending on current workload, as revisions are received (quarterly as a minimum) OTHER ZONES As noted in Chapter 1201, Traffic Control Zones also include Pedestrian Safety Zones, Loading Zones, No-Passing Zones and Temporary Traffic Control Zones (Work Zones). No-Passing Zones are addressed in OMUTCD Part 3. Temporary Traffic Control Zones are addressed in OMUTCD Part 6 and TEM Part October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

17 1210 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STUDIES As noted in Section 130-2, OMUTCD Section 1A.09 states that the decision to use a particular device at a particular location should be made on the basis of either an engineering study or the application of engineering judgment. An engineering study is also required in various sections of the Ohio Revised Code (ORC). Definitions of the terms engineering study and engineering judgment are provided in OMUTCD Section 1A.13. The scope of the study will depend on the specifics of a particular situation. The ITE Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies (see Section 193-9) is useful in providing guidance on preparing, conducting and analyzing different types of traffic studies. Additional information about specific types of studies (e.g., Safety Studies, Speed Studies, Ball Banking Studies and the Systematic Signal Timing & Phasing Program) is provided in this Part of the TEM. Engineering studies related to Speed Zones and Parking Zones are discussed in Chapters 1203 and 1204, respectively. Safety Study guidelines are addressed in Chapters 1211 and 1212, and various other traffic engineering studies are addressed in Chapter Revised October 17, 2008 October 23,

18 Intentionally blank October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

19 1211 NON-FREEWAY LOCATION SAFETY STUDY GUIDELINES General A safety study is a type of engineering study (OMUTCD Section 1A.13) that provides an analysis of roadway and traffic-related data to determine the possible cause of an identified crash pattern at an intersection or highway section. The study also addresses alternative countermeasure(s) meant to mitigate the crash pattern(s). Non-Freeway Location safety studies are on two-lane and four-lane roadway sections, intersections, and urban arterials. The safety study is localized to a segment or an intersection. Roadway and traffic crash data is analyzed to develop countermeasure(s) to mitigate the crashes specific to a given location only. These safety study guidelines are for use by ODOT personnel, consultants and local jurisdictions conducting minor (spot location) safety studies and preparing reports. By establishing a uniform format for ODOT safety studies and providing direction for completing safety study reports, these guidelines are intended to assure the completeness of a study and to expedite review and analysis of the reports Table of Contents Non-Freeway safety study reports shall have a Table of Contents (see Figure ) Title Page The report shall have a title page and it should show the District, County, Route, Section, High Crash Location Identification System (HCLIS) Number (#), Hot Spot Number (#), the year of the Safety Annual Work Program (SAWP), congestion location and rank (as applicable), study completion date, and a location map (see Figure ) Executive Summary General Every safety study report for a Non-Freeway Location shall include an Executive Summary, which can be used as an overall summary of the report. The following sub-sections outline the information that should be included in this Summary Purpose and Need Statement This part of the Executive Summary is used to identify the location being studied and give the reasons for conducting the safety study. For Non-Freeway studies, on two-lane and four-lane roadway sections and intersections, the safety study is localized to a segment or an intersection. Roadway and traffic crash data is analyzed to develop countermeasure(s) to mitigate the crashes specific to a given location. Non-Freeway safety studies are completed during Step 2 for Major and Minor Projects and PDP Step 1 for Minimal Projects. Example 1 The intersection of U.S. 250 & Kidron Road has been selected for analysis and study based traffic and safety deficiencies of the existing roadway. The roadway is ranked #305 in the 2001 HCLIS for the safety program. The present facility is operating at level of service F for the current and projected conditions. The purpose of this study is to efficiently serve existing and future traffic columns and reduce the number and severity of collisions. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

20 Example 2 This section of road appears on District 5's 1999 listing of high crash locations, it is rated #348 in the State. The purpose of this report is to study this location and analyze the crashes to determine what, if any, actions can be taken to reduce these crashes Background This section of the Executive Summary is used to identify the location being studied, type of facility, type of traffic control, history of problems or crashes and reason for the study. Example 1 This section of U.S. 20 is between the intersection of S.R. 58 and the four-lane section, which begins approximately 1 mile west of the interchange with S.R This portion of U.S. 20 is fairly straight and flat and it is marked with a single dashed center line except at the intersection of S.R. 58 where there is an exclusive left-turn lane on U.S. 20. The section between SLM 6.60 and SLM 7.10 appears on the 1997 HCLIS as location #261 and on the District s AWP as location #33. However, a longer section was studied due to complaints received regarding the transition from the four-lane section to the two-lane section. The complaints were received after two fatal crashes (one in 6/98 and one in 7/98) in which the U.S. 20 westbound vehicle traveled left of center and struck an eastbound vehicle head on. However, it does not appear as though the westbound drivers were confused by the transition, nor did it appear that they thought they were still on the four-lane section of highway. According to witness statements, there were no other westbound vehicles in the vicinity or any objects in the roadway. Therefore, they were not attempting to pass another vehicle or swerve to avoid an object. Both westbound drivers gradually crossed over the center line striking the eastbound vehicles. Example 2 This approximately 1.16 mile section of S.R. 56 is located in Pickaway County. It is part of the rural state highway system under the jurisdiction of District 6 of the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT). The section under study, log point to 27.60, begins at the intersection of S.R. 159 and S.R. 56 and extends in an easterly direction just beyond and including the Township Road (T.R.) 62 and S.R. 56 intersection. The project limits extend longitudinally 1000 feet along the center line at intersections and 200 feet laterally from the center line along the entire length of the study area. Based on information supplied by District 6, PIC to was ranked #135 on the 1997 HCLIS and #290 on the Department s 1998 HCLIS. Example 3 This segment is located in central Knox County in Morris Township. It begins 1.20 miles north of the City of Mt. Vernon. It ends 3.50 miles south of the Village of Fredricktown. This section of S.R. 13 is curved and on a steep grade while crossing the CSX railway. S.R. 13 is generally straight and level north and south of this section. The CSX railroad crossing is at the mile marker Possible Causes The possible causes or deficiencies in the roadway location are identified in this section of the report through detailed analysis of crash patterns, roadway conditions, existing traffic control, traffic volumes, vehicle speeds, etc October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

21 Example The safety problems identified at this location are as follows: The sight distance for the south approach of Line Rd. is obstructed. There are an insufficient number of gaps for Line Rd. traffic to pull onto U.S. 36. There are no exclusive turn lanes to separate left turns from the rest of the traffic stream. The radii at the intersection are not large enough to allow heavy vehicles to turn easily Recommended Countermeasure and Cost Countermeasure(s) recommended by a safety study may result in a project that follows the Minimal, Minor or Major Projects process as defined by the Project Development Process (PDP) Manual. If a project involves work that will be constructed by ODOT forces or under a purchase order, the requirements of the PDP Manual do not apply. Recommended countermeasures and their related costs are also noted in the Executive Summary. A recommended countermeasure is a highway safety treatment or corrective activity designed to alleviate a safety problem or a potentially hazardous location. The cost of every countermeasure is the cost of improvement through force account or contract work and should be included with every countermeasure identified. All countermeasures should address the possible causes identified earlier. Example The trees and brush on the southwest corner of the intersection should be removed to allow 800 feet of sight distance. The estimated cost for this countermeasure is $$$$$. A traffic signal is warranted and should be installed. The estimated cost for this countermeasure is $$$$$. Left-turn lanes should be installed on U.S. 36 to correct the safety problems. Left-turn lanes should be installed on Line Rd. to optimize the operation of the traffic signal. The estimated cost for this countermeasure is $$$$$. The corner radii should be improved to 45 feet and berms should be stabilized. The estimated cost for this countermeasure is $$$$$ Existing Conditions Condition Diagram (Required) The condition diagram is a to scale drawing of the most important physical conditions of an intersection or section of a roadway. It is used to relate the crash patterns found on the collision diagram with their probable causes to physical features on and near the roadway. It also documents the site conditions that exist. The following items should be located by reference to a benchmark that can be identified in the field at any time. A title block identifying the location shall be used consistently in all drawings. See Figure for an example of an existing condition diagram for a roadway section and Figure for an intersection Roadway Features Required The following features shall be shown in the drawing or in the related descriptive text: 1. Intersections: Identify by name, type of pavement (if applicable) and width of street. 2. Traffic Control Devices (signs, signals and pavement markings) at the intersection. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

22 3. Section: Identify by county, route and log point in the title block of the drawing. 4. North arrow and match line if more than one page. 5. Pavement Markings: Center Line, No Passing Zones, Auxiliary Markings, Stop Lines, Crosswalks, etc. 6. Signs: All signs within the right-of-way, including non-omutcd signs, sign sizes (optional). 7. Pavement and shoulder widths and any surface irregularities. 8. Speed limits on all approaches. 9. Driveways: Identify type of pavement of drive (concrete, asphalt, grass or gravel), and use (residential or commercial) when applicable. 10. Show Corporation Lines. 11. Curb: Identify type of curb, height, etc. (detail information about the curb is optional). 12. Median: Identify type of median (grass, concrete, asphalt, etc.) and width. 13. Cross-corner sight distance at intersection or driveway with crashes. 14. Bridges and culverts, if involved in the accident. 15. Legend is required when using symbols on the diagram. 16. Other items that may be contributing factors Roadway Features If Applicable When applicable, the following items should also be included: 1. Show evidence of parking within the right-of-way, if any. 2. Utility/Strain Poles: If involved in crash or sight distance restriction. 3. Guardrail: Include distance from edge of pavement, type of end treatment and height of guardrail (distance and height of guardrail optional). 4. Fire Hydrants: If involved in crash or sight distance restrictions. 5. Highway lighting. 6. Widths of drive, street number address (optional): Commercial or residential, any restricted movement. 7. Catch basins (optional). 8. Manholes (optional). 9. Vegetation: If contributing factor to the crash problem. 10. Trees in the right-of-way: Identify by diameter if contributing to crash problem October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

23 11. Roadside features: Steep grades, ditch locations along the roadside, but not behind guardrail Physical Condition Writeup (Optional) The physical condition writeup explains the type of location, type of roadway, traffic control devices in place, traffic and any operational deficiencies related to the location. Example 1 S.R. 13 is a two-lane asphaltic concrete roadway running north and south. The pavement is now in poor condition. It is 24 feet wide with berms approximately 2 feet wide. The sight distance from C.R. 13, also known as Green Valley Road, looking south across the railroad tracks is 340 feet. Example 2 S.R. 56 is a rural two-lane roadway. The layout of S.R. 56 within the study area consists of horizontal and vertical curves, residential drives and a commercial drive. The driveways in the study section were counted and their distance from S.R. 159 measured. Standard center line and edge line markings exist throughout the study area. The curves between S.R. 159 and T.R. 62 are marked with warning signs and Advisory Speed Plaques. A number of vehicle types travel this roadway, including semi-trucks, farm equipment and horse-drawn buggies. The intersection of S.R. 56 and S.R. 159 is a four-way stop with an all-way red intersection flasher. Each leg of the intersection is 21 feet in width from edge line to edge line with a 2- foot paved berm and varying gravel berm beyond the edge of the paved berm. The two State Routes come together to form an approximate 90 degree intersection. Stop lines and Stop Ahead signs are on all four approaches of the intersection. D-1 assemblies and standard route direction and confirmation markers are also on each approach of the intersection. Example 3 The intersection under study is located approximately a third of a mile west of the City of Delaware corporation limits, as shown in Figure. It is unsignalized with STOP signs on the approaches of South Section Line Road. Signs on South Section Line Road also indicates that U.S. 36 cross traffic does not stop (see pictures included in the Appendix). U.S. 36 runs mostly east-west, with a skew to southwest-northeast. South Section Line Road runs northsouth and intersects other major traffic carriers; primarily Airport Road, U.S. 42 and U.S. 37. Average daily traffic on U.S. 36 and South Section Line Road is 8,610 and 4,575 vehicles, respectively. The posted speed limit is 45 mph on South Section Line Road and 55 mph on U.S. 36. There is no street lighting at the intersection. There are no exclusive turn lanes on any of the approaches. There is a slight crest on the east approach of U.S. 36 and a stand of trees on the southwest corner of the intersection Collision Diagrams A collision diagram is a schematic drawing that has been compiled from a series of individual crash reports relative to a specific location (intersection or section), which shows the direction the vehicles traveled prior to contact, and pedestrians whose presence contributed to a collision. A minimum of three years of the latest crash data should be used to draft the collision diagram. See Figures and for sample intersection collision diagrams and Figure for a roadway section collision diagram. The following information should be included in the collision diagram: (October 17, 2008) October 23,

24 1. Title box with county, route, section, Hot Spot or congestion designation, HCLIS year and rank (if applicable), and crash data time frame (e.g., 1/1/97-12/31/99). The title box should also have the initials of the person it was drawn by and the date it was completed. 2. Schematic of location: Each approach should be labeled and the north arrow shown. 3. Each crash should include the following information as a minimum: date, time and pavement conditions. This information is typically shown on the line for the driver at fault. Any other pertinent information about the accident, or driver at fault, should also be shown (e.g., injury, intoxicated, ran STOP sign or red light, etc.). 4. Legend key to denote all symbols used must be included in the collision diagram Crash Data Crash data helps identify crash patterns which are indicative of possible safety problems. A minimum of three years of the latest crash data shall be used for review of crash data and analysis. Crash summaries should include summaries by crash type, severity, contributing factors, environmental conditions, time periods and other data as applicable. They should be useful for easy comparison and trend analysis. See Figure for typical crash data and analysis Crash Analysis The crash analysis procedures include the study and analysis of crash characteristics of a site. The characteristics such as crash type, severity, contributing factors, environmental conditions and time period data are analyzed. The detailed analysis of these characteristics is conducted to identify safety problems and their possible causes. Example 1 Crash reports from January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1998 were obtained. During this fiveyear period, a total of sixty-one crashes occurred within the study limits. Of the sixty-one crashes, ten were animal crashes (deer) and one was due to a vehicle defect. Of the remaining fifty, six were rear-end, nine were angle, five were sideswipe, twenty-seven were fixed object and three were left-turn crashes. Sixteen of the crashes involved injury, but none were fatal. Of the fifty crashes in the study area, thirty-eight occurred during the day and twenty-nine on dry pavement. The crash diagrams show the approximate location of the crashes in the study area. At the intersection of S.R. 56 and S.R. 159 (plate ---), five crashes occurred, four angle and one left turn. All five of the crashes took place during the day, and the vehicle that was traveling north on S.R. 159 was at fault in each situation. The crash diagrams also showed seven crashes occurring 0.20 miles west of T.R. 62. Five of the seven were fixed object crashes where drivers were unable to maintain control of their vehicles on the horizontal curve (four of the fixed object crashes occurred on the same day, due to icy conditions). The other two crashes were sideswipe passing and sideswipe meeting. All of the vehicles that caused these crashes were traveling westbound. This indicates a possible skid problem in the westbound lane, drivers traveling at an excessive speed, and/or unsafe geometry. The diagrams show four crashes that occurred in the vicinity of the Mini Mart gas/convenient store drive (plate---). Vehicles turning left into the Mini Mart driveway in front of opposing traffic caused two of the crashes. These crashes may have been caused by limited sight distance due to a sag vertical curve just east of the Mini Mart drive October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

25 Example 2 Crash records were obtained for the years of The database was checked for completeness with copies of actual police reports. One of the fixed object crashes involved a heavy vehicle making a right turn from westbound U.S. 36 to northbound South Section Line Road. Angle crashes may also be caused by high speeds on the major street, indicating the need for a speed study. Inadequate sight distance may also play a role in the number of angle crashes. Excessive speed on the east and west approaches may also be a cause, meaning that major street traffic cannot stop in time when confronted with stopped traffic waiting to turn onto the minor street. The number of rear-end crashes indicates that roadway lighting may be inadequate, but the following study of crashes by environmental conditions shows that lighting does not influence crashes at this location. The failure to yield and running a STOP sign circumstances resulted in angle crashes in the intersection. This emphasizes the problem of inadequate gaps for South Section Line Road traffic to pull out. The rear-end crashes on U.S. 36 were a result of drivers following too close. The failure to control and driver inattention circumstances resulted in fixed object struck crashes on U.S. 36. Most of the contributing circumstances of crashes at this location are correctable. Of the crashes that occurred during wet pavement conditions, most were angle crashes in the intersection. Only percent of all crashes were rear-end crashes occurring during wet pavement condition. This indicates that skidding is not a problem. The majority of crashes at this location occurred during daylight, indicating that street lighting was also not a problem. A significant percentage of crashes occur during the peak volume times. Angle crashes made up the majority of crashes during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. This also indicates that Line Road traffic has difficulty finding adequate gaps in U.S. 36 traffic. To summarize, the possible causes of angle and rear-end crashes are lack of sufficient gaps in major street traffic, excessive speeds on the major street, lack of exclusive turn lanes at the intersection, and sight distance problems. The possible causes, as determined by the crash study, are used to determine areas of further study. These possible causes may be eliminated with further study. Example 3 The crash history indicates that angle and turning crashes are 82 percent of the total. We will analyze these because they show identifiable patterns. Approximately 55 percent of the angle crashes occurred from the north approach and 45 percent from the south. The 1999 traffic count shows a traffic signal is justified for six hours by Warrant No.1. This is two hours less than the requirements, but if the hourly volumes are projected for five years at a growth rate of 3 percent per year, the eight hours are satisfied. The installation of a traffic signal would create the gaps for traffic to safely enter U.S. 62. The turning crashes and rear ends on U.S. 62 should be reduced by the installation of left-turn storage lanes. The ODOT L&D Manual and the Highway Capacity analysis were used to determine the appropriate turn lanes, signal phasing and level of service. This information is part of the report. In addition to the traffic volumes generated by tourists coming to Amish Country and passing through this intersection, the crest vertical curve on U.S. 62 is limiting the needed intersection sight distance and stopping sight distance. These can be improved by lowering the crest and filling the sag just northeast of the intersection. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

26 Recommendations The recommendations resulting from a safety study are based upon identified safety deficiencies at the location. Several factors need to be considered when developing countermeasures and recommendations. For example, they may include engineering, enforcement, driver education or a combination of factors. The recommendations should be based on knowledge of the effectiveness of the improvement being recommended in similar situations. Improvements should be based upon the traffic and site conditions. A combination of improvements may be the best practical countermeasure for a location. All practical improvements, including do nothing, should be identified and considered and analyzed for safety so that no feasible alternative is overlooked. Example 1 From the crash analysis and field observation, it is apparent that the roadway needs to be widened. Due to the recent widening that was completed on the east end of the section, only the western portion of the section from approximately mile marker 2 to Shaker Rd., east junction, needs to be improved. This would create a project length of approximately 1.5 miles. The traveled lanes should be widened to 12 feet and the shoulder should be widened to 8 feet. The shoulder should be bituminous surface treated, and half of it should be full-depth pavement. The three existing culverts should be extended to minimize the need for guardrail. Guardrail should be installed at all steep drop-off areas. Example 2 Problem areas are the railroad intersection located within the S curve, and the intersection located north of the track. The following actions are recommended: work with the County Engineer to realign County Road; apply for safety funding to realign S.R. 13; and get crossing lights and gates installed at the highway-rail grade crossing. Example 3 1. Construct left-turn storage lanes on the U.S. 62 approaches. 2. Construct right-turn storage lane on the C.R. 77 north approach. 3. Construct fully-actuated traffic signal. 4. Replace existing intersection lighting. Example 4 1. Remove trees and brush on southwest corner to allow 800 feet of sight distance. 2. Install a traffic signal. 3. Install an eastbound left-turn lane on U.S. 36 with a length of 345 feet. 4. Install a westbound left-turn lane on U.S. 36 with a length of 356 feet. 5. Install north and southbound left-turn lanes on south Section Line Road with lengths of 150 feet. 6. Improve corner radii to a minimum of 45 feet and stabilize the berms Design Evaluation In addition to traffic related issues that influence the recommendations of the safety study, there are non-traffic design issues that may have an impact on project scope, schedule and cost. When October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

27 developing the recommended solutions for a safety study, these design issues should be evaluated at a conceptual level to determine their impacts on the project. For studies where the recommended solution results in a project that follows the PDP, these issues are identified using a using a Red Flag Summary (RFS) checklist. For Major Projects, an RFS should be prepared in accordance with the PDP Manual. The completed RFS should be included as an appendix to the safety study and/or the Existing and Future Conditions Report. For Minor Projects, an abbreviated RFS for Safety Projects form (see Form ) may be used in lieu of the RFS form presented in the PDP Manual. The completed RFS form should be included as an appendix to the safety study. For Minimal Projects, RFS issues should be evaluated. However, a written RFS is not required. The Design Evaluation section of the safety study should summarize any design issues identified during the RFS analysis which should be considered in future plan development activities or that are likely to have a significant impact on project cost. Example 1 Using 12'lanes and 8'graded shoulders may have an impact on a possible wetland on the south side of S.R. 56 approximately 0.5 miles west of Shaker Road. The area should be evaluated to determine if a wetland is present. If this area is determined to be a wetland, the designer should investigate minimizing impacts by widening to the north. Example 2 Due to the number of residential homes located in close proximity to the roadway on both sides of S.R. 13, it is desired to use a closed drainage system to minimize right-of-way impacts caused by widening the roadway. If significant impacts are encountered using a closed drainage system and full graded shoulder criteria, the designer should evaluate the use of a reduced graded shoulder width and obtaining a design exception. Example 3 An existing bridge cannot be utilized for part width construction due to the configuration of the existing substructure. In order to facilitate maintenance of traffic, the proposed alignment should be established such that it does not fall within the limits of the existing bridge. The existing bridge will be used to maintain traffic during construction of the proposed bridge. Example 4 In order to provide left-turn storage on U.S. 62, the existing bridge must be widened. This bridge is in poor condition and must be replaced rather than widened. Example 5 A sanitary pump station is located at the corner of U.S. 36 and Section Line Road. This pump station will need to be relocated in order to construct the proposed turn lanes Rate of Return The rate of return determines the benefits expected to be obtained by an improvement. It is a measure of expected yield or effective return of the safety countermeasure. This technique computes an estimated interest rate for a safety countermeasure at which the estimated net present annual worth of the countermeasure minus the estimated improvement cost is equal to zero. In this case, the net present annual worth of the countermeasure is the expected dollar (October 17, 2008) October 23,

28 value of safety benefits in terms of crashes prevented. The estimated improvement costs include those expected costs required for implementation and maintenance of the countermeasure. Example: See Figure Photos Include relevant photos that show the probable cause of crashes at the location studied. Standard photographs shall be included as follows: 1. Intersections: a. 200 feet, 600 feet and 1000 feet from intersection. b. Cross-corner sight distance. 2. Highway Sections: a. At 400 foot intervals for the complete length of the section; and b. Extending 400 feet at each end. Example: See Figures and Other Issues and Data Other relevant data and information are included when such information is essential in garnering support of the study and the countermeasures being recommended. Relevant information may include proposed developments, schools, shopping malls, public concerns/petitions, newspaper articles, and public and law enforcement officer s concerns Appendix The Appendix will include related material such as that shown below to further document and enhance the quality of the safety study. The references shown for the different topics are just a guide and are not meant to be the only source. These topics are covered by many traffic engineering manuals, including ITE handbooks, and those should be used as a source for reference. 1. Traffic Volume Count: Required. This is discussed elsewhere in this Part of the TEM and in Chapter 2 of the ITE Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies. 2. Traffic Speed Studies: If applicable. This is discussed Section and in Chapter 3 of the ITE Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies. 3. Crash Summaries: Required. This is discussed in Sections and and Figure Standard Photographs: Required. See Section and Figures and Traffic Signal Warrants: If applicable. See Section and OMUTCD Part 4 for further information about traffic signal warrants October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

29 6. Other Traffic Studies and Analyses: If applicable. See Chapters 1202, 1203, 1204 and 1213 and the ITE Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies for information about other traffic studies and analyses that may be applicable. Also see OMUTCD Section 1A.11 and Section of this Manual for information additional resources that may be of assistance. 7. Aerial and Other Photos of the Location: Optional. 8. Field Review Notes: Optional. See the Field Review Forms developed as part of the ODOT research report Rural Highway Safety Advisor (RITA). (October 17, 2008) October 23,

30 Intentionally blank October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

31 1212 FREEWAY SAFETY STUDY GUIDELINES General A safety study is a type of engineering study (OMUTCD Section 1A.13) that provides an analysis of roadway and traffic-related data to determine the possible cause of an identified crash pattern at an intersection or highway section. The study also addresses alternative countermeasure(s) meant to mitigate the crash pattern(s). Freeway safety studies are on Interstate and Interstate look-alike corridors. The safety study is a collection of roadway information and traffic and crash data aggregated and analyzed to determine on major urban corridors: crash pattern(s), locations with abnormally high numbers or rates of crashes, and possible countermeasures to lessen these crashes. The purpose of these guidelines is to establish a procedure for conducting these safety studies and preparing the crash information to show realistic visualizations of the crash data on aerial maps/sketches, as well as establishing a uniform format for ODOT safety study reports. The guidelines contain samples of maps/figures to be used when presenting the data to local officials, ODOT employees and the public for review, input and comments. Studying and understanding the crash experience can aid with: locating high crash locations, evaluating design features, and effectively prioritizing and developing roadway improvement projects. By establishing a uniform format for Freeway safety studies, these guidelines should expedite analysis and review of the information. These guidelines are to be used by ODOT personnel, consultants, and any others conducting Freeway safety studies, writing the reports and preparing the presentations for ODOT Table of Contents Freeway safety study reports and presentations shall include a Table of Contents (see Figure ) Title Page The report shall have a title page and it shall show the District, County, Route, Section and PID (if applicable), congestion location(s) and rank, and HCLIS or Hot Spot Number (#), as appropriate. Information on who conducted the study and the date of completion shall be included (see Figure ) Definitions The following shall be defined at the beginning of all Freeway safety studies. Other definitions may be included at the discretion of those conducting the study. 1. Areas of Interest. 2. Area of Influence. 3. Crash Rate. 4. Critical Crash Location. 5. Ramp Related Crashes. 6. Severity Index. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

32 7. Unlogged Data. 8. Weave Area Crashes Executive Summary Purpose and Need Statement The Purpose and Need Statement portion of the Executive Summary should: 1. Identify the location being studied and give the reasons for conducting the Freeway safety study, or the need for safety improvements for projects that are the stand-alone type. 2. Define the time frame for analysis from year - to year. 3. List/show any locations within the study area which are listed in the top 200 HSP (Highway Safety Program) list or Hot Spot List or Congestions Location list (see Figure ). Use the most current listing. This figure should show the area under study, locations on the listings (with the rankings), route numbers/names and a north arrow. The Purpose and Needs Statement needs to be comprehensive, specific, and concise to allow decision-makers and the public to understand the purpose of the study. See the Environmental Process Manual for additional details regarding Purpose and Need Statements. Example Traffic crashes were analyzed to assess the safety issues and select abnormally high crash frequency, crash rate, and crash severity locations along the I-70/I-71 South Innerbelt in downtown Columbus, Ohio. Congestion along this section is a major concern and over the years capacity and safety have declined. This report provides information on high crash locations to assist in the planning of the future construction project and to determine short-term, low-cost improvements at the critical crash locations defined in the study. The crash data for this stretch of I-70/I-71 was collected for three years ( ) and is categorized to look for safety issues on mainline sections, individual ramps, weave areas, and the six areas of interest. Several of the roadway segments under review are on the 2004 HSP (Highway Safety Program) list of top 50 freeway locations for crashes. The HSP locations are chosen based on crash rate, frequency, density, severity, and other factors. The HSP location within the study area is: #172 FRA-IR-71 from Main St to Long St The proposed project is intended to address congestion and safety issues on this section of highway. The purpose of this study is to reduce the number of crashes along this section of roadway Location Details of the location being studied should be provided: the project s beginning and ending log points, the list of crossroads to be included and their limits, and a list/description of interchanges, weaves and areas of interest to be included October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

33 Example The project study area is located in central Summit County, Ohio. The area is bound by I-76 & SR 21 to the west, I-76 & SR 8 to the east, and I-77 & Lovers Lane to the south. Traffic crashes were analyzed for approximately 12 miles of mainline I-76, thirteen interchanges, thirteen weave areas, and six areas of interest. The segment under study: I-76: from to The interchanges under study: I-76 & SR 21 I-76 & Barber Road The weave areas defined in the study area: I-76 EB at SR 21 between the loop ramps I-76 EB from the I-277 entrance ramp to the Kenmore Blvd exit ramp The areas of interest defined in the study area: Norton-Barberton Leg: I-76 west of SR 21 to east of East Avenue North Kenmore Interchange: I-76 and I-77 Interchange Results and Recommendations Briefly summarize the project statistics, the critical crash locations, the major areas of interest and areas of influence. As a minimum, the following data should be included in this summary: 1. Total number of crashes in the study area. 2. Most common crash type in the study area and what percentage of the total crashes this type is. 3. Second most common crash type in the study area and what percentage of the total crashes this type is. 4. Comparison of the average urban interstate crash rate to the crash rates for the segments in the study area. 5. Comparison of the average urban ramp crash rate to the crash rates for the ramps in the study area. 6. Comparison of the average urban interstate severity index to the severity indexes of the segments in the study area. 7. Comparison of the average urban ramp severity index to the severity indexes of the ramps in the study area. 8. Critical segment crash locations. 9. Critical ramp crash locations. 10. Critical weave crash locations. 11. Total number of crashes for each Area of Interest. 12. Total number of crashes for each Area of Influence. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

34 Example The crash data for the three-year period from indicates a total of over 2700 crashes occurred within this study area. This is equivalent to approximately 2.5 crashes per day within the South Innerbelt Study area. The most common crash type in the corridor is rear-end (52% of all crashes). Sideswipe crashes are the next most common type of crash (16%). The average crash rate for urban Interstates in Ohio is 0.94 crashes per million vehicle miles traveled. Seventy-seven percent of the mainline segments studied in the South Innerbelt Corridor are above the statewide average. The average crash rate for urban Interstate ramps in Ohio is crashes per million vehicle miles traveled. Six percent of the ramps studied are above this statewide average. The average severity index for urban Interstates in Ohio is Approximately 60% of the locations analyzed are above this statewide average. The average severity index for urban Interstate ramps in Ohio is Seventeen percent of the ramps studied are above this statewide average. The critical mainline segments and ramp locations within the study area were independently analyzed to determine any roadway features or conditions which led to these crashes. The critical locations within the South Innerbelt Corridor were found to be: Segments: I-70 EB from Souder Avenue to SR 315 I-70 EB from SR 315 to I-71 I-70 WB from S. Fourth St to S. Grant Ave Ramps: I-70 WB to I-71 NB I-71 SB to I-70 EB S. 3rd to I-70/71 WB Weaves: I-71 NB from the Greenlawn entrance ramp to the I-70 EB exit ramp Existing Conditions Physical Condition Write-up Explain the type of location, types of interchanges, number of lanes, any weave areas, existing ADT on mainline segments and ramps, percentage of trucks for the mainline, existing levels of service for mainline segments, speed limits, and other relevant information. This information can be provided in the text and/or on the schematic described below. Example Interstate 76: I-76 is an Interstate traveling west to east through Summit County and the City of Akron. Approximately 12 miles of the Interstate were analyzed (log points 1.16 to ) I-76 carries an average daily traffic (ADT) ranging from 50,000 to 125,000. The I-76 mainline consists of two lanes of travel in each direction west of the I-77 split and three/four lanes in each direction in the overlap area with I-77. The speed limit is posted at 65 miles per hour and decreases to 55 miles per hour east of the Barber Road interchange. To the west of Barber Road is a grass median approximately 35 feet wide separating the opposing directions of travel. East of Barber Road, the grass median is replaced with a concrete barrier October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

35 Ramp Data: The average daily traffic and the ramp length for each of the ramps in the study area are gathered as well as the crash data. The following table is a list of the ramps, the ADT for each ramp, and the ramp length. Ramp Description Ramp Length (miles) Ramp ADT I-71 NB to Red Bank Expressway I-71 SB to Red Bank Expressway Red Bank Expressway to I-71 NB Red Bank Expressway to I-71 SB I-71 NB to Pfeiffer Road I-71 SB to Pfeiffer Road Pfeiffer Road to I-71 NB Pfeiffer Road to I-71 SB Freeway Schematic Diagram The following should be shown in the freeway schematic diagram (see Figure ): 1. North Arrow. 2. Match Line if more than one page. 3. Existing Level of Service with year. 4. Bridges. 5. Segment average daily traffic (ADT), with year. 6. Other Relevant Information Crash Data Investigation General A crash data investigation is a complete evaluation of a location s crash history over the latest three years for which crash data is available and complete. All unlogged crashes (see Section ) for the roadways under study will be properly logged first and included in the data for analysis. Changes due to construction, major maintenance or other temporary situations in nature, during this time period should be noted and discussed with ODOT for determining a course of action. Example of a Temporary Issue The I-275 data may be skewed as it was under construction during 2002 and For the entire three-year period, work zone crashes represented 53.7% of the crashes. Only two percent occurred in The total yearly crashes dropped in The average Work zone crashes in 2002 and 2003 were 144 crashes, which dropped to 94 crashes in (October 17, 2008) October 23,

36 Therefore, to determine a three-year average for the interchange of I-71 & I-275 and the mainline sections on I-275, the 2004 data was the only data used and it was multiplied by three for comparison purposes to other ramps and segments within the study area. The following items shall be collected from the crash reports and used in the Crash Analysis Portion of the safety study report. 1. Location. 2. Date. 3. Direction of travel. 4. Severity (Fatal, Injury, PDO). 5. Crash Type (Fixed Object, Rear End, Angle, Side-Swipe, etc). 6. Time of Day (Day, Night). 7. Road Condition (Wet, Dry, etc). 8. Light Condition (Daylight, Dawn/Dusk, Dark). If trends are noticed in other data that is pertinent to the study it should be documented as well Crash Data Management Managing the crash data shall include dividing the entire project into subgroups. The subgroups shall consist of: 1. Mainline crashes by segment and direction. The segments can be defined by half-mile segments, by interchange to interchange, or other segments based upon the individual study. The report shall describe how the segments are defined. 2. Ramp related crashes by ramp at each interchange and then by beginning, middle or end of the ramp (based on direction of travel). Ramp related crashes are not identifiable in crash report databases. Ramp crashes are grouped with the mainline crashes. Each crash report requires visual inspection of the OH-1 report and then hand coding as a ramp crash. It is then determined whether the crash occurred on the beginning of the ramp (entrance to the ramp), the middle of the ramp, or the end of the ramp (exit from the ramp). To determine if a crash occurred on a ramp, there are several rules of thumb. The following scenarios are considered ramp related crashes: a. A crash with at least one vehicle moving to or from the ramp (no matter where the crash occurred). b. A crash occurring within the entire length of an acceleration lane or deceleration lane. c. A crash occurring within 0.2 miles from the end of the pavement gore on a ramp that turns into an add lane, or a drop lane that becomes a ramp. d. A crash occurring on the cross street and involving a minimum of one vehicle turning onto or off of a ramp October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

37 e. A crash on the cross street anywhere within a lane designated as a turn lane onto the ramp. f. If the OH-1 report states the crash is due to the ramp or a vehicle on the ramp. Figure shows examples of crashes to include as ramp crashes. Figures and are interchanges with the ramps shown in color. 3. Weave area crashes occur where several one-way traffic streams cross one another by merging or diverging maneuvers. They may be considered simple or multiple. A multiple weaving area consists of two or more overlapping weave areas. A multiple weave may also be defined as that portion of a one-way roadway that has two consecutive entrances followed closely by one or more exits, or one entrance followed closely by two or more exits. Weave area crashes include ramp crashes as well as mainline crashes (see Figure ). The weave area crashes are those at the end of the on ramp, the entire mainline between the ramps (from gore area to gore area), and the beginning of the off ramp. If the area between the two ramps is longer than approximately one-half mile, then a weave condition does not exist. Within areas of multiple weaves, an analysis on each individual weave less than one-half mile shall be included, as well as an analysis for the entire weave area as a whole. 4. Cross route crashes per scope of study. If not defined, use limits between the ramps terminals. 5. Areas of Interest crashes are those occurring in areas consisting of several segments and/or ramps/weaves grouped together as one crash problem location. Each Area of Interest shall be defined (including ramps and weaves within the area). For example, an area of interest may be all the ramps within a large interchange along with the segments leading into the interchange. Or an Area of Interest may be all the segments on the Interstate between two major interchanges. Example The data for the South Innerbelt Study was grouped into six Areas of Interest (four sections and two interchanges) to determine which large areas of the South Innerbelt had the majority of the crashes. (Each group included the segments as well as the ramp crashes within the boundaries.) Section 1: Mound Street to Whittier Street on I-70 Greenlawn Avenue to I-70 on I-71 I-70 to Rich Street on SR 315 Section 2: Whittier Street to Grant Avenue on I-70/I-71 Section 3: 18th Street to Miller Avenue on I-70 Section 4: Main Street to Spring Street on I-71 Interchange 1: I-70 & I-71 & SR 315 interchange Interchange 2: I-70 & I-71 East interchange 6. Area of Influence means the area where all upstream crashes for quite a distance or in a general area are affected due to a highly congested or deficient location downstream. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

38 Example I-270 South to I-70 East on the east side of Columbus (the weave between loop ramps) can cause queues that back-up all the way upstream to the Main Street interchange, over 1.5 miles, and on the I-70 West loop ramps and I-70 CD (collector-distributor) lane under I-70 to I-270 South. All these crashes are in the Area of Influence of a very short, congested weave (see Figure ) Unlogged Data At times, the log point is not defined on a crash report at the time the crash report was completed. The unlogged crash report is given a log point of A query shall also be conducted for these crashes. The log points for these crashes shall be found if feasible. Many times reading the officer s written description and using the drawings on the OH-1 Reports and straight line mileage diagrams will be sufficient to determine the log points. Once identified, the unlogged crash reports shall be logged. Any unlogged reports left shall be noted and not used in the analysis Collector-Distributor Data Collector-distributor routes are also not identifiable in crash report databases. Again, each crash report requires visual inspection and then hand coding Crash Summary A database shall be created that includes all the crash report information as well as the newly logged crash reports, ramp information, and collector- distributor information. A total number of crashes for the entire study area as well as each route and interchange is determined. Tables shall be included in the report with the total number of crashes for the mainline route, interchanges, weaves and areas of interest. Example A total of 2327 crash reports were collected and analyzed. A breakdown of the crashes for each route and each interchange are shown below. Route Total Crashes Total Mainline Crashes I I SR Interchange Total Interchange Red Bank Expressway Crashes 46 Stewart Road 16 Kenwood Road 40 US SR Pfeiffer Road 98 I October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

39 Figure is an example of a display of the crash frequency data. It shows the number of crashes for the mainline segments in both directions and for each interchange. This information shall be shown in figure format in the report Crash Analysis General This section of the Freeway safety study looks for and evaluates factors leading to unusually high proportions of crashes. It will help identify driver judgment errors and other factors leading to crash trends. The crash data is looked at in several ways to assure comprehensive review of the data: 1. Crash Summaries. 2. Crash Rates. 3. Severity Index. 4. Critical Crash Location Analysis. 5. Areas of Interest. 6. Areas of Influence Crash Summaries Crash summaries include summaries by crash type, road condition, light condition, crash severity, time periods, and other data as applicable for each mainline segment, ramp, weave area, cross route, area of interest and area of influence. They shall be used for easy comparison among the segments, ramps, etc. in the study as well as in comparison to the Ohio s Interstate averages. The data shall be summarized individually for mainline segments, ramps, weaves, areas of interest and areas of influence. Detailed analyses of these characteristics are used to identify safety problems, their possible causes, and countermeasures The study shall include a summary table for each of the following: 1. Mainline segments, 2. Ramps, 3. Weaves, 4. Areas of Interest, and 5. Areas of Influence. The tables shall include information on number of crashes, type of crashes, road conditions, light conditions and severity. Other data may be represented if desirable. Figures and present examples of these tables. A summary sheet similar to the example in Figure shall also be included. This figure shows data for all the crashes within the study area in its entirety. Data (as published by ODOT) from a minimum of the past three years will be used. Ohio Interstate crash data (averaged from 2000 to 2005) is depicted in Table and can be used as a comparison point. The table includes the percentage of crashes occurring on Ohio Interstates in that particular category (weather condition, road condition, severity, etc.) The table also breaks the data down further into urban Interstates, rural Interstates and ramps. For example, the first number, i.e., 66%, indicates that 66% of the total Interstate crashes in Ohio occurred on dry roadways. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

40 Example After each of the reports was analyzed, a summary review of the crash data for the overall study area revealed the following: (in parentheses is the State average for urban Interstates) Crash Types: Weather Condition: 46% Rear End (41%) 57% Clear (53%) 15% Fixed Object (29%) 24% Cloudy (21%) 13% Angle (11%) 12% Rain (16%) 10% Side Swipe (14%) 5% Snow (8%) Road Condition: Light Condition: 60% Dry (66%) 63% Day (68%) 33% Wet (25%) 2% Dawn (3%) 5% Snow (5%) 2% Dusk (2%) 2% Ice (3%) 33% Dark (27%) Crash Severity: 74% Property Damage Only (72%) 25% Personal Injury (27%) <1% Fatality (only 3 crashes) (<1%) In an effort to determine where and why the majority of crashes occurred within the study area, a more detailed analysis was completed. The analysis looked for areas with a concentrated number of crashes and associated roadway features to determine the conditions which led to these crashes. The detailed analysis charts and graphs are included. The interchange diagrams depict the total number of crashes on each ramp, the number of crashes for each of the locations (beginning, middle or end), as well as the bar charts for each type of crash Crash Rates In order to be able to develop countermeasures to mitigate the effects of crashes, high crash locations need to be identified and contributing factors should be associated with these crashes. One method to identify hazardous locations is to use crash rates. The crash rate is defined as the number of crashes occurring on a segment of roadway per million vehicle miles driven. Crash rates take into account not only the number of crashes, but also the average daily traffic (ADT) volume and the length of the road segment. Crash rates shall be computed for each segment, ramp, weave, and area of interest. Crash Rate = (# crashes x 1,000,000)/(length of segment x average daily traffic x 365 x # years) The sample table in Section provides an example of crash rates Severity Index The severity index is calculated to address locations with high occurrences of fatal and injury crashes. The severity index is calculated as the number of fatal crashes plus injury crashes divided by the total number of crashes for that location. Summary tables for the mainline, ramps, weaves, and areas of interest shall be included within the report showing the total October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

41 crashes, length, volume, crash rate and severity index for each segment, ramp, weave and AOIs. Severity Index = (# fatal crashes + # injury crashes) / # total crashes Example of Crash Rate and Severity Index Calculations Ramp I-71 NB to Red Bank I-71 SB to Red Bank Red Bank to I-71 NB Red Bank to I-71 SB I-71 NB to Stewart Stewart to I- 71 SB Total Crashes Length Volume Crash Rate Fatal Injury Severity Index Crash Analysis Diagrams Each interchange and weave area shall have a diagram included in the study s appendix displaying the crash data as follows: Interchanges: The bottom portion of the figure depicts the crash information (frequency, type and severity) for the entire interchange. The data for each ramp that is required includes: the total number of crashes, the number of crashes per location on the ramp (beginning, middle, and end), and the number of crashes for each type. The type of crash information is shown on a scale of proportions to allow for quick identification of the high crash types on the ramps (see Figures and ). Weave areas: The figure includes an aerial of the weave area studied (including on and off ramps), crash frequency, crash rate, severity index, and crash type. The type of crash information is shown on a scale of proportions to allow for quick identification of the high crash types. The bottom portion of the figure is a diagram depicting the number of lanes and the lane use in the weave area (see Figures and ) Critical Crash Location Analysis Statistical analyses are performed on the data in order to efficiently and effectively locate the segments, ramps and weaves with the highest percentage of crashes or severe crashes in the study area. Once crash frequency, crash rate, and severity index have been calculated for the mainline segments and ramps, a critical crash frequency, crash rate, and severity index is determined. The critical crash locations are determined to be the locations where the frequency of crashes, crash rates, and/or severity index is higher than the MEAN + 1 STANDARD DEVIATION calculated for each. Critical Crash Location = MEAN + 1 STANDARD DEVIATION The MEAN is the average of all the numbers in a set. Identifying the locations with one (1) STANDARD DEVIATION above the mean predicts that approximately 68% of the locations should be less than the expected value, leaving the top 32% as the target critical locations. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

42 This statistical analysis prioritizes the areas and allows ODOT to target the top critical locations. The output is a list of locations that need to be reviewed during the Results and Conclusions portion of the report. Figures through are sample of illustrations of the Critical Crash locations. These figures shall highlight the critical locations along with displaying the crash frequency, crash rate and severity index. One figure should be for mainline segments, one should be for ramps, and one for all critical crash locations. The only other criteria for locations to be included as critical crash locations is that they must have over fourteen total crashes. Example of Critical Crash Location Analysis Ramp Total Crashes Length Volume Crash Rate Fatal Injury Severity Index I-71 to Stewart Rd Stewart Rd to I-71 SB I-71 NB to Kenwood Rd Kenwood Rd to I-71 SB I-71 NB to US I-71 SB to US US 22 to I-71 NB US 22 to I-71 SB I-71 NB to SR I-71 SB to SR SR 126 to I-71 NB SR 126 EB to I-71 SB SR 126 WB to I-71 SB I-71 NB to Pfeiffer Rd I-71 SB to Pfeiffer Rd Pfeiffer Rd to I-71 NB Pfeiffer Rd to I-71 NB I-71 NB to I-275 EB I-71 NB to I-275 WB I-275 EB to I-71 NB I-275 WB to I-71NB I-275 EB to I-71 SB I-275 WB to I-71SB MEAN: STANDARD DEVIATION: MEAN + STD. DEVIATION: Note: Locations in bold are the Critical Crash locations October 23, 2002 Revised October 17, 2008

43 Data Results and Conclusions After identifying top crash locations, the next step is to conduct supplemental analysis on these locations in order to better understand the nature of the problem. Each segment, ramp, and/or weave area identified as a critical crash location (above the MEAN + STANDARD DEVIATION) shall be analyzed at the micro level. This should also be done for any Areas of Interest identified. The first analysis to be completed is comparing each critical crash location to the Ohio Urban Interstate Average or the Ohio Urban Ramp Average in the categories of: Type of Crash, Road Condition, Light Condition, and Severity. Locations > 50%, 100% and 200% more than the statewide urban Interstate or urban ramp averages for each category shall be marked accordingly. Other data of interest may be discussed as well. Example 1 The critical crash locations on the mainline of I-76 and I-77 in the study area are listed below in the table. These locations account for approximately 22% of the crashes in the study area. Critical Crash Locations on Mainline I-76 Direction Section No. of Crashes Crash Rate Severity Index WB 76 I-77 to East Ave WB 76 East Ave to SR WB 76 Wolf Ledges/Grant St to SR NB 77 Lovers Lane to SR Note: Shaded cells are the categories exceeding the critical crash criteria. Each of the above mainline critical crash sections was also compared to the average for Ohio urban Interstates in several categories: type of crash, road condition, light condition, and severity. Type of Crash by Percent of All Crashes Rear End Fixed Object Sideswipe Angle WB 76: I-77 to East 48% 5% 15% 6% WB 76: East Ave to SR 59 39% 13% 22% * 11% WB 76: Wolf Ledges to SR 8 36% 16% 19% 7% NB 77: Lovers Lane to SR 8 41% 22% 11% 7% Urban Interstate Average 40% 29% 14% 12% * Locations > 50% more than statewide urban interstate average for category. Rear-end crashes usually suggest a problem with capacity and sideswipe/angle crashes usually suggest a weaving problem. Example 2 The statewide urban Interstate average for crashes occurring on non-dry pavement is 33%. Locations with 40% or more of crashes occurring on non-dry pavement are considered high. It was found that six segments and thirteen ramps had a high percentage of crashes occurring on non-dry pavement. The District has already addressed this issue at several of the locations. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

44 Countermeasures General The countermeasure(s) may include engineering, enforcement, driver education, or a combination of these factors. The countermeasure(s) recommended by a safety study may result in a project that follows the Minimal, Minor or Major process as defined by the Project Development Process (PDP) Manual. If a project involves work that will be constructed by ODOT forces or under a purchase order, the requirements of the PDP Manual do not apply. The final step of the safety study is to determine potential countermeasures that could effectively correct or improve the crash situation at the critical crash locations (segments, ramps, and weaves) identified previously in the report. Countermeasures can be identified using: 1. ODOT s Traffic Engineering Manual (TEM), 2. ODOT s Standard Construction Drawings, 3. ITE s Traffic Engineering Handbook, 4. FHWA s Low Cost Safety Improvements Workshop manual, and 5. NCHRP 500 reports. The mainline segments, ramps, and weave areas should each be individually analyzed on the basis of the crash data collected, existing conditions, and site visits. The focus here is to further review crash data, roadway characteristics, and existing traffic control devices currently in place to identify low or medium cost/time duration countermeasures which can be implemented to alleviate crashes at these critical crash locations. The high-cost and long-term duration countermeasures are beyond the scope of these endeavors. Most of the mainline critical crash segments require countermeasures which are major redesign and reconstruction with high cost and are beyond the scope of these countermeasures. Each location analyzed shall have three sections of information: Crash Data, Existing Conditions and Countermeasures Crash Data The crash data findings shall be described in the report. Specifically identify those crash data categories that were found to be > 50% higher than the Urban Interstate/Ramp Averages. This will determine the actual crash situations at the particular location. The added detail in this step provides understanding of the data to help identify countermeasures that will be applicable. In this step, the crash reports should each be reviewed to delve into the details of the crashes occurring Existing Conditions Site visits shall be conducted and a brief description of the physical state of the segment, ramp, weave and the existing traffic control devices shall be given. A visual presentation will aid others in understanding the where and what of the report. At least one to five photos of the discussed locations should be included for each site. These photos can be placed throughout the site discussion or grouped at the end of the site discussion (with captions if October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

45 placed at the end). Ramps with the majority of crashes at an intersection will include collision diagrams showing the crash locations, street names, and lane placement for that particular intersection. The existing conditions description should aid in determining any criteria or conditions that may be contributing to the crashes Countermeasures Low/medium cost and short/medium duration countermeasures, as well as suggestions for further investigation, shall be grouped by the types of crashes they are addressing. The countermeasures should be specific to a particular location and the types of crashes occurring. Example 1 I-74 WB from I-75 to Spring Grove: Crash Data: This segment is.62 miles long. This section is a critical location due to the severity of the crashes. The Severity Index is Fixed objects are 43% of the crashes, which is 50% greater than the urban Interstate crash average of 29%. Over half (59%) of the crashes occurred on wet pavement. This is 100% greater than the urban Interstate crash average of 25%. Existing Conditions: This section begins as two lanes and then I-75 SB to I-74 WB adds an additional two lanes. One lane becomes a drop lane at the exit for Spring Grove. This section has some curves (including an S curve at the beginning of the I-74 WB lanes) and several underpasses. The underpasses give a very tight feel to the roadway. There are double raised pavement markers installed and a rumble stripe on the right shoulder. A portion of this section also has skid resistant pavement. The fixed object crashes may be due to vehicles avoiding vehicles entering from I- 75 SB. Drivers coming from I-75 SB are entering I-74 WB in a curve and right after an underpass. This is causing crashes on both the mainline and the ramp. As soon as I-75 merges with I-74, there are exit signs to Spring Grove (far right lane only) and to Colerain Ave (2nd right lane only). There is not a lot of room between the I-75 entrance ramp and the Spring Grove exit ramp. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

46 Countermeasures: 1. To address the wet pavement crashes, we recommend the following countermeasures: a. Replace existing pavement markings (lane lines and edge lines) with 6 inch markings. b. Improve wet conditions by grooving existing pavement and/or applying a high skid overlay. This has already been done, but check to see if the area needs to be expanded and the overlay reapplied. c. Address any possible drainage issues with the wet conditions. 2. To address the fixed object crashes, we recommend the following countermeasures: a. Install signage warning drivers of high number of vehicles entering from I-74. Install this signage in fluorescent yellow sheeting. See countermeasures listed for the ramp from I-75 SB to I-74 WB. b. Install 3M Linear Delineation on the concrete barrier in the curves (especially under the overpasses) October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

47 Example 2 I-75 NB Ramp to Hopple St: Crash Data: On this ramp, 47 crashes occurred with a crash rate of Almost half of the crashes occurred at night and 1/3 occurred on wet pavement. Of the crashes, 34% included hitting a fixed object (13 of the 47 crashes were vehicles hitting the crash cushion at the beginning of the ramp and 5 of the 47 crashes were vehicles hitting the concrete wall in the center curve of the ramp). Twenty of the 47 crashes were vehicles rear ending or sideswiping other vehicles at the end of the ramp (at the intersection of the ramp with Hopple Street). Existing Conditions: This ramp is a left-hand exit off of I-75 NB. A crash cushion is located at the divergence of this ramp from I-75. The ramp then loops around 180 degrees. The ramp from I-75 SB merges with this ramp right before the Hopple Street intersection. Drivers on the ramp from I-75 SB have no notice that traffic will be merging from their left in the middle of the ramp. Countermeasures: 1. To address the low light and wet pavement crashes we recommend the following singular or combined countermeasures: a. Improve overhead roadway lighting along the curve of the ramp. b. Improve wet conditions by grooving existing pavement and/or applying a high skid overlay. 2. To address crashes at the entrance of the ramp we suggest the following countermeasures: a. Advanced Advisory Speed signs of 35 mph are present. Increase the size of these signs and remove any tree limbs/branches obscuring signs, especially the one on the left hand side of I-75 (it is currently covered). Install these signs using fluorescent yellow sheeting. b. Provide retroreflective sign post material for speed/curve signs on both the mainline of I-75 (for the ramp) and on the ramp. c. Install advanced signs for the ramp curve on the mainline of I-75. Use fluorescent yellow sheeting for these signs. Revised October 17, 2008 October 23,

48 d. Install flashers on the Speed Advisory and Curve signs. e. Install rumble strips across the lane in advance of the ramp exit (similar to I-70 EB to SR 315 in Franklin County). 3. To address crashes in the middle of the ramp near the concrete barrier we suggest the following countermeasures: a. Install advanced signs on the mainline of I-75 for the ramp curve. Use fluorescent yellow sheeting for these signs. b. Improve wet conditions by grooving existing pavement and/or applying a high-skid overlay. c. Install 3M Linear Delineation along the concrete wall. d. Install edge line raised pavement markers (currently there are none in the middle of the curve). e. Improve the pavement markings by replacing the with 6-inch lines. 4. To address the unexpected merge of I-75 SB and the short stopping distance between the merge and the signal, we suggest the following countermeasures: a. Install lane use signs in advance of the intersection on the ramps, side-mounted or possible overhead mounted. b. Install merge lane signs on both ramps for the merging/weaving of this ramp with the ramp from I-75 SB. Use fluorescent yellow sheeting. c. Continuously assure lane use pavement markings are as retroreflective as possible. d. Improve roadway lighting through this area October 23, 2002 Revised October 17, 2008

49 Deliverables The following shall be part of the safety study report or submitted with it: 1. For each Area of Influence and Area of Interest, a large base map of the study area with a realistic presentation of crash frequency, crash rate, and bar chart of crash types (see Figures and through ). 2. For each segment of the mainline, a large base map of the study area with a realistic presentation of crash frequency, crash rate, and bar chart of crash types. Mainline segments with frequencies or rates greater than the mean plus one standard deviation shall be highlighted/noted (see Figure ). 3. For each ramp of the mainline, a large base map of study area with a realistic presentation of crash frequency, crash rate, and locations of crashes (beginning, middle, end of ramps). Ramps with frequencies or rates greater than the mean plus one standard deviation shall be highlighted/noted (see Figure ). 4. Summaries of three years of crashes, highlights of crash statistics (see Figures through ). 5. Document numbers of all crash reports used in the study. A hard copy and an electronic copy of the complete study report shall be submitted in a format acceptable to the ODOT. Project data files (hard copy and electronic versions) for the complete project shall also be provided. Newly logged crash reports shall be given to ODOT specifying the following fields: Document Number (nine digits/characters) County Route Prefix Route Number State Log Mileage (SLM) Street On Offset Distance Offset Direction Location Reference Used Type of Crash Code (if changed) (October 17, 2008) October 23,

50 Location Code (if changed) The following table provides an example of the use of these required fields: Hand Logging Required Fields If Applicable Document Number Co. Route Prefix Route No. Route Suffix SLM Street On Offset Distance Offset Directio n Location Reference Used Crash Type Code Location Code Examples: FRA US 0023 R US0023R 020 N Kingston FRA US 0023 R US0023R 003 S Kingston 02 7 If the type of crash code or the location code is changed, it is important to use only the specified codes so collected data is uniform. Do not use the written description of the crash type or location. Refer to the following tables. Crash Type Codes Not Stated 00 Head On 01 Rear End 02 Backing 03 Sideswipe-Meeting 04 Sideswipe-Passing 05 Angle 06 Parked Vehicle 07 Pedestrian 08 Animal 09 Location Codes Location Not Stated 0 Intersection 1 Intersection Related 2 Driveway Access 3 Railroad Crossing 4 Bridge Passing-Over (On Bridge) 5 Bridge Passing-Under 6 Non-Intersection 7 Private Property 8 Train 10 Pedalcycles 11 Other Non-Vehicle 12 Fixed Object 13 Other Object 14 Falling From/In Vehicle 15 Overturning 16 Other Non-Collision October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

51 1213 OTHER TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STUDIES General This Chapter includes information about various other traffic engineering studies, such as ball bank studies, delay studies, speed studies and the Systematic Signal Timing & Phasing Program Ball Bank Studies for Determining Curve Advisory Speeds General The Ball Bank Indicator is an instrument used to determine the recommended maximum speed to display on an Advisory Speed (W13-1) plaque when the plaque is used to supplement a curve (or turn) Warning Sign. This recommended maximum speed is considered to be the maximum safe speed that a passenger car can comfortably traverse the curved section of roadway. Safe speeds on horizontal curves must also be related to the safe-stopping sight distance and various other factors which cannot be determined by using either the Ball Bank Indicator or the calculation method for determining curve advisory speed signing (Section ). Since speeds are presently only posted in English units (miles per hour), all studies related to advisory speeds shall be conducted and calculated in English units. This method will simplify the study process and also eliminate any possibility of errors in the final determined speed caused by either additional calculations or the use of conversion factors. OMUTCD Section 2C.46 indicates that the advisory speed may be the 85th-percentile speed of free-flowing traffic, the speed corresponding to a 16-degreee ball bank indicator reading, or the speed otherwise determined by an engineering study because of unusual circumstances Mechanical Ball Bank Indicator This instrument consists of a steel ball in a scaled curved glass tube filled with an alcohol solution. The tube, bent on the arc of a circle, is graduated from 0 to 20 degrees both to the left and right of the zero point. The tube is enclosed in a metal case (see Figure ). When mounting the Ball Bank Indicator, the car should be in a stationary level position. The speedometer of the automobile must be accurately calibrated and the tires uniformly inflated. The indicator should be mounted as near as possible on a vertical surface, with the steel ball at the zero point. All occupants who are to be in the car when the observations are to be made should be in the same position when mounting or checking the instrument as when making the test. This is necessary because changing position of the passenger or the load in the car may cause the car body to tilt to the right or left depending on the transfer of the load from one side to the other and this tilting action or body roll is reflected in a change in the ball bank readings. Use of the Ball Bank Indicator to measure the safe speed on curves involves the efforts of two persons - one to drive and the other to observe the indicator. For each test run, the driver should: 1. Appraise the curve under observation to determine the approximate safe speed that may be maintained throughout the curve. 2. Conduct the first test at a speed 10 miles per hour below the appraised speed. Revised October 17, 2008 October 23,

52 3. Make each succeeding test at a speed 5 miles per hour greater than the last one. The limiting Ball Bank Indicator value for comfort (OMUTCD Section 2C.46) is 16 degrees. 4. Attain the trial run speed on each test at a distance of at least one-quarter mile from the beginning of the curve. 5. Maintain a course throughout the curve precisely in the center of the lane and at uniform speed. The observer carefully notes the position of the ball at the approximate center of the curve and records the reading. The reading shall be recorded as right or left of zero Digital Ball Bank Indicator The digital Ball Bank Indicator (electronic accelerometer) uses electrical power from the vehicle cigarette lighter or other power take off. Depending on the manufacturer s specifications, it may: 1. Be mounted on any horizontal surface within a specified slope limit. 2. Have an audible alert to advise the driver when a specific degree reading is reached. 3. Hold the highest and lowest reading through the curve or turn. 4. Be computer compatible - supplying data directly to the computer. Use of the digital Ball Bank Indicator involves the same procedures and has the same cautions as the mechanical Ball Bank Indicator (Section ), but does not require an observer to record data when connected to a computer Recording the Safe Speed Data The procedures for making the test runs with a Ball Bank Indicator are noted in Section It is important that all the information noted in Form be recorded. A fullsize copy of the Curve Study Sheet is available from the OTE website. As provided for on the Curve Study Sheet, trial runs should be made in each direction. For the specified speed ranges, the following ball bank angles shall be used: With the recent change in the OMUTCD s recommendation for the ball-bank angle to be used, the related forms are currently being reviewed and revised versions will be published later Calculation Method to Determine Curve Advisory Speed If trial run information is not available, the advisory speed indications for horizontal curves may be calculated by inserting the curve data into the following equation relating superelevation, pavement friction, radius of curvature and vehicle speed: Vmph = ( e + f ) 15R Where V = speed of vehicle in miles per hour e = superelevation in feet per foot of horizontal width f = transverse coefficient of friction R = radius of curvature in feet October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

53 The recommended values of transverse coefficient of friction are as follows: Operating Speed Transverse Coefficient of Friction 30 mph mph mph mph 0.13 Safe speeds on horizontal curves must also be related to the safe-stopping sight distance and various other factors which cannot be determined by using either the Ball Bank Indicator (Section ) or this calculation method Delay Studies This Section is reserved to address information available regarding delay studies. In the interim, contact OTE for such information if needed Speed Studies See information in Section regarding the Speed Check and Test Runs used to evaluate proposed changes in speed limits Systematic Signal Timing & Phasing Program (SSTPP) General The Systematic Signal Timing & Phasing Program (SSTPP) is funded by the ODOT Safety and Congestion Program. Its purpose is to systematically update the timing and phasing of signal systems at approved candidate intersections and/or corridors. Applications for this program would be submitted to Central Office at the same time as other Safety & Congestion applications (April and September) Benefits Safety Benefits - The following safety benefits can be realized by updated signal timing. The Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) cites the following crash reduction factors associated with improved signal timing and phasing: Properly timed addition of all red clearance interval = 25 % crash reduction factor Properly timed yellow clearance interval = 4-31 % crash reduction factor (all crashes) Adding protected/permitted left turn phase at existing signal = % crash reduction factor (left-turn crashes) Congestion Benefits - In addition to the safety benefits of good signal timing, a more obvious benefit is an improvement of mobility throughout the signalized corridor. Ohio s Major New Program will go a long way to addressing congestion on Ohio s freeways. The Systematic Signal Timing & Phasing Program (SSTPP) is a complimentary program addressing congestion on surface street facilities. Numerous signal timing case studies have shown a reduction in stops of 10 to 20 percent, with a similar reduction in delays. As a result of reduced congestion, comparable decreases in fuel consumption and emissions are also realized. Case studies have shown that properly timed traffic signals reduce fuel consumption 10 to 15 percent when compared to poorly timed traffic signals. Most obvious to drivers is a significant decrease in travel times. Revised October 17, 2008 October 23,

54 The following tables show the benefits of improved signal timing and phasing that were realized through projects initiated in the ODOT Safety and Congestion program: October 23, 2002 Revised October 17, 2008

55 Eligibility The following intersections/corridors would be eligible for the SSTPP funding: 1. Intersections or corridors identified by ODOT as being high accident and relevant planned countermeasures will not be constructed within one year. 2. Intersections or corridors identified as being congested by ODOT s Congestion Model (Office of Technical Services) and relevant planned countermeasures will not be constructed within one year. 3. Intersections or corridors identified by an MPO as being high accident or congested. See Subsection for documentation requirements. 4. Intersections or corridors identified by a local government as being high accident or congested. See Subsection for documentation requirements. 5. Corridors that span more than one local agency that could benefit from a unified signal system operation and were not previously operating as one system. 6. Others as recommended by the ODOT District Safety Review Team (DSRT). In the case of 1 and 2 above, the DSRT will review the candidate intersections or corridors. If in the opinion of the DSRT the timing project would be beneficial, the effected local agency will be notified of the possibility of receiving funding through an application to the ODOT Safety and Congestion program. In the case of 3, 4 and 5 above, the involved agencies would request a review of the proposed intersections or corridors from the DSRT. If the DSRT concurs that the intersections/corridors would be a good candidate project; the local agency or MPO should make an application through the DSRT to the ODOT Safety & Congestion Program. Revised October 17, 2008 October 23,

56 Every signalized intersection in a corridor that meets the above criteria would be eligible for funding, even if a specific signalized intersection does not meet the criteria. The physical termini of traffic signal systems should not necessarily be defined by municipal boundaries. They should be logically determined based upon the operational characteristics of a corridor. Corporation limits should not be an artificial barrier to providing effective operations. Where it would be beneficial for a signal system; an attempt should be made to have multiple agencies enter into a joint operational agreement. In the absence of an actual inter-agency agreement being adopted, every attempt should be made to coordinate signal operations across incorporated boundaries via time-based coordination. It is not necessary to have the cooperation of adjacent agencies to receive funding; however, it is required to attempt to cooperate with traffic operations when the signal system would benefit from having termini in multiple jurisdictions. If an agreement cannot be reached between agencies an explanation shall be provided with the application for funding to the Safety and Congestion Program MPO & Local Documentation Requirements MPO and Local project requests based upon safety and congestion (Eligibility Criteria 3, 4 and 5 in Subsection ) will need to provide documentation of need to the DSRT. The requesting agency will need to contact the DSRT about the extent of documentation for each funding request. For safety related requests, the documentation may be as simple as noting how many crashes and crash types occur in the corridor. The requesting agency may provide the information from its own records or ask the District if an ODOT CAM tool analysis would be available to provide the information (CAM tool is an internal ODOT crash analysis program). Crash information available through the CAM tool may be limited on some local routes; the District can elaborate on data availability. Congestion problems are more difficult to quantify because the effort will typically require much the same information that is required to re-time the signals (volumes, computer analysis, existing geometric information, etc.). Documentation for congestion can be as simple as pictures or video of the corridor operation or a field visit by the DSRT. Some corridors will be infamous for their congestion issues and will require very limited documentation. Alternatively, a congestion model run by the MPO could serve as the basis of documenting the project need. The DSRT can provide specific guidance on need documentation for each funding request Project Scope Projects approved for funding will typically, but not always, be performed by ODOT utilizing existing Safety Consultant task orders. The following describes a typical consultant scope of services. This scope may be altered by the DSRT as needed to meet the specific needs of each project. Scope This project will provide optimized traffic signal timings for (# of signals) in (location). Pre and post travel time runs will be utilized to provide measures of effectiveness for the project. The following are the major tasks associated with this project. Task 1: Equipment Inspection A field inspection will be made to identify any detectors, pushbuttons or other appurtenances that are not operational that could affect system operation. Included shall be a confirmation that internal controller clocks are synchronized (system master and local clocks). A list of deficiencies will be provided to the maintaining October 23, 2002 Revised October 17, 2008

57 agency identifying any problems. Prior to commencing any additional work, repairs must be made by the maintaining agency in order for the system to work as intended. Task 2: Existing System Observation The consultant shall make field observations of the existing signalized operation. These observations should include the identification of movements that experience cycle failure; turn-lane blockage; semi-truck issues; pedestrian operations; queue storage/spill back issues; lane utilization/volume balance issues; identification of very major midblock traffic generators/sinks; speed limits; school zones; vertical/horizontal alignments; and other issues that could affect traffic signal operations. These observations should be utilized to properly calibrate the model. Task 3: Counts 24-hour tube counts (or equivalent automated counting device) will be taken for one week (seven days) at (location). [Designer Note - tube count locations should be provided, and if more than one tube count is necessary, it should be noted how many and at what locations. Multiple tube count locations are based upon discretion considering system complexity, size, and variations in volumes.] Weekday 10-hour turning-movement counts (including percentage of trucks) shall be taken for each intersection. Weekday AM, midday and PM peak hour turning counts will be used to develop three individual weekday peak hour timing plans. Tube counts will be used to identify the exact count hours. Tube counts will also be used to decide which weekday peak hour plan is most appropriate for non-peak hours. Weekend peak hour timing counts/plans may be authorized if tube counts indicate the weekday timing plans would not be appropriate for use on the weekend. The consultant shall consider travel time runs as well as compare the weekend tube counts taken on the weekdays to make a recommendation to ODOT if weekend turning movement count/plans will be necessary. A typical application requiring the authorization to create separate weekend timing plans would be an arterial with large retail centers such as a mall. In addition to identifying which weekday timing plan should be used in off-peak hours, the tube counts will be used to determine plan transition points and to determine if/when the system should be set to free operation. Intersections that are currently operating in over-saturated conditions cannot be accurately counted (turning-movement counts) at the intersection due to the movements being over capacity (i.e., excessively long approach queues that experience cycle failure). The consultant shall notify ODOT if this condition exists and make a recommendation if additional counting should be undertaken to determine demand traffic. If authorized, the demand approach traffic (i.e,, free-flow approach volume) shall be counted in addition to the turning-movement counts. The turning-movement counts will be used to derive movement percentages on the over-saturated approach (percentage of left, thru, and right). These percentages will then be applied to the demand (free-flow) approach traffic to obtain the demand turning-movement counts. An acceptable alternative method for obtaining counts at over-saturated intersections is to use modeled demand traffic. The consultant should compare counts to the Office of Technical Services seasonal adjustment factors charts to determine if adjustments should be made based upon the time of year the counts are taken. Paper copies and electronic files of all counts (turning movement and tube) shall be provided to the ODOT Office of Technical Services (Mr. David Gardner) as well as the maintaining agency. A map shall accompany the counts indicating the count locations. Task 4: Measures of Effectiveness (existing timing) The consultant shall perform travel time studies documenting existing conditions. Travel time studies shall not be performed until any necessary system repairs are made by the maintaining agency. Four sets of travel time studies shall be made, one for each of the AM, midday and PM peak Revised October 17, 2008 October 23,

58 periods as well as the peak weekend period identified from the tube traffic counts. Each travel time study shall have at least five bi-directional timing runs. All travel time studies shall be made using ITE recommendations and shall be accomplished through the use of a GPS based automated device. Task 5: Signal Warrants Signal Warrants shall be performed on all signalized intersections. Any unwarranted signals that the local maintaining agency is unwilling to remove shall be assessed to determine if their retention significantly affects mobility in the project corridor. The consultant will use the optimized timing model - with and without the unwarranted signal modeled to make a recommendation to ODOT. Based upon the mobility assessment and the crash history associated with the unwarranted signal, ODOT will address each unwarranted signal on a case by case basis with the maintaining agency. A signal need only meet one of the OMUTCD prescribed signal warrants to be eligible for funding. Task 6: Timing Parameters Minimum green times shall be per local agency policy, or in the absence of a policy shall be per ODOT recommendations outlined in the Traffic Signal module of Traffic Academy. Vehicle clearance intervals (Y+AR) shall be calculated per ITE recommendations (contained in the TEM). Pedestrian clearance intervals shall be calculated using 3.5 feet/sec crossing speed, and shall be calculated to get the pedestrian to the opposite curb. Walk times should typically be 4 to 7 seconds depending on demand. Where applicable, authorization may be given to update railroad preemption clearance intervals. Peak hour factors for each intersection/timing plan shall be calculated based upon traffic volumes. Right turn on red will be allowed in the model when the condition is actually allowable in the field. [One critical intersection should always be forced to have an offset of zero in all timing plans. This will allow the critical intersection to always be at the proper offset when timing plan changes are implemented.] Task 7: Modeling Field Work - shall be performed to gather necessary model parameters including basic geometrics, lane use, turn lane storage length, intersection widths (all red calculation), pedestrian crossing widths, lane widths, intersection spacing, etc. Model Creation - shall consist of the physical creation of the Synchro 7.0 timing model using already gathered volume information and field work information. Model Check/Calibration - shall consist, when necessary, of making vehicle and driver parameter changes to ensure the model accurately represents real world conditions. Bandwidth Check - The offsets, cycle length and splits provided by Synchro will be input into a bandwidth optimization program to check arterial progression. The offsets will be adjusted as necessary to improve arterial operations. Synchro is based upon minimizing total delay and does not always provide the best progression in cases where side street delay is a major consideration. This process should be iterative (back and forth between Synchro and the bandwidth program) in an effort to maximize arterial operations without harshly impacting side street and non-coordinated phase operations. Simtraffic should be used to determine the effects of manually changing the Synchro file results. Attention should be especially paid to turn-lane blockage and cycle failure for non-coordinated phases/approaches. Timing Table Creation - shall consist of making easily readable timing tables for use in October 23, 2002 Revised October 17, 2008

59 the field (or via download) to program controllers with optimized timing plans. Included shall be cycle lengths, splits, offsets, local timing parameters (min, max, recalls, yellow, all red, ped timing, memory settings, etc). Also included shall be plan transition times (time when a plan is scheduled to begin). [The implementation of a new timing plan (plan transition time) should normally occur at least a half hour prior to when it is needed. The implementation of a new timing plan can cause a lack of coordination for two to four cycle lengths so this disruption should be completed prior to the onset of peak hours.] Task 8: Field Timing Plan Implementation Local agencies will be given the option to program the proposed optimized timings or have the consultant do it on their behalf. The consultant shall have qualified personnel or partner with individuals with these qualifications to implement the optimized timing plans in the field (or via download) should the local agency request it. The name and qualifications/resume of personnel actually implementing the timing changes shall be provided to ODOT for approval. The consultant shall coordinate implementation of the timing plan to accommodate the local maintaining agency if they wish to be represented in the field for the programming. Task 9: Field Observation and Timing Adjustments The consultant shall make field observations of implemented optimized signal timings. Adjustments will be made accordingly. Any changes shall be accurately reflected as the final timings in the Operational Report. Task 10: Measures of Effectiveness (optimized timing) The consultant shall perform travel time studies documenting optimized conditions. Four sets of travel time studies shall be made, one for each of the AM, midday and PM peak periods as well as the peak weekend period. Each travel time study shall have at least five bi-directional timing runs. All travel time studies shall be made using ITE recommendations and shall be accomplished through the use of an automated device. The optimized travel time runs shall be performed as nearly as practical on the same days and times as the existing condition runs. All travel time studies shall be made using ITE recommendations and shall be accomplished through the use of a GPS based automated device. Task 11: Deliverables Geometric and Operations Report: The timing programmed into the controller shall be the best possible optimized timing. In instances where this optimized timing cannot provide a Level of Service (LOS) of D or better, a geometric and operations report shall be produced for that intersection. This shall be a very short report providing geometric improvements (e.g.,.addition of turn lanes) and/or operational improvements (e.g., addition of a protected turn phase) that would be required to improve the operation to an intersection LOS of D or better. The purpose of the geometric and operations report is to document potential low/medium cost improvements that would improve capacity, safety and mobility. This report would be the documentation necessary for locals to request future funding for relatively low-cost improvements such as phase additions or turn lanes. For the geometric and operations report, the consultant will base improvements both on current-day volumes and 20-year traffic. Twenty-year traffic will not be certified traffic. It will be the current-day traffic expanded to 20-year traffic using a reasonable growth factor for the project area. The idea is that the local could potentially make improvements using local money based upon current-day traffic; however, if State or Federal funding is used, they will need to utilize 20-year traffic. Use of estimated 20-year design traffic is just meant to give an idea of the possible scope for a future improvement project. Should a Revised October 17, 2008 October 23,

60 project request be made and subsequently approved certified traffic would be required as necessary in the Project Development Process (PDP). The geometric and operations report shall be provided to the maintaining agency(s), the ODOT DSRT chairman, the ODOT Office of Traffic Engineering Administrator, and the ODOT Office of Systems Planning and Analysis Administrator. Operational Report - This report will provide the optimized signal timing plans (with field adjustments accurately reflected); traffic counts; signal warrants (and any supporting documentation to retain an unwarranted signal); and Synchro reports for each intersection that shows lane use, timing, LOS, etc. Also included will be the MOE/travel time study findings. A commentary should also be provided as necessary noting any unsignalized intersections that could potentially benefit from being signalized. This should be based upon observation of the optimized signal timing model, as well as field observations. The scope of this work is simply to note the possible locations. If they want to, the maintaining agency can follow up on this outside of the signal timing project. The operational report shall be provided to the maintaining agency(s), the ODOT DSRT chairman, the ODOT Office of Traffic Engineering Administrator, and the ODOT Office of Systems Planning and Analysis Administrator. Software - The consultant shall provide one copy of the Synchro/Simtraffic to the local maintaining agency for their future use. Included shall be copies of the.syn files with the optimized signal timing. Task 12: Meetings The consultant shall attend a pre-meeting with ODOT and the local maintaining agency and post-implementation meeting. After the pre-meeting the consultant shall submit a project schedule to both ODOT and the maintaining agency for approval October 23, 2002 Revised October 17, 2008

61 1220 MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT Chapter 120 provides information about various procedures developed to address the review and approval of new products and the purchase of traffic control related materials and equipment CONSTRUCTION Section addresses speed limit reductions within temporary traffic control zones 1280 RESEARCH This Chapter is reserved for information about research that involves zoning and traffic engineering studies REFERENCE RESOURCES Various reference resources that may be useful have been noted in Chapters 193 and 194. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

62 Intentionally blank October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

63 1296 FORMS INDEX Speed Zone Request for Narrow and Low-Volume Rural Roads Form is used to document geometric and roadway characteristics when submitting a Speed Zone request for a road with an ADT of 400 or less or a width of 16 feet or less. This form is described in detail in Section Speed Zone Warrant Sheet Form is used for a full-scale Speed Zone Warrant analysis. The procedure for using this form is described in Section This form is currently being reviewed with the intent of developing a new form using a format similar to the Excel file developed for Form Sample Speed Study Data Sheet Form may be used to record data used in the Speed Zone Warrant Analysis (see Section ). See Table for determination of Intersection Class and Building Type Sample Completed Speed Study Data Sheet Form is a sample of a completed version of Form Speed Check Form Form is used to record speed information to determine the 85th-percentile and pace speeds (see Section ) Speed Limit Revision Form is used to establish a revised speed limit (see Section ). Note that the established limit becomes effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected Withdrawal of Issued Speed Zone Authorization Form is used to withdraw a revised speed limit (see Section ) Field Report on Parking Practices Form is used to request a No-Parking Zone. The procedure for using this form is described in Section Establishment of No-Parking Restrictions Form is used to establish a No-Parking Restriction (see Section ). Note that the restriction becomes effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected Withdrawal of Issued No-Parking Restrictions Form is used to withdraw an established No-Parking Restriction (see Section ). (October 17, 2008) October 23,

64 Curve Study Form Form is used in the Ball Banking Study described in Section to determine if an Advisory Speed plate should be used to supplement a curve (or turn) Warning Sign and, if used, the recommended maximum speed to use on the Advisory Speed plate. Based on OMUTCD Section 2C.46, this form is under review and will be revised Completed Curve Study Form Form is a sample of a completed Form Red Flag Summary Form for Safety Projects Form is used in lieu of the RFS form presented in the PDP Manual (see Section ) Freeway Speed Zone Evaluation Sheet Form is used to document a request for a change in the speed limit on a freeway (see Section ) Speed Zone Request for Unimproved Highways and Residential and Commercial Subdivision Streets Form is used to document a request for a reduction of the speed limit on unimproved County highways and residential and commercial subdivision streets (see Section ). The form may also be used by Townships to document Speed Zones they establish based on ORC Division (K) Speed Zones in Temporary Traffic Control Zones Reserved for the form being developed to document speed zone requests for temporary traffic control zones (see Sections ) October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

65 Form Speed Zone Request for Narrow and Low-Volume Rural Roads (sheet 1 of 4) (October 17, 2008) October 23,

66 Form Speed Zone Request for Narrow and Low-Volume Rural Roads (sheet 2 of 4) October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

67 Form Speed Zone Request for Narrow and Low-Volume Rural Roads (sheet 3 to 3) Revised October 17, 2008 October 23,

68 Form Speed Zone Request for Narrow and Low-Volume Rural Roads (sheet 4 of 4) October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

69 Form Speed Zone Warrant Sheet Ohio Warrants for Speed Zones DATE: COUNTY: ROUTE/STREET: BEGIN: END: LENGTH: ADT: I. HIGHWAY DEVELOPMENT (A) BUILDING DEVELOPMENT (End Length minus Begin Length) (B) INTERSECTION CLASSIFICATION TYPE 1 - UNITS x 1 = CLASS A - NO. x 2 = TYPE 2 - UNITS x 2 = CLASS B - NO. x 3 = TYPE 3 - UNITS x 3 = CLASS C - NO. x 4 = TYPE 4 -UNITS x 4 = TOTAL CLASS (B) TOTAL TYPE (A) HIGHWAY DEVELOPMENT = (A) + (B) LENGTH (MILES) = = II. ROADWAY FEATURES FACTORS ) LANE WIDTH, FEET < > 12 2) SHOULDER... UNIMPROVED < 2 < 4 < 6 > 6 IMPROVED < 2 < 4 < 6 > 6 3) CHARACTERISTICS E D C B A TOTAL ROADWAY FEATURES = III. CRASH CALCULATIONS: 2740 x Crashes Crashes = ADT x Years x Miles Mil. Veh. Miles = SPEED LIMIT FACTORS HIGHWAY DEVELOPMENT > <21 ROADWAY FEATURES th-PERCENTILE (MPH) > 52 PACE (MPH) CRASHES/MVM > <1.5 TOTAL FACTORS = IV. CALCULATED SPEED: Total Factors X 55 = = V. TEST RUN, AVERAGE MPH WARRANTED SPEED = MPH Study by: Requested Speed Limit Additional information & comments (October 17, 2008) October 23,

70 Form Sample Speed Study Data Sheet October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

71 Form Sample Completed Speed Study Data Sheet (October 17, 2008) October 23,

72 Form Speed Check Form Speed Check Location: Date: Day: County: Observer: Type Pavement: Dry: Wet: Condition: Width: Weather: Temperature: Bound, Time: M to M Vehicles Com. Cum. No. % Total Passenger Commercial Cars mph Over Below Totals Bound, Time: M to M Vehicles Cum. Passenger No. Com. % Commercial Total Cars October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

73 Form Speed Limit Revision STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SPEED LIMIT REVISION Location of Alteration: District: Revision No.: Name of Street: Municipality: County: State Route No.: Co. Rd./Twp. Rd.: Under Authority of Section of the Ohio Revised Code, the following revised prima facie speed limits, which have been determined upon the basis of a traffic and engineering investigation to be reasonable and safe, are hereby established for the streets and highways described herein. The prima facie speed limit or limits hereby established shall become effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected. LOCATION OF REVISED PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS From To Approved Speed Limit (in MPH) Bound Bound Signs giving notice of approved speed limits shall be erected immediately. Such signs shall conform to the Ohio Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways. This authorization is revocable by the Director of Transportation whenever, in his opinion, any altered prima facie speed becomes unreasonable and, upon such withdrawal and notification such altered prima facie speed shall become ineffective and the signs relating thereto shall be immediately removed by the local authorities. Date: Director of Transportation Immediately after erection of the appropriate speed limit signs, return the attached copy of this Speed Limit Revision form to the ODOT District Deputy Director or his designee, with the following certification properly executed. I hereby certify that appropriate signs, giving notice of the above prima facie speed limits were erected on Signed Title (October 17, 2008) October 23,

74 Form Withdrawal of Issued Speed Zone Authorization STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Location of Alteration: WITHDRAWAL OF ISSUED SPEED ZONE AUTHORIZATION District: Revision No.: Name of Street: Municipality: State Route No.: County: Co. Rd./Twp. Rd.: Under Authority of Section of the Ohio Revised Code, the following revised prima facie speed limit(s) approved by the Director of Transportation on, has been determined, on the basis of a traffic and engineering investigation, to be unreasonable and approval of the same is hereby withdrawn. LOCATION OF REVISED PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS From To Approved Speed Limit (in MPH) Bound Bound Signs relating to the altered prima facie speeds shall be immediately removed and the prima facie speed limit or limits after such removal shall be as specified in the Ohio Revised Code. Date: Director of Transportation Immediately after removal of the speed limit signs, return the attached copy of this Speed Limit Withdrawal form to the ODOT District Deputy Director or his designee, with the following certification properly executed. I hereby certify that appropriate signs, giving notice of the above prima facie speed limits were removed on Signed Title October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

75 Form Field Report on Parking Practices State of Ohio Department of Transportation Field Report On Parking Practices Location: The sides of State Route in County at the following locations: From: SLM log point To: SLM log point Date and time of field check: at Highway Features at Point of Study: Pavement Type Width No. of Lanes Type of Berm Width of Berm Other Features Roadside Culture: The major portion of the area included in this study should be described as: Residential Rural Industrial Business Properties which abut the highway are used for the following purposes: Traffic Control: At the present time, the following traffic control measures are in use: Signals - Signs - Pavement Markings - Other - The legal Speed Limit is now mph. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

76 Parking Practices: Thereis evidence of the following parking practices: Conclusion: (check one and fill in pertinent information) It is the opinion of this observer that these parking practices constitute a traffic hazard for the following reasons: It is the opinion of this observer that these parking practices do not constitute a traffic hazard for the following reasons: Recommendations: I have reviewed the attached data and make the following recommendations: I recommend the establishment of a No-Parking restriction along the side of SR from SLM log point to SLM log point, which includes a total length of feet. I do not recommend the establishment of any No-Parking restrictions. I recommend the following corrective measures: Attached is a diagram and/or photographs showing the physical conditions outlined above. Other attachments include: Signature: Title: District: Date: October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

77 Form Establishment of No-Parking Restrictions STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION No.: ESTABLISHMENT OF NO-PARKING RESTRICTIONS District: County: State Route No.: Section: Under Authority of Section of the Ohio Revised Code, the following described No-Parking Zone is established. No person shall park or leave standing any vehicle, whether attended or unattended within the right-of-way within the No-Parking Zone indicated herein when appropriate signs giving notice thereof have been erected. LOCATION OF NO-PARKING LIMITS From To Along This restriction shall become effective immediately upon the erection of signs giving notice thereof. Signs giving notice of the approved restriction shall be erected immediately. Date: Director of Transportation Immediately after the erection of appropriate No-Parking signs, return the attached copy of this No-Parking Restriction form to the ODOT District Deputy Director or his designee, with the following certification properly executed. I hereby certify that appropriate signs, giving notice of the above No-Parking restriction were erected on Signed Title (October 17, 2008) October 23,

78 Form Withdrawal of Issued No-Parking Restrictions STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WITHDRAWAL OF ISSUED NO-PARKING RESTRICTIONS No. District: County: State Route No.: Section: Under Authority of Section of the Ohio Revised Code, the following described No-Parking restriction(s) approved by the Director of Transportation on, has been determined, on the basis of a traffic and engineering investigation, to be unreasonable and approval of the same is hereby withdrawn. LOCATION OF NO-PARKING LIMITS From To Along Signs relating to the parking prohibition shall be immediately removed. Date: Director of Transportation Immediately after removal of the No-Parking signs, return the attached copy of this No-Parking Restriction Withdrawal form to the ODOT District Deputy Director or his designee, with the following certification properly executed. I hereby certify that appropriate signs, giving notice of the above No-Parking restriction were removed on Signed Title October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

79 Form Curve Study Form ======= Based on OMUTCD 2C.46 this form is under review and will be revised. ======== Curve Study Sheet Location County Pavement Type: Width: Condition: Curve Degree: Central Angle: Radius: Traffic Signs: End ; End Trial No. 50 MPH 45 MPH Ball-bank Angle for Various Trial Speeds 40 MPH 35 MPH 30 MPH 25 MPH 20 MPH 15 MPH Superelevation Feet per Foot Of Width Recommended Speed 1 2 Bound o Ball-bank Angle = Speed At 12 o Ball-bank Angle = 14 o Ball-bank Angle = Trial No. 50 MPH 45 MPH Ball-bank Angle for Various Trial Speeds 40 MPH 35 MPH 30 MPH 25 MPH 20 MPH 15 MPH Superelevation Feet per Foot Of Width Recommended Speed 1 2 Bound o Ball-bank Angle = Speed At 12 o Ball-bank Angle = 14 o Ball-bank Angle = Remarks (October 17, 2008) October 23,

80 Form Completed Curve Study Form ======= Based on OMUTCD 2C.46 this form is under review and will be revised. ======== October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

81 Form Red Flag Summary Form for Safety Projects RED FLAG SUMMARY FOR SAFETY PROJECTS Purpose The purpose of this Red Flag Summary is to identify concerns that could cause revisions to the following: Anticipated design and construction scope of work Proposed project development schedule Estimated project budget Potential impacts of the project on the surrounding area Instructions The Safety Red Flag Summary is required for minor projects and is intended to be a supplement to an ODOT Safety Study. For major projects and projects that do not involve a safety study, use the form in the Project Development Process Manual. For minimal projects, red flag issues should be evaluated, but completion of this form is not required. A field review is required for all projects. Each specialty area of the Red Flag Summary should be completed by individuals who possess sufficient experience to enable them to correctly identify and evaluate issues arising from the field review. In the Location/Comments field provide information concerning potential impacts that is brief, but gives enough detail to allow an understanding of the issue(s). The scope of services document should account for any issues identified in the Red Flag Summary that have the potential to affect scope, schedule, and budget. A list of resources that may need to be consulted in order to complete this form can be found in the introduction to the Appendix H of the Project Development Process Manual. Red Flag Summary Deliverables Provide an expanded Study Area Map identifying project design constraints identified through the Red Flag Summary. Tables, photographs or other support material may also be submitted with the Red Flag Summary to illustrate specific problem areas. (This information is mandatory for Major Projects.) Date Red Flag Summary Completed: Project Name (County, Route and Section): EXISTING INFORMATION: Check all information that was reviewed for the Red Flag Summary. Not all information is available or necessary for every project. The scope of the Red Flag Summary should be commensurate with the nature of the proposed project. Legal Speed: Design Speed: Turning movement traffic counts Functional Classification: Interstate, freeway Arterial Collector Local (October 17, 2008) October 23,

82 Form Red Flag Summary Form (continued) Locale: Rural Urban National Highway System (NHS): NHS Routes: non-nhs Routes: Safety Locations: HSP Location Hot Spot Location Congestion Location SITE VISIT: A site visit is required for ALL projects. The site visit shall consist of visual inspection of the entire project area including the ditch lines, cut slopes, stream banks, bridge foundations, pavement, embankment slopes, etc. Date(s) of site visit: ODOT DISCIPLINE INVOLVEMENT: List name and phone number of individual(s) representing each discipline during the site visit and preparation of the Red Flag Summary. One individual may represent multiple disciplines. DISCIPLINE NAME PHONE NUMBER ODOT County Manager** District Production Administrator** District Planning and Programming Administrator** ** The County Manager, Production Administrator and Planning/Programming Administrator (or qualified representative) must attend the site visit. EXTERNAL AGENCY INVOLVEMENT: Indicate external agency involvement during identification of red flags. List the name and phone number of individual(s) representing each agency during the site visit. AGENCY NAME PHONE NUMBER October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

83 Form Red Flag Summary Form (continued) ODOT COUNTY MANAGER CONCERNS: List any comments/requests from the ODOT County Manager. Make a preliminary determination on whether the following resources will be affected by the proposed project. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: Make a preliminary determination on whether the following resources will be affected by the proposed project. Involvement Resource Comments Yes No Possible Parkland, nature preserves and wildlife areas (Name) Yes No Scenic River (Name) Possible Yes No Public Facilities (Name) Possible Yes No Possible Threatened and Endangered Species and/or habitat (e.g., Indiana bat trees, etc.) Yes No Possible Streams, rivers and watercourses (Use Designation) Yes No Existing Wet Areas (Location) Possible Yes No Historic Building(s) or Bridge(s) (Location) Possible Yes No Evidence of hazardous materials (Location) Possible Yes No Federal Emergency Management Agency Possible Yes No Possible (FEMA) floodplains Other environmental issues GEOMETRIC ISSUES: Use the design speed, design functional classification and available traffic data to make a preliminary determination as to the geometric standards for the project. Compare these requirements to accident data and impacts if deviations are being considered. Design Exception Required? Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Design Feature Lane Width (including curve widening) Graded Shoulder Width Bridge Width Structural Capacity Preliminary Comments Regarding Justification (October 17, 2008) October 23,

84 Form Red Flag Summary Form (continued) Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Horizontal Alignment (including Excessive Deflections, Degree of Curve, Lack of Spirals, Transition/Taper Rates and Intersection Angles) Vertical Alignment (including grade breaks) Grades Stopping Sight Distance Intersection Sight Distance Pavement Cross Slopes Superelevation (Maximum rate, transition, position) Horizontal Clearance Vertical Clearance GEOMETRIC ISSUES: Indicate if the following geometric issues are present or should be considered during project development. Consider work on the mainline as well as any side roads or service roads. Provide additional comments as needed. Design Issue Comments Yes No Possible Are there any hazards in the clear Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable zone? Specify treatment. Are there geometric issues that may affect traffic safety (including Full or Half-Clover Leaf Interchange, Slip Ramps, Weave Areas, and short acceleration/deceleration lanes). Describe. Are there any other geometric issues? Describe HYDRAULIC ISSUES: Indicate if the following drainage issues are present or should be considered during project development. Side road and service road work should be considered in this assessment. Provide additional comments as needed. Design Issue Comments Yes No Possible Should a closed drainage system Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable be considered? Are there any other hydraulic issues? Describe October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

85 Form Red Flag Summary Form (continued) GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES: Based on the information compiled during this study indicate whether or not the following geotechnical issues are present or should be further considered during project development. Provide additional comments as needed. Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Design Issues Is there evidence of soil drainage problems (e.g., wet or pumping subgrade, standing water, the presence of seeps, wetlands, swamps, bogs)? Is there evidence of any embankment or foundation problems (e.g., differential settlement, sag, foundation failures, slope failures, scours, evidence of channel migrations)? Is there evidence of active, reclaimed or abandoned surface mines? Should the Office of Geotechnical Engineering be contacted to evaluate the project site? Are there any other geotechnical issues? Specify. Comments PAVEMENT ISSUES: Indicate if the following pavement issues are present or should be considered during project development. Side road and service road work should be considered in this assessment. Provide additional comments as needed. Design Issue Comments Yes No Possible Does sidewalk need to be replaced or Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable installed? Are there any other pavement issues? Specify. STRUCTURAL ISSUES: Indicate if the following structure issues are present or should be considered during project development. Provide additional comments as needed. Provide a separate table for each structure. Structure: Design Issue Comments Yes No Possible Is the bridge deck in poor condition? Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Is there any evidence of substructure movement (e.g., settlement, rotation)? Yes No Possible Are the piers in poor condition? Specify Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable measures to be taken. Are there any other structures issues? Specify. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

86 Form Red Flag Summary Form (continued) TRAFFIC CONTROL ISSUES: Indicate if the following traffic control (signals, signing, pavement markings, etc.) issues are present or should be considered during project development. Provide additional comments as needed. Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Design Issue Does it appear that any traffic control items will fall outside the existing right of way limits (e.g., large signs, strain poles)? If traffic control at an intersection is being changed from stop control to signalization, does the stop condition road need to be upgraded to accommodate faster traffic? Is highway lighting required and are there any issues regarding highway lighting? Comments Yes No Possible Not Applicable Are there any other traffic control issues? Specify. MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC ISSUES: Briefly describe the maintenance of traffic and any constraints. A list of considerations has been provided below. Maintenance of Traffic Considerations Limits on traffic detour (including local alternate detours) due to load limits, bridge width restrictions, shoulder condition Temporary pavement requirements Speed limit during construction Pedestrian Traffic Additional width at culverts Drive Access Stopping Sight Distance Construction Access Right of Way acquisition School, EMS, Special Events in area Maintenance of Traffic Description October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

87 Form Red Flag Summary Form (continued) RIGHT-OF-WAY/SURVEY ISSUES: Indicate if right-of-way or survey issues are present or should be considered during project development. Provide additional comments as needed. Design Issue Comments Yes No Possible Will there be any work beyond the Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable existing right of way limits? Will the project cause relocation of parties that might be eligible for relocation assistance? If so, list the estimated number of residential and non-residential relocations? Will the project require modifying the access control to any properties? If so, list the estimated number and type of properties affected. Are there any objects within the existing right of way limits that may be considered an encroachment? Are there any specific property owner concerns? If so, list property owners and concerns. Will right of way be acquired for wetland or stream mitigation? Are there any other right of way or survey issues? Specify. UTILITY ISSUES: Indicate if the following utility issues are present or should be considered during project development. Provide additional comments as needed. Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Yes No Possible Not Applicable Design Issue Do existing utilities need to be relocated? Specify if part of ODOT contract. Is additional right of way needed to accommodate utility relocations? Are there any other utility issues? Specify. Comments PERMIT ISSUES: Indicate if the following permit issues are present or should be considered during project development. Provide additional comments as needed. Yes No Possible Not Applicable Design Issue Will a Corps of Engineers/Environmental Protection Agency 404/401 permit or any other permit be required? Specify. Comments MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES: Indicate if the following issues are present or should be considered during project development. Provide additional comments as needed. Yes No Possible Not Applicable Design Issue Are there any other concerns? Specify. Comments (October 17, 2008) October 23,

88 Form Freeway Speed Zone Evaluation Sheet October 23, 2002 Revised October 17, 2008

89 Form Speed Zone Request for Unimproved Highways and Residential or Commercial Subdivision Streets (October 17, 2008) October 23,

90 Form Speed Zone Request for Temporary Traffic Control Zones Reserved for future use October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

91 1297 TABLES INDEX Symbols For Use with the Speed Study Data Sheet Table depicts the symbols mentioned in Section that are used to represent physical features along the highway when completing the Speed Study Data Sheet (Form ) Speed Zone Warrant Analysis - Highway Development Table defines components used in Highway Development portion of Form for the Speed Zone Warrant Analysis (see Section ) Speed Zone Warrant Analysis - Roadway Features Table defines components used in the Roadway Features portion of Form for the Speed Zone Warrant Analysis (see Section ) Speed and Parking Zone Revision Number Assignments Table assigns numbers to be used by Districts when submitting/reviewing a Speed or Parking Zone request (see Sections and ) Average: Ohio Interstate Crash Data Table provides six-year averages for Ohio Interstate crash data and can be used as a reference for comparisons in Freeway safety studies (see Section ) Speed Zone Warrant Analysis Roadway Characteristics Table provides descriptions of the roadway characteristics categories used in Form (see Section ). (October 17, 2008) October 23,

92 Intentionally blank October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

93 Table Symbols for Use with the Speed Study Data Sheet Symbol Feature Residence Business School Church (or other house of worship) Intersection Driveway Traffic Sign Painted Lane and Center Line No Passing Line Railroad Bridge Underpass Sidewalk Guardrail Signal or Flasher (October 17, 2008) October 23,

94 Table Speed Zone Warrant Analysis - Highway Development Building Development Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 residential, small apartment, commercial or public building, or other low volume generator Medium size commercial, public building, light industrial and multi-unit apartment type generators with traffic activity meeting one of the following general descriptions: a. Continuous, but light; b. Moderate at certain times, as opening, noon, or closing hours; c. Substantial on infrequent occasions. Substantial traffic generated by industry, shopping center or similar type large facility. Very large shopping mall, industrial park, major industry or similar large traffic generators with substantial, continuous volume. If the drive is signalized, it counts as a Class C intersection (instead of a Type 4 building development). Intersection Classification Class A Class B Class C Subdivision/residential type streets, low-volume Township Roads, and low-volume County Roads. Through streets, through Township Roads, through County Roads, and State Routes. Signalized intersections October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

95 Table Roadway Feature Lane Width, in feet Speed Zone Warrant Analysis - Roadway Features Definition Consider average or most dominant lane width. Two feet may be deducted from the lane width in curbed sections. Shoulder: (see Notes) Characteristics: (see Notes) Unimproved Improved (A) Very Good (B) Good (C) Average (D) Adverse (E) Poor Unimproved shoulders are sod or loose aggregate. Shoulders are considered improved when paved, surface treated or compacted aggregate. Curbed sections shall be considered improved <2 feet (Factor = 9 on the form). Essentially level and tangent, with minimal intersection involvement, minimal sight distance restrictions. Curves and/or grades resulting in minor speed reduction, few intersections, mostly good sight distance. Curves and/or grades resulting in moderate speed reduction, some restrictive sight distance problems, some intersection involvement. Curves and/or grades resulting in substantial speed reduction, frequent sight distance and intersection problems. Curves and/or grades resulting in excessive speed reduction, limited sight distance a dominant factor. Volume (ADT/Lane) If the volumes are not relatively consistent throughout the section under study, it may be necessary to evaluate shorter sections. This feature uses vehicles per continuous lane and turning lanes, or other special lanes, are not normally used in this calculation. Notes: It is recognized that shoulder features may not be consistent throughout the section under study. A judgment will need to be made to determine the most dominate design. The characteristics noted are generalized descriptions which can be used to describe various roadway design characteristics in evaluating optimal operating speeds. Warning Signs with appropriate Advisory Speed signs should be considered before speed zoning for roadway characteristics. (October 17, 2008) October 23,

96 Table Speed and Parking Zone Revision Number Assignments Districts Speed Zones Parking Zones District District District District District District District District District District District District October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

97 Table Average: Ohio Interstate Crash Data Total Interstate Urban Interstate Rural Interstate Urban Ramps ROAD CONDITION Dry 66% 65% 66% 63% Wet 23% 25% 21% 31% Snow 6% 6% 7% 3% Ice 4% 3% 5% 1% LIGHT CONDITION Day 65% 67% 61% 67% Dawn/Dusk 5% 5% 5% 5% Night 30% 27% 34% 26% TYPE OF CRASH Fixed Object 39% 29% 52% 20% Rear End 34% 40% 25% 38% Sidswipe 13% 14% 12% 12% Angle 10% 12% 8% 16% SEVERITY Injury 25% 27% 22% 26% Property Damage Only 75% 73% 77% 74% TRUCK 12% 10% 16% (October 17, 2008) October 23,

98 Table Speed Zone Warrant Analysis Roadway Characteristics (also see Figures , and ) Alphabetic Value A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 C Description Relatively straight and level road that generally provides good longitudinal sight distance, but may have a random hillcrest and/or curve that affects travel speeds in only a small part of the study area. Basically free of roadside obstructions and features that restrict lateral sight distance. Relatively straight and level road that generally provides good longitudinal sight distance, but may have a random hillcrest and/or curve that affects travel speeds in only a small part of the study area. Occasional roadside obstructions and features that randomly restrict lateral sight distance for short distances within the study area. Relatively straight and level road that generally provides good longitudinal sight distance, but may have a random hillcrest and/or curve that affects travel speeds in only a small part of the study area. Frequent or constant roadside obstructions limiting lateral sight distance through most of the study area. Gentle curves and/or straight-aways with level to moderate grades, interspersed with sharp curves and/or hillcrests that affect travel speeds and limit longitudinal sight distance in much of the study area. Basically free of roadside obstructions and features that restrict lateral sight distance. Gentle curves and/or straight-aways with level to moderate grades, interspersed with sharp curves and/or hillcrests that affect travel speeds and limit longitudinal sight distance in much of the study area. Occasional roadside obstructions and features that randomly restrict lateral sight distance for short distances within the study area. Gentle curves and/or straight-aways with level to moderate grades, interspersed with sharp curves and/or hillcrests that affect travel speeds and limit longitudinal sight distance in much of the study area. Frequent or constant roadside obstructions limiting lateral sight distance through most of the study area. Constant, tightly-spaced, sharp curves and/or hillcrests that affect travel speeds and/or severely restrict longitudinal sight distance in nearly all of the study area. The sharp alignment of a C road dictates travel speeds to such an extent that lateral sight distances need not be a factor. Note: As an aid in selecting the most appropriate Road Characteristics, it is suggested that the alignment first be identified as most resembling the first sentence of A, B or C in the above descriptions. If the alignment is determined to be an A or a B, it should then be determined which description of the amount and proximity of roadside obstructions (1, 2 or 3) most closely resembles the conditions along the road being studied. If the alignment is determined to be C, a description of roadside obstructions is not required October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

99 1298 FIGURES INDEX Reserved for Future Use Ball Bank Indicator Figure illustrates a Mechanical Ball Bank Indicator which is described in detail in Section Examples of Type A Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning Figure provides aerial view examples to help illustrate the Type A category of roadway characteristics used in Form (see Section ) Examples of Type B Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning Figure provides aerial view examples to help illustrate the Type B category of roadway characteristics used in Form (see Section ) Examples of Type C Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning Figure provides aerial view examples to help illustrate the Type C category of roadway characteristics used in Form (see Section ) Sample Non-Freeway Safety Study Table of Contents Figure shows a sample Table of Contents for a Safety Study, as discussed in Section Sample Non-Freeway Safety Study Title Page Figure shows a sample Title Page for a Safety Study, as discussed in Section Sample Condition Diagram - Section Figure shows a sample condition diagram for a section, as discussed in Section Sample Condition Diagram - Intersection Figure shows a sample condition diagram for an intersection, as discussed in Section Sample Collision Diagram - Intersection Figure shows a sample collision diagram for an intersection, as discussed in Section Sample Collision Diagram - Section Figure shows a sample collision diagram for a section, as discussed in Section (October 17, 2008) October 23,

100 Sample Collision Diagram - Intersection Figure shows a sample collision diagram for an intersection, as discussed in Section Sample Crash Analysis Figure shows a sample crash analysis, as discussed in Section Sample Rate of Return Worksheet Figure shows a sample rate of return worksheet, as discussed in Section Sample Photos for Safety Study Figure shows sample photos for a safety study, as discussed in Section Sample Photos for Safety Study Figure shows sample photos for a safety study, as discussed in Section Sample Freeway Safety Study Title Page Figure shows a sample title page for a Freeway safety study, as discussed in Section Sample Freeway Safety Study Table of Contents Figure shows a sample Table of Contents for a Freeway safety study, as discussed in Section Sample Schematic with HSP Rankings Figure shows a sample Schematic for a Freeway safety study, as discussed in Section Sample Freeway Safety Study Area Schematic Figure shows a sample area schematic for a Freeway safety study, as discussed in Section Ramp-Related Crashes Figure shows various types of ramp-related crashes, as discussed in Section Sample Illustration - Ramp-Related Crashes Figure shows a sample illustration of ramp-related crashes, as discussed in Section Sample Illustration - Ramp-Related Crashes Figure shows a sample illustration of ramp-related crashes, as discussed in Section October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

101 Sample Weave Area Crashes Figure shows various types of weave area crashes, as discussed in Section Sample of an Area of Influence Map Figure shows a sample of an Area of Influence Map, as discussed in Section and Section Sample of a Crash Frequency Diagram Figure shows a sample crash frequency diagram, as discussed in Section Sample of a Mainline Crash Summary Figure shows a sample Mainline Crash Summary, as discussed in Section and Section Sample of a Ramp Crash Summary Figure shows a sample Ramp Crash Summary, as discussed in Section Sample of a Crash Summary Figure shows a sample Crash Summary, as discussed in Section Sample of Interchange Crash Information Figure shows a sample Interchange Crash Information illustration/diagram, as discussed in Section Sample of Interchange Crash Information Figure shows a sample Interchange Crash Information illustration/diagram, as discussed in Section Sample of Weave Area Crash Information Figure shows a sample Weave Area Crash Information illustration/diagram, as discussed in Section Sample of Weave Area Crash Information Figure shows a sample Weave Area Crash Information illustration/diagram, as discussed in Section Sample of Critical Crash Locations - Segments Figure shows a sample illustration of Critical Crash Segments, as discussed in Section Sample of Critical Crash Locations - Ramps Figure shows a sample illustration of Critical Crash Ramp Locations, as discussed in Section (October 17, 2008) October 23,

102 Sample of Critical Crash Locations Figure shows a sample illustration of Critical Crash Ramp Locations that includes weave areas, as discussed in Section and Section Sample of Area of Interest Crash Data Figure shows a sample illustration of Area of Interest crash data, as discussed in Section Sample of Area of Interest Crash Analysis Figure shows a sample illustration of an Area of Interest Crash Analysis, as discussed in Section Sample of Mainline Crash Analysis Figure shows a sample illustration of a Mainline Crash Analysis, as discussed in Section Sample of Ramp Crash Analysis Figure shows a sample illustration of a Ramp Crash Analysis, as discussed in Section October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

103 Figure Reserved for Future Use (October 17, 2008) October 23,

104 Figure Mechanical Ball Bank Indicator October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

105 Figure Examples of Type A Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning for Form (Sheet 1 of 3) (October 17, 2008) October 23,

106 Figure Examples of Type A Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning for Form (Sheet 2 of 3) October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

107 Figure Examples of Type A Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning for Form (Sheet 3 of 3) (October 17, 2008) October 23,

108 Figure Examples of Type B Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning for Form (Sheet 1 of 3) October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

109 Figure Examples of Type B Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning for Form (Sheet 2 of 3) Revised October 17, 2008 October 23,

110 Figure Examples of Type B Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning for Form (Sheet 3 of 3) October 23, 2002 Revised October 17, 2008

111 Figure Examples of Type C Roadway Characteristics for Speed Zoning for Form (October 17, 2008) October 23,

112 Figure Sample Non-Freeway Safety Study Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Title Page... 1 Executive Summary... 2 i) Purpose... 2 ii) Background... 3 iii) Brief Overview of Possible Causes... 3 iv) Recommended Countermeasures and Related Costs... 4 Existing Conditions... 5 i) Condition Diagram... 6 ii) Physical Condition Writeup... 9 Collision Diagram Crash Data Crash Analysis Recommendations Rate of Return Photos Other Issues Appendix October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

113 Figure Sample Non-Freeway Safety Study Title Page SAFETY STUDY LIC CO: SR. 310 AND CR. 25 (Morse Rd.) Dist. 5 SWAP 1999 HCLIS #26 Completed By: Completion Date: (October 17, 2008) October 23,

114 Figure Sample Condition Diagram Section October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

115 Figure Sample Condition Diagram Intersection (October 17, 2008) October 23,

116 Figure Sample Collision Diagram Intersection October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

117 Figure Sample Collision Diagram Section (October 17, 2008) October 23,

118 Figure Sample Collision Diagram Intersection October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

119 Figure Sample Crash Analysis (October 17, 2008) October 23,

120 Figure Sample Rate of Return Worksheet October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

121 Figure Sample Photos for a Non-Freeway Safety Study (October 17, 2008) October 23,

122 Figure Sample Photos for a Non-Freeway Safety Study October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

123 Figure Sample Freeway Safety Study Title Page Hamilton I-75 District 8 Freeway Safety Studies (Mill Creek Expressway) (Thru the Valley) PID # Sharon Rd Glendale-Milford Rd Shepherd Lane S. Cooper Ave Davis St E. Galbraith Rd Cross County Highway Paddock Rd Towne St Mitchell Ave Montana Ave Beekman St Spring Grove Ave Hopple St Bates Ave Western Hills Viaduct Prepared by: Ohio Department of Transportation Office of Traffic Engineering August 2006 (October 17, 2008) October 23,

124 Figure Sample Freeway Safety Study Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Title Page... 1 Definitions... 2 Executive Summary... 3 Purpose and Background... 3 Location... 3 Results and Recommendations Existing Conditions...5 Physical Condition Write-up... 6 Freeway Schematic Diagram... 7 Crash Data Investigation Crash Data Management... 9 Unlogged Data Collector-Distributor Data Crash Summary Crash Analysis Crash Summaries Crash Rates Severity Index Critical Crash Location Analysis Data Results and Conclusions Critical Crash Location Analysis Non-Dry Crash Location Analysis Countermeasures Appendix A - Study Area Overview Appendix B - Ramp and Weave Crashes Appendix C - Crash Data Appendix D - Critical Crash Locations Appendix E - Deliverables October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

125 Figure Sample Schematic with HSP Rankings (October 17, 2008) October 23,

126 Figure Sample Freeway Safety Study Area Schematic October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

127 Figure Ramp-Related Crashes (October 17, 2008) October 23,

128 Figure Sample Illustration - Ramp-Related Crashes October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

129 Figure Sample Illustration - Ramp-Related Crashes (October 17, 2008) October 23,

130 Figure Weave Area Crashes October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

131 1200 ZONES AND STUDIES Traffic Engineering Manual Figure Sample of an Area of Influence Map Main Street Area of Influence (Due to weave as Highlighted) Weave Area Crashes = 45 Area of Influence Crashes = = Weave Area (October 17, 2008) October 23,

132 Figure Sample of a Crash Frequency Diagram October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

133 Figure Sample of a Mainline Crash Summary Route Segment Start Segment End Total Crashes Rear End Fixed Object Side- Swipe Angle Dry Wet Snow Ice Day Dawn/ Dusk Dark Fatal Injury PDO I-76 EASTBOUND begin SR SR 21 Cleveland-Massillon Road Cleveland-Massillon Road Barber Road Barber Road State Sreett State Sreett East Avenue East Avenue I-277/US I-277/US 224 Kenmore Boulevard Kenmore Boulevard I I-77 East Avenue East Avenue SR SR 59 Main Street/Broadway Street Main Street/Broadway Street Wolf Ledges Parkway/Grant Wolf Ledges Parkway/Grant Street Street SR SR 8 end I-76 WESTBOUND begin SR SR 21 Cleveland-Massillon Road Cleveland-Massillon Road Barber Road Barber Road State Street State Street East Avenue East Avenue I-277/US I-277/US 224 Kenmore Boulevard Kenmore Boulevard I I-77 East Avenue East Avenue SR SR 59 Main Street/Broadway Street Main Street/Broadway Street Wolf Ledges Parkway/Grant SUM I-76 SAFETY STUDY Mainline Crash Summary ( ) Type of Crash Road Condition Light Condition Severity Wolf Ledges Parkway/Grant Street Street SR SR 8 end I-77 NORTHBOUND Lovers Lane SR I-76 end I-77 SOUTHBOUND Lovers Lane SR I-76 end (October 17, 2008) October 23,

134 Figure Sample of a Ramp Crash Summary Interchange Ramp Ramp Code SUM I- 76 SAFETY STUDY Ramp Crash Summary ( ) Total Crashes Location on Ramp Begin Middle End Rear End Type of Crash Road Condition Light Condition Severity Fixed Object Side- Swipe Angle Dry Wet Snow Ice Day Dawn/ Dark Fatal Injury PDO Dusk I-76 at SR 21 I-76 EB to SR 21 NB K I-76 EB to SR 21 SB H I-76 WB to SR 21 NB M I-76 WB to SR 21 SB Q SR 21 NB to I-76 EB J SR 21 NB to I-76 WB R SR 21 SB to I-76 EB L SR 21 SB to I-76 WB P I-76 at Cleveland-Massilon Road I-76 EB to Cleveland-Massilon Road H I-76 WB to Cleveland-Massilon Road M Cleveland-Massilon Road to I-76 EB J Cleveland-Massilon Road to I-76 WB P I-76 at Barber Road I-76 EB to Barber Road H I-76 WB to Barber Road Q Barber Road to I-76 EB L Barber Road to I-76 WB P I-76 at State Street I-76 EB to State Street H State Street to I-76 WB P I-76 at SR 619/East Avenue I-76 EB to SR 619 H I-76 WB to SR 619 Q I-76 WB to East Avenue C SR 619 to I-76 EB J East Avenue NB to I-76 WB P East Avenue SB to I-76 WB E I-76 at I-277/US 224 I-76 WB to I-277/US 224 EB Q I-277/US 224 WB to I-76 EB J I-76 at Kenmore Boulevard/Battles Avenue I-76 EB to Kenmore Boulevard K I-76 WB to Battles Avenue M Kenmore Boulevard to I-76 EB J Battles Avenue to I-76 WB R I-76 at I-77 I-76 EB to I-77 NB Q I-77 SB to I-76 WB P I-76/77 at East Avenue/Russell Avenue I-76 WB to East Avenue Q I-76 WB to Russell Avenue C East Avenue NB to I-76 EB J East Avenue SB to I-76 EB F I-76/77 at SR 59 I-76 EB to South Street H I-76 WB to Russell Avenue M South Street to I-76 EB J Appendix A-2 Sum I-76 Ramp Crash Summary I-76/77 at Main Street/Broadway Street I-76 EB to South Street H I-76 WB to Broadway Street M I-76 WB to Voris Street A Broadway Street to I-76 EB J South Street to I-76 EB E Main Street to I-76 EB L Broadway Street to I-76 WB R Russell Avenue to I-76 WB P I-76/77 at Wolf Ledges Parkway/Grant Street I-76 EB to Wolf Ledges Parkway H I-76 WB to Grant Street M Grant Street to I-76 EB J Wolf Ledges Parkway NB to I-76 WB P Wolf Ledges Parkway SB to I-76 WB A I-76 & I-77 & SR 8 I-76 EB to SR 8 NB T I-76 WB to SR 8 NB V I-76 WB to I-77 SB G I-77 NB to I-76 EB J SR 8 SB to I-76 EB U SR 8 to I-76 WB P I-77 SB to Burkhardt Ave (Lovers Lane) M October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

135 Figure Sample of a Crash Summary (October 17, 2008) October 23,

136 Figure Sample of Interchange Crash Information October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

137 Figure Sample of Interchange Crash Information (October 17, 2008) October 23,

138 Figure Sample of Weave Area Crash Information October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

139 Figure Sample of Weave Area Crash Information (October 17, 2008) October 23,

140 Figure Sample of Critical Crash Locations Segments October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

141 Figure Sample of Critical Crash Locations Ramps Critical Crash Locations Ramps Severity Index 0.28 Cleveland- Crash Rate Massillon Rd Barber Rd Severity Index 0.32 Crash Rate State St East Ave Severity Index 0.14 Crash Rate East Ave Battles Ave Kenmore Blvd 224 Russell Ave South St Severity Index 0.19 Crash Rate Severity Index 0.34 Crash Rate Severity Index 0.17 Crash Rate Main St Wolf Ledges Pky 23 Broadway St Grant St 28 Lovers Lane Crash Rate Severity Index Crash Rate Crash Rate 6.66 Severity Index 0.20 Severity Index 0.23 LEGEND: Number of Crashes Crash Rate Severity Index (October 17, 2008) October 23,

142 Figure Sample of Critical Crash Locations October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

143 Figure Sample of Area of Interest Crash Data (October 17, 2008) October 23,

144 Figure Sample of Area of Interest Crash Analysis October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)

145 Figure Sample of Mainline Crash Analysis (October 17, 2008) October 23,

146 Figure Sample of Ramp Crash Analysis October 23, 2002 (October 17, 2008)