Chapter 4 COLLISION REDUCTION PROGRAM

Chapter 4 COLLISION REDUCTION PROGRAM Table of Contents 4.0 Background...4-3 4.1 Safety Improvement Projects SHOPP 201.010 Program...4-3 4.1.1 Spot Improvements..4-3 4.1.2 Wet Improvements...4-4 4.1.3 Shoulder and Centerline Rumblestrips. 4-5 4.1.4 Multiple Median Crossing Closure..4-5 4.1.5 Traffic Signals..4-5 4.1.6 Roundabouts.4-6 4.2 Warrant for Study Projects SHOPP 201.010 Program.....4-6 4.2.1 Median Barrier Monitoring Program 4-7 4.2.2 Two- and Three-Lane Monitoring Program.4-7 4.2.3 Wrong-Way Monitoring Program....4-8 4.3 Collision Severity Reduction Projects SHOPP 201.015 Program....4-9 4.3.1 Run Off Road Program...4-10 4.3.2 Clean-Up the Roadside Environment (CURE)..4-11 4.3.3 Shoulder and Centerline Rumble Strips 4-12 4.3.4 School Zone Signals...4-12 4.3.5 New/Upgrade Metal Beam Guardrail...4-12 4.3.6 New/Upgrade Crash Cushions...4-12 4.3.7 New/Upgrade Guardrail Transitions and End Treatments.4-12 4.3.8 Rockfall Mitigation 4-13 4.3.9 Glare Screen.. 4-13 4.3.10 Overcrossing Pedestrian Fencing..4-13 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-1

4.4 Median Barrier Upgrade Projects SHOPP 201.020 Program..4-14 4.5 Approval Process 4-14 4.5.1 Approval Process for 201.010 Safety Improvement Projects 4-14 4.5.1.1 Programming of 201.010 Safety Improvement Projects..4-15 4.5.1.2 Delivery of 201.010 Safety Improvement Projects 4-16 4.5.1.3 Long Lead for 201.010 Safety Improvement Projects 4-16 4.5.2 Approval Process for 201.015 Collision Severity Reduction Projects...4-16 Figures: Figure 4-A: Freeway Median Barrier Study Warrant... 4-18 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-2

4.0 Background The State Highway Account provides funds for the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and the State Highway Operational Protection Program (SHOPP). The STIP is a multiyear capital improvement program of transportation projects on and off the State Highway System. One of the main objectives of the STIP is to improve mobility and solve urban congestion problems on the state highway system through the coordination of local agencies and Caltrans. The State Highway Operational Protection Program (SHOPP) is also a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects on the State Highway System. The main objective of the SHOPP is to preserve and protect the highway system and not add capacity to the state highway system. The Collision Reduction Category is one of eight categories that make up the SHOPP. Within the Collision Reduction Category are three programs. They are 201.010 Safety Improvements, 201.015 Collision Severity Reduction, and 201.020 Upgrade Median Barrier. All three programs are discussed in detail in this chapter. 4.1 Safety Improvement Projects SHOPP 201.010 Program These projects are based on collision history in which the improvement will reduce the number and/or severity of collisions. The Traffic Safety Index of greater than 200 at the time of funds request must be obtained to have the project funded in the 201.010 Program. Projects should be evaluated at the various stages of project delivery to ensure funding eligibility at funds request. Projects that do not have a Traffic Safety Index of 200 do not qualify for SHOPP 201.010 Program funding. 4.1.1 Spot Improvements A spot improvement is a Safety Improvement project that is justified on the basis of actual collision experience at the location in question and for which a Traffic Safety Index can be calculated. An explanation of the Traffic Safety Index including the calculation procedures is located in Chapter 5 of these guidelines. Standard types of spot safety improvements consist of the following: New Signals Signal warrants defined in Chapter 4C of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) should be met in addition to a minimum 200 Traffic Safety Index. If the Warrant 7, Crash Experience, is met but the Traffic Safety Index is < 200, refer to Item 4.1.5 Traffic Signals of this section. Modified Signals Signal phasing, mast-arms and increasing lens size are applicable (does not apply to signal upgrades). 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-3

New Left Turn Channelization Flashing Beacons New Safety Lighting Curve Improvements Rumble Strips Superelevation Improvements Truck Escape Ramps Shoulder Widening on Narrow Two-Lane Roads Truck Climbing Lanes for Two-Lane Highways Spot improvement types not listed will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The district must provide supporting documentation to Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program for review and approval. Chapter 5, Traffic Safety Index, provides step-by-step instructions and clearly explains the components of the benefit/cost analysis for both spot and wet improvements. 4.1.2 Wet Improvements Table C (see Chapter 2) also identifies Wet collision concentrations which are distributed to the districts on an annual basis. Wet improvement types consist of: OGAC - Open Graded Asphalt Concrete (Average service life is 10 years.) Pavement Grooving (Average service life is 10 years.) Localized Drainage Improvements - super-elevation improvement, localized drainage facility improvement. (Average service life is 20 years.) These type of projects must be reviewed and have the agreement of the Headquarter s Traffic Liaison as the most cost effective solution. The evaluation of wet improvement location is based on percent wet time for the specific location, and the wet collision experience. The average service life for a wet improvement is 10 years. The number of wet collisions reduced per year is determined by calculating the wet collision rate for the most recent three- to five-year period, subtracting the average wet collision rate and multiplying the difference by wet travel. Skid resistance testing is another tool that can aid in the investigation process to develop projects that increase the skid resistance of pavement. Further information on skid resistance testing procedures is located in the Appendix. 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-4

4.1.3 Shoulder and Centerline Rumblestrips Rumble strips are bands of raised material or indentations formed or grooved in the traveled way on the centerline or shoulders. Rumble strips call the motorist's attention to standard warning or regulatory devices or otherwise alert drivers by transmitting sound and/or vibration through the vehicle. Centerline rumble strips may be used on the state highway system. Traffic engineers may consider the use of this low cost improvement in response to observed cross centerline collisions. The types of centerline rumble strips include raised or ground in rumble strips within centerline buffer zones or under centerline double yellow marking. For these projects to qualify in the 201.010 Program, the following applies: Shoulder rumble strips (all types of highways) Use the Safety Index Evaluation form. Count the run off road collisions, base rate is set to 0.01. The reduction factor used is 50%. The project life is 10 years. Centerline rumble strips (only for undivided roadways) Use the Traffic Safety Index Form. Count all head-on and sideswipe collisions, base rate is set to 0.01. The reduction factor used is 25%. The project life is 10 years. 4.1.4 Multiple Median Crossing Closure To qualify multiple median crossing closure improvements at intersections with a correctable collision pattern, the following criteria has been established: At least 50% of the proposed median crossing closures must have a higher than average intersection collision rate in a three-year period. A Traffic Safety Index greater than 200 using total intersection collisions only for the expressway segment being considered. A reduction factor of 25% shall be used. Present and future mainline AADT. Mainline highway type for existing and proposed rate groups. Project life = 20 years Generally, no full interchanges will be funded as a Safety Improvement project, however, overcrossings can be designed to accommodate a future interchange. A new overcrossing connecting the local road system can be included if the proposed overcrossing is greater than two miles from any existing interchanges. 4.1.5 Traffic Signals New traffic signal projects that do not achieve the minimum Traffic Safety Index of 200 can be funded as a 201.010 Safety Improvement project if all of the following criteria are satisfied: 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-5

Traffic Signal Warrant 7 - Collision Experience must be satisfied. The cost of non-electrical work shall not exceed 30% of the total construction cost. Mandated items such as Americans with disabilities act (ADA) compliance and stormwater best management practices (BMPs) are excluded from this 30% nonelectrical work cost criteria. Items common to most projects such as Transportation mangement plan (TMP), water pollution control and construction area signs are also excluded. The total cost of the signal project at funds request shall not exceed 125% of the original scoping estimate. When Traffic Signal Warrant 7 is satisfied, a Traffic Safety Index is still required to be completed and submitted in the initial approval documents. 4.1.6 Roundabouts Roundabouts are a common form of intersection control used throughout the world. Since the roundabout is a relatively new intersection control strategy for use on California highway system, base rates have not been established for them. In order to qualify as a 201.010 Safety Improvement project, the following criteria shall be satisfied: Headquarters Traffic Liaison shall review and recommend approval. For proposed base rate in the Traffic Safety Index calculation, use the appropriate rate group as if installing a new traffic signal. A reduction factor of up to 30% will be used. If justified, a higher reduction factor can be proposed but must be approved by Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program and District Traffic Liaison. 4.2 Warrant for Study Projects SHOPP 201.010 Program A warrant for study improvements, as defined by the Highway Safety Improvement Program, is based on pre-established minimum criteria, which identifies locations where an engineering analysis is to be performed. On an annual basis, Headquarters analyzes collision data to develop monitoring reports. These reports consisting of identified locations to be investigated by the districts are distributed each year. The districts are required to return a report to Headquarters, documenting the fact that the locations have been investigated or reviewed and their concomitant recommendations. Headquarters responds to the district with approval to proceed with the recommended improvements. These projects need to be expedited and delivered as soon as practicable. Any project that results from the following programs will be included in the SHOPP 201.010 Program Safety Improvements. Warrant for study criteria applies to the following programs.. 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-6

Median Barrier Monitoring Program Wrong-Way Monitoring Program and Two- and Three-Lane Highway Monitoring Program 4.2.1 Median Barrier Monitoring Program The Median Barrier Monitoring Program addresses cross median collisions on freeways, expressways, and conventional highways that have four or more lanes. The minimum criteria for installing new median barrier is based on: Existing roadway volumes and median width (volume/width), or Cross-median collision history. The volume/width study warrant is a proactive measure for placement of median barrier prior to the occurrence of a concentration of cross-median collisions and is applicable to freeways only. The Freeway Median Barrier Study Warrant identifies the relationship between volume and width for new barrier installations (see Figure 4-A). The cross-median study warrant utilizes two separate cross-median collision rates, total and fatal, to conduct engineering analysis at identified locations. A cross-median collision is defined as any collision resulting from an out-of-control vehicle crossing the median of a four or more lane roadway and striking or is struck by a vehicle from the opposite direction. The minimum collision criteria are a total cross-median collision rate of 0.5 collisions of any severity per mile per year and a minimum of three cross-median collisions for a five-year period, or a fatal crossmedian collision rate of 0.12 fatal collisions per mile per year and a minimum of three fatal cross-median collisions for a five-year period. The annual Median Barrier Monitoring Report provides more detail of the investigation and review criteria for each identified location. The two standard types of median barrier that is used for this program are Type 60 concrete barrier and Thrie beam barrier. Chapter 7, Section 7-04, in the Traffic Manual gives further guidance on the selection of median barrier for various median widths. The gaps in median barrier are eligible to be filled in with median barrier. A gap is defined as being up to three miles in length. They can exist between ends of two existing median barriers or from the end of an existing barrier to a logical stopping point such as a bridge column. 4.2.2 Two - and Three-Lane Monitoring Program The Two- and Three-Lane Monitoring Program addresses cross-centerline collisions on two- and three-lane expressways and conventional highways. Cost effective measures have been identified such as barrier striping, rumble strips, shoulder widening and centerline buffer zones. The annual Two- and Three-Lane Monitoring Program report utilizes collision data on expressway and conventional highways for the most recent five-year period. 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-7

The collisions included are cross-centerline, head-on fatal collisions without left turn or U-turn related collisions. Collisions with left or U-turns are excluded due to the driver s apparent intent to cross or enter the opposing lanes, which may normally not be prevented. Also excluded are locations that do not meet the minimum fatal collision concentration level of 0.12 fatal collisions per mile per year and a minimum of three fatal collisions for a five-year period. Headquarters staff, based on statistics for fatalities, fatality rate, fatal collisions, fatal collision rate, and total collisions per mile, evaluates the locations meeting the minimum criteria. The rating process provides a numerical evaluation of the collision severity of the locations under investigation. On the basis of the rating process, a list of route segment locations is sent to the districts for further analysis. The district s analysis follows the general procedures used in evaluating collision locations. Low-cost improvements include, but are not limited to, the following and may be used in combination with each other: Shoulder rumble strips Centerline rumble strips Buffer zones used in combination with the previously described improvements create a visual, tactile, and auditory effect to alert drivers that they are crossing the centerline. The buffer width may be developed by redistributing the existing shoulder and lane width or by pavement widening. Reducing or eliminating passing areas (possible application of centerline buffer zone) or improving passing sight distance. Lane and shoulder widening may be funded under this program to incorporate the low-cost improvements identified above. Barriers may be installed provided the criteria in the March 15, 1996 Deputy Directive 50 are met. Improvement alternatives such as passing lanes, adding lanes, upgrading to an expressway or a freeway, or widening structures are not intended to be funded under this program. 4.2.3 Wrong-Way Monitoring Program The Wrong-Way Monitoring Program is an analysis tool used to identify locations where wrongway collision concentrations have occurred on freeways and expressways. The wrong-way study warrant utilizes two separate wrong-way collision rates, total and fatal, to conduct engineering analysis at identified locations. The minimum collision criteria are a total wrong-way collision rate of 0.5 collisions of any severity per mile per year and a minimum of three wrong-way collisions for a five-year period, or a fatal wrong-way collision rate of 0.12 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-8

fatal collisions per mile per year and a minimum of three fatal wrong-way collisions for a fiveyear period. The annual Wrong-Way Report provides more detail of the investigation and review criteria for each identified locations. The most common types of treatment to decrease wrong-way collisions are: Repainting or adding wrong-way pavement arrows Reorienting, relocating, or adding wrong-way sign packages Modifying the trailblazing freeway entrance packages Placing edgelines and pavement markers Upgrading signs with high intensity reflective sheeting Modifying lighting Most of the improvements listed above are performed by the Department s Maintenance Program. If the district proposes a systematic approach to scope a project for the wrong-way type treatments listed above, the scoping document must be submitted to Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program for project and funding approval. The systematic approach can be whole route segments, all routes within a county, or an alternate approach the District Traffic Safety Engineer deems appropriate. 4.3 Collision Severity Reduction Projects SHOPP 201.015 Program The purpose of this program is to decrease the potential of collisions and reduce severity of run off road collisions. However, these projects may not be identified because of collision history but on the basis of minimizing future collisions and their severity with other roadside objects. Projects are implemented to create a forgiving quality for the roadsides. The idea of creating safer roadsides for highways and the design for safety concepts has been incorporated in the Department s Highway Design Manual. The goal is to keep the vehicles on the road. However, should a vehicle leave the road it is desirable to provide an area clear of fixed objects adjacent to the roadway to provide a recovery zone. Where practical, the Department removes, relocates, makes breakaway or shields fixed objects along the roadside. Typical projects that are included in this category are: placing rumble strips, widening shoulders, installing new guardrail, improving the clear zone (CURE projects), upgrading guardrail end terminals and crash cushions. A component of the Highway Safety Improvement Program is designated for those types of improvements in which collision history is not a required criteria. These type of improvements are proactive, targeted to reduce the potential for traffic collisions or reduce the severity of traffic collisions. The criteria used are engineering judgment in conjunction with the guidelines listed below. Collision Severity Reduction Improvements include (in priority order): 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-9

1) Run Off Road Program 2) Clean-Up the Roadside Environment (CURE) projects 3) Shoulder/Centerline Rumblestrips 4) School Zone Signals 5) New/Upgrade Metal Beam Guardrail 6) New/Upgrade Crash Cushions 7) Upgrade guardrail transitions and end treatments 8) Rockfall Mitigation 9) Glare Screen 10) Overcrossing Pedestrian Fencing 4.3.1 Run Off Road Program The purpose of the Run Off Road (ROR) Program is to reduce the number and severity of ROR collisions. In 2006, this program was implemented to focus on the more severe type of collisions involving single vehicle that leave the roadway to the right and either hit an object or overturn. The ROR Program is intended to take a corridor approach, which enables the identification of additional sites that would not otherwise be captured through other programs, such as TASAS Table C screening. ROR collisions involve vehicles that leave the traveled lane and encroach onto the shoulder and beyond, hitting objects such as utility pole, bridge rails, guardrails, trees, highway curbs, embankments and parked vehicles. ROR collisions can also occur in the median of highways where the highway is separated or on the opposite side when the vehicle crosses the opposing lanes of a non-divided highway. ROR collisions where vehicles enter the median, strike or are struck by other vehicles are excluded, as these are captured in the Median Barrier Monitoring Program. Every two years a statewide list of ROR locations is generated. The list consists of the 150 locations with the highest value ranking, as explained below. Collision concentration locations are identified using the following criteria: Segments with 5 or more F+I ROR collisions in 3 years that are within one mile for conventional and expressway segments and 0.75-mile for freeways. Segments with a collision ratio of Fatal to Fatal+Injury (F/(F+I)), four times greater than the statewide average. Relative value rankings are based on the following seven characteristics or factors: 1. Number of fatal collisions 2. Number of F+I collisions 3. Outside treated shoulder width 4. Inside treated shoulder width 5. ROR collisions in dark conditions 6. ROR collisions on wet pavement 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-10

7. ROR collisions that resulted in overturned vehicles Low cost improvement strategies should be tried first. Countermeasures are intended: (1) to keep vehicles from encroaching on the roadside, (2) to minimize the likelihood of crashing or overturning if the vehicle travels off the shoulder; and, (3) to reduce the severity of the collisions. The following countermeasures and strategies can be considered to reduce the frequency and severity of ROR collisions. Install shoulder rumble strips Install edgeline "profile marking," edgeline rumble strips or modified shoulder rumble strips on section with narrow or no paved shoulders Install centerline rumble strips. Provide enhanced shoulder or in-lane delineation and marking for sharp curves. Provide improved highway geometry for horizontal curves. Provide enhanced pavement markings. Provide skid-resistant pavement surfaces. Apply shoulder treatments. Eliminate shoulder drop-offs. Widen and/or pave shoulders. Design safer slopes and ditches to prevent rollovers. Remove/relocate objects in risk locations. Delineate trees or utility poles with reflective tape or object markers. Improve design of roadside hardware such as light poles, signs, bridge rails. Improve design and application of barrier and attenuation systems. 4.3.2 Clean-Up the Roadside Environment (CURE) The CURE program for freeways was developed in 1967 to provide a clear recovery area with a forgiving quality for vehicles leaving the traveled way. In 1993, the CURE program was expanded to include all highways. Each year a large number of collisions are reported in which an errant vehicle leaves the traveled way and strikes a fixed object or overturns. There are a wide variety of fixed objects such as trees, ditches, guardrail, culverts, cut slopes, signs and embankments. The common factors contributing to these collisions are roadway design and treatment of the fixed object. The CURE Program was established to reduce collisions and minimize collision severity involving fixed objects. 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-11

Even though stand-alone CURE projects can be developed and funded in the 201.015 Program, horizontal clearance standards have been established for all highway projects. Chapter 300, Topic 309 in the Highway Design Manual establishes the design standards for horizontal clearances. 4.3.3 Shoulder and Centerline Rumble Strips Shoulder and centerline rumble strips that are recommended by the District Traffic Safety Engineer and do not qualify as a 201.010 Program - Safety Improvement project can be funded under the 201.015 Program. Where designated bicycle lanes exist, the shoulder width should follow the guidance shown in Caltrans Highway Design Manual, Chapter 1000. 4.3.4 School Zone Signals School zone traffic signals are occasionally necessary to extend or create crossing gaps in the flow of traffic on the Suggested Route to School. If the criteria in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) are satisfied, the traffic signals can be funded within the 201.015 Program. Reference: California MUTCD, Part 7 4.3.5 New/Upgrade Metal Beam Guardrail Metal beam guardrail is the most common traffic safety system found on highways in California. Guardrail is installed to reduce the severity of run-off-the-road collisions. This is accomplished by redirecting a vehicle away from embankment slopes or fixed objects and dissipating the energy of the errant vehicle. However, guardrail is designed to reduce collision severity only for those conditions where striking the guardrail is less severe than going down an embankment or striking a fixed object. Guardrail should only be installed where it is clear that collision severity will be reduced. Reference: CALTRANS Traffic Manual, Chapter 7, Section 7-03 4.3.6 New/Upgrade Crash Cushions Crash cushions, also known as impact energy attenuators, are intended to protect a motorist from the consequences of a collision with a fixed object that cannot be removed or where other protective systems are not suitable. Projects to install new crash cushions, including upgrades to existing crash cushions to current standards, will be funded in the 201.015 Program. Reference: CALTRANS Traffic Manual, Chapter 7, Section 7-05 4.3.7 New/Upgrade Guardrail Transitions and End Treatments Guardrail end treatments are generally placed on the leading end and sometimes on the trailing end of guardrails to reduce the severity of collisions of vehicles that may strike the end the 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-12

guardrail. As of October 1998, all new installations of guardrail end treatments are required to meet National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350 crash test standards. Transition railings are defined as the stiffening section between the flexible w-beam or thrie beam guardrail system to a concrete bridge rail, wingwall or parapet, or other concrete barrier or rigid wall. At the issuance of the 2004 Standard Plans, all new installations of the transition railing will need to be upgraded according to the standard plan. The transition railing will be eligible to be funded in the 201.015 Program. Other programs such as rehabilitation, capital maintenance or STIP projects should include the upgrades of the guardrail end treatments and transition railings in their projects. 4.3.8 Rockfall Mitigation Rockfall mitigation measures consist of protective devices designed to control large rockfall events and prevent rocks from reaching the traveled way. There should be a minimum of two reported collisions involving fallen rocks on the roadway in the past five years to qualify for 201.015 Program funding. For additional information on the characteristics and applications of the best protective device to be used, contact the Office of Structural Foundations. Reference: CALTRANS Highway Design Manual, Chapter 700, topic 703 4.3.9 Glare Screen Glare screens are designed to screen out the headlight glare of opposing traffic. Glare screen may be installed on new or existing median barriers where the median is less than 20 feet except on horizontal curves where the installation would reduce the stopping sight distance for the design speed. Glare screen should be installed where engineering evaluations show that glare screen would improve safety, considering the cost and other impacts of the glare screen. Evaluations should consider glare due to the combined effects of grades, horizontal alignment, and traffic volumes. Reference: CALTRANS Traffic Manual, Section 7-04 4.3.10 Overcrossing Pedestrian Fencing To reduce the risk of objects being dropped or thrown upon vehicles, protective screening in the form of fence-type railings should be installed along overcrossing structures with sidewalks in urban areas. Screening should also be considered for the opposite side of structures having one sidewalk. Screening should be installed at other locations determined to be appropriate by the District Traffic Safety Engineer and Headquarters Traffic Liaison. Reference: CALTRANS Highway Design Manual, Section 208.10 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-13

4.4 Median Barrier Upgrade Projects SHOPP 201.020 Program In an effort to meet current standards for median barrier and to increase maintenance worker safety, the median barrier upgrade program is targeted toward upgrading the single strand cable and the double metal beam barrier. Cable median barrier is a higher priority because the single strand cable barrier does not meet current crash test standards according to the National Cooperative Highway Research Program NCHRP 350 report. This SHOPP Program is scheduled to sunset in 2010, at which time existing cable and double metal beam barriers will have been replaced or a project in another program has been initiated. 4.5 Approval Process All 201.010 and 201.015 Minor A and Major projects should have conceptual approval prior to beginning a Project Initiation Document (PID) in order to receive funding commitment from SHOPP. Prioritizing of Minor B projects are at the district s discretion. The conceptual approval is the first stage of approval that explains the general scope and cost of the project. The final approval is at funds request. Projects should be evaluated at the various stages of project delivery to ensure funding eligibility at funds request. Projects that were approved for funding eligibility at final Project Approval & Environmental Document (PA&ED) phase and have since experienced cost increases due to materials cost escalation, may be considered for continued eligibility. The District Traffic Safety Engineer must get concurrence from Headquarters Traffic Liaison and submit the reason for the cost increase to Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program for final approval as soon as cost increases are known. Listed below are the three categories and the review process for each of them. 4.5.1 Approval Process for 201.010 Safety Improvement Projects Spot and wet proposed improvement projects require a Traffic Safety Index greater than 200 to be funded as a 201.010 Safety Improvement project. To ensure a project will be funded, a minimum Traffic Safety Index of 230 or greater is recommended at project initiation. This will allow for any adjustments in final project scope and/or cost. This Safety Index is in effect for 5 years. At project initiation, the following should be included in the initial project submittal for conceptual approval: Cover memo briefly explaining the project scope, cost and proposed schedule. All project submittals should have the Headquarters Traffic Liaison agreement or buy-in of the project scope prior to submitting to Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program. Traffic Safety Index calculation Table B 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-14

Collision Diagram Pictures (Optional) Cost Estimates If the major project shows a Traffic Safety Index below 300 or the project cost is over $3 million, submit a six-page cost estimate as outlined in the Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM) Appendix AA also available on the intranet at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/pdpm/pdpmn.htm Submittal should identify any reduced standards within the project limits. Early buy-in with the Headquarters Geometric Reviewer is recommended in order to expedite the programming and delivery of Safety Improvement projects. Upon receipt of the project submittal package, Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program will review and provide a written response. This will conclude the conceptual approval process. For projects identified by the Median Barrier Monitoring, Two- and Three-Lane Highway Monitoring, and the Wrong-Way Monitoring Programs, the process will be as follows: Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program generates annual monitoring reports. They are sent to the districts for investigation and response. A letter of instruction is included in each report explaining what is needed for the designated locations in each monitoring report. The scope and estimated cost of each project should be included in the response. Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program sends a written response to the districts completing the conceptual approval process. The conceptual approval allows development of the PID. It does not ensure programming or Capital Outlay Support (COS) approval. 4.5.1.1 Programming of 201.010 Safety Improvement Projects Safety Improvement projects are the Department s highest priority. All efforts should be made to expedite the programming and delivery of Safety Improvement projects. All Divisions of the Department should diligently work together to expeditiously deliver these projects. While developing the Project Initiation Document (PID) for a Safety Improvement project every effort should be made to focus the project on the safety need and not allow scope creep. PID s for Safety Improvement projects are to be submitted to Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program as soon as they are completed and approved in the district. Upon approval of the PID by Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program, Division of Transportation Programming will be notified and the Safety Improvement project will be eligible for amendment into the SHOPP. 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-15

Districts will not be required to identify a funding source or project tradeoffs for approved Safety Improvement projects. The SHOPP contains a reservation for these projects (both Major and Minor A level) which will be used to fund these newly identified Safety Improvement projects. 4.5.1.2 Delivery of 201.010 Safety Improvement Projects Capital Outlay Support (COS) resources are available only for programmed projects. If the District identifies a new Safety Improvement project, all COS work during the current FY will need to be covered by redirected work from other projects which do have COS resources allocated for them. COS resources for the future years should be included when the resource for future years are being requested or updated. It is important that Right of Way resources are adequately identified for each Safety Improvement project. As part of accelerating delivery of these projects, all Safety Improvement project work plans should assume a reasonable but aggressive schedule. The PID should identify where risk management has been considered in the work plan, and what the impacts would be if this risk management strategy proves unattainable. 4.5.1.3 Long Lead for 201.010 Safety Improvement Projects It is the Department s policy that Safety Improvement projects will be approved for Long Lead (LL) status only in exceptional cases. Safety Improvement projects submitted for LL will be carefully scrutinized by all impacted Headquarters Divisions. Executive SHOPP committee will grant approval for the LL Safety Improvement projects. To obtain LL status, the District must show that the project s work plan schedule has been minimized to the extent possible. The project s work plan should take the perspective of risk management as opposed to risk avoidance. The District must also identify and commit to interim actions that will begin to address safety issue. It is recognized that interim actions may not provide the desired solution. The Headquarters Traffic Liaisons as well as Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program are available to provide guidance on appropriate interim actions. 4.5.2 Approval Process 201.015 Collision Severity Reduction Projects At project initiation, it is recommended that the following should be included in the initial project submittal: Cover memo briefly explaining the project scope, cost and proposed schedule. All project submittals should have the Headquarters Traffic Liaison agreement or buy-in of the project scope prior to submitting to Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program. Pictures (Optional) Cost Estimates 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-16

Upon receipt of the project submittal package, Headquarters will review and provide a written response. This will conclude the conceptual approval process. Once these projects have been given conceptual approval, a PID document should be developed. Any significant scope and cost change from the conceptual approval stage shall need Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program approval prior to the PID document being approved. The district minor allocation will provide the funds for the Minor A project. All Major projects will be prioritized according to list in Section 4.3 of this chapter. Each project that makes the priority cut will be programmed in the SHOPP during each programming cycle. 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-17

FIGURE 4-A 2008 HSIP Guidelines, Chapter 4 4-18