Highway Infrastructure and Operations Safety Research Needs (NCHRP 17-48) Prime Contractor: UNC Highway Safety Research Center Subcontractors: VHB Jim Bonneson Geni Bahar, NAVIGATS Ezra Hauer

Background This study is an outgrowth of TRB Special Report 292 The focus is on improving safety research related to infrastructure and operations (I & O) research through development of a national research agenda The study will recommended how a national research agenda should be established and how to best have it accepted by national organizations that fund I & O research

NCHRP Panel HSRC Charles V. Zegeer Raghavan Srinivasan Daniel Carter Dan Gelinne VHB Hugh W. McGee Forrest M. Council Nancy X. Lefler Frank Gross Michael Sawyer TTI James A. Bonneson NAVIGATS Geni Bahar Ezra Hauer

Study Objectives and Scope Establish a prioritized list of research needs Propose a detailed plan for establishing an ongoing, sustainable, and dynamic agenda Plan formulation will include: –Examination of institutional structures to include expert scientific advice –Coordination with national funding agencies –Developing techniques to evaluate research quality –Finding ways to monitor progress in national agenda –Developing method to update and refine the agenda

Study Contribution Define a priority-setting methodology which is: –Transparent (Understood by others) –Quantitative and analytical –Applicable to both those who set the agenda and those who use it

Task A- Develop a process for identifying and prioritizing research needs Subtask 1a- Define the method for identifying potential research areas and issues Incorporate widespread stakeholder input Include fundamental and applied research from: –AASHTO research needs (e.g., TZD White papers) –HSM knowledge gaps –Problem statements from TRB committees –Unfunded high-priority NCHRP projects –National Highway Research and Technology Partnership topics –Input from FHWA Office of safety and Safety R & D –AAA Foundation –Other sources identified by the project team and NCHRP panel

Task A- Develop a process for identifying and prioritizing research needs (continued) Subtask 1b- Define the prioritization process Determine clearly defined criteria and value of research The prioritization process should: –Be analytically based –Be understandable and useable by others –Include measures of the frequency and severity of crashes –Consider the likely effects of the treatment being researched –Include measures of research feasibility –Consider likelihood of research results being implemented

Task 2- Identify and Prioritize Research Needs Step 1- Identify potential research areas and issues Step 2- Collect research topic descriptor Step 3- Reduce list of potential research issues Step 4- Prioritize the research issues

Task 3- Develop a Plan for Long-Term Implementation of National Research Agenda Step 1- Evaluate alternative institutional structures to insure expert advice into a dynamic and continuing agenda (e.g., some type of Scientific Advisory Committee) Step 2- Define means to encourage coordination of national agenda research funding (e.g., FHWA, NCHRP, AASHTO, UTC’s) Step 3- Define methods for evaluating the quality of research conducted for the national agenda projects (methodology, sources of bias, data sources, sample sizes, standard error) Step 4- Define methods to monitor progress of national agenda (e.g., are high-priority tasks being researched)

Potential Data Sources for Applying Prioritization Process to Potential Research Topics HPMS Database of national sample sizes for roadway features –Mileage by number of lanes, roadway functional class, ADT, divided vs. undivided, etc. –Number of Intersections by traffic control devices, number of legs, ADT, etc. HSIS Database for selected states for key research areas –Geometric features, such as distribution of horizontal curves by degree of curve, superelevation, spiral transition, curve length, etc. –Intersection data by number of turn lanes, type of traffic control, intersection angle, intersection ADT’s, etc. –Mileage by lane & shoulder width, shoulder type, median width, etc. –Link crashes to GES and/or HSIS data subsets

RNS Selection Process

Sources 1.AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety 2.AASHTO Toward Zero Deaths: a National Strategy on Highway Safety 3.AASHTO Safety Management Task Group 4.HSIS Research Topics 5.Knowledge gaps identified in the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) 6.HSM webinars - topics of interest for CMF development 7.Input from FHWA Office of Safety and Office of Safety Research & Technology 8.Knowledge gaps identified in work plan- HSM (NCHRP 20-7(279) 9.Pedestrian Safety Program Strategic Plan 10.Research Problem Statements from key TRB committees 11.SHRP2 Safety project 12.Topics from National Highway Research and Technology Partnership 13.TRB Research Needs Search Engine - search keywords "crash" / "accident" 14.Unfunded high-priority NCHRP projects found in NCHRP Report Other sources identified by the project team, with input from the NCHRP Panel

20 Focus Areas Access management Advanced technology and ITS Alignment Bicyclists Data Management Evaluation Methods Highway lighting Interchange design Intersection geometry Intersection traffic control Network Safety On-street parking Pedestrians Roadside Commercial vehicles Roadway and Cross Section Roadway delineation Roadway signs & traffic control Traffic management Roadway lighting

Existing Attributes Focus Area Research Topic Title Research Project Description Source/Author of RNS Year Status Comments / Notes Cost of Research Study

Current Project Status A total of 50 DAR non-cmf RNS’s priority ranked A total of 45 cmf RNS’s have been short-listed for final priority ranking A draft Task 3 report was prepared and presented to the project panel. Comments were received from the panel. The task 3 report was revised. Progress continues on the final CMF RNS priority rankings Draft final report to be completed in one month (November, 2012)