1. National Perspective on Innovative Intersections Jeffrey Shaw - FHWA
First 18 minutes: Jeff starts off with a national perspective on innovative Intersections/interchanges: what is “hot”, what is coming, interesting trends, etc.
Second 18 minutes: John shares where Missouri is and where they are headed: roundabouts (painted only); DDI, J-Turn, public acceptance issues,
Third 18 Minutes: Jim shares what he sees from his perspective (consultant, east coast footprint); what locals are looking for, interesting installations, hurdles…
Fourth 18 minutes: Praveen shares research results: safety, operation and signage evaluations, simulation w/visualization etc.
Final 18 minutes: stimulating panel discussion with audience questions and observations

2. Innovative Intersections
Inherent characteristics:
Improve the way people move across intersections
Eliminate, relocate or modify conflict points
Strategically optimize traffic control
“cho·re·og·ra·phy”
Source: Missouri Department of Transportation
Source FHWA
Source: Mark Doctor, FHWA

3. Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI)
EDC-2
Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI)
Source: FHWA
Roundabouts
These designs reduce
SEVERE crashes
while enhancing efficiency
Restricted-Crossing U-Turn (RCUT)
Median U-Turns
Source: FHWA-RD
Displaced Left-Turn (DLT)

4. Benefits of Innovative Intersections
SAFETY
Fewer, less severe conflict points
Speed management potential
Significant crash reductions
MOBILITY
Less delay
Reduced congestion
New/more pedestrian and bike opportunities
VALUE
Smaller footprints
Less ROW
Decreased costs
Quicker construction

5. Progress Beyond EDC2 (Spring 2016)
Progress since EDC2 ended:
Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, Wisconsin

6. Innovative Intersections Resources

7. Long Term Vision for IIG
Agencies include these EDC intersection designs in their evaluation processes or policies in a manner that ensures they are considered and evaluated alongside other improvement alternatives, and implemented when appropriate.
Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE)
Policies/Procedures

8. Historic Intersection Control Options
Mostly “de facto” minor route stop (TWSC), All Way Stop (AWSC) or Traffic Signal
Viewed through a mainline operations lens (i.e., volumes-based warrants)
Separate and involved process(es) for “other”, non-conventional alternatives
Some state policies require roundabout “consideration”

9. Generally, ICE is… A policy and a process POLICY PROCESS
Establishes the general applicability and future effect; sets forth a course of action, plan or procedure; expectation that it will be implemented and adhered to without deviation
PROCESS
Describes the framework and methodologies by which a Policy can be successfully implemented; details the actions or steps to be taken to achieve a particular end; facilitates consistency of effort and results

10. General ICE Framework Typically a 2-Stage Screening Process
Stage 1 is a high-level assessment that considers all possibilities but quickly filters down to a short list to inform project scope
Stage 2 is a more rigorous assessment of the chosen project performance criteria

11. Core Benefits of ICE Quantification, documentation of decision
Important criteria analyzed form basis of defensible decision
Multimodal Safety (quantitative)
Multimodal Operations (quantitative)
Environmental, Construction, ROW and Maintenance Costs (quantitative)
Political and Public acceptability (qualitative)
Other benefits?

12. Lead State Lessons Learned
ICE helps meet the following needs:
Helped advance innovative intersections
Incorporates safety performance in to scoping stage
Helped vet possibilities for context and risk
Provides opportunity for early non-motorized assessment/inclusion
Addressed concerns about documentation sufficiency and consistency

13. Realizing SHSP Vision
ICE is cross-cutting and can link SHSP to all facets of highway program

14. Reduce 547 to 465 in 2 years = 15% reduction
82 LIVES SAVED

15. $56,023,000/$8,620,000,000 =
0.65%

16. ICE and Safety PM Final Rule
Safety PM Final Rule establishes 5 performance measures to carry out HSIP (5-year rolling avgs):
(1) Number of Fatalities
(2) Rate of Fatalities per 100 million VMT
(3) Number of Serious Injuries
(4) Rate of Serious Injuries per 100 million VMT
(5) Number of Non-motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries
States establish and report on targets; annual evaluation on meeting or making significant progress toward targets
Safety PM Final Rule establishes five performance measures to carry out the HSIP: the five-year rolling averages for: (1) Number of Fatalities, (2) Rate of Fatalities per 100 million VMT, (3) Number of Serious Injuries, (4) Rate of Serious Injuries per 100 million VMT, and (5) Number of Non-motorized Fatalities and Non-motorized Serious Injuries.
These safety performance measures are applicable to all public roads regardless of ownership or functional classification. The Safety PM Final Rule also establishes a common national definition for serious injuries.
State Targets
States will establish statewide targets for each of the safety performance measures. States also have the option to establish any number of urbanized area targets and one non-urbanized area target for any or all of the measures. Targets will be established annually, beginning in August 2017 for calendar year For common performance measures (number of fatalities, rate of fatalities and number of serious injuries), targets must be identical to the targets established for the NHTSA Highway Safety Grants program. The State DOT must also coordinate with the MPOs in the State on establishment of targets, to the maximum extent practicable. States will report targets to the FHWA in the HSIP report due in August of each year.
ICE Policies/Procedures can help achieve
Safety PM targets across entire highway program
(Not limited to HSIP)!

17. Progress Continues
FHWA reports on DDI, Mini Roundabouts, Signalized RCUTs, Displaced Left Turn Intersections
NCHRP “Guidance for Traffic Signals at DDIs and Adjacent Intersections”
NCHRP “Assessment of Safety and Geometric Design Criteria for Diverging Diamond Interchanges”
NCHRP “Arterial Weaving at Conventional and Alternative Intersections
NCHRP “Guide for Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety at Alternative Intersections and Interchanges”

18. Please visit our website at
For more information …
Please visit our website at
FHWA Innovative Intersections contacts: Mark Doctor - Jeff Shaw - Hillary Isebrands - Wei Zhang -