Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Overview Two Examples of Local Systemic Safety Partnerships Brief History of Crashes and Systemic Safety in Ohio.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Overview Two Examples of Local Systemic Safety Partnerships Brief History of Crashes and Systemic Safety in Ohio."— Presentation transcript:

1

2 Overview Two Examples of Local Systemic Safety Partnerships Brief History of Crashes and Systemic Safety in Ohio

3 Ohio is a “Home Rule” State 120,000 miles maintained by: ODOT 937 cities/villages 1,309 townships 88 counties 1,109 law enforcement agencies

4 THE ROAD TO ZERO FATALITIES ROADWAY DEPARTURE 545 54 % SEATBELTS 372 37 % ALCOHOL-RELATED 369 36 % YOUNG DRIVER 330 33 % 306 30 % SPEED-RELATED

5 THE ROAD TO ZERO Serious Injuries ROADWAY DEPARTURE 3452 36 % YOUNG DRIVER 3637 38 % 3574 37 % INTERSECTION

6 Brief History of Systemic

7 Highway Safety Program Improvements on high-crash or severe crash public roads $102M annually Requests typically $5M or less Historically spot safety projects

8 Systemic Treatments In 2006, Ohio shifted its focus to include systemic safety. We’ve made investments in: Reflectorized Back Plates, LED Bulbs, Battery Backups Signal Timing Corridors Curve Signage Primarily on the state system Cable Median Barrier Edge Line Rumble Stripes Dual Stop, LED Stop Signs, Post Delineators

9 Systemic Treatments Every two years, we select investments by: Setting crash thresholds to prioritize locations Establishing templates and guidelines Modified systemic approach based on availability of roadway data Identifying high-risk roadway features Identifying crash types Reviewing nationally proven, low-cost countermeasures

10 Local Systemic Safety

11 Partnerships Ohio is using LTAP, MPOs and the County Engineers Association to “coach” local partners through the systemic safety process. Administer safety funding and assist with implementation Crash analysis Countermeasure and location screening and prioritization Training How do we make it easy?

12 Township Safety Signs

13 Township Safety Signs Grant Program Administered through Ohio LTAP using $1M annually in HSIP funding. Townships install signs at their cost 100% federal funds Up to $50,000 in materials (signs, posts, hardware) Top 100 Townships based on total crashes Templates and guidance created by ODOT

14 Township Safety Signs Sign Order Priorities Locations are prioritized using crash maps developed for every township. Review non-crash areas w/ similar characteristics Review crash areas by severity Complete sign order form

15 Township Safety Signs Paperwork Process No out of pocket money for the Townships. ODOT pays the vendor directly Township certifies the order is complete LTAP/ODOT issues a purchase order to the vendor w/ instructions to deliver materials to the township. LTAP conducts sample QAR to verify sign installation

16 Township Safety Signs Before and After Since 2013, 152 Ohio Townships have received about $3M for 48,000 new safety signs.

17 Township Safety Signs Before and After

18 MPO Systematic Safety Pilot

19 Systematic Safety Improvements Identify crash types Identify high risk features Select countermeasures Screen and prioritize locations Facilitate review and implementation Project Evaluation MPO-led Regional Pilot Project ($2M) Advance low-cost safety improvements by working with member governments Create a template for other MPOs Phase 1Phase 2 Targets angle crashes Targets pedestrian crashes

20 Phase 1 Installation to start in spring across 11 communities Signal Upgrade Location FHWA Signage Location LED Stop Sign Location Identify crash types Identify high-risk features Select countermeasures Screen and prioritize locations Facilitate review and implementation Project Evaluation

21 General Criteria

22 Step 1: GIS Analysis Spatially join intersections to crashes within 500ft Urbanized Area Boundary was used to classify locations as urban or non-urban 500 ft

23 Step 2: Verification of Results Please answer these questions for each intersection Intersection LocationJurisdiction Total Crashes Angle Crashes Severity Index All Severity Index Angle Is there a signal at this location? Does the existing signal have reflective backplates? Should this location be considered for installation of a reflective backplate? (if so, please answer the two additional questions to the right) How many signal heads are at this intersection? Description of signal support or other features of the signal that may affect backplate installation Cleveland Ave @ Morse RdColumbus219471.621.64 Cleveland Ave @ Dublin Granville Rd / SR 161Columbus180431.511.60 Hilliard Rome Rd @ Renner RdColumbus162231.371.35 Morse Rd @ Westerville Rd / SR 3Columbus156261.651.77 Dublin Granville Rd / SR 161 @ Maple Canyon DrColumbus153691.581.61 Gender Rd @ Refugee RdColumbus143571.521.56 Broad St / SR 16 @ James RdColumbus142351.581.29 Henderson Rd @ Olentangy River RdColumbus137161.501.63 E Livingston Ave @ Hamilton Rd / SR 317Columbus136221.591.45 Brice Rd @ Scarborough Blvd / Tussing RdColumbus133171.481.94 Hamilton Rd / SR 317 @ Refugee RdColumbus131181.471.56 Waggoner Rd @ E Broad St / SR 16Columbus126181.671.56 Lyra Dr @ Polaris Pkwy / SR 750Columbus125131.241.46 Broad St / SR 16 @ Lancaster Ave / Reynoldsburg-New Albany RdColumbus122221.441.55 E Broad St / SR 16 @ Taylor Station Rd / Mt Carmel Service RdColumbus121101.611.60 Karl Rd @ Morse RdColumbus120191.421.74 Morse Rd @ Sunbury RdColumbus119161.611.75

24 Step 3: Selection of Potential locations

25 Step 4: Evaluations/ Field Reviews Signal Strength Evaluations – Were performed by TEC engineering who was on task order with ODOT in batch Field reviews were performed by locals to determine signage needs

26 Step 5: Selection of Final locations Funding available to jurisdictions was based on a combination of need and geographical equity Need Calculation Geographic equity

27 All Treatments 67 Locations will be treated 28% (19) of these locations were on MORPC’s top 100 High Crash Locations list Signal Upgrade Location FHWA Signage Location LED Stop Sign Location

28 Lessons Learned You need good data Working with 11 jurisdictions is hard – 11 different engineers – 11 different standards – 11 different sets of priorities and concerns You’ve got to make it as easy as possible

29 Contacts and Kudos Jordan Whisler, MORPC, jwhisler@morpc.org Victoria Beale, Ohio LTAP, victoria.beale@dot.state.oh.us Michelle May, ODOT, michelle.may@dot.state.oh.us


Download ppt "Overview Two Examples of Local Systemic Safety Partnerships Brief History of Crashes and Systemic Safety in Ohio."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google