hsm implementation a case study of willow road in district 1 2/hsm implement… · a case study of...
TRANSCRIPT
HSM ImplementationA Case Study of Willow Road in District 1
64th Annual Traffic Engineering and Safety (TES) Conference
Pete Harmet, IDOTSrikanth Panguluri, CH2M
2
Project Location
Mixed Use: Commercial, Residential, Parks, Schools
3
• Paved by Cook County in 1940’s• IDOT jurisdiction in 1970’s• Western sections widened to four lanes• Eastern 2 mile section in Northfield
– Widening strongly opposed by community– Discussions about widening since 1960’s– Multiple IDOT studies– 25,000 to 30,000 vehicles per day, direct connection to the Edens Expressway (I-94)– Average of 3 injury crashes per month
Willow Road History
4
Willow Road Existing Traffic
Long traffic queues through the Village of Northfield
5
Willow Road Existing Traffic
Congestion eastbound in morning, westbound in afternoon
6
Northfield Concerns•Pedestrian safety (longer crossing = less safe)•Dividing the community•Changing community character (“Mayberry”)•Encouraging more through traffic
The Village hired a legal team, two transportation consulting firms, a public relations firm, and a lobbyist.
Village Perspective
7
Village Campaign
8
• Comprehensive, Transparent, Professional
• Stakeholder involvement program– Project Website
– Newsletters
– 2 Public Meetings
– Public Hearing
– Community Advisory Group
– Technical Advisory Committee
– Northfield follow up meetings
How did IDOT address those issues?NEPA, and robust stakeholder involvement (CSS)
Safety Health Environmental
Economics
Social Cultural
Aesthetic Sensory
Right-of-Way Constraints
Land Use
Transportation Mobility
9
Willow Road Phase I StudyKey Stakeholders
• Village of Northfield
• Village of Glenview
• Village of Winnetka
• Village of Northbrook
• FHWA
• IDOT
• CMAP
• NorthSuburbanAwarenessGroup
10
• Met in evenings (2-3 hrs)
• “U” shaped table for CAG – Seating provided for alternates/public
• IDOT chaired, moderated
• Consultant Presentations– Brought in Outside Experts
– Conducted Workshops
• CAG/Community Input– Provided specific question and answer periods for CAG
during CAG meeting
– CAG alternates and public could
provide comments after meeting concluded
Twelve CAG Meetings Were Conducted Over A Two-Year Period
Up to 4 reporters at each meeting,audio recordings were posted to project website.
11
• Present and Discuss over multiple meetings• Prepare for it (layman’s terms, compact format, anticipate issues)• Study it (local and regional alternatives)• Measure it
– Travel Demand Model
– Highway Capacity Manual
– Highway Safety Manual
• Document it (prepare and share reports throughout)• Respond to it (timely and thorough)• Illustrate it • Manage it (keep process on track)• Listen
The CAG – an educational process
Pavement Edge Staking
12
Safety Studies
13
Significant Shift in Safety Analysis
Willow Road project development initiated in 2009
• Nominal vs. Substantive
• 5% Reports
Highway Safety Manual (HSM)
• 1st Edition – 2010
• Complex, data-intensive predictive method
14
Nominal vs. Substantive Safety
• Nominal safety is the use and adherence to engineering standards and practices
• Substantive safety is the performance of the street or highway as measured by frequency of traffic crashes and their outcomes (severity).
Nominal Safety is an Absolute
Substantive Safety is a Continuum
Greater
Gre
ater
CRAS
H RI
SK
DESIGN DIMENSION(Lane Width, Radius of Curve, Stopping Sight Distance, etc.)
15
Safety AnalysesExisting conditions and alternatives study
• Existing Conditions – Pre-HSM
• HSM Application:
– Round 1 evaluation – 16 alternatives
– Round 2 evaluation – 5 alternatives
– Round 3 evaluation – 2 alternatives
HSM application details are increased at each round of alternative evaluation
Round 1 evaluation
Round 2 evaluation
Round 3 evaluation
16
Existing Crashes StudyData Gathered
Traffic Crash Reports
Review of the 3-year 639 crash reports (2006 -2008)
Public perceptions on the safety
School Crossing Guards Interviews
Walk-through of the project
17
Existing Crash AnalysesData summary
• 17 crashes per month
• 3 injury crashes per month
• Weather and lighting conditions not a factor
• 5% Report
– Comparison to peer type roads
– Critical intersections were identified
• Rear end and sideswipe crashes
Segment or Intersection Peer Group
Statewide Willow Road
Urban Multilane Divided Highway 39% 60%
Urban 2-Lane Highway 27% 88%
Urban Freeway 6 Lanes 50% 50%
Urban Minor Leg Stop Control 28% 50%
Urban Signalized Intersection 30% 56%
18
Alternatives EvaluationRound 1 Alternatives
19
Alternatives analysesRound 1 Safety Analyses
Predictive Regression Model:𝑁𝑁𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 = 𝑎𝑎 + 𝑏𝑏 ∗ 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑥𝑥1 + 𝑐𝑐 ∗ 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑥𝑥2 × 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶1 × ⋯× 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝑛𝑛
20
Key Safety Metrics
21
Alternatives EvaluationRound 1 safety results
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
12.12.22A3.13.24.14.2
56789
10111213141516
Total Predicted Crash Frequency (Crashes/Year)
Total Predicted Ave Crash Frequency (Crashes/Year)
Will
ow R
d.
Alte
rnat
ives
Oth
er P
aral
lele
d Ro
ute
Alte
rnat
ives
Inte
rcha
nge
Alte
rnat
ives
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14
1
2.1
2.2
2A
3.1
3.2
4.1
4.2
5
Predicted Pedestrian Crash Frequency Willow Rd. at Sunset Ridge Rd.
Intersection (Crashes/Year)
Predicted Pedestrian Crash Frequency Willow Rd. at Sunset RidgeRd. Intersection (Crashes/Year)
22
Alternatives EvaluationRound 1 safety results
23
Alternatives EvaluationRound 2 Alternatives
24
Round 2 Safety AnalysesPedestrian and Bicycle Safety Toolbox
High visibility crosswalks
Pedestrian countdown signals
Pedestrian pushbuttons treatments
Pedestrian only signal
Pedestrian refuge island/median
Roadway lighting improvements
Turn restrictions
Narrower lanes/shorter crossing distance
Multi-use bike paths
25
Alternatives analysesRound 2 safety analyses
• Non-HSM Crash Modification Factors (CMF) were applied
• CMFClearinghouse.org
• Expert reviews
26
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
No-Build Plus
2-lane with flush median
2-lane with curbed median
2-lane with median (2005 Plan)
4-lane with flush median
4-lane with curbed median
3-lane unbalanced (2 Ln WB, 1 Ln EB)
3-lane unbalanced (1 Ln WB, 2 Ln EB)
2-lane with roundabouts
Safety
Wagner Rd. Intersection
Sunset Ridge Road Intersection
Total Predicted Crash Frequency (Crashes/Year)
Alternatives Evaluation Round 2 safety results
Predicted Pedestrian Crash Frequency (1 Crash every X Years)
27
Alternatives Evaluation Round 2 safety results
28
Alternatives EvaluationRound 3 Alternatives
11’ Travel Lane
10’ Lane
2-Lane Alternative 4-Lane Alternative
35 mph 30 mph
29
Alternatives analysesRound 3 safety analyses
30
Alternatives analysesRound 3 safety results
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Willow Rd. 2-lane with curbed median
Willow Rd. 4-10' lanes with curbed median
Safety
Wagner Rd. Intersection Sunset Ridge Road Intersection Total Predicted Crash Frequency (Crashes/Year)
Predicted Pedestrian Crash Frequency (1 Crash every X Years)
31
Alternatives analysesRound 3 safety results
32
Project Wrap Up
Public Hearing76% comments in favor of the project
Light applause after last question answered
Post HearingVillage board voted 6-0 to endorse the project, accept local cost share
Chicago Tribune Editorial
“The Berlin wall of the North Shore finally came down”
33
Willow Road Study CorridorWidened and Reconstructed
34
Enhanced Interchange Safety Analysis Tool (ISATe)
35
ISATe Applications – District 1Circle Interchange Study, Chicago
Summary of Predictive Average Crash Frequency
Segments/Crash Frequency by Severity
K A B C PDO Total
Freeway Segments (I-90/94, I-290/Congress Pkwy)
No build 0.8 2.2 14.9 56.0 182.4 256.2
Recommended Alternative 0.8 2.1 14.3 53.3 182.9 243.3
Ramp Segment
No build 1 3 16.8 38 36 94.8
Recommended Alternative 0.6 1.7 9 20.9 32.7 64.9
Total
No build 1.8 5.2 31.7 94 218.4 351
Recommended Alternative 1.4 3.8 23.3 74.2 205.6 308.2
