State Summaries for Peer Exchange (5-07).doc



AASHTO/FHWA TIG RSA PEER EXCHANGE: MAY 2007: STATE SUMMARIES

ARIZONA

Arizona conducts RSAs in various stages of a project: scoping, design, construction, and existing. This first year, we plan on conducting at least 3 RSAs in each of these phases, and we are scheduled to complete 15 RSAs this first year. We solicit applications from City, County, and Tribal agencies. We also solicit projects from within ADOT (planning, predesign, design, Districts, etc.). We have also selected RSA locations from the state’s Top 5 Percent List. The RSA Teams are comprised of me (RSA Program Manager), FHWA, ADOT, DPS, BIA, City, County, Consultants, and FHWA Peer-to-Peer Program. We have compiled a list of RSA volunteers from our RSA workshops, RSAs, and RSA presentations at various meetings and conferences. Since the Program is only 6 months old, we have not conducted any follow-up evaluation, although we plan on doing this after one year. Here is a quote from a road owner (tribal) that was included in his thank you letter to the RSA Team after we completed an RSA: “This project has brought out a lot more than just the actual audit, which is a good thing. This project has made for better communication between two parties (ADOT & BIA), and the Nation has a better understanding of how ADOT operates. We hope to continue to use this tool as another means of obtaining funding or showing our needs in transportation related issues.”

Michael R. Blankenship, P.E.

Arizona Dept. of Transportation, Consultant

602-712-7601

mblankenship@

COLORADO

(Division Safety Engineer Marcee Allen): There is growing interest in RSAs. The Division submitted an ASAP grant application for some RSA related activities for this year. FHWA could possibly pay for instructor travel or the pilot RSA, etc., using the HQ/HfL money since CO hasn't shown up on the activity map yet. Will contact CDOT to remind them of tomorrow's Peer Exchange deadline and encourage them to send someone.

FLORIDA

FDOT (District 7, Tampa Bay, FL) has a quarterly RSA schedule to work on approx. 10 intersection or corridor locations along state or local highway systems. These RSAs were done by members from the FHWA Florida division office, local law enforcement and engineering agencies, FDOT maintenance, traffic operations & design folks and FDOT RSA consultants (act as RSA team leaders). FDOT has targeted high crash locations & resurfacing projects for these RSA tasks. Results/benefits will be determined when all recommended improvements are done. (However, I was told personally by a traffic unit commander in local County Sheriff office that he personally felt he has done something usefully to address traffic safety)

Safety is the #1 priority in FDOT as shown in FDOT's mission & vision statement ()

Safety engineers are super busy to work with numerous traffic safety issues throughout the State of Florida.

Peter Hsu, P.E.

Florida Department of Transportation

Phone: (813) 975-6251 / Fax: (813) 975-6278

E-mail: ping.hsu@dot.state.fl.us

GEORGIA

We have only done 2 RSAs in Georgia. Both of these were to “try them out”. The first one was done by GDOT employees in 2004. The second one was done in late 2006, at the request of a local government after they went to an RSA training seminar.

The first RSA was for a GDOT project, one that was randomly chosen to perform the RSA on. The second one (requested by a local government) was in advance of a commercial development.

The first was done by GDOT employees. The second was done by a cross section of Local Government, GDOT, FHWA, law enforcement, a planner, and an independent engineer. “Safety Engineers” mostly work for our Traffic Operations office, and in our field districts.

The results of the first RSA were that many of the safety recommendations were addressed as part of the project (e.g. removal of guardrail, etc). The results of the second RSA are not complete yet, but one section of roadway has already been reconfigured based on the recommendations of the RSA.

Scott E. Zehngraff, P.E., General Operations Manager

Georgia Department of Transportation, Office of Traffic Operations

404-635-8127

ILLINOIS

Illinois has embraced Road Safety Assessments (RSA) as a valuable tool for district or Local Agency analysis and engineering studies. Currently we are implementing use of RSA’s as the preferred tool for analysis of site specific, segment, or systematic Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) project locations and consider them suitable for any project. For ad-hoc requests we have applied RSA’s to address safety operational issues or perceived substandard safety performance as indicated by jurisdictional owners for a variety of locations.

The State completed RSA training at three of the nine districts in 2006, and plans to complete training in the remaining six districts during June and July 2007. Our training teams include State Engineers, FHWA, Illinois State Police, County Engineers, and County Sheriffs. The training currently involves a wide range of state and local government employees involved with engineering and highway safety.

The majority of RSA’s will be completed by the district safety committee, comprised of the Traffic Operations Engineer, Operations Plans and Design Engineer, Program Development Studies and Plans Engineer, Programming Engineer, and Geometrics Engineer. Additional assistance from law enforcement is encouraged. The major benefits from completed RSA’s involve numerous low cost safety improvements implemented because of the synergy involved as working in a team.

The main challenge to further incorporation of the RSA process is the time for staff to accomplish them. Independent teams are needed to perform the RSA’s and this is sometimes seen as an “add-on” to the project development effort. The RSA needs to be recognized based on the value received for this investment, and become a routine part of project safety analysis.

Illinois has a central Bureau of Safety Engineering within the Department’s Division of Highways. The Bureau of Safety Engineering (BSE) is responsible for administering the Department’s Highway Safety Program as defined in SAFETEA-LU. Safety Policies are developed and issued through the Bureau and coordinated with other Central Bureaus. Illinois has 5 regions with 9 District offices involved with implementing State safety programs. The 9 Districts have Safety Committees responsible for review and evaluation of safety data; recommending Highway Safety Improvement projects; and providing district continuity toward planned improvement projects as well as effective low-cost safety improvements. The Safety Committees communicate and coordinate with the BSE to provide a means of knowledge transfer. The Central Bureau of Local Roads, as well as the District Bureau of Local Roads, coordinates with local agencies to assist in administering the Local Agency Safety Programs. The BSE shares the coordination effort with Local Roads Bureaus to ensure continuity statewide to reduce fatalities and serious injuries.

Brian K. Trygg, IDOT - Region 3/District 5, (217) 466-7233, Brian.Trygg@

INDIANA

Of the limited number of RSAs done in Indiana all were conducted as a planning and programming exercise, not for a project in active (design) development. One RSA was conducted on the interstate system (I-65 at weigh station, INDOT lead), one on the US 20 corridor in LaPorte County (INDOT lead), and four on the local county road system where LTAP was the lead. The RSAs included an onsite field review. Crash data and other statistics were collected prior to the review and the data presented to the participants at the start of the RSA. Each corridor was analyzed using Indiana’s Hazard Analysis Tool (HAT, developed by Purdue University and INDOT) which compares actual crash data to a predicted or expected performance for like facilities accounting for statistical variations. Operating speed studies made on the corridor were analyzed. Interdisciplinary teams were used and typical participants at an RSA were the central office safety engineer, district development engineer, district maintenance, FHWA safety engineer, local law enforcement, district traffic engineer, and township (local) representative, etc. Overall purpose of each RSA was to apply a comprehensive approach from parties having specific expertise and perspective combined with the use of good data to assess highway safety conditions, to target proper solutions, then to pursue the type of projects that would result in an expected reduction in the crash rate.

Safety Engineering falls under several distinct offices within INDOT, including central office and our six districts. However, the department’s new office of Roadway Safety and Mobility (RSM) coordinates highway safety functions. RSM is located in INDOT’s central office in Indianapolis. Within RSM are four staff engineers with at least half their responsibilities and time devoted to highway safety matters including one supervisor focusing on highway safety and another supervisor with responsibility for safety and congestion.

Kevin Knoke

Office of Roadway Safety and Mobility/Congestion Indiana DOT

Phone: (317) 233-3944

E-mail kknoke@indot.

IOWA

The FHWA requested the Iowa DOT develop a formal Road Safety Audit Program. Like most states we were reluctant to do so. We made a decision to focus our Safety Audit/Review program on our 3R resurfacing projects for a number of reasons. Foremost, it was felt we could best advance safety in Iowa by incorporating low cost safety improvements into our resurfacing projects. Since every roadway will likely be resurfaced within 15 to 20 years we can accomplish a "System wide” safety improvement in addition to selected improvements at high crash locations. We made every effort to make sure that these were not perceived as an “inspection “by the Central office safety staff. This program was developed to be non- threatening to the district staff, the project schedule and the budget.

We initiated this program with a "3R Safety Workshop" and Peer Exchange for our District Design staff. This had an immediate impact; the Districts began to incorporate more safety improvements into their resurfacing projects - using their resurfacing funds. This course has since been provided free to our County Engineers.

We then followed this up a with a Safety Review to each District where we drive recently completed and proposed resurfacing projects looking for opportunities to enhance the safety on these projects. Prior to these District reviews we perform a detailed crash analysis on each project we will review. Participants include Safety and District Staff as well as a retired FHWA Safety engineer who is our designated older driver participant. We or the district staff will sometimes consult with the local governments or enforcement agency prior to the safety review.

These district safety reviews will be held every other year and a 3R Safety Peer exchange will be held every other year also. No formal report is prepared for each project; rather a summary report is prepared for each District Safety Review trip.

Tom Welch, PE, State Transportation Safety Engineer

Iowa Dept of Transportation

515-239-1267

KANSAS

The Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) began its version of a Road Safety Audit (RSA) in 1997. The RSA is a county wide traffic study for the existing state highway system. Many entities are involved in the RSA process (Cities, Counties, KDOT Districts/Areas) but the Bureau of Traffic Engineering is responsible for completing RSA report.

Generally, a certain number of counties are selected for review each year. The goal has been for each staff engineer, six (6) in total, to complete reports for six (6) counties per year; however, we have had to make adjustments due to staffing issues. A county is primarily field reviewed during the spring, summer, and fall months. Each county is scheduled for data collection throughout the year. Below describes what we have been able to accomplish:

Round One: The whole state – 105 counties completed; Timeframe: 1997 – 2004; KDOT Traffic Engineering staff with assistance from two consulting firms

Round Two: 36 counties completed; Timeframe: 2004 – present; KDOT Traffic Engineering staff

Benefits

• Proactive approach to completing traffic studies

• Better use of staff resources

• Comprehensive review of the state highway system

• Promotes consistency along the state highway system

• Promotes a working relationship with cities/counties

• High crash locations are identified

• Projects can be developed to address high crash locations

We believe the RSA process has been a good thing for the state of Kansas. It has allowed us the opportunity to review speed limits, traffic signals, sight distance, signing, and identify high crash locations for the complete state highway system. Our primary focus for improvement has been at intersections, which is an emphasis area in the state’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). The State Safety Engineer is responsible for the SHSP and has a role in getting engineering countermeasures implemented to improve safety. The Bureau of Traffic Engineering is where the State Safety Engineer, State Signing Engineer, and State Traffic Engineer reside. Traffic Engineering is within KDOT’s Division of Operations.

Brian D. Gower (BDG)

Kansas DOT

785-296-1181

gower@

KENTUCKY

• 1999-2000 Trained all 12 Districts on how to do RSAs, when and why

✓ Unfortunately, in that time period, there was no extra money to fund them; and CSD and VE were also being mandated to our design staff, so they weren’t sure where to turn.

• 2004 – 2006 - RSA’s have been done in selected areas. For example, every Drive Smart Corridor (13 across the state) has had RSAR’s performed.

✓ Many of the Districts, with their own maintenance forces and operating budgets did some of the recommended countermeasures. But, many Districts are waiting for funds.

• 2006 – Began a research study to evaluate RSAR’s around the country and continue RSAR training in 2 Districts (to date, plan to train all 12).

✓ Focus has changed in the last few years with RSAR instead of Stage 1 and 2 RSA’s, mostly due to NY’s successes with the SAFETAP Program.

✓ HSIP guidelines are being finalized so that funds can be spent to conduct RSARs and implement findings in various improvement areas.

Questions that always come up:

1. What can I charge do while doing the RSAR? (from the Design, Traffic, Maintenance staff)

2. Why do we want to have a list of things that are wrong that are going to take us awhile to fix? And,

3. Are we liable if we don’t have things identified fixed by a certain time?

Jo Anne Tingle, PE, Transportation Engineer Specialist

Division of Traffic Operations

KYTC – Dept. of Highways

Jo.tingle@

502-564-3020

MAINE

Maine has used the Road Safety Audit approach for more than 3 years. Our RSAs can range from a basic one location/one exposure focused team analysis, that may take just a few hours total, to a comprehensive corridor analysis that may take the team a couple of days from team orientation, site evaluation and pulling consensus information together. Two high-end comprehensive corridor RSAs have been conducted in Maine (which will be the focus of our Peer Exchange presentation) along with a number of more focused RSAs.

No matter what degree of RSA intensity, the process has been effective in getting a broader perspective on road safety issues and at coming to a consensus on recommendations resulting from the improved understanding of the sometimes complex background on the issues. Especially in the more involved RSAs, it provides the team a road map on strategies and priorities to bring about safety improvements and a working document to steer future activities. Bottom line, it promotes across the board buy-in from all stakeholders.

Maine does not have a cookbook approach on when to conduct RSAs, but uses this tool when the matrix of crash history, intricate road and context issues, local public interest and combined desire in resolution exist. We recommend employing RSAs as an initial project scoping tool, rather that waiting to use it as part of preliminary design review, to achieve the earliest identification of safety needs that then can be better integrated into project design.

MaineDOT's Safety Office oversees the diverse Department-wide safety issues related to Employees; Work Zones; and Transportation System needs. The Safety Office reports to the executive office of DOT (reporting to the Chief Engineer).

Duane Brunell, PE

Maine Department of Transportation

E-mail address is duane.brunell@

Phone: 207-624-3278

MARYLAND

When we started:

• Started in 2006

• Formed RSA Steering Committee

• Developed RSA Guidelines/ Manual

• Conducted Training on RSAR and RSA

• Conducted Workshops: RSAR & RSA

• Audited 8 RSAR and 2 RSA projects in various Districts in the State

• Implemented some of the audit results

Where we are at now:

• More Training: Human Factors

• More Training: Train-The-Trainer

• 10 more RSA Projects to be audited in 2007

• Establishing Correlation between RSA Program & Current Planning & Design Process

• Streamlining the Process to involve local jurisdictions, Police and local Safety Coordinators

Future Plans:

• Continue and Expand RSA Training

• Audit 8 to 12 projects each year

• Develop countermeasures from RSA projects & apply early in planning and design stages

• Incorporate RSAR recommendations in future roadway safety projects, e.g. resurfacing & Maintenance.

• Involve Local Jurisdictions and Community Traffic Safety Coordinators from the beginning stage

• Streamline RSA Guidelines & Apply Lessons Learned

Morteza Tadayon

Maryland State Highway Administration

410-545-5580

MASSACHUSETTS

In the fall of 2003, a team (consisting of MassHighway engineers along with Federal Highway personnel) conducted two road safety audits; one signalized intersection and one corridor. The intersection was selected based on input from the District offices and the placement on the “Top 1000 High Crash Location Report”. The corridor was selected as a reaction to a fatal crash that occurred after the cross section of the roadway was recently changed to address a series of previous fatal crashes. The results of the RSA at the intersection location was submitted to a consultant for the purposes of developing full PS&E design improvements to address the issues raised as part of the HSIP. The recommendations presented for the corridor had a number of quick fix items that was presented to the District Office to address. To date, no additional fatal crashes have occurred along this corridor.

In 2006, a multi-discipline team of state and local officials from engineering/public works, planning and public safety conducted two road safety audits, both at intersection locations. The intersections were selected based on placement on the “Top 1000 High Crash Location Report” and input from the MassHighway district offices. The results from the first location were that the Regional Planning Agency and the District Office would evaluate the short-term recommendations. If appropriate, the tasks could be assigned to a MassHighway open-ended signal betterment contractor and in-house pavement marking crew for implementation. At the 2nd location, the team decided that the findings listed in this Road Safety Audit be evaluated by the Regional Planning Commission and the District Office to develop a full Project Need Form. If accepted, the recommendations will be assigned to a MassHighway open-ended contract for preliminary design. Most short-term fixes have already been implemented at this location and a larger scale project is needed.

This summer of 2007, there are 14 planned road safety audit locations. All of these areas are corridors and are a part of our SHSP strategy to address the high number of fatal and incapacitating injury lane departure crashes. The locations, including both state and local jurisdiction roadways, were selected based on an analysis of the top Lane Departure locations around the state. A short list of the top locations was then formed based on selections by Regional Planning Agencies (with input from local officials). This effort will be accomplished through the use of a consultant. To address a recent spate in cross median crashes, MassHighway will be conducting road safety audit at locations which have been identified as this type of crash. A consultant has been retained to conduct the audit and prepare and prioritize recommendations to remedy this crash type. The road safety audits are scheduled to begin sometime this summer.

Neil E. Boudreau, State Traffic Engineer, MassHighway

Email: neil.boudreau@MHD.state.ma.us

Ph.: (617) 973-8211

MONTANA

Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) has conducted a few road safety audits.

A. Reconstruction project on a segment of Non-Interstate National Highway two-lane highway with passing lanes

B. Pavement preservation project on a State secondary route

C. Reconstruction on a segment of State Urban route

D. Rural off-system roads area-wide by a small town

E. Pavement preservation/bridge deck rehabilitation projects on an Interstate mountain pass.

F. With Comprehensive Highway Safety Plan, Consultant led three road safety audits along high severity corridors, one Interstate segment, one segment of Non-Interstate National Highway and a State Secondary route.

Project Initiation:

• A, B, C Road Safety Audits initiated by Preconstruction Engineer with input from District Administrators to experiment with Road Safety Audit process.

• D initiated by District Administrator, following fatal crashes.

• E initiated by FHWA.

• F initiated by Traffic & Safety Engineer.

RSA Team Members:

A through E: RSA led by the Safety Management Section. Team members included Traffic Engineering, Construction, Maintenance, FHWA and Safety Management. F: RSA led by Consultant, with large crowds involving local citizens, enforcement, EMS, school representatives, driver education instructors, motor carriers, MCSA/NHTSA/FHWA and MDT staff.

Examples of results:

A. As field review had already taken place, only minor recommendations were added to the process, such as consideration for school bus stops, path adjacent to roadway for farm equipment.

B. Major recommendation was to elevate the project to partial reconstruction. Minor improvements implemented immediately by the County, such as delineation, breakaway posts, signing.

C. Numerous recommendations about signing, pavement markings, bike lane signing, roadside obstacles. The team felt that RSA would have greatest benefits in urban/suburban conditions.

D. Mostly recommendations for uniformity of signing and pavement markings. Some vision obstructions were noted. Most recommendations were implemented by the County and two sites were improved under the Highway Safety Improvement Program.

E. Recommendations were given for short, medium and long range for signing, pavement markings, guardrails. Project is in design stage. Long range recommendation is to look at relocating the weigh station, currently located in the median.

F. Numerous recommendations in the human behavior side such as public service announcements, increased enforcement, driver training. Several engineering recommendations were not substantiated.

MDT has a Safety Management Section, which develops the yearly Highway Safety Improvement Program, among other functions. The Safety Management Section is part of the Traffic & Safety Bureau, which is part of the Engineering Division.

Pierre A. Jomini, P.E.

Safety Management Engineer

Montana Department of Transportation

NEBRASKA

(Division Safety Engineer John Perry): RSAs don't seem to be on State's radar screen. Will remind them of this opportunity to have AASHTO fund a participant, but may be a long shot for them to send someone.

NEVADA

Since 2000, the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) Safety Engineering has used the Road Safety Audit process many times on Nevada roadways on an ad hoc basis.

In 2006, NDOT Safety Engineering created a position for a dedicated RSA Coordinator to implement the NDOT RSA program statewide. The first task was to formulate and formalize the RSA guidelines. The guidelines give NDOT Project Managers and the Safety Audit Team a detailed process for conducting an effective RSA. The focus is to minimize the number and severity of crashes on Nevada roadways.

The guidelines contain the procedures for RSA Pre-Construction Audits on new transportation project plans such as capacity projects on various design stages, as well as procedures for RSA Post Construction Audits on existing roads such as safety and 3-R preservation projects.

One of the benefits of an RSA is that the essential safety issues can be identified at the beginning of a project planning phase to be able to program and incorporate the recommended safety improvements in the scoping process.

Recently, Craig Allred and Rudy Umbs from the FHWA conducted two successive RSA classes in Nevada (January 2007 in Las Vegas and March 2007 in Carson City). As a result of the training, we now have more than fifty (50) potential auditors statewide. Coming from a variety of disciplines, these auditors include safety engineers, traffic engineers, roadway design engineers, transportation consultants, law enforcement officers, emergency medical responders, road maintenance managers/supervisors, construction resident engineers, and engineers from local and Regional Transportation Commissions.

We will be using consultants as RSA team leaders to organize and report RSA team findings Our RSA Coordinator will present the RSA concept to different governmental agencies. We believe safety engineers working in the NDOT Safety/Traffic Engineering Division under the Assistant Director of Engineering are responsive in addressing roadway safety issues.

Jaime B. Tuddao, P.E., NDOT Senior Road Safety Engineer,

Safety Engineering Division

(775) 888-7467, jtuddao@dot.state.nv.us

NEW YORK

When are Road Safety Audits Conducted? Before resurfacing or as soon as possible after.

Where are Road Safety Audits Conducted? All state highways scheduled for simple resurfacing ( state highways are almost 16,000 miles of an approx. 116,000 mile system).

Who does the Road Safety Audits? New York has 11 Regions. In ten Regions the Regional Director assigns a team from Traffic, Maintenance, and Design to conduct the audit. In New York City the audits may be done by consultant. All regions use a "recommended checklist" of items to evaluate.

What are the Results of the Road Safety Audits? Systematic, pro-active, and preventive upgrade of low cost roadside features.

Where do "Safety Engineers" fit into the organization? We have recently reorganized our Department. Currently the former Traffic Safety Engineers are in charge of "Transportation Systems Operations" which combines some responsibility for maintenance activities with traffic engineering.

Barbara O'Rourke

Safety and Security Planning and Development Bureau

NYS Department of Transportation

518 457-1910

borourke@dot.state.ny.us

NORTH CAROLINA

Status/Progress:

a. 2 completed but not enough time has passed for any after analysis. (US 601 in Union County as directed by the Board and SR 1105 in Onslow County)

b. 2 in progress of completion (waiting on Division response) SR 1221 in Rowan County and US 70 in Carteret County.

c. 10 currently assigned to the TE II's - in various stages of completion.

d. 2 others reduced from RSR status to spot location studies (NC 11 in Duplin County and US 70 in Iredell County)

When: Year-round program, although summer is optimal in order to observe vegetation problems.

Where: Statewide. Primarily rural two-lane roadways with high fatal and/or severe injury crash rates. (As dictated by the Board)

Who: TE II from Traffic Safety Systems Section selects participants, leads the process, provides the study data, compiles the final report, and follows through with after improvement analysis. (With input from supervisors)

Participants:

a. Traffic Safety Project Engineer (TE II) from Traffic Safety Systems Section (Team Leader)

b. Division Traffic Engineer from neighboring Division (to eliminate bias)

c. Regional Traffic Engineer from neighboring Region (to eliminate bias)

d. FHWA Representative(s)

e. Law Enforcement Representative

f. Community Representative (Governor's Safe Communities Representative, Emergency Management Representative, etc.)

g. Other NCDOT Representatives as required based on the data (Engineers from Roadway or Maintenance for example)

Results/Benefits: Expected to reduce the number of fatal and/or severe injury crashes as well as total crashes along the "reviewed" route. Similar to HSIP and Spot Safety projects.

Anthony D. Wyatt

awyatt@nc.

OHIO

The Ohio DOT does not currently have a formal RSA program. This is one of the reasons for attending the workshop -- to see what criteria or processes are typically included in a formal RSA program.

We do, however, have an informal program where our district safety engineers are beginning to develop multidisciplinary teams that jointly review problem locations to identify crash problems and recommend counter measures. We have found this process useful in building relationships with local representatives (Ohio is a home rule state) and developing action plans for locations that might not otherwise make our statewide list for formal safety studies. I am looking at ways to integrate this process into our formal safety review program.

We have safety engineers (at least two) in each of our 12 district offices who conduct formal safety studies at required locations annually. We also have three on staff at Central Office, who consult with the Highway Safety Program Manager.

Michelle May

Ohio Department of Transportation

Highway Safety Program Manager

Michelle.May@dot.state.oh.us

OREGON

The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) does not have a formal road safety audit. We have participated in a FHWA sponsored RSA on a large modernization project. Staff involved in the RSA found it helpful in developing the project. I believe the audit has benefited us by helping the project team focus on specific safety elements and evaluate including them in the project.

We hope to build on this effort to expand the program at least regionally, if not statewide. ODOT does not really have "Safety Engineers." The responsibility for our roadway safety program lays with our traffic engineering and operations staff. At the statewide level our traffic engineering and operations staff help compile and review safety data, develop initiatives and focus areas, special funding packages, and guidance to the regions. The region traffic engineering staff investigate accident locations, scope safety projects and work to incorporate safety elements in other projects.

Joel McCarroll, P.E.

ODOT Region 4 Traffic Manager

Joel.R.MCCARROLL@odot.state.or.us

SOUTH DAKOTA

The Road Safety Audit (RSA) and Road Safety Audit Review (RSAR) process in South Dakota began in 2001 with the South Dakota Local Transportation Assistance Program (LTAP) sponsoring training put on by Dr. Eugene M. Wilson, University of Wyoming and Dr. Martin Lipinski, University of Memphis. This training was presented to LTAP field representatives, DOT Region Traffic Engineers, DOT Traffic Operations Engineer, DOT Traffic & Safety Engineer, and FHWA representatives.

SDDOT conducts road safety audits when initiated by the Region Traffic Engineers on our major urban construction/reconstruction projects. The Roadway Safety Improvement (RSI) team also recommends RSAs and RSARs [the RSI process is what SDDOT calls the Hazard Elimination & Safety (HES) process] We conduct road safety audit reviews on local government roads when requested by the local officials. The local officials coordinate these through LTAP. The RSA/RSAR team varies depending on the type of project or roadway to be inspected. The variation in the team is an effort to comprise the team of independent members not familiar with the project or roadway. The team will consist 5-6 people selected from the following: DOT Traffic & Safety Engineer, a DOT Road Design Engineer, FHWA Traffic & Safety Engineer, a law enforcement representative, a local representative from a neighboring local entity, an LTAP representative, and a DOT Area Engineer.

The results/benefits the team finds/recommends are: signing deficiencies, pipe ends in the clear zone, steep inslopes, pavement edge drop offs, substandard vertical and horizontal alignments, non-breakaway mailbox supports, addition of turn lanes, addition of auxiliary lanes, need for guardrail to protect large pipe/boxes, need for median barriers to control access, other access management items, trees in clear zone, turning radius deficiencies for trucks, and parking issues to name a few. The recommendations/findings from RSAs are given to the project designers to be studied for incorporation into the project plans. For RSARs, we divide the findings into 3 categories: 1) immediate improvements, 2) low cost improvements that could have a positive impact on safety and should be considered in a reasonable period of time, and 3) high cost improvements that should be considered when funds are available for a major rehabilitation or reconstruction. The recommendations/findings from the RSARs given to the entity responsible for the roadway are often used for budgeting and planning tools.

The DOT has included a project in the RSI category of the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) to assist in financing the improvements identified in the RSAR process. There are far more items identified than there are funds to cover the improvements. The Traffic & Safety Engineer works in the DOT Office of Project Development. This position coordinates the RSI program and works with the Region Traffic Engineers, Design Engineers, Project Identification Coordinators, and Local Government officials on traffic safety related issues.

Cliff Reuer, Traffic & Safety Engineer, SDDOT, 605-773-5361, cliff.reuer@state.sd.us

TENNESSEE

Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) has institutionalized the use of Road Safety Audits (Road Safety Audit Reviews). The guidance from these RSARs is used to direct spending in our Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) and High Risk Rural Roads (HRRR). Our Project Planning Division has set up four Road Safety Audit teams (one in each region). The teams are primarily of TDOT personnel from various disciplines, although others, such as Rural Planning Organizations, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (RPOs and MPOs), law enforcement and emergency medical services are included at times. Spots or sections are identified by several different means and are evaluated to determine if they meet guidelines established by SAFETEA-LU. Once eligibility is established by review of data and crash reports, the RSAR is scheduled. Pre-audit meetings are held and then the field review is conducted. Guidance is then written and agreed upon by the team. An estimate is prepared and based on cost and required work to be done, the improvement is performed by either state maintenance forces or let to bid contract. The work takes place after approval by the Chief Engineer and acquisition of required environmental permits.

When the work is completed the site is monitored for three years and data compiled to evaluate the performance of the safety improvements. At present about one RSAR is done every two weeks. Several of the smaller improvement projects have been completed and many more are in the pipeline.

This process seems to have high potential to correct many safety concerns quickly at relatively low cost.

Gary Ogletree

Safety Plan Manager

Tennessee Department of Transportation

Office (615) 350-3308

Gary.Ogletree@state.tn.us

VERMONT

Vermont’s Road Safety Audit Review (RSAR) program involves a collaborative effort between the eleven regional planning commissions (RPCs/MPO), selected towns and the Vermont Agency of Transportation (VAOT) to conduct RSARs through out the state of Vermont.

In 2003, VAOT worked with six RPCs to pilot a RSAR program. The program was expended in 2004 to include all eleven regions. Each year, at least one RSAR is performed in each of the regions during the summer and early fall. The RPCs/MPO select locations (intersections or segments) that can either have a crash history or that are perceived to be unsafe. In 2006, we asked that the primary focus be on town roads.

A five-member multi-discipline team is formed for each RSAR with VAOT and RPCs/MPO staff. Our conduct of each RSAR is structured around specific steps. Typically, day one includes a local concern meeting with the RSAR team, a site visit and a post visit meeting for the team to reach a consensus on issues and solutions. A draft report is prepared and a meeting with the local community and other agencies responsible for the improvements is held to discuss the findings. A final report is sent and those responsible to make the improvements are asked to stipulate in writing whether they will perform the improvement and if not, to state a reason why.

The primary purpose of the RSAR program is to provide technical assistance in identifying safety problems and offer suggestions for small low cost improvements. Two other important purposes are to create awareness among the parties responsible for safety improvements and to educate local communities about safety issues and solutions.

Mario Dupigny-Giroux

Mario.Dupigny-Giroux@state.vt.us

WYOMING

(Division Safety Engineer Paul Harker): Interest in RSAs has been demonstrated by the WY LTAP. They used ASAP money last year to develop and host a one-day version of the RSA/LCSI workshop for local agencies. Three sessions were held last year. So far, the State is cool to the idea of RSAs, and most of their energy now has been on SHSP (creation and implementation). Due to the timing of the recent SHSP Peer Exchange, it is not likely that the State will favor sending someone to SC (despite the "free" travel).

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download