Programming Safety Improvements on Resurfacing, Restoration, and Rehabilitation Projects

1
Programming Safety Improvements on Resurfacing,
Restoration, and Rehabilitation Projects

• Cameron Grile
• February 18, 2004

2
Presentation Overview

• Background
• Literature Review
• Resurfacing Safety Resource Allocation Program
  (RSRAP)
• Methodology
• Results
• Conclusions

3
Background

• What are Preservation Projects
• Funding Limitations
• Effectiveness of Current Allocation
• Need for an Optimum Allocation Process
• Research Objectives

4
Literature Review

• Provided Background Information
• Preservation Project Selection
• Discussion of Estimating Safety Effects
• Safety Improvement Selection

5
RSRAP Procedure

• Developed in NCHRP Report 486
• Assumptions
• Sites represent all possible sites eligible for
  the input budget
• Budget is the only source of funding
• 9 Step Process

6
RSRAP Procedure
7
Methodology

• Identify ODOT Projects
• Gather Project Information
• Project Partitions
• Identify Safety Goals
• Cost Data
• Apply to RSRAP

8
Identify ODOT Projects

• Region 2 Preservation Projects from 04-07 STIP
• Non-Freeway Locations
• 33 Total Projects

www.odot.state.or.us
9
Gather Project Information

• Data for Each Site
• Highway Number
• Site Description
• Site Length
• Number of Lanes
• Type of Roadway

• Urban/Rural
• ADT
• Crash Data
• Average Travel Speed
• Lane Width
• Shoulder Width/Type

Data collected using GIS Layers
10
Methods of Data Collection

• GIS Layers
• Crash Reports
• Highway Inventories
• Digital Video Log

11
Methods of Data Collection
ODOT Digital Video Log
12
Project Partitions

• RSRAP requires consistent cross sections
• 33 Projects split into 101 sites
• Based on
• Lane Number and Width
• Shoulder Width and Type
• ADT
• Speed
• Area type

13
Identify Safety Goals

• Improvement Types
• Lane Widening
• Shoulder Widening
• Shoulder Paving
• Roadside Improvements
• Horizontal Curve Improvements
• Turn Lane Improvements
• User-Defined Improvements

14
Identify Safety Goals

• Lane Widening if lane width less than 12 ft.
• Shoulder Widening if shoulder width less than 8
  ft.
• Retain Paved Shoulders
• No User-Defined Alternatives

15
Roadside Improvements

• IHSDM used to determine expected number of
  crashes (rural only)
• Roadside Hazard Rating
• 7 different ratings in 4 groups
• Descriptions and example photos used as reference

IHSDM Interactive Highway Safety Design Module
16
Roadside Improvements
17
Roadside Improvements
ODOT Digital Video Log
18
Horizontal Curve Improvements

• IHSDM used to determine expected number of
  crashes (rural only)
• Not considered on Urban Sites
• Curves with lt 4 crashes/5 yrs
• 1 site considered Curve Improvements
• ODOTs ITIS used to gather Curve Information
• New curve length based on minimum design radius

19
Turn Lane Improvements

• IHSDM used to determine expected number of
  crashes (rural only)
• 4 sites
• 1 or 2 intersections per site
• Digital Video Log used for determining existing
  number of Turn Lanes
• Crash Report
• TURN Left Turn Lane
• REAR END Right Turn Lane

20
Default Cost Data

• Average from Various Highway Agencies

21
Cost Data

• Based on RS Means Cost Estimating Guides or
• ODOT Average Prices

22
Apply to RSRAP

• Optimize Safety Improvements Only
• Safety Only or Safety and Speed Benefits
• Penalty for Resurfacing without Safety
  Improvements
• Budgets
• Region 2 Budget 19,840,000
• Multiple Budgets tested to see effects on Project
  Selection

23
Results

• Challenges with RSRAP
• Region 2 Results
• Safety and Speed Benefits
• Safety Benefits Only
• ODOT Scheduled Projects

24
RSRAP Challenges

• Safety Improvements
• Determination of Improvements
• Roadside Hazard Ratings
• Improvement Costs
• User-Defined Improvements

25
RSRAP Challenges

• Optimization Procedure
• Software Compatibility Problems
• VB Code designed for Excel 97
• Multiple Alternatives Selected
• Funding allocated to do same thing twice
• Midwest Research Institute contacted

26
Region 2 Results

• 6 Different budgets tested in RSRAP
• Safety and Speed Benefits
• Region 2 Budget 27 Sites improved
• Shoulder Widening, Roadside, and Turn Lane
  improvements
• Some Sites had a combination of improvements

27
Safety and Speed Benefits
28
Safety Benefits Only

• 4 of 6 budgets returned same selections
• 12 Sites received improvements

29
ODOT Projects

• 3 out of 33 Projects scheduled to receive Safety
  Money
• Remaining 28 have some Safety Improvements
• Widening Shoulders, adding Turn Lane

30
ODOT Projects
31
Region 2 Results
Region 2 Safety Costs
32
Conclusions

• 25 of Safety funds
• Data Collection Process
• Number of Sites
• Crash Expectation

33
Recommendations

• RSRAP could be used if
• Data Collection Methods Simplified
• Further Research on Program
• Effects of the Number of Sites
• User-Defined Alternatives

34
Questions