Synthesis of Safety for Traffic Operations - Transports Canada

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The effects of the transverse pavement markings on crash frequency is as shown in Table 10.14. Two years of before and two years of after data were used in the analysis. Property damage only crashes are not included in the analysis because of different reporting thresholds across jurisdictions. Using the non-target crashes as a control, the CMF for speed-related crashes produced by the transverse pavement markings is 0.43. This result is statistically significant to a 99% level of confidence. TABLE 10.14: Safety Effects of Transverse Rumble Strips on Approaches to Roundabouts in the United Kingdom Crash Type Before After Target (speed-related) 96 47 Non-target 265 303 Similar results were found when examining target crashes at the identified test and control sites (CMF=0.41 with a 99% level of significance). The CMF for all crashes on the treated approach was likewise found to be 0.48. In examining crash severity, Helliar-Symons found that fatal and serious-injury (target) crashes were significantly reduced (CMF=0.26). Slight injury crashes that were speedrelated were also reduced CMF=0.48. Finally, the author examined crash occurrence within a one-kilometre square area of the roundabout to check for crash migration; a 12% overall reduction in crashes was observed. This reduction was not statistically significant, nonetheless it is a strong indication that crash migration did not occur. Harwood (1993) Harwood (1993) in undertaking an analysis of transverse rumble strip usage concluded the following… The author of this report indicates that most of the before and after studies are small, not statistically significant, poorly designed and difficult to quantify. Given the limitations of the information available, the author of the report was able to draw only limited conclusions. He indicated that: • Despite the lack of rigor in their accident evaluation designs, the study results in the literature generally indicate that rumble strip installation in the travel lane can be effective in reducing accidents. However, the study results are not reliable enough to quantify the expected accident reduction effectiveness. • Rumble strip installation in the travel lane should be considered at locations where rear-end accidents and ran-STOP-sign accidents involving an apparent lack of driver attention are prevalent.
Traffic Calming • Care should be taken not to overuse rumble strips by placing them in too many locations in the travel lane. • Normally, placement of the rumble strips in the travel lane should be considered only where a documented accident problem exists and only after more conventional treatments, such as signing, have been tried and been found to be ineffective (Harwood pp. 11-12). Page 136
Page 1 and 2:
Transport Canada Transports Canada
Page 4:
Synthesis Of Safety For Traffic Ope
Page 8 and 9:
DISCLAIMER The material presented h
Page 10 and 11:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Traffic operation
Page 12 and 13:
Synthesis of Safety for Traffic Ope
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
TABLE OF CONTENTS DISCLAIMER REJET
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
LIST OF TABLES TABLE 3.1: Crash Rat
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24:
Chapter 1: Chapter 1: Introductio I
Page 27 and 28:
Introduction Before proceeding, a f
Page 29 and 30:
Introduction Literature regarding t
Page 31 and 32:
Introduction The current science of
Page 33 and 34:
Introduction adequate size control
Page 35 and 36:
Introduction In concluding this sec
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42:
Chapter 3: Chapter 3: Intersectio I
Page 45 and 46:
Intersection Control TABLE 3.3: Cra
Page 47 and 48:
Intersection Control TABLE 3.5: CMF
Page 49 and 50:
Intersection Control Vancouver Regi
Page 51 and 52:
Intersection Control V m = the sum
Page 53 and 54:
Intersection Control where: X1 = 0
Page 55 and 56:
Intersection Control Region of Durh
Page 57 and 58:
Intersection Control TABLE 3.17: CM
Page 59 and 60:
Intersection Control The predictor
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Intersection Control program includ
Page 65 and 66:
Intersection Control TABLE 3.26: Me
Page 67 and 68:
Intersection Control TABLE 3.29: St
Page 69 and 70:
Intersection Control TABLE 3.32: Ni
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Intersection Control It is noted th
Page 75 and 76:
Intersection Control Sayed et al (1
Page 77 and 78:
Intersection Control Signal Clearan
Page 79 and 80:
Intersection Control The CMFs are 0
Page 81 and 82:
Intersection Control also examined
Page 83 and 84:
Intersection Control Shebeeb (1995)
Page 85 and 86:
Intersection Control approaches at
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Intersection Control TABLE 3.56: Sa
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102:
Chapter 5: Chapter 5: Pavement Pave
Page 105 and 106:
Pavement Markings The study methodo
Page 107 and 108:
Pavement Markings Hall (1987) Hall
Page 109 and 110:
Pavement Markings TABLE 5.8: Safety
Page 111 and 112:
Pavement Markings THIS PAGE IS INTE
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124:
Chapter 7: Chapter 7: Bicycle Bicyc
Page 127 and 128: Bicycle Safety TABLE 7.1: Safety Im
Page 130 and 131: Synthesis of Safety for Traffic Ope
Page 148: Chapter 9: Chapter 9: Turn Lanes Tu
Page 151 and 152: Turn Lanes TABLE 9.2: Safety Impact
Page 153 and 154: Turn Lanes Vogt determined that a l
Page 155 and 156: Turn Lanes 1998 one of their high c
Page 157 and 158: Turn Lanes Section TABLE 9.10: Safe
Page 159 and 160: Turn Lanes A T = ADT 0.91 L 0.852 e
Page 161 and 162: Turn Lanes CMF = 1 - 0.7 P lt/d 0.0
Page 163 and 164: Turn Lanes occurred within 250 feet
Page 168 and 169: TABLE 10.3: Speed Changes Resulting
Page 170 and 171: Sites Where Applied 1 URBAN Island
Page 172 and 173: Forbes and Gill (2000) undertook a
Page 174 and 175: Ideally, three years of before and
Page 176 and 177: Kermit and Hein (1962) looked into
Page 180: Chapter 11: Chapter 11: Other Other
Page 183 and 184: Other Safety Issues collisions per
Page 185 and 186: Other Safety Issues THIS PAGE IS IN
Page 220: References References
Page 223 and 224: References Bloch SA (1998) “Compa
Page 225 and 226: References Hamilton Associates (199
Page 227 and 228: References Lee JT, Maleck TL, and T
Page 229 and 230:
References Polanis SF (1998) “Do
Page 231 and 232:
References Vancouver, City of (1999
Page 233 and 234:
References THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONAL
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242:
Appendix B: Critical R Appendix B:
Page 245 and 246:
Critical Reviews Worksheet for Eval
Page 247 and 248:
Critical Reviews 2. Are the expecte
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258:
Appendix D: Appendix D: How to Use
Page 261 and 262:
How to Use Safety Performance Funct
Page 263 and 264:
How to Use Safety Performance Funct
show all

Synthesis of Safety for Traffic Operations - Transports Canada

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?