Synthesis of Safety for Traffic Operations - Transports Canada
Synthesis of Safety for Traffic Operations - Transports Canada
Synthesis of Safety for Traffic Operations - Transports Canada
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
LIST OF TABLES<br />
TABLE 3.1: Crash Rates at Rural High-Speed Intersections in Kentucky 15<br />
TABLE 3.2: The Effect <strong>of</strong> Signalization <strong>of</strong> Crashes in Kentucky 15<br />
TABLE 3.3: Crash Severity <strong>for</strong> Kentucky Intersections 16<br />
TABLE 3.4: <strong>Safety</strong> Impacts <strong>of</strong> Signalization in San Buenaventura, Cali<strong>for</strong>nia 16<br />
TABLE 3.5: CMFs <strong>for</strong> a Change in Approach Control 18<br />
TABLE 3.6: <strong>Safety</strong> Impacts <strong>of</strong> Signalization in South Dakota 18<br />
TABLE 3.7: SPFs <strong>for</strong> Ontario Signalized Intersections 19<br />
TABLE 3.8: Data Ranges Used in Developing SPFs <strong>for</strong> Urban, Unsignalized<br />
Intersections 20<br />
TABLE 3.9: SPFs <strong>for</strong> Urban, Unsignalized Intersections in BC 20<br />
TABLE 3.10: Overdispersion Parameters from Vogt (1999) 22<br />
TABLE 3.11: <strong>Safety</strong> Effects <strong>of</strong> Signal Installation in the United Kingdom 23<br />
TABLE 3.12: Intersection Characteristics <strong>for</strong> SPFs from Cali<strong>for</strong>nia 23<br />
TABLE 3.13: Region <strong>of</strong> Durham – Signalized Intersections 26<br />
TABLE 3.14: Region <strong>of</strong> Durham – Unsignalized Intersections 26<br />
TABLE 3.15: Region <strong>of</strong> Halton – Signalized intersections 27<br />
TABLE 3.16: Region <strong>of</strong> Halton – Unsignalized intersections 27<br />
TABLE 3.17: CMFs <strong>for</strong> Signalization (Thomas and Smith) 28<br />
TABLE 3.18: CMFs <strong>for</strong> Signalization Plus Turn Lane Construction (Thomas<br />
and Smith) 28<br />
TABLE 3.19: <strong>Safety</strong> Effects <strong>of</strong> Signalization in Waterloo, Ontario 29<br />
TABLE 3.20: Estimated Parameters <strong>for</strong> Florida SPFs (All Crashes) 30<br />
TABLE 3.21: Characteristics <strong>of</strong> Intersections used to Develop Pedestrian<br />
SPFs 31<br />
TABLE 3.22: Parameters <strong>for</strong> SPFs <strong>for</strong> Pedestrian Intersection Crashes 31<br />
TABLE 3.23: CMFs <strong>for</strong> Conversion to All-way Stop 32<br />
TABLE 3.24: CMFs <strong>for</strong> All-direction Stop Control in Chicago 32<br />
TABLE 3.25: CMFs <strong>for</strong> Regular Patterns <strong>of</strong> Stop Control 34<br />
TABLE 3.26: Mean Crash Rates at Stop- and Stop+Beacon Controlled<br />
Intersections 36<br />
TABLE 3.27: <strong>Safety</strong> Impacts <strong>of</strong> Signal Upgrades in South Dakota 37<br />
TABLE 3.28: <strong>Safety</strong> Effects <strong>of</strong> Signal Modifications in the United Kingdom 37<br />
TABLE 3.29: Study Site Characteristics <strong>for</strong> White Strobes to Supplement<br />
Red Signal Indications 38<br />
TABLE 3.30: Crash Results <strong>for</strong> White Strobes to Supplement Red Signal<br />
Indications 38<br />
TABLE 3.31: <strong>Safety</strong> Impacts <strong>of</strong> Alternative Signal Head Design in BC 39<br />
TABLE 3.32: Night-time Crash Frequency at Locations with Modified Signal<br />
Heads in BC 40<br />
TABLE 3.33: <strong>Safety</strong> Effects <strong>of</strong> New Signal Heads in Waterloo, Ontario 40<br />
TABLE 3.34: <strong>Safety</strong> Impacts <strong>of</strong> Signal Head Location in Kansas City 41<br />
TABLE 3.35: CMFs <strong>for</strong> Replacing Pedestal-Mounted Signal Heads with<br />
Mast Arm-Mounted Signal Heads (Thomas and Smith) 42<br />
TABLE 3.36: <strong>Safety</strong> Impacts <strong>of</strong> An Additional Primary Signal Head 43<br />
- xiii -