Synthesis of Safety for Traffic Operations - Transports Canada

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Synthesis of Safety for Traffic Operations March 2003 APPENDIX C – CONDUCTING AND AUTHORING RESEARCH In the course of preparing this Synthesis, it became evident that much of the literature that comprises the conventional wisdom is comprised of articles and reports that fail to meet the minimum standards of quality demanded by the community of science. In some instances the substandard work is a result of the study design (i.e., the methods and materials), in others it is simply the incomplete presentation of the results. In either event, the glut of poorly conducted research or inappropriate reporting is at best limiting the advancement of road safety knowledge, and at worst is misleading practitioners. Conducting Road Safety Research The proper conduct of road safety research requires forethought and planning. To build the road safety knowledge-base it is essential that the safety efficacy of traffic operations and control strategies be accurately determined. The pace of advancement is significantly reduced if the community relies solely on academics and researchers to undertake this activity. The traffic operations practitioner is almost continuously making changes to the system, whether safety-related or not, and as such has access to a vast storehouse of data. The use of this data to advance the knowledge in road safety should not be limited by inappropriate research methods. This section provides a discussion on the need for standardized research methods in road safety, suggests some general principles to assist in standardization, and some assistance for the practitioner in conducting safety research. Proposed Road Safety Research Standards Road safety is a subset of the public health and injury prevention field. However, the process by which products are approved for use in road safety versus a pharmaceutical product are vastly different. While both protected left turn phasing, and influenza vaccinations have a direct impact on human health (although in different populations), seldom are the two interventions treated similarly. The evaluations of crash countermeasures seldom have the same degree of rigour as initial testing of pharmaceutical products, food additives, and other products intended to protect public health. Pilot studies are popular fare among practicing traffic operations professionals. New equipment, designs, and features such as red light cameras, traffic calming, and strong yellow-green sheeting are often implemented on a ‘pilot basis’ in municipalities. How ever good intentioned the pilot study, it’s usefulness is often severely hampered by a failure to consider the measures of effectiveness, and the evaluation methodology a priori. Page 195
Conducting and Authoring Research As an example, the City of Ottawa and the Region of Ottawa-Carleton implemented traffic calming within the City of Ottawa on a trial basis with the intention of evaluating it’s effectiveness. However, the evaluation methodology and metrics were not scripted at the initiation of the study. When the evaluation was undertaken, and the methodology determined, it was found that much of the data required from the ‘before’ period was not recorded [Hemsing and Forbes, 2000]. The failure to careful script an evaluation methodology at the start of the pilot study limited the conclusions that could be definitively drawn from the pilot study. Organizations such as the Transportation Association of Canada who produce the standards, guidelines, and practices that govern the day-to-day decisions made by practitioners would certainly benefit from more rigourous road safety research. The Transportation Association of Canada’s Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTC) would be greatly enhanced by making safety an explicit consideration in the selection and application of different traffic control devices. Furthermore, if the MUTCD could integrate numerical guidance and “best evidence” respecting safety, then practitioners’ decisions would be more informed. In order to achieve these ends, there is a need for standardization on what is considered good practice in conducting road safety research and evaluation of traffic operations and control strategies. Even if the guideline publishers do not adopt some minimum standards (although it is strongly recommended that they do), the traffic operations practitioner can use these guidelines in conducting their own evaluations and developing a better understanding of the safety implications of various actions. As a starting point for standardization, the profession may look to the health care industry and their standards for research titled “Good Laboratory Practice” (GLP) which is: A quality system concerned with the organisational process and the conditions under which non-clinical health and environmental safety are planned, performed, monitored, recorded, archived, and reported. 7 GLP is intended to cover work performed in the laboratory and in the field as it relates to pre-clinical studies in the pharmaceutical and cosmetic industries. Nonetheless, there is clearly a parallel use in road safety. The profession has developed sound, scientific methods to be used in conducting road safety research. Yet these methods are routinely ignored, either because the researcher is not aware of the proper methods, the researcher is not experienced in the proper methods, and/or the data required to implement best practices is not available. 7 “Principles on Good Laboratory Practice” Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Environment Directorate, Chemicals Group and Management Committee, Revised 1997. Page 196
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:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
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 166 and 167:
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 178 and 179:
The effects of the transverse pavem
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 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199: Synthesis of Safety for Traffic Ope
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 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 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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?