11.07.2015 Views

Light Rail Vehicle Collisions with Vehicles at Signalized Intersections

Light Rail Vehicle Collisions with Vehicles at Signalized Intersections

Light Rail Vehicle Collisions with Vehicles at Signalized Intersections

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

11CHAPTER THREECOUNTERMEASURES TO MITIGATE COLLISIONS BETWEEN LIGHT RAILVEHICLES AND MOTOR VEHICLES AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONSThis chapter focuses on the countermeasures used to mitig<strong>at</strong>ecollisions between LRVs and motor vehicles <strong>at</strong> signalizedintersections. According to Coifman and Bertini (3), a countermeasurefor mitig<strong>at</strong>ing collisions between LRVs and motorvehicles should address motorists’ expect<strong>at</strong>ions <strong>at</strong> conventionalintersections as well as work to keep motorists <strong>with</strong>in the law<strong>at</strong> LRT crossings. They go on to st<strong>at</strong>e,A successful collision countermeasure should accomplish <strong>at</strong>least one of the following goals:Remind the driver th<strong>at</strong> there are special risks in the givensitu<strong>at</strong>ionPhysically prevent the driver from taking these additionalrisks (3, p. 4).Table 3 shows a variety of countermeasures, found in areview of the liter<strong>at</strong>ure and through interviews <strong>with</strong> selectedtransit agencies, which have been tested, implemented, orsuggested to mitig<strong>at</strong>e collisions between LRVs and motorvehicles <strong>at</strong> signalized intersections. The sections th<strong>at</strong> followprovide details on each of these countermeasures.PHYSICAL BARRIERSPhysical barriers provide physical separ<strong>at</strong>ion between movements.Transit agencies have employed a variety of physicalbarriers, including g<strong>at</strong>es, bollards, and deline<strong>at</strong>ors to providephysical separ<strong>at</strong>ion between LRV and motor vehicle movements.These countermeasures are discussed here.G<strong>at</strong>esAn FTA-sponsored study was undertaken in 2002 to investig<strong>at</strong>ethe use of railroad crossing g<strong>at</strong>es to reduce collisionsbetween LRVs and motor vehicles <strong>at</strong> intersections wherestreets run parallel to LRT and motorists are permitted to makeleft turns across the tracks (8). The two types of g<strong>at</strong>es includedin the study were:• Left-turn g<strong>at</strong>es, which can be used to physically prohibitmotorists from turning left in conflict <strong>with</strong> an LRV. Leftturng<strong>at</strong>es can be installed parallel to the tracks (along theline separ<strong>at</strong>ing the left-turn lane from the tracks in amedian-running environment) or <strong>at</strong> 90 degrees to the leftturnlane directly in front of the first left-turn vehiclewaiting to turn. Calgary Transit has installed both typesof left-turn g<strong>at</strong>es.• Four-quadrant g<strong>at</strong>es—From the review of a variety ofg<strong>at</strong>es conducted in the FTA study, full-closure, fourquadrantcrossing g<strong>at</strong>es were selected as the best option asthey offered a number of advantages over the other g<strong>at</strong>esystems reviewed. A full-closure, four-quadrant crossingg<strong>at</strong>e system was installed in October 1998 <strong>at</strong> the124th Street intersection in south central Los Angeles todeter motorists from making left turns around loweredrailroad crossing g<strong>at</strong>es. During the experimental phase,d<strong>at</strong>a recorded for the first 6 months of oper<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>at</strong> the124th Street intersection showed th<strong>at</strong> the four-quadrantg<strong>at</strong>e approach resulted in a 94% reduction in the numberof risky moves by motorists using the intersection. Theuse of four-quadrant g<strong>at</strong>es has continued in Los Angelesand they have continued to have success <strong>with</strong> this countermeasure.Four-quadrant g<strong>at</strong>es are effective in semiexclusiverights-of-way, but not for street oper<strong>at</strong>ions.Knock-Down BollardsCoifman and Bertini (3) note th<strong>at</strong> <strong>at</strong> a typical median LRTcrossing <strong>with</strong> left-turn pocket lanes, the left-turn lanes areoften separ<strong>at</strong>ed from the trackway by a narrow curb, whichmay end before the intersection to allow for install<strong>at</strong>ion of andpassage for a pedestrian crosswalk. With the end of this curb<strong>at</strong> the crosswalk, motorists frequently enter the LRV dynamicenvelope during their left turns. The problem is compoundedwhen drivers cross the stop bar and stop <strong>at</strong> the near side of thecrosswalk. In these situ<strong>at</strong>ions, knock-down bollards can providea safe and effective means for restricting automobilemovements in the crosswalk, effectively reducing the length ofthe potential LRV–motor vehicle collision zone.Raised Medians or Deline<strong>at</strong>orsIn side-running, semi-exclusive alignments, raised medians ordeline<strong>at</strong>ors can be installed to deter left-turn motorists fromdriving around lowered autom<strong>at</strong>ic g<strong>at</strong>es during their turns. Inthis applic<strong>at</strong>ion, the raised medians or deline<strong>at</strong>ors are installedon the cross street, perpendicular to the tracks, between thetrackway and the intersection.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!