-
“haw ... _.,,
P8 .mwrvmw“
VI. ’0‘. 4.
fin. a bi

 

 

{e
.u
.. ...._..,.. . Put...
a smart. C

 

am

40.

r.
.0”... .0:
at 6: in

1s... t.

 

 

 

 

u.

‘ ‘qunumfimflxminmu. 3,.wa .W: . .w . .
h . \D 4 4 , ‘ | . . y . v . ‘ A ‘ 2 . .

.I‘.\"V
‘ \.\

200$

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled
AAA ROAD IMPROVEMENT
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM:
COMBINING THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS
TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC SAFETY AT

URBAN SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS IN MICHIGAN
presented by

Jeffrey S. Bagdade

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M. S . degree in CiVil Engineering

 

_12Zéééé;wn ‘3’“:72¢/A;£I

Major professor

 

Date €/¢3 0//&’Z

0-7 639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

 

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 cz/CIFICIDateDuepGS-p. 15

 

 

AAA ROAD IMPROVEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM:
COMBINING THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC
SAFETY AT URBAN SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS IN MICHIGAN

By

Jeffrey S. Bagdade

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

ABSTRACT
AAA ROAD IMPROVEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM:
COMBINING THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC
SAFETY AT URBAN SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS IN MICHIGAN
By

Jeffrey S. Bagdade

The AAA Road Improvement Demonstration Program (AAA RIDP) is a
public/private partnership designed tO enhance traffic safety by reducing the
frequency and severity Of crashes at high-risk urban signalized intersections.
Beginning in 1996 AAA Michigan partnered with state, county and city
governments in Detroit and Grand Rapids to provide seed money for low cost
safety improvements tO the existing traffic signals and pavement markings with
the goal Of reducing traffic crashes at targeted high-crash intersections.

The safety improvements that were implemented included enhanced
traffic signal visibility, the addition Of left-turn lanes and phases, and longer all red
intervals. An evaluation Of the safety improvements Showed statistically
significant reductions in the number Of vehicle crashes and personal injuries at
59 completed intersections in Detroit and Grand Rapids. These safety
improvements are the result Of cooperation and financial contributions by all Of
the public and private sector partners. The improvements have benefited society
with safer roads and AAA Michigan with a positive impact to their loss reduction
efforts. The AAA RIDP confirmed that Since both the public and private sectors
play important roles in preventing crashes and injuries that when they worked

together, traffic safety could be improved.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes tO acknowledge the valuable contributions Of Richard
Miller, Susan Carbin, Marcia Barnes, Sarita Bagdade, Danny Bagdade and

Franki Berg.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1 — Introduction

\

Section 2 - Program History

Section 2.1 — 1996
Section 2.1.1 - Canadian Model
Section 2.1.2 - AAA Michigan / City Of Detroit Partnership
Section 2.1.3 — Program Structure

Section 2.2 — 1997
Section 2.2.1 — The First Detroit Intersection Projects
Section 2.2.2 - Grand Rapids Partnership

Section 2.3 — 1998
Section 2.3.1 — MDOT and Wayne County Projects
Section 2.3.2 — AAA Michigan / State Farm Partnership

Section 2.4 - 1999 tO 2003

Section 3 — How the Program Works

Section 3.1 - Step 1: Identify Target Intersections

Section 3.2 — Step 2: Conduct a Safety Study
Section 3.2.1 — Crash Analysis and Collision Diagrams
Section 3.2.2 - Traffic Flow Data
Section 3.3.3 —— Suggested COuntermeasures

Section 3.3 — Step 3: Conduct a Benefit Cost Analysis

Section 3.4 — Step 4: Develop a Project Funding Strategy

Section 3.5 — Step 5: Design and Construct the Improvements

Section 3.6 - Step 6: Conduct a Post-Improvement Evaluation Study

Section 4 — Example Intersections
Section 4.1 - Seven Mile Road at Ryan Avenue in Detroit

Section 4.1.1 - Left-Turn Head On Collisions
Section 4.1.2 - Angle Collisions
Section 4.1.3 — Rear End and Sideswipe Collisions
Section 4.1.4 - Implemented Safety Improvements
Section 4.1.5 — Project Funding
Section 4.1.6 - Post-Improvement Evaluation Study

(OCOCDCDVNVU'IO‘IOJCOOJ

11
12
13
13
15
16
16
18
19
19

21
21
23
24
26
26
27
28

Section 4.2 - Woodward Avenue at Milwaukee Street in Detroit
Section 4.2.1 - Angle Collisions
Section 4.2.2 — Implemented Safety Improvements
Section 4.2.3 — Project Funding
Section 4.2.4 — Post-Improvement Evaluation Study
Section 4.3 — Burton Street at Breton Avenue in Grand Rapids
Section 4.3.1 — Left-Turn Head On Collisions
Section 4.3.2 — Driveway Related Collisions
Section 4.3.3 - Implemented Safety Improvements
Section 4.3.4 - Project Funding
Section 4.3.5 — Post-Improvement Evaluation Study

Section 5 - Program Funding Sources
Section 5.1 - AAA Michigan Sources
Section 5.2 - Federal Sources
Section 5.3 - State and County Sources
Section 5.4 - City Of Detroit Sources
Section 5.5 - City Of Grand Rapids Sources
Section 5.6 - OHSP Sources

Section 6 - Post-Implementation Evaluation Of the
Safety Improvements
Section 6.1 - Detroit Intersections Completed in 1997
Section 6.2 - Woodward Corridor in Detroit
Section 6.3 - Grand Rapids Completed Intersections
Section 6.4 - Citywide Crash Trends
Section 6.5 - Economic Analysis

Section 7 - Conclusion

Appendix A - Seven Mile Road at Ryan Avenue
Appendix B - Woodward Avenue at Milwaukee Street
Appendix C - Burton Street at Breton Avenue

Appendix D - Locations Of all AAA RIDP Intersections

Appendix E - Before and After Crash Data

29
3O
32
33
34
35
36
37
37
38
39

42
42
43
44

45
45

46
46
48
49
5O
52
53

55
58
61

64

67

Appendix F - All Red Interval Equation
Appendix G - Poisson Test

Bibliography

vi

71

73

75

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 - Critical Value Comparisions for Seven Mile at Ryan

Table 4.2 - Before and After Collision Data for Seven Mile at Ryan
Table 4.3 - Critical Value Comparision for Woodward at Milwaukee
Table 4.4 - Before and After Collision Data for Woodward at Milwaukee
Table 4.5 - Critical Value Comparision for Burton at Breton

Table 4.6 - Before and After Collision Data for Burton at Breton

Vii

’22

29

.30

36
41

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 - Detroit Steering Committee Organizational Structure
Figure 2.2 - Grand Rapids Steering Committee Organizational Structure
Figure 3.1 - AAA RIDP Procedure
Figure 4.1 - Condition Diagram for Seven Mile at Ryan

(Before Improvements)
Figure 4.2 — Condition Diagram for Seven Mile at Ryan

(After Improvements)
Figure 4.3 - Condition Diagram for Woodward at Milwaukee

(Before Improvements)
Figure 4.4 — Condition Diagram for Woodward at Milwaukee

(After Improvements)
Figure 4.5 — Condition Diagram for Burton at Breton

(Before Improvements)
Figure 4.6 - Condition Diagram for Burton at Breton

(After Improvements)
Figure 5.1 - Funding Sources by Agency
Figure 6.1 - Before and After Crash Data for Detroit Sites
Completed in 1997

Figure 6.2 -'Before and After Crash Data for the Woodward Corridor
Figure 6.3 - Before and After Crash Data for Grand Rapids

Viii

O)

11

22

27

31

33

36

40
42

47
49
49

SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION

Historically, it has been the responsibility Of government agencies tO build
and maintain the nation’s transportation infrastructure. This strategy has proven
effective, as the American road network has become a model for the entire world.
Every year in Michigan, more than 400,000 traffic collisions occur on this road
network leading tO 124,000 injuries and 1,300 deaths. “Many Of these collisions
occur at urban intersections that were designed for traffic flows and patterns from
the 1940’s and 1950’s which have not been equipped tO meet modern demands.
This Situation adversely impacts society with more injuries, property damage and
higher insurance claims experience leading tO higher costs and ultimately
producing higher premiums for consumers.” (1)

In response, AAA Michigan developed the AAA Road Improvement
Demonstration Program (AAA RIDP). The AAA RIDP is a public/private
partnership designed to enhance traffic safety by reducing the frequency and
severity Of crashes at high-risk urban signalized intersections. Based on the
Insurance Corporation Of British Columbia Road Improvement Program, the AAA
RIDP allocated seed money and set up partnerships in Detroit and Grand
Rapids, Michigan. These partnerships Of public and private sector
representatives planned and implemented low cost safety improvements tO traffic
signals, pavement markings and signs tO reduce traffic crashes and injuries. The
benefits Of the AAA RIDP can extend tO all motorists by reducing the number Of
intersection related collisions occurring in Michigan’s urban areas. AAA Michigan

could expect a positive economic impact to their loss prevention and loss

reduction efforts resulting from the safety improvements. The primary Objectives

Of the AAA RIDP are:

TO contribute knowledge, experience and seed money for defined
demonstration projects intended tO reduce the number and severity Of
collisions at high risk urban signalized locations.

TO achieve a minimum benefit-cost ratio Of 2:1 on road improvements
funded under this program.

TO encourage a proactive approach tO traffic safety in future engineering
projects, passing along knowledge and expertise gained tO public

agencies that may institutionalize the process. (1)

SECTION 2 — PROGRAM HISTORY
SECTION 2.1 -1996

In early 1996, the City Of Detroit’s Mayor approached the automobile
insurance industry with concerns about automobile insurance rates in the city. In
response, a task force Of automobile insurers formed the Detroit Urban Insurance
Coalition to explore this issue.

One Of the members Of the coalition, AAA Michigan*, heard about a
successful traffic safety program that was being implemented in Western
Canada. The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC) began a project
called the Road Improvement Program as a way “tO reduce the frequency and
severity of motor vehicle crashes by identifying and investing in cost effective

road improvement projects at high crash locations.” (3)

SECTION 2.1.1 - CANADIAN MODEL

ICBC is a government owned third party automobile insurance provider
that supplies insurance tO more than 80% Of the licensed drivers in the Canadian
province Of British Columbia. In recent history, most insurance providers had
been involved in loss prevention programs such as lobbying automakers tO
enhance vehicle safety and public education campaigns tO improve driver
behavior. ICBC was involved in these types Of safety initiatives through their

"Road Sense” program. In 1989 they began conducting safety studies at high-

 

* AAA Michigan refers tO the Auto Club Group Of affiliated organizations that includes the
Automobile Club Of Michigan, the Auto Club Insurance Association, and several other
Midwestern American Automobile Association (AAA) clubs.

crash intersections throughout the province. They hoped that, by identifying
potential deficiencies in traffic signals, pavement markings and roadway
geometry at these locations, they could then identify potential improvements. If
the improvements were completed, the number Of collisions occurring at the
high-crash intersections would likely be reduced. The program could
economically benefit ICBC with fewer Claims due tO the prevented collisions.
This part Of the Road Sense program became known as the ICBC Road
Improvement Program.

“Until 1993, the program was limited tO CO-funding traffic safety studies at
high crash locations. Since 1993, the program has provided funding for the
implementation Of cost-effective safety improvements that are identified in the
studies.” (3) They found that many Of the proposed improvements identified in
the earlier safety studies were not being implemented. It was not as if the road
agencies did not want tO implement the recommendations, they just did not have
funding available. The ICBC safety projects had to compete for construction
funds against already existing capacity and road paving projects. AS a way tO
insure that the projects identified in the safety studies were constructed even if
the local funds were inadequate, ICBC began giving the road agencies grants for
constructing the improvements. Since the program began, ICBC has invested
more than $15 Canadian in road improvement projects at over 500 intersections
have been completed throughout British Columbia. According tO Sayed and de

Leur (4), the improvements at 26 Of 31 evaluated intersections reported

reductions in insurance claims. Similar programs have been organized and

implemented in Alberta, Australia and Great Britain.

SECTION 2.1.2 - AAA MICHIGAN / CITY OF DETROIT PARTNERSHIP

AAA Michigan was the only member Of the Detroit Urban Insurance Task
Force that showed an initial interest in the ICBC program. AAA Michigan insures
22% Of Michigan’s drivers. Therefore implementing a Similar Road Improvement
Program in Michigan could prove very promising in the areas of loss prevention
and loss reduction.

Based on the success Of the ICBC Road Improvement Program abroad,
AAA Michigan approached Detroit’s Mayor in 1996 with the opportunity tO begin
a pilot road improvement demonstration program in Detroit as a way to address
some Of the city’s traffic safety related concerns. During these discussions
Mayor Archer agreed tO allow AAA Michigan to help the city address safety
problems at several high crash intersections. That discussion Officially began the

AAA Road Improvement Demonstration Program (AAA RIDP).

SECTION 2.1.3 - THE PROGRAM STRUCTURE

The AAA Michigan Traffic Engineer was delegated to coordinate this
program both internally and externally. Internally, the traffic engineer would
work directly with other AAA Michigan employees from Community Safety

Services, Community Relations, Public Relations, Finance and Actuarial.

Externally, a steering committee was put together tO include and
coordinate the efforts including representatives from AAA Michigan and members
Of city government. Wayne County and Michigan Department of Transportation
(MDOT) Officials were also included in the steering committee because Of their
jurisdiction over some roads in Detroit. Representatives from the Southeast
Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) and the Michigan Office Of
Highway Safety Planning (OHSP) were also involved. The Community Safety
Services Manager from AAA Michigan was selected tO chair the committee. The
steering committee’s main task was to approve targeted high crash locations,
discuss funding agreements and oversee the construction planning. To enhance
efficiency, each Of the representatives had budgeting authority in their respective

agencies. (2)

 
  
  

 

.. Chairman: COmmunity Safety Services ManagerfromAAAMIc gan
IAAAMICHIGAN ‘ _C - ,flMDOT

 

~ Community Relations Manager . . , 3 - . Engineer Of Traffic and Safety
Traffic Engineer . ‘ ‘ Metro Office Representative
CITY OF DETROIT I - WAYNE COUNTY
Public WOrks Director , ‘ ' V, Director of Engineering
Traffic Engineering Division Director - Engineer of Traffic Operations 3
OHSP . - j 5 r 1 ' SEMCOG , -
_ _ Director ' . . . Director of Transportation

Figure 2-1 The Detroit Steering Committee Organizational Structure

 

The steering committee had engineering technical subcommittees for the
city Of Detroit, Wayne County and MDOT. These technical subcommittees were
responsible for determining what type Of safety improvements would be
implemented at each targeted high-crash intersection. The AAA Michigan Traffic

Engineer coordinated these subcommittees.

SECTION 2.2 — 1997
SECTION 2.2.1 - THE FIRST DETROIT INTERSECTION PROJECTS

It took less than a year for the first safety improvements tO be constructed
at three intersections in the city Of Detroit. Detroit is Michigan’s largest city with a
population Of 975,000 and approximately 48,000 traffic crashes per year. These
three intersections each had histories Of high numbers Of vehicle crashes and
personal injuries. They each met specific criteria outlined in Section 3.1 for
identification as a target high-crash intersection. Safety improvements at these
three high crash locations were selected and approved by the steering committee
and the engineering technical subcommittee. AAA Michigan and the city shared
the construction costs and the safety improvements were built between July and

November 1997.

SECTION 2.2.2 - GRAND RAPIDS PARTNERSHIP

The safety problems experienced at urban intersections in Detroit were
not unique. Based on the positive experience Of the AAA RIDP in Detroit, a
Similar partnership was organized for Grand Rapids, Michigan. Grand Rapids is

the second largest city in Michigan with a population Of 258,000 and

approximately 11,000 (1) traffic crashes per year. and has Similar traffic crash
problems tO those existing in Detroit. It was determined that a AAA RIDP in
Grand Rapids would be economically beneficial to AAA Michigan in the areas Of
loss prevention and loss reduction. .

A Similar steering committee was organized for the Grand Rapids
program. Members included representatives from the city Of Grand Rapids,
MDOT and AAA Michigan. The steering committee began meeting to develop

safety improvements for target high-crash intersections in Grand Rapids. By the

middle Of 1998, safety improvements were completed at four intersections.

    
 
 

. Chairman Community Safety SerVIces Manager from AAA MIchIgan

 

 

PTAAAW MICHIGAN - . MDOT ..

Community Relations Manager Engineer of Traffic and safety
Traffic Engineer ‘ , * 7 Grand Region RepresentatIve

iii-"CITY‘OF GRAND RAPIDS ' OHSP _

Assistant City Manager .-., ._ .3, Director

Traffic Safety Engineer

Figure 2.2 - The Grand Rapids Steering Committee Organizational Structure

SECTION 2.3 - 1998
SECTION 2.3.1 - MDOT AND WAYNE COUNTY PROJECTS

Both MDOT and Wayne County were active participants in the Detroit
steering committee. During this time period, MDOT was attempting to complete

a traffic signal modernization project for Woodward Avenue in Detroit. This

project included the upgrading Of traffic signals at 30 intersections. AAA
Michigan participated in this project by providing a corridor safety study,
construction funding and assistance in project coordination between MDOT and
the city Of Detroit.

While AAA Michigan was working on the Woodward project they were also
planning a road improvement project with Wayne County at the high crash
intersection Of Evergreen at SchOOIcraft in Detroit. Wayne County and AAA
Michigan jointly funded the construction Of safety improvements at this

intersection. Construction was completed in late 1998.

SECTION 2.3.2 - AAA MICHIGAN/STATE FARM PARTNERSHIP

During the summer Of 1998, AAA Michigan approached other insurance
companies about the possibility Of participating in the AAA RIDP. State Farm,
the nations largest Insurance company agreed tO participate in one intersection
project in Detroit; Davison at Linwood. Based on the positive experience gained,
State Farm decided to leave the partnership to start their own national effort to

improve intersection safety called the “Dangerous Intersections” program.

SECTION 2.4 - 1999 TO 2003
Between 1999 and 2001, 116 intersection projects were completed. By
December 2003, safety improvements will be completed at an additional 134

intersections in Detroit and Grand Rapids. (Please see Figures D1 and 0.2

located in Appendix D for maps Of which intersections have been completed and

those slated for safety improvements).

10

 

SECTION 3 — HOW THE PROGRAM WORKS

One Of the first tasks Of the steering committee was tO develop a specific
procedure for the partnership tO follow when making safety improvements. The
procedure developed involved six specific steps for the planning, implementation,
construction and evaluation Of the safety improvements.

First, an analysis Of the historical traffic crash data for the community is
conducted to determine what locations may be worthwhile candidates for AAA
RIDP safety projects. Next the locations identified in step 1 are studied and
countermeasures tO mitigate the crashes are suggested. Then, a benefit tO cost
analysis is conducted to determine whether the sites meet the AAA Michigan
criterion for them tO invest for the improvements. If AAA Michigan meets the
minimum investment criteria, the project partners develop a strategy tO pay the
improvements. The fifth step IS to design and construct the improvements.
Finally, a post-improvement evaluation study is performed tO determine the

safety and economic impact Of the improvements.

' Step 1: Identify Target Locations

Step 2: Conduct Safety Study &
Develop Countermeasures

Step 3: Conduct a Benefit Cost Analysis

Step 4: Develop Project Funding Strategy

Step 5: Design and Construct Improvements

Step 6: Conduct Post Improvement
Evaluation Study

 

Figure 3.1 - AAA RIDP Procedure

11

SECTION 3.1 - STEP 1: IDENTIFY TARGET INTERSECTIONS

In order to identify potential target intersections for improvement, traffic
collision data from the Michigan State Police (MSP) crash database and the AAA
Michigan claims database are collected for analysis. Using the MSP crash data,
intersections are ranked by total crashes, collision rate, casualty ratio and
frequency Of various crash types. Total crashes account for all Of the collisions
occurring within 150-feet Of the center Of the intersection. Collision rate is the
total crashes occurring at the intersection per million entering vehicles. This is
calculated using the following formula:

COIRate=(TotCra*1,000,000)/(Approach ADT*365)

COIRate = Collision Rate (collisions per MEV)

TotCra = total crashes

Approach ADT = average daily traffic during the study period (sum Of all Of

the approach volumes for an intersection)

The casualty ratio is the percentage Of injury crashes tO total crashes for a
Specific intersection. Intersections with a high casualty ratio tend to have higher
annual claims costs tO AAA Michigan. Therefore, these intersections will be
ranked higher on the list Of target intersections. Total crashes, collision rate and
casualty ratio are compared tO 95th percentile (critical) values listed in the
SEMCOG Traffic Safety Manual (5). This manual compares the collision history
Of a Specific intersection tO others with Similar characteristics. If the total
crashes, collision rate or casualty ratio value for the location exceeds the critical

value in one Of these categories, it is classified as a high-crash location.

12

 

7-“ “-v-1
I ‘ >5

 

 

Intersections with high numbers Of angle and left-turn head-on (LTHO) collisions
are also ranked higher since these types Of crashes tend tO be more severe and
can Often be easily prevented using safety countermeasures.

The AAA Michigan claims database was origionally used to determine
how many crashes have involved AAA Michigan insured vehicles. There is one
shortcoming to using the claims database. It is extremely time consuming tO
query the data by location. For this reason, AAA Michigan discontinued relying
on the claims database tO determine actual locations. It iS used tO help choose
communities where AAA Michigan can maximize their investment in road

improvement projects.

SECTION 3.2 - STEP 2: CONDUCT A SAFETY STUDY

The second step Of the AAA RIDP process is to conduct a traffic safety
study at each Of the identified target intersections. Each safety study focuses
on determining the causes Of the traffic crashes occurring at each Of the
intersections and whether they can be mitigated. AAA Michigan hires third-party
traffic engineering consultants to study each intersection, document findings and
suggest potential countermeasures. The safety study includes crash analysis,

collision diagrams, traffic flow data and suggested countermeasures.

SECTION 3.2.1 - CRASH ANALYSIS AND COLLISION DIAGRAMS
The traffic crash data for each intersection undergoes a detailed analysis.

Crash data is analyzed tO determine what types Of collisions are occurring, their

13

 

 

 

 

degree Of severity and their causal factors. The purpose Of the crash analysis is
tO determine whether the crashes are occurring due tO environmental factors or
caused by driver error. In many situations, Changing environmental factors such
as roadway geometry or traffic Signal visibility can prevent crashes. The safety
study documents any consistencies in crash patterns caused by environmental
faCtors. Collisions related tO driver error such as drunk driving, drowsy driving
and road rage are much more difficult to prevent. In order tO prevent these types
Of crashes, drivers must be educated and convinced that these behaviors are
hazardous. This process can take many years and is beyond the scope Of the
safety study.

Severity is the second type Of crash data analyzed. Injury crashes are
lOOked at in-depth. Injury and fatal crashes tend tO be more costly both
personally and to society than property damage only (PDO) crashes. The safety
study does not include fatal crashes within the analysis. Fatal crashes usually dO
not Offer specific collision trends at intersections.

All Of the crash data are placed in a collision diagram, a visual illustration
Of the crash data. Each crash is shown on the diagram with a symbol
corresponding tO the type Of collision. Collision diagrams are a simple way tO
identify crash patterns. The engineer can use the collision diagram tO lOOk for
groupings Of the same symbols. This helps tO identify trends.

Based on their availability, UD-10 police crash reports are analyzed for
intersections. These are the Official reports filled out by the police Officer at the

scene Of a crash. They provide a detailed written description Of each collision

14

 

 

 

and Often include sketches. When analyzing these reports, it is Often possible tO
determine whether environmental factors caused the collisions. For example, a
review Of UD-10 police crash reports was conducted for the intersection Of Burton
Street at Kalamazoo Avenue in the Burton Street Corridor Traffic Operations and
Safety Review, Grand Rapids, Michigan. The review noted that “Grand Rapids
Police Department comments indicated that parked cars and the presence Of
snow on the exit leg unexpectedly forced two lanes Of southbound traffic into one
lane south Of the intersection, and contributed to Sideswipe and secondary rear
end collisions.” (6) This type Of information can be Of considerable assistance in
the process Of determining whether environmental factors caused the collisions.
It is clear that, based on the police Officer’s description the southbound rear ends
and sideswipes were caused by the presence Of parked cars and snow, not by

driver error.

SECTION 3.2.2 - TRAFFIC FLOW DATA

Traffic flow data is gathered and analyzed for each intersection. This is
accomplished by first collecting traffic volume data through the use Of electronic
counters or human Observers. The traffic volume and geometric data is then
analyzed using Synchro 4.0 a software package designed for modeling and
Optimizing traffic signal timings. This type Of software uses computerized models
tO identify locations where adjustments to the traffic Signal timing or geometry
can maximize capacity. The software will provide a level Of service (LOS)

calculation Of how well the intersection is Operating based on the provided traffic

15

volume and geometric data. Defined in units Of delay (seconds per vehicle), LOS
takes intO account driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption and lost travel
time. (8) Synchro 4.0 allows the engineer tO use trial and error tO adjust the traffic
signal timing in order tO reduce delays. In some cases, reductions in delay may
help to improve safety. Other research such as spot speed studies and traffic

conflict analysis may be necessary for certain intersections.

SECTION 3.2.3 - SUGGESTED COUNTERMEASURES
Once the analysis has been completed, countermeasures tO potentially
mitigate the crashes are suggested. Example suggested countermeasures
include:
. Replace the existing eight-inch diameter traffic signals with larger
twelve-inch lenses.
. Provide permitted/protected left-turn phasing for all approaches.
. Remove on-street parking near the intersection and add dedicated
left-turn lanes.
. Re-time the traffic Signals tO include all-red intervals.
The suggested countermeasures are always stated in the safety study with

supporting documentation.

SECTION 3.3 - STEP 3: CONDUCT A BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS
Once the safety study has been completed AAA Michigan conducts a

benefit cost analysis tO determine whether the suggested countermeasures

16

 

 

 

warrant AAA Michigan investment. Using information extracted from the AAA
Michigan insurance claims database a crash cost model was developed. The
AAA Michigan Actuarial Department developed this model to determine the cost
per property damage and injury crash tO AAA Michigan. These crash costs are
inserted into the benefit term (equation 3.3) Of the benefit cost analysis. For a
proposed intersection project tO warrant investment by AAA Michigan, it must
meet a minimum Of a 2:1 benefit cost ratio (B/C) over two years using equation
3.3. AAA Michigan follows the mathematical process below tO determine
whether a proposed intersection project warrants investment:
Benefit = (PDOy*AAAPDO) + (lNJy*AAA/NJ) <equation 3.1>
Cost = (AAAinv*CapRec) <equation 3.2>
Benefit/Cost = B/C 2 2 <equation 3.3>
. Benefit = Equivalent UnifOrm Annual Benefit;
. PDOy = Total number Of property damage only crashes occurring
at the intersection per year (based on police data);
. AAAPDO = Average cost tO AAA Michigan for each property
damage only crash;
. INJy = Total number Of injury crashes occurring at the intersection
peryean
. AAAINJ = Average cost to AAA Michigan for each injury crash;
. Cost = Equivalent Uniform Annual Cost
. AAAinv = Potential investment by AAA Michigan in dollars; and

. CapRec = Capital Recovery Factor.

17

 

First, the Benefit must be calculated. Next the Cost is determined using an
estimated AAAinv and finally the BIG ratio is calculated. If the BIO is less than
two, the estimated AAAinv must be changed until the BIO is greater than or equal
tO two. The maximum investment AAA Michigan can make occurs when the BIC
= 2. If an intersection does not meet the minimum BIG 2 2, then AAA Michigan
will not invest in improvements. This may occur when the total number Of
crashes is low and the cost Of improvements is high. Intersections are then
ranked based on AAA Michigan’s minimum potential investment that meets the

above criteria.

SECTION 3.4 - STEP 4: DEVELOP PROJECT FUNDING STRATEGY

If investment in the suggested countermeasures is warranted, AAA
Michigan must work with the partners tO develop a project funding strategy.
There are two steps involved in developing a project funding strategy. The first is
tO determine which items AAA Michigan will pay and which items the partnering
agencies will fund and the second is tO propagate an Official agreement or
contract.

It is necessary to determine how much AAA Michigan will invest at each
intersection based on the amount Of funding available from the partnering
agencies. AAA Michigan’s investment must meet the minimum 2:1 benefit cost
ratio criteria over two-years. That is the maximum amount AAA Michigan can

invest. The rest must come from other sources.

18

 

 

 

Once it has been determined how much AAA Michigan will invest and how
the remaining project costs will be funded, some type Of Official agreement must
be Signed between AAA Michigan and the partnering agency. The reason for an
agreement is tO indemnify AAA Michigan Of all claims or lawsuits that may result
from any Of the improvements. All Of the partnering agencies tO date have
agreed tO this indemnification provision through a formal contract or a resolution

passed by the agencies governmental authority.

SECTION 3.5 - STEP 5: DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS

Either the partnering agencies engineering staff or a private consultant
design all Of the safety improvements based on the countermeasures suggested
in the safety study. Each Of the safety improvements must be designed tO meet
standards outlined by partnering agencies involved and by AASHTO (American
Association Of State Highway and Transportation Officials). Once the designs
have been completed, the safety improvements are then constructed either using

the partnering agencies public works staff or a private contractor.

SECTION 3.6 - STEP 6: CONDUCT POST-IMPROVEMENT EVALUATION
STUDY
After safety improvements have been implemented at an intersection, a
post improvement evaluation study is conducted. The Highway Safety

Improvement Program states "Evaluation involves Obtaining and analyzing

 

quantitative information on the benefits and costs Of implemented highway safety

improvements.” (10) The purpose Of conducting an evaluation Of the AAA RIDP

19

was tO assess AAA Michigan’s safety and economic benefits. That study was

conducted using predicted collision reductions based on research. During this

 

step, the economic analysis was revisited using actual post-improvement crash
data. The post-improvement crash data was compared to the pre-improvement
data analyzed in step 3. The final output Of this comparison is always a benefit
cost analysis detailing the cost savings tO AAA Michigan due to reduced number
Of insurance claims occurring at an improved intersection. Many times the

improved intersections will be compared tO control intersections to assist in trend

 

venficafion.

 

2O

 

SECTION 4: EXAMPLE INTERSECTIONS
This section contains detailed descriptions Of safety improvements completed at
three high-crash intersections. The improvements implemented varied based on
the existing geometry, traffic control, collision history and funding availability.
The example intersections include:

. Seven Mile Road at Ryan Avenue in Detroit;

. Woodward Avenue at Milwaukee Street in Detroit; and

. Burton Street at Breton Avenue in Grand Rapids.

SECTION 4.1 - SEVEN MILE ROAD AT RYAN AVENUE IN DETROIT

Seven Mile at Ryan was the first intersection completed as part Of the AAA
RIDP. It is located on the east Side Of Detroit and falls under the city’s
jurisdiction. Seven Mile Road is classified as a primary arterial while Ryan
Avenue is a minor arterial. The intersection has an average daily traffic Of (ADT)
Of 30,000 vehicles per day.

In late 1996, AAA Michigan identified this intersection as a target location
for potential improvements. Collision data from 1993 tO 1995 indicated that the
intersection was averaging 71 total crashes per year. The crash rate was also
very high, 6.10 collisions per million entering vehicles (col/MEV). AS the. collision
rate Of 6.10 col/MEV is greater than the critical rate Of 1.88 col/MEV, the
intersection was identified as high-crash and designated as a target intersection
for improvement. Table 4.1 compares the critical crash frequency and rate tO the

actual crash frequency and rate.

21

 

 

 

Table 4.1 - Critical Value Comparison for Seven Mile at Ryan

 

 

Actual Critical
Total Crashes 71 14
Crash Rate 6.10 1.88

 

Intersection photos and collision diagrams can be found in Appendix A. A
condition diagram of the intersection geometry can be found in figure 4.1. A
condition diagram is a pictorial representation Of the intersection including traffic

control devices, pavement markings and the geometric layout.

SEVEN MILE ROAD

LAJ
:3
2
[1.1
>
4
:1
fr;
..

 

Figure 4.1 — Condition Diagram for Seven Mile at Ryan (Before Improvements)

22

 

Once the intersection was identified as a high crash location, the traffic safety
study was conducted. The safety study revealed the following issues:

. Left-turn head-on collisions;

- Angle collisions; and

. Rear-end and Sideswipe collisions.

SECTION 4.1.1 - LEFT-TURN HEAD-ON COLLISIONS

Crash data indicated that the intersection experienced an average Of 19
Left-turn head-on (LTHO) collisions each year. High numbers Of LTHO collisions
usually indicate that vehicles may be having difficulty making left-turns. Two -
safety countermeasures, dedicated left-turn lanes and permitted/protected
phasing are commonly used tO assist with left-turns and were not present at this
intersection. There are two benefits Of adding dedicated left-turn lanes tO an
intersection. First, making left-turns on roadways with no dedicated left-turn
lanes can limit sight distance. This occurs when an Opposing vehicles waits to
make a left-turn, it can block the oncoming traffic. Adding a dedicated left-turn
lane typically improves Sight distance. Second, the absence Of dedicated left-
turn lanes can result in a vehicle blocking a through travel lane while waiting tO
make a left-turn. This can cause crashes by forcing vehicles to choose
inadequate gaps when through traffic queues begin to form behind the left-
turning driver. Research conducted by G.D. Hamilton Associates for ICBC (10)
examined nine intersections in Vancouver, British Columbia where dedicated left-

turn lanes were added. They concluded “the average proportion Of LTHO

23

 

 

 

collisions decreased from 32 tO 22.” Furthermore, “the average collision rates
were reduced from 1.6 tO 1.3 col/MEV.” According tO this research, adding
dedicated left-turn lanes can Significantly reduce the risk Of a collision.

Since the intersection averaged more than five LTHO collisions for the
combination Of the eastbound and westbound approaches per year,
permitted/protected left-turn phasing for those approaches was also suggested
as a safety countermeasure. Three LTHO collisions per year for the
eastbound/westbound or northbound/southbound approach combinations have
been used throughout the AAA RIDP as the critical value for'determining where
to add left-turn phasing. Research outlined in by J.E. Fisher (11) supports this
critical value. Finally, in order to add left-turn lanes and phasing, the new lane
configuration and Signal timing had to satisfy an acceptable approach level Of
service (LOS) C or higher. Intersections Operating at LOS D or lower typically
Operate at or near capacity with significant congestion and vehicle delays.
Intersections Operating at LOS E or F, have already reached capacity. If the LOS
can be enhanced to C, the delays are typically Shorter. Dedicated left-turn lanes
typically are not implemented if they will cause increased congestion since this

may lead tO more crashes.

SECTION 4.1.2 — ANGLE COLLISIONS
The intersection Of Seven Mile and Ryan also had a very high number Of
angle collisions, eight per year. There were two environmental factors causing

these angle collisions, signal visibility and inadequate all-red intervals. The traffic

24

 

 

signals had eight-inch diameter traffic signal lenses. Research by Creasey and
Agent (12) has Shown that upgrading traffic signals from eight-inch diameter
lenses tO twelve-inch diameter lenses can reduce angle collisions by as much as
10%.

Traffic Signal visibility could also be improved by adding low-level traffic
Signals. Low-level traffic signals are supplementary signals that are not placed
overhead on the span-wire or mast-arms, but rather on the far side Of the
intersection, lower tO the ground closer tO the driver’s eye height. Low-level
traffic Signals are installed also as a way to increase conspicuity by placing
additional signal heads within the driver’s cone Of vision.

The intersection also lacked all-red intervals, a standard endorsed by the
Institute Of Transportation Engineers (ITE). All-red intervals are part Of the traffic
Signal timing where all directions briefly have a red indication (typically 1.0 tO 2.5
seconds) tO clear the intersection. The all-red interval can prevent collisions
occurring when vehicles enter the intersection during the last few moments Of the
yellow indication. Before the improvements were implemented, Ryan Avenue
had an all-red Of 0.1 seconds and Seven Mile Road had no all-red interval. The
safety study suggested that all red intervals Of two-seconds be implemented to
meet the ITE standard (13). The equation used for timing all-red intervals can be

found in Appendix F.

25

 

 

SECTION 4.1.3 — REAR END AND SIDESWIPE COLLISIONS

When nO dedicated left—turn lanes are present, the inside lane becomes a
de-facto left-turn lane. This occurs because vehicles must stop in the primary
travel lane while waiting for a gap to make a left-turn. This leads to an increased
potential tO strike the stopped vehicle in the rear or, by having tO switch lanes at

the last moment Sideswiping the stopped vehicle.

SECTION 4.1.4 -— IMPLEMENTED SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS

Five safety improvements were implemented at the intersection Of Seven
Mile Road at Ryan Avenue. First, left-turn lanes were added tO all four-
approaches as a way tO reduce the number Of LTHO collisions at the
intersection. The addition Of the left-turn lanes required changing the lane
configuration and removing on-Street parking within 200 feet Of the intersection.
The intersection’s level Of service improved from C to B with the new lane
configuration. Permitted/protected left-turn phasing was added for the eastbound
and westbound approaches Of Seven Mile Road tO further assist in reducing the
risk for LTHO collisions.

TO reduce the number Of angle collisions, the traffic signal heads were
upgraded from eight-inch diameter lenses tO twelve-inch diameter lenses. Low-
level traffic Signals were added tO the Ryan Avenue approaches tO further
increase the traffic signal visibility by increasing the total number Of Signal heads.
The all red intervals were increased tO 2.0 seconds for through movements and

1.5 seconds for the left-turn phase. These new all red intervals conformed to the

26

ITE standards. Please see figure 4.2 for a condition diagram Of the

improvements.

SEVEN MILE ROAD

 

Figure 4.1 — Condition Diagram for Seven Mile at Ryan (After Improvements)

SECTION 4.1.5 — PROJECT FUNDING

Three partners were involved in funding this $35,000 safety project. AAA
Michigan contributed $20,000 for project construction. The City of Detroit paid
for the remaining $15,000 for the design and construction. The safety study was
completed by Wayne State University using grant money allocated by the

Michigan Office Of Highway Safety Planning (OHSP).

27

 

SECTION 4.1.6 — POST IMPROVEMENT EVALUATION STUDY

The safety improvements tO Seven Mile Road at Ryan Avenue were
completed in July 1997. Before and after data were analyzed using UD-10 police
crash reports collected from the Detroit Police Department. The before (January
1995 to December 1996) and after (July 1997 tO October 2001) periods were
used in determining the annual average Of total crashes, total injuries and each
specific collision type. Total crashes have been reduced by 53% and total
injuries have been reduced 70%. The addition Of left-turn lanes and
permitted/protected phasing has reduced the number Of LTHO crashes by 87%
per year. The left-turn lanes also helped reduce the number Of rear end and
Sideswipe crashes. While the reduction in the number Of Sideswipe collisions
was Significant, (77%), the 36% reduction Of rear and collisions was not
statistically significant. The larger signal lenses and longer all red intervals have
helped reduce the angle collisions by 76% per year. Each Of the statistically
Significant reductions met a 95% level Of confidence using the Poisson test.
These large reductions translate intO Significant reductions in claims for AAA
Michigan and exceeded the goal Of a 2:1 benefit cost ratio over two years. The
intersection delays and congestion was reduced as LOS improved from D tO B. Iii-
(Please see Table 4.2 for a detailed description Of the before and after collision

data. Statistically significant reductions are denoted in bold.)

28

Table 4.2 - Before and After Collision Data for Seven Mile at Ryan I

 

 

Before After % Chat—nge
Rear End 14 9 36%
Angle (Intersection) 20 5 75%
Sideswipe 13 3 ‘ 77%
Left—Turn Head-On 22 8 64%
Other 39 9 77%
Total Crashes 71 34 52%
Total Injuries 1 9 5 74%

 

”Before" period represents an annual average Of 24-months from 1/95 tO 12/96

"After" period represents an annual average Of 53—months from 7/97 to 10/01

SECTION 4.2 - WOODWARD AVENUE AT MILWAUKEE STREET IN
DETROIT

During discussions in early 1998 with the Michigan Department Of
Transportation (MDOT), AAA Michigan agreed tO partiCipate in a project to make
safety improvements tO 30 traffic signals along Woodward Avenue in Detroit.
Woodward Avenue (M1) is a state trunkline route with an ADT Of 23,000
vehicles per day with eight travel lanes and a continuous center left-turn lane.
Milwaukee Street intersects Woodward in Detroit’s New Center Area central
business district. Milwaukee Street iS a minor arterial with an ADT Of 7,000
vehicles per day.

According to a crash analysis Of the Woodward at Milwaukee intersection
before the improvements were made, it experienced 22 crashes per year with a
0.43 casualty ratio and a crash rate Of 1.83 col/MEV. Because the casualty ratio

and the collision rate exceeded critical values, this intersection was classified as

29

 

a high crash location and a target for additional safety analysis. Please see

Table 4.3 for the critical value comparisons.

Table 4.3 — Critical Value Comparison for Woodward at Milwaukee

 

Actual Critical
Casualty Ratio 0.43 0.42

 

Crash Rate 1.83 1.65

 

Before the safety improvements were made, the Woodward Avenue
approaches had two overhead traffic signals with eight-inch lenses. The
Milwaukee Street approaches had one overhead Signal, also with eight-inch
lenses. There were two far-side low-level signals for each approach and no
pedestrian Signal heads. NO all red intervals were present in the traffic signal
timing. Due tO the low volumes Of left-turning traffic from Milwaukee Street, it did
not have dedicated left-turn lanes. (Please see figure 4.3 for a condition diagram
Of the existing geometry and traffic signal layout.) Once the intersection was
identified as a high crash location, the traffic safety study was conducted. The

safety study revealed the following issues related tO angle collisions.

SECTION 4.2.1 — ANGLE COLLISIONS

Before the improvements, angle collisions accounted for 43% Of the

intersection’s crashes. This exceeds the critical angle collision percentage Of

30

 

WOODWARD AVENUE

«T M ILWAUKEE STREET

Note: Signals located
at the corners are post
mounted low-level
signal heads not
pedestrian signals.

 

Figure 4.4 - Condition Diagram for Woodward at Milwaukee
(Before Improvements)

24% for this type of intersection according to the SEMCOG Traffic Safety
mil. This was the only collision type with any identifiable trends. A more in
depth look at the UD-10 crash data Identified three hazardous actions associated
with these angle collisions. Disobey traffic control, unable tO stop and failure tO
yield hazardous actions accounted for more than 50% of the angle collisions.
The Woodward Avenue Traffic Safeg and Operations Review noted, “these
hazardous actions indicate that vehicles are entering the intersection during the

yellow interval, and are related tO driver inattention to the traffic signals and lack

31

Of Signal conspicuity. The lack Of an all red interval in the existing Signal timings
may further increase collision risk.” (6) The lack Of signal conspicuity was related
to three factors:

1. Smaller eight-inch lenses on the traffic signals;

2. Signal heads placed outside Of many Of the driver’s cone Of vision; and

3. Relatively few number Of overhead signal heads.
The remaining angle collisions were caused be hazardous actions such as
speeding and other unknown factors. These factors combined with the lack Of all

red intervals were the cause Of the high number Of angle collisions.

SECTION 4.2.2 - IMPLEMENTED SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS

In November 1999, five safety countermeasures were implemented at this
intersection. First, the existing traffic signals with eight-inch diameter lenses
were replaced with larger and more visible twelve-inch diameter lenses. Next,
the overhead Signals were moved closer to the centerline Of the road. This would
improve their placement in relation tO the driver’s cone Of vision. Additional
overhead Signal heads were placed on the Milwaukee approaches and the
clearance intervals were adjusted tO include all-red intervals. Finally, pedestrian
signals were added tO the intersection. Although no pedestrian crashes occurred
at the intersection during the crash analysis period, up to 150 pedestrians
crossed during the afternoon peak period. Pedestrian signals were installed as a
way tO reduce the risk for future pedestrian crashes. (Please see Figure 4.4 for a

condition diagram Of the safety improvements.)

32

 

SECTION 4.2.3 — PROJECT FUNDING

Similar to the Seven Mile at Ryan intersection, three partners were
involved in funding these safety improvements. AAA Michigan had already
commissioned a safety study Of the entire Woodward corridor. Included was a
section related tO this intersection. Constructions Of these improvements were

part Of a $2 million effort to make safety improvements tO 30 intersections along

WOODWARD AVE NLIE

MILWAUKEE STREET

H—

I

Note: Signals
located at the
corners are post
mounted low-level
signal heads not
pedestrian signals.

 

Figure 4.4 — Condition Diagram for Woodward at Milwaukee
(After Improvements)

Woodward Avenue. MDOT contributed $1.8 million Of Congestion Mitigation Air
Qualih/ (CMAQ) funds, the city Of Detroit contributed $150,000 and AAA

Michigan provided a grant for the remaining $50,000.

33

 

SECTION 4.2.4 - POST IMPROVEMENT EVALUATION STUDY

Since the Woodward Avenue at Milwaukee Street improvements were
implemented in November 1999, total crashes have decreased by 71%.
Similarly, total injury crashes have decreased by 71 %. Before and after data was
analyzed using UD—10 police crash reports collected from the Detroit Police
Department. The before (November 1996 tO October 1998) and after (November
1999 tO December 2001) periods data represent an annual average Of total
crashes, total injuries and each specific collision type. The improvements tO the
traffic Signals have almost eliminated angle crashes from occurring as they have
decreased by 92%. All Of these reductions are statistically Significant with a 95%
level Of confidence interval using the Poisson test. This intersection also satisfies
AAA Michigan’s 2:1 benefit cost ratio over two years. (Please see Table 4.4 for
a description Of the intersections average annual crash reductions. Statistically

significant reductions are listed in bold.)

Table 4.4 - Before and After Collision Data for Woodward at Milwaukee

 

 

Before After % Change
Rear End 1 2 -100%
Angle (Intersection) 1 2 1 92%
Sideswipe 2 50%
Left-Turn Head-On 6 O 100%
Other 3 50%
Total Crashes 24 7 71%
Total Injuries 7 2 71 %

 

"Before" period represents an annual average Of 24-months from 11/96 to 10/98
”After" period represents an annual average Of 26-months from 11/99 tO 12/01

SECTION 4.3 - BURTON STREET AT BRETON AVENUE IN GRAND RAPIDS

In 1998, AAA Michigan identified the Burton Street corridor in Grand
Rapids, Michigan as a potential candidate for safety improvements. Since the
intersection Of Burton and Breton had the highest collision frequency on the
corridor, it was identified for detailed analysis. Both streets are primary arterials,
which fall under the jurisdiction Of the city of Grand Rapids. The combined ADT
Of the intersection is 65,000 vehicles per day. The land use surrounding the
intersection is predominantly commercial and includes the busy Breton Village
Shopping Mall on the northeast corner.

Before the improvements, the Intersection had both permitted/protected
left-turn phasing and dedicated left-turn lanes. The traffic Signals consisted Of

smaller eight-inch diameter lenSes mounted in a diagonal span configuration.

1 (Please see Figure 4.5 for a condition diagram Of the geometry and traffic signal
layout before any safety improvements were implemented.)

During 1997 and 1998, the intersection averaged 61 collisions per year.
The collision rate Of 2.57 col/MEV exceeded the critical rate Of 1.70. The
’ intersection also had high numbers Of LTHO, angle and driveway related
crashes. Please see Table 4.5 for a comparison Of actual and critical crash
frequency and rate for this intersection. Once the intersection was identified as a
high crash location, the traffic safety study was conducted. The safety study

revealed the following issues related tO LTHO and driveway related collisions.

35

BRETON AVENUE

,.° BURTON STREET

 

Figure 4.5 — Condition Diagram for Burton at Breton (Before Improvements)

Table 4.5— Critical Value Comparison for Burton at Breton

 

Actual Critical

 

Total Crashes 61 47
Crash Rate 2.57 1.70

 

4.3.1 — LEFT TURN HEAD ON COLLISIONS
The analysis Of the crash data identified high numbers Of LTHO collisions.

Even with the presence Of dedicated left-turn lanes and permitted/protected left-

36

turn phasing, this intersection experienced ten LTHO collisions per year. Limited
Signal head visibility or unacceptable levels Of service for the left-turn movements
may have been causative factors in these LTHO collisions.

Before the improvements were implemented, the intersection had traffic
signals with eight-inch diameter lenses mounted on a diagonal span, similar tO
the two previously discussed intersections. This intersection had the same
issues related tO the visibility Of traffic signals with eight-inch diameter lenses
discussed earlier in section 4. There were also two issues related tO traffic Signal
visibility that were unique tO this intersection. First, the placement Of the
permitted/protected left-turn phase signal was difficult tO see. Since the
intersection had lagging left-turn phases, vehicles tended to pull out intO the
center Of the intersection during the leading permitted phase while waiting for a
gap tO make a left-turn. This is a normal maneuver at this intersection. When
this occurs, the left-turn phase signal is nO longer within the driver's cone Of
vision. The second issue is the unacceptable levels Of service for the left-tuming
movements. “Poor levels Of service experienced by the left-turn movements,
especially for the north, south and west approaches, may contribute to driver
frustration and encourage drivers tO accept inadequate gaps." (5) These issues
appear tO be the primary causes Of‘the LTHO collisions.

4.3.2 - DRIVEWAY RELATED COLLISIONS
The intersection Of Burton Street at Breton Avenue is the center Of a

bustling commercial district with developments present on all four corners. Each

37

' I

n
I‘ As. .
I

 

 

Of the commercial developments have high volumes Of traffic entering and exiting
from their driveways. The large number Of driveways combined with the width Of
Burton Street and Breton Avenue and the high traffic volumes lead tO an average
Of 16 driveway related collisions per year. Rear end and angle crash types
accounted for a majority Of the driveway related collisions. The rear and
collisions occurred when a vehicle on Burton or Breton had tO unexpectedly slow
down or stop for another vehicle entering or exiting a driveway. The angle
collisions occurred primarily when vehicles attempted tO make left-turns while

exiting a driveway and crossing three or four lanes Of oncoming traffic.

SECTION 4.3.3 — IMPLEMENTED SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS

Safety improvements were implemented at this intersection in April 2000.
The only AAA RIDP suggested improvements constructed tO date have been
upgrades tO the traffic signals. The existing traffic signals have been replaced
with larger twelve-inch diameter lenses. The overhead traffic signals were
reconfigured from a diagonal span to a box span. The box span allows a vehicle,
waiting to make a left-turn during the permitted phase, tO have adequate visibility
Of the traffic Signal. A box Span configuration places the traffic signals on the far
Side Of the intersection with a signal head over each lane “greatly improving the
Signal visibility for vehicles which have entered the intersection, especially for
left-turn movements.” (5) Black back plates on overhead traffic Signals and far left
low-level left-turn phase Signals were added tO further increase the conspicuity Of

the intersections traffic signals.

38

 

 

 

 

There were nO improvements to the intersection’s access management. A
narrow concrete median was proposed for both Burton Street and Breton Avenue
as a way tO physically restrict vehicles from making left-turns in and out Of the
driveways. The narrow median was not implemented due to a lack Of available

funding resources.

SECTION 4.2.4 - PROJECT FUNDING

Safety improvements at Burton Street and Breton Avenue were
constructed as part Of a wider $600,000 project that included 18 other
intersections along the Burton Street and Eastern Avenue corridors. AAA
Michigan provided funding for the Burton Street Corridor Safety and Operations
W, project design and a grant for a portion Of the construction. The City Of
Grand Rapids and MDOT shared the remaining construction costs using a

combination Of Transportation Economic Development and local funding.

SECTION 4.3.5 - POST IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION STUDY

Since the safety improvements were implemented at the intersection Of
Burton Street at Breton Avenue, total collisions have been reduced by 26%.
Before and after data was analyzed using UD-10 police crash reports collected
from the Grand Rapids Police Department. The before (January 1998 tO
December 1999) and after (April 2000 to December 2001) periods represent an

annual average Of total crashes, total injuries and each specific collision type. AS

39

 

,.—fi~w———v~ m
i

BRETON AVENUE
q-----------

4:—-------

BURTON STREET

Note 1: Crosswalks
and Stop Bars were
not removed but were
not Included in this
figure.

Note 2: Signal heads
for each lane are
placed on the far side
Of each approach.

 

J.
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Figure 4.6 - Condition Diagram for Burton at Breton (After Improvements)

a result Of the safety improvements targeted on left-turning issues, LTHO
crashes declined by 80%. These reductions were statistically significant with a
95% level Of confidence using the Poisson test. There was nO significant
reduction in driveway related crashes since no improvements were made to the

access management plan. (Please see Table 4.6 for a detailed de3cription Of the

40

before and after collision data. Statistically significant reductions are denoted in

bold.)

Table 4.6 - Before and After Collision Data for Burton at Breton

 

 

Before After % Change
Rear End 18 19 -6°/o
Angle (Intersection) 2 0 100%
Left-Turn Head-On 1O 2 80%
Sideswipe 8 1O -25%
Other 9 1 89%
Driveway Related 16 13 19%
Total Crashes 61 45 26%
Total Injuries 9 6 33%

 

"Before" period represents an annual average of 24-months from 1/98 to 12/99
"After" period represents an annual average of 21-months from 4/00 to 12/01

41

SECTION 5 — PROGRAM FUNDING SOURCES

Funding for the AAA RIDP has come from various sources. Between
1997 and 1999, AAA Michigan allocated $2 million for safety studies, design and
construction of safety improvements at high crash intersections in Detroit and
Grand Rapids. This allocation leveraged more than $20 Million of federal. state,

county and city funds. (Figure 5.1 outlines the funding sources by agency used

to pay for the safety improvements.)

 

I AAA Michigan
El Detroit

El FHWA

Grand Rapids
E MDOT

I OHSP

E Wayne County

 

 

 

 

5% 25%

Figure 5.1 — Funding Sources by Agency

SECTION 5.1 — AAA MICHIGAN SOURCES
The majority of the AAA Michigan contribution went to fund design of the

safety improvements. It was easier and quicker for AAA Michigan to contract out

the designs to third-party engineering consultants than it was for any of the

42

partners. This helped to decrease the time required to design and implement the
safety improvements.

AAA Michigan also lobbied state government to have Transportation
Economic Development Funds (TEDF) dedicated for specific use for AAA RIDP
safety improvements. This effort resulted in more than a quarter of the

government funds leveraged for the safety improvements.

SECTION 5.2 - FEDERAL SOURCES
The Federal Highway Administration (F HWA) provided 25% of the funding

for the safety improvements. All of this funding was allocated through Detroit,
Grand Rapids, MDOT and Wayne County. Each of those agencies receives a
specific amount of FHWA funding each year. They can also apply for funding in
addition to the initial allocation. The types of federal (FHWA) funding used for
the safety improvements were:

. TEDF;

. Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ);

. Federal Aid Traffic Signal Modernization Program; and

. Safety.
To use any of these federal funds, the receiving agency must match 20% of the

federal allocation.

43

SECTION 5.3 — STATE AND COUNTY SOURCES

TEDF accounted for the majority of the funding provided by the MDOT for
the AAA RIDP. In 1998 and 1999, MDOT allocated a total of $4 million of state
funding for use on safety improvements constructed as part of the AAA RIDP.
This funding required a 50% match by Detroit, Grand Rapids or Wayne County.
MDOT also used some of their federal CMAQ allocation to pay for the safety
improvements. All of this funding came from MDOT general operating budget
which is made up state gas tax revenue. Wayne County provided matching
funds to came from their general operating budget, which is made up of county
tax and public bond revenue. During early meetings of the AAA RIDP steering
committee both MDOT and Wayne County committed to using portions of their
federal allocations and providing the matching funds for implementation of the

safety projects.

SECTION 5.4 — CITY OF DETROIT SOURCES

The city of Detroit has allocated 22% of the funding used for construction
of AAA RIDP safety improvements. Similar to MDOT and Wayne County, Detroit
used portions of their annual federal allocation to pay for the majority of their
share. The city’s federal allocation includes Category C TEDF and Federal Aid
Traffic Signal Modernization funds. CMAQ and Safety funds were also awarded
for a few additional intersections. The remaining funds which were used for

MDOT and federal matching, came from the Detroit’s Department of Public

44

I A

Works operating budget which is a combination of city tax and public bond

revenue.

SECTION 5.5 — CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS SOURCES

Funding of safety improvements in Grand Rapids is a bit different to what
occurred in Detroit. The Grand Rapids annual federal allocation is smaller than
Detroit’s. Therefore Grand Rapids had to apply for safety and CMAQ funds for
some projects. AAA Michigan successfully lobbied for TEDF funds to help pay
for safety improvements. Their matching funds came from their city-operating
budget. In order to reduce construction costs, the City of Grand Rapids Streets

and Lighting Department constructed all of the safety improvements.

SECTION 5.6 - OHSP GRANTS

Beginning in 1997, The Michigan Office of Highway Safety Planning,
(OHSP), a division of the Michigan Department of State Police, provided
government grants for safety research. OHSP provided Wayne State University
with grants to conduct safety and post-improvement evaluation research of the
AAA RIDP. These grants allowed Wayne State University to conduct safety
studies at more than 75 target high-crash intersections, primarily in Detroit as

well as some post-improvement evaluation research.

45

SECTION 6 — POST IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION OF THE SAFETY
IMPROVEMENTS
Post implementation evaluation studies have been conducted to analyze

the safety and economic impacts of the improvements. Of the 120 completed
intersections where safety improvements have been applied, 59 have sufficient
data for evaluation. The three intersections discussed in section 4 of this report
are included within the 59 completed intersections. These 59 completed
intersections have been divided into three evaluation categories:

. Detroit intersections completed in 1997;

. Woodward Corridor in Detroit; and

. Grand Rapids completed intersections.

SECTION 6.1 — DETROIT INTERSECTIONS COMPLETED IN 1997

In 1997 safety improvements were completed at three high crash
intersections in the city of Detroit. The intersection of Seven Mile at Ryan is
included within this category. At these three intersections, total crashes were
reduced by 53% and total injuries were reduced by 70%. These reductions are
based on two years of pre-improvement “before” and more than four years of
post-improvement “after" collision data. These reductions were statistically
significant with a 95% level of confidence using the Poisson test. According to
research conducted in 1999 by T. Datta, Schattler and S. Datta two years after
implementation on the effects of these improvements, “the before and after

comparison of right-angle, injury and total crashes at all three treatment sites

46

show that the crash frequencies were significantly lower after treatment. This
indicates the positive effectiveness of properly designed and installed clearance
intervals, exclusive left-turn lanes at all approaches, left-turn phases where
warranted and larger signal lenses." (11) A list of the specific safety
improvements can be found in Table E1 in Appendix E. Figure 6.1 illustrates the
before and after crash data for the Detroit intersections completed in 1997. The
crash data was compiled from UD-1O police crash report forms collected from the
Detroit Police Department. The before period represents the annual average of
collisions from January 1995 to December 1996. The after period represents the

annual average of collisions from July 1997 to October 2001.

Figure 6.1— Before and After Crash Data for Detroit Sites Completed in 1997

180

5 163
5 160 . 77
3
U'
g 140 7.
u.
g 120 - - 7 7",. . .-
.72 777-
:5 10° 77 7 7 ’7 ' ' ‘lBefore
o 80 7 .. 7.. After
3 so 51 . . 5.3. 7745
< 40 . . .7 - -7
‘3' 15 25 2° 13
C
< o -. , 7
Total Injury Rear End Angle LTHO
Crashes Crashes

47

SECTION 6.2 — WOODWARD CORRIDOR IN DETROIT

In 1999, safety improvements to 30 intersections (including Woodward at
Milwaukee) were completed. The primary improvement was enhancing the
visibility of the traffic signals. A list of all of the safety improvements can be
found in Table E.2 located in Appendix E. The crash data were compiled from
UD—1O police crash report forms collected from the Detroit Police Department
and the Highland Park Department of Public Safety. The before period
represents the annual average of collisions from January 1997 to December
1998. The after period represents the annual average of collisions from
November 1999 to December 2001. A comparison of the before collision data to
the after collision data shows a 26% reduction in total crashes and a 34%
reduction in total injuries. Angle crashes, a target for improvement, were
reduced by 71 %. Both of these reductions are statistically significant with a 95%
level of confidence using the Poisson test. Rear end and LTHO crashes did not
decrease significantly. This was most likely due to the fact that the
improvements were targeted toward mitigating angle collisions. Additionally,
most of the LTHO collisions were clustered at a few isolated intersections where
left-turn phasing was warranted but not installed.

The reason these reductions are smaller than what was found for the
Detroit intersections completed in 1997 was that the crash problems in the before
period were less severe and therefore, the potential for reduction was smaller.
Figure 6.2 illustrates the collision reductions for the 30 intersections included in

the Woodward Corridor.

48

Figure 6.2 - Before and After Crash Data for the Woodward Corridor

~ ~ Fees};
.7 777- --— _After Mg

,_ l—I—u— . -

"_I'—

Total Injury Rear End Angle LTHO
Crashes Crashes

 

 

 

Annual Average Collision Frequency
0

SECTION 6.3 - GRAND RAPIDS COMPLETED INTERSECTIONS

Between 1998 and 2000, safety improvements were completed at 26
intersections in Grand Rapids including Burton Street at Breton Avenue. The
safety improvements varied by intersection but primarily included enhancements
to traffic signal visibility, additional dedicated left-turn lanes and
permitted/protected left-turn phasing. A list of the actual improvements made at
each intersection and implementation dates can be found in Table BB in
Appendix E.

Collision data for these analyses were collected from the Grand Rapids
Police Department. The before period represents an annual average of the two-

years before implementation of the safety improvements. The after period

49

represents an annual average of a minimum of one-year of after data. Before
and after periods vary by site as each had a different implementation date.

Since the improvements have been made, total crashes have been
reduced by 22% and total injuries have decreased by 47%. Angle collisions have
been reduced by 54% and LTHO collisions have decreased by 52%. All of these
reductions are statistically significant with a 95% level of confidence using the
Poisson test. Rear end collisions remained unaffected. Figure 6.3 illustrates the

collision reductions at the 26 completed Grand Rapids intersections.

Figure 6.3 - Before and After Crash Data for Grand Rapids

700
606
600 .- ,7

500 472

400 ' ’ T ’ ’ I Before
300 . After
186 186

200 W ,.
148 120 116

I78 I“ I“

Total Injury Rear End Angle LTHO
Crashes Crashes

Annual Average Collision Frequency
0

SECTION 6.4 - CITYWIDE CRASH TRENDS
The before and after crash data for the improved intersections has been
compared to citywide total collision and injury trends for both Detroit and Grand

Rapids. Figure 6.4 illustrates the total collision and injury trends for 1994 and

50

Colllsions Per Year

Collisions Per Year

60000 ;

50000 7
I

40000 ;-.---

12000

10000 s.

8000 .

5000 -,-..-

4000 ,

2000 £fle~fifiifiih~¥ ,

Figure 6.4 - Citywide Crash Trends for Detroit

 

 

 

51

1998

 

—Total

mfla-a‘njuq

1 999 2000

2000. During that time period, total collisions decreased at a rate of 1.5% per
year while injuries decreased at 3% per year. The annual decrease is less than
the decreases experienced sue to the improvements. In Grand Rapids, total
collisions increased by 3.5% per year and injuries increased 2% per year. In
Grand Rapids, the annual increases may indicate that the improvements may

have had a larger effect.

SECTION 6.5 - ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

The safety improvements in Detroit and Grand Rapids have benefited
society with safer roads and AAA Michigan with a positive impact to their loss
reduction effort. Societal costs such as medical expenses, wage losses and
vehicle damage have been significantly reduced as a result of the improvements.
Each of those societal costs occurs as a result of traffic crashes.

The impact to AAA Michigan of the safety improvements has been
positive. Improvements satisfied the minimum 2:1 benefit cost ratio criterion as
described in Section 3.3. Costs associated with paying claims at the completed

intersections are significantly smaller for AAA Michigan.

52

SECTION 7 - CONCLUSION

The AAA Road Improvement Demonstration Program (AAA RIDP) has
satisfied its primary objective of reducing the frequency and severity of traffic
crashes at high-risk urban signalized intersections. Traffic crashes and injuries
have been significantly reduced at the completed intersections in both Detroit
and Grand Rapids. Crash decreases varied among the three categories based
on each intersection’s potential for reduction. The AAA RIDP met its economic
objective as the safety improvements have satisfied the minimum 2:1 benefit cost
ratio.

These safety improvements are the result of cooperation and financial
contributions by all of the public and private sector partners. The AAA RIDP has
confirmed that when public and private sectors work together to provide safety
improvements to high-risk urban signalized intersections that vehicle crashes and
personal injuries could be prevented. Traffic safety in Detroit and Grand Rapids
will continue to improve as safety improvements are applied on larger scales.
These agencies are now routinely conducting safety studies and implementing
safety countermeasures such as traffic signal visibility enhancements, left-turn
lanes, left-turn phases and all-red intervals on their individual road projects.

This proactive approach to traffic safety has demonstrated the potential to
greatly improve the safety and reduce the risk of collisions for all motorists in
Detroit and Grand Rapids. The safety improvements have benefited society with
safer roads and AAA Michigan with «a positive impact to their loss reduction

efforts. The AAA RIDP has confirmed that when public and private sectors work

53

together to provide safety improvements to high-risk urban signalized

intersections that vehicle crashes and personal injuries could be prevented.

54

APPENDIX A

SEVEN MILE AT RYAN ROAD

55

 

Figure A.1 - Seven Mile At Ryan Before Improvements

 

Figure A.2 — Seven Mile At Ryan After Improvements

56

Table A1 - Before and After Collision Data for Seven Mile at Ryan
Listed by Month

12-Month Total

12-Month Total

T-Month Total

12-Month Total

12-Month Total

12-Month Total

12-Month Total

 

57

APPENDIX B

WOODWARD AVENUE AT MILWAUKEE STREET

I
L

 

58

 

Figure 3.1 - Woodward At Milwaukee Before Improvements

 

Figure 8.2 — Woodward At Milwaukee After Improvements

59

Table 8.1 - Before and After Collision Data for Woodward at Milwaukee
Listed by Month

Pen'od

Nw96 Dee-96 Jm-97 Feb-97 Mar-97 Apr-97 May-97 Jun-97 Jul-97 Aug-97 Sop-97 061-97

Nov-97 Dec—97 Jaw-98 Feb-98 Mar-98 Apr-98 May-98 Jun-98 Jul~98 Aug-98 Sep-98 Oct-W

0

' After
Nov-99 Dec-99 Jan-00 Feb-00 Mar-00 Apr-00 May-m Jun-00 Jul-00 Aug-m Sop-00 Oct-00
0 0 1 0 0 1 O 1 1

0 0 0 0 0

Afier
Nov-00 Dec-00 Jaw—O1 Feb-01 Ma-Ot Apr—O1 May-01 Jun-01 Jul-01 Aug—O1 Sop-01 Oct-01

Pen'od
Nova) Dec-00 Jaw-01 Feb-01 Ma—OI Apr-01 May-01 Jun—01 Jul-01 M01 Sop-01 Oct-O1

 

60

 

APPENDIX C

BURTON STREET AT BRETON AVENUE

E

 

61

 

 

Figure 0.2 — Burton at Breton After Improvements

62

 

Table C.1 - Before and After Collision Data for Burton at Breton listed by
Month

 

Immfl

 

 

63

APPENDIX D

LOCATIONS OF ALL AAA RIDP INTERSECTIONS

 

64

Figure 0.1 — Intersections where safety improvements have been planned
and implemented in Detroit

 

Projects Completed
100 Intersections

 

 

65

 

Figure 0.2 — Intersections where safety improvements have been planned.

and implemented in Grand Rapids

I
BRETQN

 

Ill—

\
\
\f
‘— s .
1- 7
_ V
\\(
(\ TI DUI h /

22899:. 5
nBoEEoo 306.85

7
e

at
.4

 

APPENDIX E

BEFORE AND AFTER CRASH DATA

67

 

Table E.1 - Collision Data and Implemented Safety Countermeasures for the

Detroit Intersections Completed in 1997

 

 

EoEooca .mcoa 058. 05 3.6.9:. - cm.

39.9» 9&8. 36526 .9622! 303‘ - O<

mica.» 5.53an not: - d

9:6: ace” 2. o. 323:. no. .3 5 821 - m<

2953 use. .96. so. 821 - j

9.32.. 52-5. 8.8658258 2.22 - a:

«ace. 52-..! 02»:on can: - ._.S

32.2 .2956 sup 2 so ES. 2953 05!. 333a: - .m—
eoSuaoEScaoo 3.3m

 

 

$2 0.? men *3 RR 92: .30»
.930 v . 9n— . 2.85 . o! . . 0.2.. x , x _ x x 5m. 53:53:33: .n
2.8 o 7 3: £782. 9% . 98 - x 7x x . x 7 x I. . 1.52 _. mezo:ao..2co>om.~
32 n 02 .33 0.2., a: x x x x . x 39 c318 0:2 Sim .P
09.2.08 .32 8260 cozoauom .\. .82 22.5 mm. o< a ¢< .3 as d... ..~p nasasoo 23> cocoa-:35
3:35.88. 3:33.83 3520 .2380
.352 a>< .353 a>< .80... .53

.355 a>< .353 o><

68

Woodward Corridor

22.85.. .29» use. 2. 89...... . mm.

22% use. Sofie-o 3828a noun... - o<

22% 5538.. 8.6.1 . n.

2...... .29.. 2. 2 its... as .a .5 Bus. . ¢<

22% use. .26. 3o. 8.03 . j

9.32.. sees 38.998558 3%... . a:

3:! Eel-.2 022.on not: . 4b..

822 .295... a. o. .... as. 22% use. 3.88... . .N.
3.5-558:3". 3&3

 

 

 

Table E.2 - Collision Data and Implemented Safety Countermeasures for the

$2..- an 3 $3 Ra Ba .58
$8. 9... . 0. $8. . n u x . x 7x7 x _. . . . x 8... , 855580.33 Ema-noes .3
I. I: 3.3 i 0.0 $0 -N m : .x . .7- .. x , .. x 2.2 . .o__m.come_.m.~ua%8§ .3
. no 2. $21 N . x x 7 7 x . - x 8.: , 3_m.%<;2em.m 5383.8
$8 I . on $8 o a x x 7.... x - . . x 8... .. 8.52%.”;me e558; .8 ..
$3 3. .. 2 $3 N. Na x :1 x . 7 x 82 ,. somemuwa 2968.52
$2- on E $.. 2 : x .x. x . x 82 2:32.95; Ema-.833
$8“. . a. no $0 m m . x 7 .7 x .- .x 8.... 285.... 2.058.... .2.
$8 3 2 $3 a. 3 . x , x 7... x x . x 8.: .. 55.3... 99682. «N
$2 a. 3 $3 a «N x x x. x x 82 3.32.2... $582. 3
$3 on at $3 a. an x - . x x 8... , 5.86323 25803.8
$8. 2. 0... $8- on m. x .7 .. x x 82 £232.... usages .2
$8.- ., . on 9.. $$ 0 v. . x . x. . x 82 . . .35..“ nieces?
$2. ow 3 $2 a : x x ,x x x 8.: .85_o:.8oz_m~az.~ 92.8.5 .t
$8- co 3 $31 8 o. x x 7 x , x mm... . 530235820... $68.55.
$3” 3 no $8.. a n x 7 . x - x 82 , 2985 e558; 2
$2 3. . on $8 a on , x .x7 x x 82 .385 558.5 3
$3 a. 3 $3 N. 1 x .x x x 82 55825323... Ema-803.2
$8 I 3. $8 n m. x x .x x x 82 , 2.03... 5383.3
. - oo , 0... $8- N . x 7.. ..- x x 82 22:85 .5568; .:
$8 3 0... $% h o. ,, x .,.x x x mm... . 830205.36... 5683...:
$8. - as n... $3 m 2 . x . x ,x.. x , x 8m. ,. .5. 53.885... 53825 a
$9. . a... 3 $8 a o x .x- x . x 8m. , 2.2.9.0... 9268......
$2. .2 3 $8. a 2 x .x. x x 8.: . 22.503 easeooss
$8.. 3. 3 $8 .. a x x7... x . x 8m. 1 , 3253.52.85 “.5583...
. mm 2. $2. a m , x, , x 7... x x x mm... . «35203.... Baggage
$2- ._ Z .- 3 $1. . a n . x x 7x.- .. x . m8. .. weasomauagooge
$9.. 7 .3 3. $9.. a m. x x _.x, x x 3... seesaw... 95380.5 .n
$83.. no -. 0. $2 . v x x. 7.. x . x 8m. . a38§§222<a eases; .N
$3 . I ,, 3 $8 9 2 x x .x. x x mm... . 8:22.02; 5268.5 ..
«9.20 $ .22 22am Sausage. .22 228 mm. o< a 5 .3 m5 .5 :2 8.23838. 8:85....
Cat—i:— fiO—qufl- DOEONLU nazuflho
.53 .58 , .5. .58.
.352 _-:::< _n=::< u>< _a:::<

u>< u>< a><

69

Table E.3 - Collision Data and Implemented Safety Countermeasures for the

Completed Grand Rapids Intersections

E

29:30.0 .0005 052. 05 096.08.
20:0.» 059. 000526 3:00:05 0003.

330.... 5:30qu uouu<

8...... .20: o... o. .93.... no. .a :- v83.

22% use. .26. 35. uouu<

05-0.... E333. 020223005500 0002

.05. E323. 023.98 0002
03:0. 3.25.... NP 0. .0 So... 22.0..- uEE. 000200:
o!3.02E$:300 Baum

 

 

 

$3 00 C.— $Nm 0:. 000 .30..
$00— 0 v $mm. mr NF x x x x x 50m >z._.~..n<.> .0 Eofimm 0.0.
$00. 0 N $3 or 1 x x x x Sou cactozm .0 Eofimw .3
$00 F N $5 m z x x x x x room 9.3 .0 Eofimw .vw
$3 0 h $mm C on . x . x x x x 30m E202“. .0 Eanw .3
$09 0 N $00 N n— . x x x x 50m €050 .0 50.an .NN
$09 0 0 $00 0 0 x x x ooom 0.0.5200 .0 005.20 .§
$0»..- a m $3. 3 I. , x , x ooow E520 .0 c0220 .ow
$00 m 0— $3 0N . tv , x , x x 000* $5.00; .n c9035 .3
$00. 0 0 $3. m m . X x 000— 3me .0 00.9.20 .3
$00 P N «Sn 0 0. . x x 000. 007.02. .0 00.0.20 .2.
$3 a 0 $0 0 m x x x 000w ce>.>w .0 cot3m .9
$0 v v $00 2 E x x x coon x0923”. .0 :ot3m .mp
$0... n 0— $..~ mm mm x x x x 000w 85:55. .m 00:30 .3
$00 0 0 $8 9. G x x x coon c905 .0 cot3m .2
$3 p n $m~ NF 0— x x x 000— 03.0 002.00 .0 003.20 .m—
$00 w m $3 nr 9 X .x x x x 000m £302.20 .0 cot3m .:
$2 0 NF $3 5 mm x x x x x 000m 502005. .0 02.3. .9
$nn. v 0 $0? 5 or x x X 000N 009.020... .0 00:30 .0
$0 0 0 $5 «N nu x . x x x coon 500530 E 03.30 .0
$007 v N $00- 9 0— x x x x 000m 200me .0 0.053. K
$5 0 5 $00 9 3 x . x x x 000m =0: .0 Sufism. .0
$00 5 I $N~ 0v 8 x x x x 002 cotam .0 :0335 0
$5 m 3 $3 hm nv x x x x x 009 =mI .0 0063.0 .v
$00 5 3 $0 an Vn x . x x 000* £200.“. .0 :0. >5 .0
$02.. m N $007 9.. MN x x 009 033.0 .0 0095.5. .N
$00 N v $2 m cm x x x 000— 002.00 .0 05:00. .—
0956 x .32 0.0qu :000303. $ .8: 9.200 ¢< 4.. F5 a: :5 080.0500 30> . .
3:3... 3:3... 02.020 02.080
.50... .50» .50... .50...
.3353 .3353 .0355 .3351
o>< u>< a>< 0><

 

70

APPENDIX F

ALL RED INTERVAL EQUATION

 

 

71

Clearance Interval = Yellow + All Red
Yellow = t + v / (2a :l: 64.49)
t = Driver perception reaction time, typically 1.0 second
v = Approach speed, usually taken as the 85th percentile speed.
a = deceleration rate for stopping taken as 10 W52.
9 = percent of grade divided by 100.
All Red=(W+ L)/v

W = V\fidth of the intersection measured from the upstream stop bar to the
downstream crosswalk.

L = Length of a typical vehicle usually taken as 20 ft.

72

APPENDIX G

POISSON TEST

73

.I

 

Figure 6 l — Poisson Distribution Curves (9)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100
I
75 '
Q)
U)
C
m
.C
o
E
Q)
9 50
Q) .
o. 9
25 E
Tj
— l
r
L L 1 1 1 i “—T
0 25 5O 75 100 125 150 175

Expected Crash Frequency (Without Treatment)

74

BIBLIOGRAPHY

75

BIBLIOGRAPHY

. Michigan Department of State Police, Office of Highway Safety Planning
(2000) 2000 Traffic Crash Facts, Lansing, MI.

 

. Feber, D.; Feldmeir, J.; and Crocker, K., (1999). The AAA Road
Improvement Demonstration Program: An analysis of the effectiveness of
using safety enhancements to help reduce societal and insurance costs,
79th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, January 9 to
13, 2000, Washington, DC. (Paper No. 00-1432)

 

. Johnson, M.; and Nepomuceno, J., (1996) Road Improvement Program -
Road Safety Engineering Five Year Implementation Plan, 1997 to 2001,
Insurance Corporation of British Columbia.

. Sayed, T.; and de Leur, P., (2001). Program Evaluation Report: Road
Improvement Program, Insurance Corporation of British Columbia.

 

. Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (1997). SEMCOG Traffic
Safety Manual Second Edition.

. G.D. Hamilton Associates (1999). Burton Street Traffic Operations and
Safety Review, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

. Husch, D., J. Albeck (1999) Synchro 4.0 Users Guide, Trafficware,
Albany, CA.

. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council (1997)
Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209.

. FHWA (1981) Highway Safety lmmovement Program (HSIP) User’s
Manual. FHWA-TS-81-218. National Highway Institute, Federal Highway
Administration.

10. GO. Hamilton Associates (1994). Economic Evaluation of Left-Turn Lanes

as a Safety Improvement Strategy for the Insurance Corporation of British
Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

11.Fisher, J.E., (1998) Towards Uniform Left-Turn Guidelines, Table 1. Los

Angeles, CA.

12.Creasey, T. and K. R. Agent (1985) Development of Accident Reduction

Factors, Kentucky Highway Research Program, Research Report UKTRP-
85-6. Lexington: University of Kentucky, March.

76

 

13.Wayne State University, Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering (1997) Traffic Crash Analysis and Safety Recommendations
for the intersection of Seven Mile Road and Ryan Road, Detroit, MI.

 

 

14. G. D. Hamilton Associates (1998). Woodward Avenue Traffic Operations
and Safety Review, Detroit and Highland ParkyMichigan.

 

 

15.Datta, T.K., K. Schattler, S. Datta (1999) Red Light Violations and Crashes
at Urban Intersections, Transportation Research Record 1734. (Paper
No. 00-0480)

 

 

77

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

llllillllllllllllllljlllllllllljlllllllll