Murray Boulevard and Farmington Road Intersection

Post on 12-Jan-2016

34 views 1 download

Tags:

description

Murray Boulevard and Farmington Road Intersection. CEE 550 Transportation Safety Analysis. Sirisha Kothuri Wei Feng Ping Guo Meead Saberi. Outline. Introduction Site Description Crash Data Analysis Literature Review Countermeasures Cost/Benefit Analysis Recommendations. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Murray Boulevard and Farmington Road Intersection

Murray Boulevard and Farmington Road

Intersection

Sirisha Kothuri

Wei Feng

Ping Guo

Meead Saberi

CEE 550 Transportation Safety Analysis

Outline• Introduction

• Site Description

• Crash Data Analysis

• Literature Review

• Countermeasures

• Cost/Benefit Analysis

• Recommendations

Introduction

Map of Intersection

Murray Boulevard• 2 lane undivided• Runs N-S

Farmington Road• 2 lane undivided • Runs E-W

Intersection• City of Beaverton • 4-leg signalized• Slight skew• High Volume

Aerial View of the Intersection

Site Description - I

Murray Blvd

Farmington Road

Apt7-Eleven

AptOff

Site Description - II

Signal at Intersection Illumination at Intersection

Barrier at Intersection Pavement Markings at Intersection

Site Description - III

Speed Limit Sign on Farmington Speed Limit Sign on Murray

Driveways near Intersection School Zone Signs

Site Description - IV

Heavy Vehicles

Queue Spillover to Adjacent Intersection

Volume

Source: City of Beaverton

Crash Data Analysis

Oregon Transportation Safety Data Archive (ortsda)• Crash File

• Crashes for 4 Years (2003 -2006) at intersection

• Vehicle File• Information about vehicles involved in crashes at intersection

• Participant File• Information about drivers involved in crashes at intersection

Crash Patterns at the Intersection • Time of Day• Type of Crash• Severity• Weather• Light Conditions

Driver Characteristics• Residence Status• Gender• Age

0

2

0 0 0 0

4 4

6 6

2

6

4

67

9

14

76

0

2 21 1

2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0:00

1:00

2:00

3:00

4:00

5:00

6:00

7:00

8:00

9:00

10:0

0

11:0

0

12:0

0

13:0

0

14:0

0

15:0

0

16:0

0

17:0

0

18:0

0

19:0

0

20:0

0

21:0

0

22:0

0

23:0

0

UN

K

Time of the day

Nu

mb

ers

of

cras

hes

Time of Day

13

1

62

27 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

ANGL-OTH O-STRGHT S-1STOP S-1TURN S-OTHER S-STRGHT

Type of Crash

Nu

mb

er

of

Cra

sh

es

Type of Crash

1 14

30

55

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

FAT INJA INJB INJC PDO

Severity

Nu

mb

er o

f C

rash

esCrash Severity

1 2

8

46

9

14

38

18

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

CA

RE

LES

S

DIS

-RA

G

IMP

LN

C

IMP

-TU

RN

INA

TT

EN

T

NO

-YIE

LD

OT

HE

R

OT

HE

R-I

MP

TO

O-C

LOS

TO

O-F

AS

T

Crash Cause

Nu

mb

er o

f C

rash

es

Crash Cause

Collision Diagram

Murray Blvd

Farmington Rd

Literature Review

Rear End Crashes– Most common type at signalized intersections– Account for one-third of all reported crashes in US– Mostly PDO, sometimes severe injuries and fatalities occur

Causes– Driver Behavior – Inattentive driving, smaller headways– Driver Age and Gender– Heavy Traffic Volumes– Dilemma Zone

Dilemma (Indecision) Zone

Source: Heng Wei, Characterize Dynamic Dilemma Zone and Minimize its Effect at Signalized Intersections, Ohio Transportation Consortium (OTC),

2008

Dilemma (Indecision) Zone

Countermeasures

1. Reduce speed limit on approaches to

• 35 mph on Murray Blvd• 30 on Farmington Road

Pros• Reduction in all types of crashes

Cons• Increase in delay• Diversion of vehicles to other streets

Countermeasures

2. Advance Signal Warning Signs

• Murray Blvd & Farmington Rd

Pros• Reduction in Rear End Crashes• Low cost• Easy Implementation

Cons• Need space?

Countermeasures3. Improve Signal Timing

• Optimize to ITE Standards

Pros• Reduces Rear End PDO crashes

Cons• Increases Fatal and Injury crashes?!

Countermeasures4. Coordinated Signals

• Coordinate adjacent intersections

Pros• Allows progression of vehicles• Reduces all types of crashes

Cons• Hard to implement

Cost Benefit Analysis

Select Countermeasures– For each countermeasure, extract CRF– Calculate reduction in crashes– Calculate annual benefits and costs– Assume discount rate of 4%– Calculate NPV = NPVB – NPVC– Rank countermeasures in decreasing order of NPV

Cost Benefit Analysis

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

PDO INJC INJB INJA FATAL

Crash Type

Co

st (

$)

Cost of All Crashes at Intersection (4 years)

Cost Benefit Analysis

1. Reduce vehicle’s approach speed limit

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

PDO INJC INJB INJA FATAL

Crash Type

Cra

sh

Co

st

($/y

ea

r)

Before

After

$44,688

$76,875

$10,250

$42,937 $43,062

Cost Benefit Analysis

2. Advance Signal Warning Signs

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

400000

PDO INJ FATAL

Crash Type

Cra

sh

Co

st

($/y

ea

r)

Before

After

$40,950

$121,770

$62,010

Conclusions & Recommendations

Rear-end crashes are common at signalized intersections.

Typical causes• Driver Behavior• Driver Age & Gender• Heavy Traffic Volumes• Dilemma Zone

Countermeasures Ranking Based on B/C Analysis1. Install Advance Signal Warning Signs2. Reduce vehicle’s approach speed limit3. Signal Coordination

Acknowledgements

Dr. Chris Monsere, PSU

Jabra Khasho, City of Beaverton

Baotu Ho, City of Beaverton