ROAD SAFETY AUDIT
MAJOR HIGHWAY MEDIAN
CROSS-OVER CRASHES
I-195 FAIRHAVEN
Prepared for
Prepared by
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Framingham, Massachusetts
February 2009
ROAD SAFETY AUDIT
MAJOR HIGHWAY MEDIAN
CROSS-OVER CRASHES
I-195 FAIRHAVEN
Final Report
February 2009
Prepared for
Massachusetts Highway Department
Prepared by
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Consultant Engineers and Planners
300 Howard Street P.O. Box 967
Framingham, Massachusetts 01701
Tel: 508-620-2832 Fax: 508-620-6897
www.mstransportationsystemsinc.com
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION
1
RSA PROCESS
3
ANALYSIS
7
SUMMARY OF RSA FINDINGS/POTENTIAL ACTIONS
10
RECOMMENDATIONS
17
APPENDIX
20
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page i
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
Introduction
Lane departure crashes are one of the primary fatal crash types in Massachusetts. The
Commonwealth exceeds the national average for the proportion of fatal lane departure
crashes and was designated a lead state in lane departure crashes by the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
The
Massachusetts Highway Department (MassHighway) conducted a study of the problem
and found that during 2002-2004, lane departure crashes accounted for 25 percent of all
injury crashes and nearly half, 46 percent, of all fatal crashes.
As part of the effort in implementing the safety plan and specifically reducing lane
departure crashes, the MassHighway is completing a Road Safety Audit (RSA) Review
Project specifically focused on median crossing (or median cross-over) crashes on its
major highways. Road safety audits are a formal safety performance examination on
existing or future roadways by an independent audit team. These specific audits are
being conducted in locations where cross-over experience has been or has the potential
to be of concern and where the RSA team has judged that factors exist that could affect
the safety risk. During the audit, the RSA team works to identify opportunities for
enhancing safety and to recommend specific enhancements intended to reduce median
cross-over crashes and improve the overall safety along the highway.
A RSA was conducted as part of this project for a section of I-195 in Fairhaven and
Figure 1 shows the corridor section under study. It includes Interchange No. 18 (Route
240).
The purpose of this I-195 Fairhaven RSA was to identify current conditions on the
highway section under study that could potentially affect safety risk and to recommend a
set of actions to address the identified safety factors. Recommendations contained in
this report reflect the overall consent of the RSA team and do not necessarily reflect the
official views of MassHighway.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 1
Interchange
18
195
195
240
6
6
N
Project Location
W
S
I-195 Road Safety Audit
Fairhaven, Massachusetts
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
E
1 : 25,000
Framingham, Massachusetts
FIGURE 1
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
RSA Process
The general process outlined in the guideline1 was essentially followed although with
some minor variations incorporated in the overall procedure. These were due in part to
the project location being a high speed, high volume section of an access controlled
highway. With these characteristics, there are limited areas to safely stop and gather as
a group along the section without potentially hindering traffic flow or the safety of the
project. Given the RSA team size (noted below) and general character with the corridor,
the team members who visited the site prior to the team meeting did so either
individually or in smaller groups. A video recording of a drive-thru in both directions was
collected by the RSA consultant and used at the meeting to review conditions as a
group. Background material and plans were transmitted to the RSA consultant to
compile and review prior to the initial RSA team meeting. Crash and traffic volume data
were transmitted to RSA team members prior to the meeting as well. Once the initial
RSA team meeting was conducted, the RSA consultant gathered the input, completed
the analysis and prepared a draft document for team members to review. Data including
summary crash records for the 2004-2007 period, two (2) detailed crash descriptions of
cross-over crashes, and available record highway plans were obtained and reviewed by
the RSA consultant.
•
RSA Team
The following individuals participated in the I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit:
Edward C. Feeney, MassHighway District 5 Traffic
Timothy White, FHWA
Jim Hadfield, SRPEDD
Lisa Estrela-Pedro, SRPEDD
Timothy Kochan, MassHighway District 5 Planning
Erin Kinahan, MassHighway, District 5 Project
Lisa Schletzbaum, MassHighway, Safety
Management Unit
Erica Grygorcewicz, MassHighway, Design
Jennifer Inzana, MassHighway, Traffic
Paul Liralien, Mass State Police
William J. Scully, MS Transportation Systems
(RSA Consultant)
Team members represented various agencies, disciplines and expertise.
•
RSA Meeting
A meeting was held on September 11, 2008 at the MassHighway District 5 Office. At
the meeting, the RSA consultant provided a brief overview of the RSA purpose, a
summary of the roadway section’s characteristics and the results of the review to date in
terms of geometry, volume and crash data researched and the field visit observations.
The RSA team members listed above were present at the meeting. The video record of
1
MS Transportation Systems, Inc., Road Safety Audits, Median Cross-Over Crashes, Audit Guidelines,
Prepared for MassHighway, October 2007.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 3
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
the I-195, taken while driving the corridor was viewed. During and following the video,
additional discussions related to the possible factors related to the cross-median crashes
and possible solutions to prevent or alleviate similar characteristics in the future. The
RSA team provided input on the background supporting data and the key items
observed in the field and those items that were listed on the RSA Median Cross-Over
Prompt List.
Key items noted at the meeting included the following:
 The narrowness of the median between the New Bedford City line and the
Route 240 interchange.
 The horizontal curve in the westbound direction west of the Route 240
interchange creates some driver discomfort due in part to the vertical grade
and narrow median.
 It was also noted that the conditions at the westbound exit ramp (ramp
queues) in New Bedford in close proximity to the study section that changes
from a concrete barrier to open median may contribute to lane changing and
quick moves in this area.
 The median width (unpaved portion) appears to be the narrowest,
unprotected median studied in the cross-median RSA program.
 Speed enforcement levels may be lower than desired – difficult to staff.
Following the RSA meeting, the RSA consultant compiled the information, completed the
analysis and circulated the draft report to team members.
•
Analysis Procedures
As previously indicated, the RSA analysis generally followed the procedure described in
the previously referenced Guideline with some variations and also took into
consideration the methods published by the Federal Highway Administration2 (FHWA)
and those included in FHWA training materials3. The basic tasks included:
•
Obtaining and reviewing crash and other traffic characteristic data and
available record plans.
•
Conducting site reconnaissance and collecting a current record of condition
via photos and video,
Identifying potentially hazardous issues, and
Identifying and evaluating potential actions to address the noted issues.
•
•
2
3
Federal Highway Administration, FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines, Publication No. FHWA SA-06-06,
Washington, D.C., 2006.
Federal Highway Administration, Resource Center, Road Safety Audits Mini-Workshop, Jeffrey Shaw, PE,
PTOE, presented to New England ITE Section, September 19, 2006.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 4
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
In assessing the issues identified by the RSA Team, the relative seriousness and
potential risk relative to crash frequency and severity were determined. Using the
guidelines of FHWA4 as input and considering characteristics of this specific RSA, the
relative frequency criteria and severity criteria were identified and are presented in Table
1 and Table 2, respectively.
TABLE 1
FREQUENCY RATING
ESTIMATED
Exposure
high
medium
high
medium
low
high
Probability
high
high
medium
medium
high
low
low
medium
low
medium
low
low
EXPECTED CRASH FREQUENCY
(PER AUDIT ITEM)
5 or more crashes per year
FREQUENCY
RATING
Frequent
1 to 4 crashes per year
Occasional
Less that 1 crash per year, but
more than 1 crash every 5 years
Infrequent
Less than 1 crash every 5 years
Rare
Source: FHWA RSA Training Workshop
TABLE 2
SEVERITY RATING
Typical Crashes Expected
(per audit item)
Expected Crash Severity
High-speed crashes; head on and
rollover crashes
Moderate-speed crashes; fixed
object or off-road crashes
Crashes involving medium to low
speeds; lane changing or
sideswipe crashes
Crashes involving low to medium
speeds; typical of rear-end or
sideswipe crashes
Probable fatality or
incapacitating injury
Moderate to severe injury
Severity
Rating
Extreme
High
Minor to moderate injury
Moderate
Property damage only or
minor injury
Low
Source: FHWA RSA Training Workshop
Taking into consideration both frequency and severity, the relative risk of a particular
audit item was rated. The risk ratings are shown in Table 3. For each safety issue
identified, the potential seriousness of the issue as well as possible mitigation measures
have been indicated.
4
Federal Highway Administration, Resource Center, Road Safety Audits Mini-Workshop, Jeffrey Shaw, PE,
PTOE, presented to New England ITE Section, September 19, 2006.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 5
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
TABLE 3
CRASH RISK ASSESSMENT
Frequency
Rating
Low
Frequent
Occasional
Infrequent
Rare
C
B
A
A
Severity Rating
Moderate
High
D
C
B
A
Source: FHWA RSA Training Workshop
Crash Risk Ratings:
A: minimal risk level
B: low risk level
C: moderate risk level
•
Extreme
E
D
C
B
F
E
D
C
D: significant risk level
E: high risk level
F: extreme risk level
RSA Field Audit
Field audits were conducted prior to the RSA meeting held on September 11, 2008. The
field audits included several drive-thrus in each direction of travel as well as through the
interchanges. A Prompt List developed for median cross-over RSA’s was used for
guidance. The Prompt List is included in the Appendix. The following were noted during
the audit:
•
There are two travel lanes per direction in this section of I-195.
•
Speed limit signs were noted with 55 mph posted west of the Route 240
interchange and 65 mph east of the interchange.
•
The section between the Route 240 interchange and the New Bedford cityline
consists of a large radius horizontal curve and a consistent downgrade from
east to west.
•
The median in Fairhaven is a mix of open, grass or heavily treed (east of
interchange). There are also short segments of guardrail primarily in the area
of bridge columns.
•
West of the Route 240 interchange, the median is less than 50 feet wide.
•
East of the interchange, the median width increases significantly with
approximately 1.0 mile of the median heavily vegetated.
•
The inside shoulder exists but varies in width and is less than 4 feet. A
rumble strip exists in the shoulder.
•
Similar to the observation in the Dartmouth section of I-195, a wide outside
shoulder exists with a rumble strip, however, the rumble strip appear nearly 6
feet off the edge line.
•
The overall pavement markings appeared in good condition at the time of the
field audit.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 6
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
ANALYSIS
Existing Conditions
I-195 in Fairhaven is a major interstate highway that provides east-west movement in
Southeastern Massachusetts connecting with Rhode Island on the west to I-495 in
Wareham to the east. I-195 also serves the major cities of New Bedford and Fall River
as well as the regional shopping area and educational facilities in Dartmouth. The
section under this study is in the immediate vicinity of Route 240 (Interchange No. 18) in
Fairhaven. In total, it is approximately 3.4 miles in length.
The roadway in this area consists of two (2) travel lanes per direction. The roadway also
has a full (10 foot) outside shoulder and an inside shoulder in the range of 2 to 3 feet.
Rumble strips have been installed on both the inside and outside shoulders. The
alignment is varying but can be characterized as “gentle”. It was noted that the speed
limits are posted at 55 miles per hour (mph) west of Route 240 and 65 mph east of
Route 240. The unpaved portion of the median west of Route 240 is approximately 36
to 40 feet. Within the interchange itself, the median increases in width to between 50
and 65 feet. East of Route 240 overpass, the median is approximately 100 feet in width
or more. The length of the “open” median in the study section is approximately 2.0 miles
with 1.2 miles of it being west of the interchange. The remaining mile of “open” median
east of the interchange is broken up into two general locations along this specific
section. East of the interchange a large portion of the median (approximately 1.0 miles)
is treed or thickly vegetated. Figures 2 through 4 present photographs that depict the
current conditions along the study section.
Figure 2 – I-195 interchange with Route 240
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 7
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
Figure 3 – I-195 Eastbound upgrade just
East of New Bedford line
Figure 4 – I-195 Eastbound approaching
Route 240 interchange
A review of available safety data was completed as part of this RSA. The review of data
included median related crash data reported for the years 2004 to 2007. The summary
table and spot map are included in the appendix. Key aspects noted in the data
included the following:
 A total of 24 median related crashes reported between 2004 and 2007 or
approximately 6 crashes per year.
 Of the total, 2 or 8% were cross-median.
 One of the three reported fatal crashes was classified cross-median crashes.
 Both of the cross-median crashes occurred in the section west of Route 240.
 Approximately 58% of total reported crashes resulted in personal injuries or
fatalities.
 There was no clear distinction of the direction in which the crashes were
initiated although the two cross-median crashes were initiated in the
westbound direction.
 Only four of the 24 crashes (16%) occurred under wet or icy surface
conditions.
In assessing the characteristics of the crashes, there was no one reason that stood out
among the possible contributing causes. It is generally acknowledged that drivers may
leave the roadway as a result of the following four reasons:




Driver Error
Collision Avoidance
Roadway Condition
Vehicle Component Failure
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 8
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
High speeds were cited in three (3) crashes while five (5) crashes were at least partially
attributed to fatigue.
The traffic volumes observed on I-195 in this section generally exceed 58,000 on an
average weekday. Figure 5 depicts the volume measured in May 2007 west of the Route
240 interchange. One can see from the chart that directional volumes are similar
throughout the day. The peak hour volumes are higher in the afternoon approaching
2,500 vehicles in each direction. Historical truck traffic count data were obtained from
MassHighway that showed a 4% and 5% truck percentage of the total volume for the
peak hour and daily periods, respectively. Based on the May volume, this amounts to
approximately 100 peak hour truck trips and about 2,900 over the day.
Figure 5
I-195 Fairhaven Traffic Volume
In summary, the RSA has identified a number of physical and operational characteristics
as being a potential contributing factor to the safety issues although each with varied
levels of seriousness. The major one is:
¾ The narrow, crossable median west of the Route 240 interchange
primarily where the highway contains a downgrade (east to west) and
horizontal curve.
The next section will discuss the key issues or factors identified by the RSA team and
the potential actions to consider for addressing them.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 9
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
Summary of RSA Findings/Potential Actions
Based on the field review, the review of crash data and discussions among the RSA
team members, the issues related to the safe operating conditions of the I-195 in the
Fairhaven area were identified. There were a number of factors or issues of concern that
were identified as potentially having an effect on the risk and these are listed in Table 4
along with the assigned risk rating.
TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF FACTORS THAT POTENTIALLY AFFECT
THE RISK OF SAFETY RELATED EVENTS
Factor or Issue
Risk Rating
Open median sections – west of Route 240
E
Open median section – east of Route 240
C
Inside shoulder is less than 4 feet
C
Markings for acceleration lanes were less than desirable
D
Speeding and driver behavior is significant in section
C
Ramp queues at Coggeshall Street affect mainline
B
As shown in Table 4, there are a number of risk factors that have been identified by the
RSA team that could potentially contribute to cross-median crashes. The most
substantive factor is the unprotected, open median west of the Route 240 interchange.
In this segment, the median width is 50 feet or less. There is also a horizontal curve and
a downgrade going from east to west. A risk rating of ‘E’ was assigned to this factor.
East of the interchange, the median immediately widens and reaches approximately 100
feet for the most part. A thick vegetative tree growth also begins 0.5 miles east of the
interchange essentially eliminating the possibility of crossing with the exception of one
half-mile intermittent break in the tree line. For this reason, the section east of the Route
240 interchange within the town of Fairhaven, a risk rating of ‘C’ was assigned.
Other factors include the inside shoulder being less than the 4 feet minimum width
although in the Fairhaven I-195 section, it is generally in the range of 3 feet and wide
enough to support the rumble strip. However, a four foot wide shoulder would provide a
greater chance of recovering within the paved area. A rating of ‘C’ was assigned to this
factor.
The markings for the acceleration/deceleration lanes were found to be less than ideal
and a rating of ‘D’ was assigned to this factor. Inadequate markings in the areas of the
interchange including deteriorated markings or markings that result in the lanes not
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 10
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
being sufficiently long can influence the motorists behavior resulting in “quick lanechanging”. The RSA team also noted the high speeds/driver behavior in the section as
being a contributing factor to median entries and affecting the risk of cross-median
crashes. This factor was assigned a rating of ‘C’.
The final factor cited that can affect the driver behavior conditions was in the western
section of I-195 in Fairhaven where the ramp queues that occur during peak times at the
Coggeshall Street off-ramp in New Bedford can reach the mainline. This can result in
undesirable lane changing and movements in the westbound direction. A rating of ‘B’
was assigned to this factor. It was noted by the regional planning staff that the risk for
this factor could become higher in the future if long term improvements to the
interchange are not implemented. Redevelopment activity currently anticipated in New
Bedford will increase volume and vehicle queuing at this interchange.
Suggested actions identified are intended to reduce all crashes on the I-195 and/or
reduce the severity of the crashes were identified based on the specific issue. The
following paragraphs include discussion pertaining to the issues and the potential
actions to consider for implement. Given that this RSA program is focused on crossmedian crashes, median barriers were first evaluated. Additional actions are outlined
later in the report.
•
Consideration of a Median Barrier
One of the more significant actions to be considered is to install median barriers in the
current “open” areas. A barrier can be considered when there is a higher than desirable
chance or a greater risk for median cross-over crashes to occur and that have or could
result in fatalities and/or a high proportion of injury related crashes. In addition, a barrier
could be considered when the consequences or severity of a crash without a barrier are
worse than if the barrier were in place.
Factors that generally come into play in deciding on whether a median should be
installed involve the following:
 High volumes and speeds
 Truck volumes and mix
 Narrow median
 History of cross-median crashes
 High risk of catastrophic event
These items have been reviewed relative to the I-195 section under study. Figure 6
presents a review of the corridor in relation to the median warrant criteria presented in
the AASHTO RDG5. As can be seen in the diagram west of Route 240, with the median
5
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Roadside Design Guide,
Washington, D.C., 2002, Chapter 6 Update 2006.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 11
80
West of Rt 240 median width
36-40 feet
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
(thousands)
70
East of Rt 240 median width
100+ feet
BARRIER
RECOMMENDED
60
50
BARRIER
CONSIDERED
40
BARRIER
OPTIONAL
30
20
10
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
MEDIAN WIDTH
(feet)
60
70
ADT - 58,000 +/-
Source: AASHTO roadside Design Guide, Chapter 6 Update, 2006
Median Barrier Warrant Analysis
Interstate-195 Road Safety Audit
Fairhaven, Massachusetts
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
NOT TO SCALE
Framingham, Massachusetts
Figure 6
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
(as measured from edge line to edge line) between 36 and 40 feet and a volume of over
58,000 vehicles on an average day, the intersection of the two items is in the area of the
chart where a barrier can be “considered” close to the “recommended” criteria.
East of interchange, the median is significantly wider (100+ feet) as well as largely
vegetated marking it difficult to cross. As shown in the chart, east of the interchange, the
intersecting point falls to the right of the chart “barrier optional”. In addition to the chart
and related warrant criteria, which is a guideline, further consideration was given to the
following:
ƒ
ƒ
The horizontal and vertical alignment of the I-195 section west of the Route
240 interchange gives a sense of greater risk or potential in crossing the
median, and
A high volume that presents greater potential in the number of errant vehicles
entering the median.
Consequently, based on the analysis of the data, the field drive-thru and discussion of
the conditions by the RSA team members, it was concluded that a median barrier be
installed in the median west of the Route 240 interchange. The selection of the barrier is
discussed in greater detail in the next section followed by the complete set of I-195 RSA
recommendations.
A. Barrier Selection
Once a decision is made to install a barrier, the type must be determined. There are a
number of barrier types that can be considered in addressing the median cross-over
crashes. These include the following:
♦
♦
♦
♦
Weak post W-Beam
Box Beam
Generic Low Tension Cable
High Tension Cable Barrier
♦ Strong post W-Beam
♦ Thrie Beam
♦ Concrete (Jersey)
In deciding on the type of barrier, there are a number of criteria suggested in the
AASHTO Roadside Design Guide6. These criteria used in selecting a barrier type are
included in Table 5.
6
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Roadside Design Guide, Washington,
D.C., 2002, Chapter 6 Update 2006.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 13
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
TABLE 5
CRITERIA FOR BARRIER SELECTION
Criteria
Comments
1. Performance Capability
Barrier must be structurally able to contain and redirect
design vehicle.
Expected deflection of barrier should not exceed available
deflection distance.
Slope approaching the barrier and distance from traveled
way may preclude use of some barrier types.
2. Deflection
3. Site Conditions
4. Compatibility
5. Cost
6. Maintenance
A. Routine
B. Collision
C. Material Storage
D. Simplicity
7. Aesthetics
8. Field Experience
Barrier must be compatible with planned end anchor and
capable of transitioning to other barrier systems (such as
bridge railings).
Standard barrier systems are relatively consistent in cost,
but high-performance railings can cost significantly more.
Few systems require a significant amount of routine
maintenance.
Generally, flexible or semi-rigid systems require
significantly more maintenance after a collision than rigid
or high-performance railings.
The fewer different systems used, the fewer inventory
items/storage space required.
Simpler designs, besides costing less, are more likely to
be reconstructed properly by field personnel.
Occasionally, barrier aesthetics are an important
consideration in selection.
The performance and maintenance requirements of
existing systems should be monitored to identify problems
that could be lessened or eliminated by using a difference
barrier type.
Source: AASHTO, Roadside Design Guide, 2002, Chapter 5 Roadside Barriers.
Based on extensive research and trials over the past five years, the high tension cable
barrier system has become more prominent in the U.S. The cable (flexible) barrier has
its advantages from a cost and aesthetic perspective, over the various guardrail systems
or concrete barrier. The median slope and/or recovery area also affects the use and
placement of any barrier including guardrail.
In addition to the cable barrier systems, the alternative types of guardrail were reviewed
for potential application on this route. Considerations included the volume of traffic,
relative amount of truck traffic and travel speeds. Based on these, the most applicable
types of guardrail for this route include the W-beam with strong post or the strong post
thrie-beam. These rails are appropriate for high speed highways and high volumes with
a relatively high proportion of truck traffic. Costs for each are somewhat similar though
the thrie-beam has a higher cost. The weak post W-beam and box beam can be
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 14
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
eliminated due to the slope and type of highway. The concrete barrier would generally
be applicable in urban sections with limited median widths available. As a result of this
review, it was determined that the median barrier options that are most valid for
consideration for I-195 in this section are the cable barrier and strong post guard rail.
Maintenance issues are also an important consideration in decisions regarding median
barrier installations. The maintenance issues that are of concern include:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Barrier hits per mile
Frequency of hits
Cost recovery
Cable downtime
Repair effect on traffic
Maintaining tension with cable system
Mowing median
Final selection of the barrier type should be based on the costs, physical condition of the
median, the ability to maintain a recovery zone, likely maintenance or repair
requirements, and compatibility with future planned pavement widening. The key points
of the cable barrier and guardrail systems are summarized below.
Cable Barrier
While the low tension generic cable system has been in existence for more than 50
years, most of the recent cable system research and installation is focused on the high
tension systems. There are currently six (6) manufacturers with systems approved by
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for use under certain conditions. Research
on these types of barriers is ongoing. There are 3-rope or 4-rope cable systems as
shown in the following two photographs.
3 Cable CASS System on Route 213
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
4 – Rope Brifen System on I-495
Page 15
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
This barrier type can be installed on slopes of 6:1 or flatter with little constraint on
placement. There are certain systems (eg. Brifen and Gibraltor 4 rope) that have been
approved for slopes as steep as 4:1 as of this writing.
Guardrail
The guardrail could be placed in the median where slopes are 10:1 or flatter as well as
at the edge of a steep slope or where minimal recovery zones exist. With the guardrail
placed within several feet of the pavement edge, a clear zone (or recovery area) would
be eliminated at least on one side of the median if guardrail is applied on only one side
of the median. In some locations where the topography of the median is fairly flat, it may
be possible to install a single line of double faced barrier a greater distance from the
pavement edge in this specific project area.
Estimated per mile costs of the basic types of median barrier treatment to be considered
for this route are summarized in Table 6. Shown in the table are estimated per mile
costs of installing a cable barrier, a double faced W-beam guardrail and a double faced
thrie-beam guardrail. As can be seen, the cable barrier is expected to be the lower cost
option. The W-beam rail is a lower cost option compared to the thrie-beam, however,
there is slightly greater deflection with the W-beam.
TABLE 6
COMPARISON PER MILE COSTS
Cable vs. Guardrail
Costs/Mile
Cable
W-beam
Thrie beam
$144,000
$171,000
$213,000
For comparison, installing a Cable Barrier System in the 1.2 mile section east of Route
240 would cost approximately $173,000.
The thrie-beam guardrail would cost
approximately $255,000.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 16
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
Recommendations
As a result of the RSA analysis and team input, a set of recommendations have been
identified and are summarized in Table 7. These actions are intended to reduce the
chance of cross-median crashes, reduce the severity of all crashes and improve the
overall safety condition of this section of I-195 in Fairhaven.
Identified in the table in addition to the risk factor and recommended action are the
estimated costs and potential timeframe (i.e. short (0-1 year), medium (1-3 years) and
long (>3 years)).
The major recommendation for the I-195 section in Fairhaven is to install a median
barrier in the section of highway west of the Route 240 interchange. Figure 7 illustrates
graphically the location. This is where the median is largely between 36 and 40 feet
becoming narrower as it reaches New Bedford where a concrete barrier presently exists.
This action is recommended to be a short-term action given the narrowness of the
median, the increased potential of entering the median in that section due to the highway
alignment and it being a relatively low cost action.
TABLE 7
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Risk Factor
Risk
Rating
Recommended
Action
Estimated
Cost
Estimated
Timeframe
Open median sections –
west of Route 240
E
ƒ Install barrier –
approx. 1.2 miles
$173,000
ƒ short term
Open median sections –
east of Route 240
C
ƒ Install new
flexible
delineators
$4,400
ƒ short term
Inside shoulder is less
than 4 feet
C
ƒ Widen shoulder
TBD
ƒ Long term as
part of
rehabilitation
Markings for acceleration
lanes were less than
desirable
D
ƒ Modify markings
– extend length
of lanes
TBD
ƒ short term as
part of
normal
maintenance
Speeding and driver
behavior is significant in
sections
C
ƒ Increase
enforcement
TBD
ƒ short term
Ramp queues at
Coggeshall Street affect
mainline
B
ƒ Install warning
sign (see Figure
8)
ƒ Improve design
of interchange
$3,000
ƒ short term
TBD
ƒ long term
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 17
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
Route 240
Interchange
Coggshall Street
Interchange
PROPOSED BARRIER APPROX. 1.2 MILES
PROPOSED BARRIER LOCATION
Proposed Median Barrier Location
Figure 7
The open median sections east of the interchange are fairly wide and more difficult to
cross. However, the location of the median can be made clearer with new installations
of flexible delineator posts with current reflective specifications. The low cost of this
action enables it to be a short-term recommendation.
The inside shoulder was noted as less than the minimum 4 feet width and is
recommended to be widened. This is more of a long-term action that would be
completed as part of the overall rehabilitation or resurfacing project was undertaken.
Accomplished as part of a larger project results in a relatively small incremental cost. As
part of that future work, the rumble strip would need to be reinstalled as well.
The remaining recommendations represent relatively low cost, short term actions that
can be taken to enhance awareness, guidance and better driver behavior in the section
under study. These include acceleration-deceleration lane markings and signage. The
use of dotted lines can improve the guidance for staying in the proper lane. The current
MUTCD depicts options with dotted lines for deceleration lanes and weave sections (see
Appendix for diagrams). The upcoming revised MUTCD is expected to include dotted
lines for acceleration lanes as well. The sign recommended for the westbound direction
prior (approx. ½ mile) to the Coggeshall Street interchange is depicted in Figure 8.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 18
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
EXPECT OFFRAMP BACKUPS
AT EXIT 17
Proposed Sign Westbound
Prior to Coggeshall Street Exit
Figure 8
Again, new flexible delineator posts can be installed to maintain the visibility of the
median, particularly in the section east of the interchange. The final suggestion includes
increased enforcement of speeds and inappropriate lane changing in this section.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 19
I-195 Fairhaven Road Safety Audit
Appendix
•
•
•
•
•
•
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
RSA Meeting Agenda
RSA Meeting Attendees
Median Crash Diagram
Crash Summary Data
Traffic Volume Data
Example of Lane Markings
Page 20
Road Safety Audit
Fairhaven – Interstate 195
Meeting Location: MassHighway District 5 Office
1000 County Street, Taunton
Thursday, September 11, 2008
11:30 AM – 1:00 PM
Type of meeting:
Cross Median – Road Safety Audit
Attendees:
Invited Participants to Comprise a Multidisciplinary Team
Please bring:
Thoughts and Enthusiasm!!
11:30 AM
Welcome and Introductions
11:45 AM
Introduction to Road Safety Audits and Cross Median Crashes
12:00 PM
Review of Site Specific Material
• Crash & Volume Summaries– provided in advance
• Existing Geometries and Conditions
• Video and Images
12:30 PM
Completion of RSA
• Identification of Safety Concerns – using RSA Prompt List as a guide
• Identification of Possible Countermeasures
1:00 PM
Adjourn for the Day – but the RSA has not ended
Instructions for Participants:
• Before attending the RSA on September 11th participants are encouraged to drive
Interstate 195 in Fairhaven (between Interchanges 17-19) and complete/consider
elements on the RSA Prompt List with a focus on safety factors affecting cross
median crashes.
• All participants will be actively involved in the process throughout. Participants
are encouraged to come with thoughts and ideas, but are reminded that the
synergy that develops and respect for others’ opinions are key elements to the
success of the overall RSA process.
• After the initial RSA meeting, participants will be asked to comment and respond
to the document materials to assure it is reflective of the RSA completed by the
multidisciplinary team.
ROAD SAFETY AUDIT MEETING
Route 195 Dartmouth-Fairhaven September 11, 2008
MassHighway District 5 Offices, Taunton MA
Attendance List
Name
Agency/Dept.
Email
Bill Scully
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
bscullyjr@mac.com
Edward C. Feeney
MassHighway, District 5
edward.feeney@mhd.state.ma.us
Erica Grygorcewicz
MassHighway, Highway Design
erica.grygorcewicz@mhd.state.ma.us
Jennifer Inzana
MassHighway, Traffic
jennifer.inzana@mhd.state.ma.us
Lisa Estrela-Pedro
SRPEED
lestrela@srpeed.org
Jim Hadfield
SRPEED
jhadfield@srpeed.org
Tim white
FHWA
timothy.A.White@fhwa.dot.gov
Paul Liralien
MSP
Paul.J.Liralien@pol.mass.us
Tim Kochan
MassHighway, District 5
timothy.kochan@mhd.state.ma.us
Erin Kinahan
MassHighway, District 5
erin.kinahan@mhd.state.ma.us
Lisa Schletzbaum
MassHighway, Safety
lisa.schletzbaum@mhd.state.ma.us
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
±
Interstate 195 Median Crashes
MATTAPOISETT
NEW BEDFORD
NU
E
EA
VE
IL L
EV
Crash IDs
between 6 - 12
UE
S TR E ET
F RO NT
NOR TH
UE
E T AV E N
AC US HN
BE
LL
RO AD
ST ON
ET
TR E
IN S
MA
RIV ER SIDE AV EN
O AD
NA SH R
O
NE W B
TH
SO U
ACUSHNET
17
15
"
)
14
18
16
§
¦
¨
195
13
"
)
17
L
HOW
COGGE SHALL STREE T
D
RO A
A ND
5
3
2
RE
E
ST
BR
ID
G
E
240
D
AL
EN
RO
AD
SS
T RE
Legend
)
"
FAIRHAVEN
M
AD A
HERMAN MELVILLE BOULEVARD
T
4
MAIN ST RE ET
1
ET
HU
Cross Median, Fatal Crash
Interstate
CA
MA
Principal Arterial
Cross Median, Non Fatal Crash
R
HU
RT
Median, Fatal Crash
T
SIX T H S
0
0.2
Local
file has not yet been closed.
0.4
0.6
Miles
0.8
S T RE E T
Municipal Boundary
ET
N S TR E
U*N IO
2007 crash
ON S T
Collector
GRE E N
Median, Non Fatal Crash
R EE T
IV E
DR
ELM S T
Minor Arterial
RE ET
GT
WAS H IN
ALDEN ROAD
Type of Median Crash 2004 - 2007 * Major Roads
SC
O
N
TI
C
UT
N
EC
K
RE E T
RO
AD
LE
TT
SO
N
E
AV
NU
E
MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY SAFETY DIVISION
CRASH SUMMARY
ROADWAY:
I-195
STUDY PERIOD:
NO.
1
CITY:
1/1/2004
CRASH DAY
CRASH NUMBER
2201662
Friday
TO
12/31/2007
TIME OF DAY
CRASH DATE
10:50 AM
03/02/07
Fairhaven
LOCATION:
TRAVEL
LIGHT
WEATHER
ROAD
REASON FOR
VEHICLE
MEDIAN OR CROSS
DRIVER CONTRIBUTING
CRASH
DIRECTION
CONDITION
CONDITION
SURFACE
RUNNING OFF ROAD LEFT
MOVEMENT
MEDIAN CRASHES
CAUSE
SEVERITY
EB
Daylight
Rain
Water (standing, moving)
Vehicle drifted left into cement barrier.
2
2051011
Sunday
1:55 AM
12/04/05
WB
Dark- roadway not lighted
Clear
Dry
Operator loses control of vehicle after striking guardrail in bal causing vehicle to cross two lanes and median into on coming traffic in EB
direction.
3
1899675
Thursday
5:50 AM
06/10/04
WB
Dawn
Clear
Dry
Operator fell asleep and ran off road into median, overcorrected steering and crossed all WB lanes hitting a sign in BDL.
4
1927148
Saturday
3:27 PM
03/26/05
EB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Operator was driving over speed limit and on bald tires.
5
1887586
Thursday
7:00 AM
08/26/04
WB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Operator lost control of vehicle and crossed the center median.
6
2040947
Sunday
8:30 AM
12/25/05
WB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
7
2157678
Friday
10:45 AM
10/20/06
EB
Daylight
Cloudy/rain
Wet
8
1927083
Saturday
2:00 AM
03/12/05
EB
Dark- roadway not lighted
Clear
Dry
EB Left travel lane into cement median barrier, back across two lanes striking right cement barrier causing
vehicle to overturn.
Median
WB travel lane to right guardrail, crosses two lanes, crosses median, enters EB travel lane and strikes a
vehicle head on.
Cross Median
No improper driving
Fatal Injury
Failure to keep in proper lane or running off the road
Fatal Injury
WB left travel lane into median, across two lanes hitting a mass highway sign in BDL.
Median
EB left travel lane, swerves left to avoid rear ending vehicle and traveled into median, coming to final rest
under overpass.
Median
Fatigue/asleep
Property Damage Only
Exceeded authorized speed limit
Property Damage Only
Failure to keep in proper lane or running off the road
Property Damage Only
Operator fell asleep while driving resulting in drifting into the median.
WB right travel lane into BDL, crossed WB lanes, median and EB lanes crashing into EB BDL guardrail. Cross Median
WB travel lane into median, overcorrected and crossed two lanes struck the guardrail in BDL spinning back
across two lanes and came to a rest in the median.
Median
Over-correcting/over-steering
Non Fatal Injury
Lost control of vehicle traveling 70 mph and crashed into trees in roadway median.
EB Left travel lane left roadway and into median.
Median
Exceeded authorized speed limit
Non Fatal Injury
Vehicle tire got stuck in snow in the median spun around and hit a tree with the rear of the vehicle.
EB travel lane into median where vehicle struck a tree.
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane or running off the road
Non Fatal Injury
9
1995654
Monday
11:20 PM
08/01/05
WB
Dark- roadway not lighted
Clear
Dry
Operator may have fallen asleep due to low blood sugar levels while driving causing vehicle to drift into median.
WB travel lane into median back across two lanes coming to rest in BDL.
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane or running off the road
Property Damage Only
10
1888335
Thursday
10:05 PM
12/16/04
WB
Dark- roadway not lighted
Clear
Dry
Operator fell asleep and drove into the median and rolled the vehicle over.
WB travel lane into median and rolled over
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane or running off the road
Non Fatal Injury
11
1805015
Sunday
3:20 PM
06/27/04
WB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Operator swerved into median to avoid hitting vehicle ahead.
WB left travel lane into median.
Median
No improper driving
Property Damage Only
12
2057816
Tuesday
1:10 PM
03/14/06
EB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Operator lost control of vehicle and traveled into median.
EB Left travel lane into median.
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane or running off the road
Non Fatal Injury
13
2251102
Saturday
11:54 PM
10/21/06
WB in EB direction
Dark- roadway not lighted
Clear
Dry
Driving wrong way on roadway causing a head on crash causing two cars into the median.
Traveled WB in the Left Travel lane in EB direction and crashed head on into a vehicle. The crash resulted
in both vehicles coming to a final rest in the median.
Median
Wrong side or wrong way
Fatal Injury
14
2166438
Wednesday
11:00 AM
02/14/07
WB
Daylight
Sleet, hail (freezing rain)
Ice
Vehicle slid on icy road into the median.
WB travel lane into median, finally hitting a tree in median.
Median
Unknown
Non Fatal Injury
15
1997142
Thursday
4:05 PM
04/21/05
WB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Operator lost control of vehicle and traveled into the median where the vehicle rolled over.
WB left travel lane into median and rolled over.
Median
No improper driving
Non Fatal Injury
16
1888274
Monday
2:45 PM
12/13/04
EB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
V2 avoided hitting V1 by swerving left into the median and then pulled back into roadway striking V1 .
V2 Left travel lane into median and back on to roadway. V1 Right travel lane into Left travel lane, crossed
lanes and bal and rested in trees.
Median
Unknown
Non Fatal Injury
17
2166439
Wednesday
11:05 AM
02/14/07
WB
Daylight
Sleet, hail (freezing rain)
Ice
Vehicle slid on icy road into the median.
WB travel lane into median, finally hitting a tree in median.
Property Damage Only
1802883*
Tuesday
1:40 PM
01/13/04
EB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Operator tried to cross the median to turn around, stated they were confused.
Median
EB right travel lane turned abruptly into the left travel lane and continued into the median after being hit by a
vehicle in the left lane.
Median
Unknown
18
Failure to keep in proper lane or running off the road
Non Fatal Injury
19
1899693*
Tuesday
6:00 AM
06/15/04
EB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Operator was fatigued drifted out of lane and over steered into the median.
Drifts from EB left travel lane into right travel lane and then into median.
Median
Fatigue/asleep
Property Damage Only
20
1996790*
Thursday
9:10 PM
06/16/05
WB
Dark- roadway not lighted
Clear
Dry
Operator steered vehicle to the left into median to avoid being hit by an unknown vehicle.
WB travel lane into median back across lanes into the wooded area on the right side of roadway.
Median
No improper driving
Property Damage Only
21
2095815*
Wednesday
6:55 PM
05/31/06
EB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Vehicle made illegal lane change and caused two car crashes ending in the median.
22
2156817*
Sunday
3:20 PM
12/31/06
WB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Vehicle OSS was approximately 70 mph. Sun glare caused driver to drift into median and spin out on mud in the median.
EB Merge lane into BDL, then cut into right travel lane where vehicle was hit by another vehicle. Forced
into left travel lane and was hit by a second vehicle, causing both vehicles to travel into the median.
Median
Travel lane into median, spun on mud in median and across two lanes, hit the guardrail in BDL, spun and
struck bal guardrail again with rear of vehicle.
Median
23
2157741*
Sunday
6:15 AM
11/05/06
EB
Dawn
Clear
Dry
Operator was driving vehicle in excess speeds of posted limit, then swerved to avoid collision with another vehicle, causing a median crash.
EB right travel lane into wooded median.
Median
Exceeded authorized speed limit
Non Fatal Injury
24
2219632*
Saturday
5:42 PM
03/03/07
EB
Dawn
Clear
Dry
Vehicle drifted into the median, driver over corrected into the right bal.
EB travel lane into median, back across all lanes and into BDL continuing to rolling over in the grass.
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane or running off the road
Property Damage Only
* Crash could not be located in geocoder.
LIGHT CONDITION
WEATHER CONDITION
TOTAL NO.
DAYLIGHT
DAWN
DARK - NOT LIGHTED
CLEAR
CLOUDY
RAIN
24
15
3
6
20
1
1
2
100%
63%
13%
25%
83%
4%
4%
8%
DRY
WET
20
2
2
MEDIAN OR CROSS MEDIAN
TOTAL NO.
SNOW/SLEET
ROAD SURFACE
CRASH SEVERITY
MEDIAN
CROSS MEDIAN
PROPERTY DAMAGE
ONLY
NON-FATAL INJURY
FATAL INJURY
24
22
2
10
11
3
100%
92%
8%
42%
46%
13%
83%
8%
8%
TOTAL NO.
FAILURE TO KEEP IN
PROPER LANE
GLARE
WRONG WAY OR WRONG
SIDE
IMPROPER TURN
FATIGUED/ASLEEP
NO IMPROPER DRIVING
OVER-CORRECTING/ OVERSTEERING
SNOW/ ICE
DRIVER CONTRIBUTING CAUSE
EXCEEDED AUTHORIZED
SPEED LIMIT
UNKNOWN
24
8
3
1
1
1
2
4
1
3
100%
33%
13%
4%
4%
4%
8%
17%
4%
13%
2007 CRASH INFORMATION IS NOT COMPLETE
CRASH SUMMARY IS BASED ON CRASH REPORTS WITH STATE POLICE NARRATIVES
Made an improper turn
Non Fatal Injury
Glare
Property Damage Only
I-195, West of RT 140 05/24/2007
Eastbound Westbound
Direction
Direction
TOTAL
Start time
12:00 AM
178
140
318
1:00 AM
119
91
210
2:00 AM
98
65
163
3:00 AM
107
79
186
4:00 AM
182
145
327
5:00 AM
710
453
1,163
6:00 AM
1,676
1,204
2,880
7:00 AM
1,979
2,038
4,017
8:00 AM
1,826
1,909
3,735
9:00 AM
1,469
1,628
3,097
10:00 AM
1,504
1,471
2,975
11:00 AM
1,654
1,547
3,201
12:00 PM
1,750
1,464
3,214
1:00 PM
1,754
1,576
3,330
2:00 PM
2,061
1,749
3,810
3:00 PM
2,215
2,218
4,433
4:00 PM
2,415
2,379
4,794
5:00 PM
2,280
2,313
4,593
6:00 PM
1,787
1,560
3,347
7:00 PM
1,381
1,080
2,461
8:00 PM
1,133
905
2,038
9:00 PM
889
623
1,512
10:00 PM
701
455
1,156
11:00 PM
483
292
775
Daily Total
30,351
27,384
57,735
Eastbound Direction
Westbound Direction
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
Time of Day
11:00 PM
10:00 PM
9:00 PM
8:00 PM
7:00 PM
6:00 PM
5:00 PM
4:00 PM
3:00 PM
2:00 PM
1:00 PM
12:00 PM
11:00 AM
10:00 AM
9:00 AM
8:00 AM
7:00 AM
6:00 AM
5:00 AM
4:00 AM
3:00 AM
2:00 AM
1:00 AM
0
12:00 AM
Hourly Volume (Number of Vehicles)
Directional Traffic Volumes along I-195, West of RT-140, Fairhaven
Thursday, May, 24, 2007
a-Parallel
deceleration lane
b-Tapered
deceleration lane
Neutral area
Optional
chevron
markings
Channelizing
lines
Theoretical gore
point
Channelizing
lines
Broken lane
markings for
one-half of
full-width
deceleration
lane
Optional
dotted
extension
of lane
line
Legend
Direction of
travel
Source: MUTCD
Potential Pavement Markings Off-Ramp Deceleration Lanes
NOT TO SCALE
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Framingham, Massachusetts