ROAD SAFETY AUDIT
MAJOR HIGHWAY
CROSS MEDIAN CRASHES
ROUTE 3 HINGHAM AND
WEYMOUTH
Prepared for
Massachusetts Highway Department
Prepared by
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Framingham, Massachusetts
May 2009
ROAD SAFETY AUDIT
MAJOR HIGHWAY
CROSS MEDIAN CRASHES
ROUTE 3 HINGHAM and
WEYMOUTH
FINAL REPORT
May 2009
Prepared for
Massachusetts Highway Department
Prepared by
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
300 Howard Street P.O. Box 967
Framingham, Massachusetts 01701
Tel: 508-620-2832 Fax: 508-620-6897
www.mstransportationsystemsinc.com
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION
1
RSA PROCESS
3
ANALYSIS
8
SUMMARY OF RSA FINDINGS/POTENTIAL ACTIONS
13
RECOMMENDATIONS
21
APPENDIX
24
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
Page i
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth 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 for Route 3 in Hingham and Weymouth as part of this project.
Figure 1 indicates the corridor section under study, which was from approximately 5,500
feet north of Interchange 15 to 3,000 feet south of the interchange. This section had
experienced a high number of median related crashes, including several cross-median
crashes.
Again, the purpose of this Route 3 Hingham-Weymouth 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
Weymouth
Hingham
Interchange 15
Derby Street
Route 3
Norwell
N
Project Location
W
S
Route 3 Road Safety Audit
Hingham - Weymouth, Massachusetts
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
E
1 : 25,000
Framingham, Massachusetts
FIGURE 1
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth 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
RSA team. Given the RSA team size 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 crossover crashes, and
available record highway plans were obtained and reviewed by the RSA consultant.
•
RSA Team
The following individuals participated in of the Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road
Safety Audit:
Bill Travers, MassHighway District 5
Maintenance
Timothy White, FHWA
Seth Asante, CTPS
Bonnie Polin, MassHighway Safety
Management Unit
•
Brett Loosian, MassHighway District 4
Maintenance
Lisa Schletzbaum, MassHighway Safety
Management Unit
Lt. Daniel Mulkern, Mass State Police
Lyris Liautaud, MassHighway Highway Design
William J. Scully, MS Transportation Systems
(RSA Consultant)
RSA Meeting
A meeting was held on May 22, 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 results of the review to date. The RSA
team listed above was present at the meeting. The team included a range of safety
expertise with different perspectives. The video record of the Route 3 taken while
driving the corridor was viewed. During and following the video, discussions related to
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
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
the potential facts affecting the risk of safety related events along the corridor and
possible solutions to reduce this risk were conducted. The RSA team provided input on
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:
•
A team member noted that there is a relatively short distance of “open”
median-possibly 1,000 feet north and 1,000 south of interchange (distances
were later checked and indicated approximately 3,500 feet of open median).
•
Travel is allowed in shoulder during peak period in peak direction: NB 6AM –
10AM, SB 3PM – 7PM.
•
The lane drop in the southbound direction contributes to the safety issues as
a high volume must merge left and significant lane changing occurs as well.
Compounding the issue is the travel in the shoulder during the PM peak hour
in that direction. Within approximately ½ mile of the end of the lane drop is
the exit ramp to Derby Street.
•
Members of the RSA team felt that there is not sufficient warning to the lane
drop. Better signage may be needed.
•
With the use of the outside shoulder for travel, striping had been modified to
provide a wider outside shoulder. This modification shifted all markings
toward median which is the likely cause of the varying and narrow inside
shoulder width.
•
The Derby Street bridge was re-built a few years ago (between 2003-2006) one question was how the bridge project affected the crash data in the
immediate area of the interchange.
•
The section is “dark” and existing reflectors don’t seem to be effective. It was
mentioned that the recessed markers being put in I-93 (Randolph-Braintree
Section) seem to work well.
•
It was noted that a high proportion of the crashes occurred under dark
conditions. With little room for error (i.e. narrow, inside shoulder) good
visibility is critical and lighting may help.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 4
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
•
It was noted that drainage problems exist and a number of crashes occurred
when surface was wet and standing water had been cited. The combination
of water, dark conditions and higher speeds during the dark periods, coupled
with existing physical conditions likely contribute to median entry crashes.
•
One area of the drainage problem was noted to be near Pleasant Street.
•
Different surface between town lines (Weymouth/Hingham) was noted.
Surface type may contribute to drainage problems. One section had more
recent resurfacing.
•
Most recent pavement rehab projects were completed: Weymouth townline
to the North mid 90’s; and Hingham townline to the South in the early 2000’s.
•
Relative to widening the inside shoulder to 4 feet – it was asked if the
reduction in unpaved median width could result in more crossings due to less
width to slow down.
•
Many of the team members (though not all) felt driving the section under
study had a certain level of discomfort.
Following the RSA meeting, the RSA consultant compiled the information, for inclusion
on the analysis and in the development of recommendations.
•
Analysis Procedures
As previously indicated, the RSA analysis generally followed the procedure described in
Guideline with some minor adjustments and also took into consideration the methods
published by the Federal Highway Administration2 and those included in training
materials3. The basic tasks included:
2
3
•
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,
•
identify potential safety risk factors, and
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 5
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
•
Identify and evaluate potential actions to address the noted issues.
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 FHWA guidelines 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. Background information from
FHWA is included in the Appendix.
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 than 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)
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
Expected Crash Severity
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.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 6
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth 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
Audits were conducted by the team members prior to the RSA meeting. Key notes from
the field work are as follows:
ƒ
In the southbound direction, entering the study section, motorists come into a
horizontal curve on top of a grade – at the end of guardrail - if in the inside
lane, one can feel some discomfort due to being on the outside of the curve.
ƒ
Notices skid marks in area of vertical curve in beginning of study section in
southbound direction.
ƒ
Entering the study section (SB) in three lanes from the north in the
southbound direction, a lane drop occurs within 1,300 feet south of the
Pleasant Street overpass that increases congestion and lane changing.
ƒ
There is travel in the shoulder during peak periods – southbound in the PM
peak period and northbound in the AM peak period.
ƒ
The inside shoulder was noted as varying width from nearly non-existent to
two (2) feet – rumble strip exists in some portions of inside shoulder but not
all.
ƒ
There was some pavement edge raveling (inside) with areas of significant
edge drop off.
ƒ
There was evidence of median entries in study section.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 7
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
Analysis
Route 3 in the study area is approximately 1.5 miles in length and is shown in Figure 2.
In the north section (Weymouth), the roadway’s horizontal alignment changes, the
median is heavily vegetated and guardrail exists along the median edge. Through
Interchange 15, Route 3 is a 4-lane divided, access-controlled highway. North of the
interchange, an additional travel lane is gained in the northbound direction. In the
southbound direction, a lane drop (3 to 2) occurs prior (approximately ¾ miles) to
Interchange 15. Coupled with the allowed PM peak period travel in the southbound
breakdown lane, the lane drop creates some difficult merging and lane changing. Some
of the lane changing is done by motorists in the outside lane prior to the lane drop who
must merge left and then shift back to the outside lane (shoulder/deceleration lane) to
exit the highway at Interchange 15. Again, peak hour travel currently occurs in the
shoulder.
R o u te 3
D e rb y S tre e t
In te rc h a n g e 1 5
Figure 2 - Study section
As stated above, the existing cross-section of Route 3 in the interchange area and south
of the interchange is a 4-lane section with two lanes per direction. Each of the travel
lanes is 12 feet in width. The outside shoulder is 11-12 feet in width as it functions as an
auxiliary lane during the peak periods and must safely accommodate moving traffic. The
inside shoulder varies in width in part due to the restriping that occurred when the peak
period shoulder travel option was installed. A rumble strip exists along most of the study
section (both inside and outside shoulders) although it is missing on the inside shoulder
in spots. This condition may have been created when the Derby Street bridge overpass
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 8
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
was reconstructed and the Route 3 surface was modified to accommodate traffic through
the construction zone. The rumble strips may simply not have been reinstalled once the
bridge work had been completed.
The overall alignment in the study area is varying but can be characterized as “gentle”.
Through the interchange itself, Route 3 is level and tangent. Speed limits are posted at
60 miles per hour (mph). There are imbedded reflectors in the lane lines. The unpaved
portion of the median width through the section ranges from approximately 42 to 48 feet.
Measuring from edge line to edge line, the total median width is up to approximately 53
feet in width. The topography of the median varies over the length of the study section,
but for the most part, it could be considered a depressed median with relatively flat
slopes. The typical section plan showed slopes of 6 to 1, and based on field review, it
appears they could be flatter in the majority of the section. While the length of the study
section is approximately 1.5 miles, a review of the corridor shows that the length of the
“open” median in this section is approximately 3,500 feet. This is divided with about
1,600 feet north of the interchange and the remaining 1,900 feet south of the
interchange. Figures 3 through 6 present photographs depicting current conditions along
the study section.
Figure 3 – Entering study section on
southbound direction
Figure 4 – Southbound at end of guardrail
section north of Interchange 15
Figure 5 – Northbound On-Ramp Merge
Figure 6 – View of Cross-Section
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 9
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
A review of available safety data was completed as part of this RSA. The review of data
included 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 60 median related crashes were noted during this period or an
average of 15 median related crashes per year.
 Of the total median related crashes, only 2 or 3% were classified crossmedian crashes.
 One of the cross-median crashes reported was a fatal crash. This occurred
in the immediate area of the interchange and the motorist was initially
traveling southbound prior to crossing the median.
 Also, it appears that 24 crashes involved hitting the median guardrail and
either remaining in the highway at the guardrail or “bouncing” off and crossing
into and sometimes crossing each of the adjacent lanes to the right.
 Approximately 42% of the total median - related reported crashes resulted in
personal injuries.
 Reported median - related crashes were split about evenly in NB and SB
direction.
 Forty (40%) of crashes occurred during the non-light period (i.e. 9PM-5AM).
 Thirty-five percent (35%) of reported crashes occurred during rain or snow
conditions.
In general, the contributing causes varied but speed issues were noted in ten (10) of the
crashes. Swerving to avoid something (i.e. object, animal) was noted in seven (7)
crashes. Of the two cross-median crashes, erratic driving and alcohol were cited. In the
cross-median fatal crash, it was noted the driver that initiated the crash was driving
erratically including weaving before losing control in the area of the lane drop and “open”
median. In addition, the fatal crash also resulted in several people injured and a total of
six vehicles involved in the crash.
The traffic volumes observed on Route 3 in this section were observed to be
approximately 95,000 on an average weekday during October 2006. During the
summer, volumes on Route 3 are approximately 9 percent above average month
conditions based on nearby MassHighway permanent count data (Station No. 7318).
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 10
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
Based on the count station, October volumes approximate average month conditions.
Figure 7 depicts the hourly volume by direction in October 2006 south of Derby Street
(Interchange 15). As shown, PM peak period flows in the peak direction exceed 4,000
vehicles per hour.
Figure 7
Route 3 Directional Volume
Averag e Daily Vo lu me
Figure 8 illustrates the variation in flow on Route 3 over the year based on data from the
MassHighway permanent count Station No. 7318.
120,000
100,000
AADT – 95,000 +/-
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Month
Figure 8
Route 3 Monthly Traffic Volume
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 11
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
A review of available truck count data indicates that on Route 3, truck volumes tend to
represent approximately 5 percent of the daily total volume as well as during the peak
hour. This translates to approximately 5,000 trucks over the course of the day and 380
trucks during the peak hour. In summary, the Route 3 RSA in Hingham has identified a
number of physical and operational characteristics as being potentially a contributing
factors to increasing the risk of experiencing the safety issues although each with varied
levels of seriousness. The major ones include:
¾ Median is largely open (i.e. no barriers), has a slope of 6:1 or flatter
and was considered by the RSA team as highly crossable,
¾ The median as measured from inside edge line to inside edge line is
relatively narrow – 53 feet or less.
¾ High volumes (approximately 95,000) on average weekday.
¾ Combination of the interchange movements, peak period travel in
shoulder, southbound lane drop and high volume – results in
substantial amount of lane changing in short distance.
The next section will discuss these key issues and the potential actions to consider for
addressing them.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 12
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth 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 Route 3 in the
Hingham 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
Median width is 53 feet or less and open for approximately 3,500
feet in two sections north and south of the interchange
D1
Varying width of inside shoulder - rumble strip is absent in certain
areas
D
Condition of non-paved area just off inside paved shoulder - Edge
drop off appears significant in certain areas
D
SB horizontal curve at beginning of study section may affect driver
control and visibility - north of interchange there is an elevation
difference between the two directions
C
High travel speeds – excessive lane changing – improper driver
behavior
D
The acceleration-deceleration lanes appear to be shorter than ideal
C
Pavement broken up around some catch basins located in inside
shoulder – ponding of water reported in several areas but most
notably near Pleasant Street
C
Peak period travel in the shoulder
C
Southbound lane drop occurs approximately 3,400 feet prior to
Interchange
D
Section is dark affecting ability to follow roadway
C
1) risk rating based on reported cross-median crashes. Total reported median entry crashes average 15 per
year.
Given the high volume and the high number of median entries, the “open” median factor
was assigned a high risk factor. In other words, the operational and physical
characteristics of the highway section under study is such that once a motorist makes a
mistake or becomes “errant” and enters the median, there is a relatively high probability
that the motorist will cross the median and enter the opposing direction of flow. Recent
historical information shows a relatively small number (3) of median related crashes
(reported) actually involve crossing the median. With observed volumes approximately
95,000 vehicles per day, the exposure is considered high and this type of event
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 13
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
becomes a greater possibility. Although exposure is high, the median width relatively
narrow, and the RSA team could sense a certain uneasiness in traveling this study
section, a risk rating of ‘D’ was assigned. It was recognized, however, that a high
number of median entries occur and the potential of crossing the open median areas
could be considered highly possible based on its topography.
One of the more substantive items noted by the RSA team was the existing lane drop in
the southbound direction. It occurs approximately 3,400 feet north of the Interchange 15
exit ramp. The southbound direction is the peak direction during the PM peak hour
which experiences volumes in excess of 4,000 vehicles per hour for several hours
(based on October data). Under present conditions, travel is also allowed in the
shoulder between 3:00 PM and 7:00 PM. Consequently, during the PM peak period,
increased volume in the shoulder, the lane drop, high volumes and the exit at the
Hingham interchange combine result to in a high level of lane changing and the
possibility of a median related event. Risk ratings assigned to the lane drop and high
travel speeds were ‘D’.
The peak hour travel in the shoulder appears to be a factor in median related crashes in
general. Travel in the shoulder affects driver behavior particularly at the on- and offramps in relation to merging and lane changing. Providing for travel in the shoulders has
meant re-striping the lanes on this section resulting in a narrow and varying width inside
shoulder. A ‘C’ rating relative to cross-median risk was assigned to travel in the outside
shoulder.
With the narrow inside shoulder, rumble strips are not fully provided and if they do exist,
there is virtually no “room for error”. In other words, if a motorist hits the rumble strip on
the inside shoulder, there is a good chance that the motorist will not react in sufficient
time to keep the vehicle on the road. A risk rating of ‘D’ was assigned to this factor.
There were also noticeable areas where the edge drop off was significant which was
also rated a ‘D’.
The roadway geometry was also cited as a potential factor in southbound travel. There
is horizontal curve with some vertical grade change as one enters the study section from
the north. It was noted that visibility on roadway conditions ahead may be somewhat
affected. This occurs at or near the area of the lane drop. A factor of ‘C’ was assigned.
There were several crashes that reported “standing water” and wet surface. Members of
the RSA team confirmed this and it could be in part due to the pavement surface and
partially due to inadequate drainage in certain location. One area cited is near the
Pleasant Street overpass. This factor was assigned a ‘C’ rating. High travel speeds and
excessive lane changing (‘D’ risk rating) were noted by members of the RSA team.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 14
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
Also, the acceleration-deceleration lanes were noted as being shorter than desirable and
were assigned a ‘C’ rating. Lastly, several RSA team members noted the study section
was notably dark during evening and nighttime conditions affecting motorists ability to
“follow” the road. This factor was assigned a ‘C’.
Suggested actions identified are intended to reduce or eliminate cross-median crashes
and enhance overall safety were identified based on the specific issue. Given the
primary objective of this RSA program is to address cross-median crashes, the first
action evaluated was the potential of a median barrier. The following paragraphs include
discussion pertaining to the evaluation of a median barrier.
•
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 cross-median 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 are worse than if the
barrier were in place.
Factors taken into account 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 Route 3 section under study. Figure 9
presents a review of the corridor in relation to the median warrant criteria presented in
the AASHTO RDG4. As can be seen in the diagram, with the median (as measured from
edge line to edge line) is approximately 47-53 feet and a volume of 95,000 vehicles on
an average day, the intersection of the two items is in the area of the chart where a
barrier should be “considered”. With the volume, the result in an intersecting point in the
chart area where a barrier should be considered.
4
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Roadside Design Guide,
Washington, D.C., 2002, Chapter 6 Update 2006.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 15
95,000 ADT
median width
47-53 feet
ADT - 95,000
80
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
(thousands)
70
BARRIER
RECOMMENDED
60
BARRIER
CONSIDERED
50
40
BARRIER
OPTIONAL
30
20
10
0
0
10
20
30
40
MEDIAN WIDTH
(feet)
50
60
70
Source: AASHTO Roadside Design Guide, Chapter 6 Update, 2006
Analysis of Median Barrier Warrant
Route 3 Road Safety Audit
Hingham and Weymouth, Massachusetts
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Framingham, Massachusetts
Figure 9
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
In addition to the chart and related warrant criteria, which is a guideline, further
consideration was given to the following:
ƒ
The high volume presents a likelihood of greater number of errant vehicles
entering the median,
ƒ
A fairly high number of median entries over the four (4) year period and the
median appear to be very crossable.
Consequently, based on the analysis of the data, the field drive-thru and discussion of
the conditions by the RSA team members, it is suggested that a median barrier be
installed in the section of the study section that are currently open and “crossable”. This
installation will be approximately 3,500 feet of barrier to be installed. The selection of
the barrier is discussed in the next section.
Barrier Selection
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)
From a cost and aesthetic perspective, the cable (flexible) barrier has its advantages
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. With
regard to the cable barrier, the RSA team has discussed two primary cable alternatives
noted below. In addition to the cable barrier systems, team members also suggested
that guardrail be considered in the evaluation. 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 study section include the strong post thrie-beam or
cable barrier. The guardrail is appropriate for high speed highways that have high
volumes with a relatively high proportion of truck traffic. The weak post W-beam and
box beam can be eliminated due to the type of highway. The concrete barrier would
generally be applicable in urban sections with limited median widths available, which is
not the situation in this section.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 17
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
In deciding on the type of barrier, recommended guidelines in selection are included in
Table 5 taken from the AASHTO Roadside Design Guide5.
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
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.
5. Cost
6. Maintenance
A. Routine
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.
B. Collision
C. Material Storage
D. Simplicity
7. Aesthetics
8. Field Experience
Source: AASHTO, Roadside Design Guide, 2002, Chapter 5 Roadside Barriers.
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
5
Barrier hits per mile
Frequency of hits
Cost recovery
Cable downtime
Repair effect on traffic
Maintaining tension
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Roadside Design Guide, Washington,
D.C., 2002, Chapter 6 Update 2006.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 18
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
Final selection of the barrier type should be based on the costs, the ability to maintain a
recovery zone, and likely maintenance or repair requirements. In addition, aesthetics
and the characteristics of the recent crashes can also be taken into account. The key
points of the cable barrier or guardrail 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. There are
3-rope or 4-rope cable systems as shown in the following two photographs.
This barrier can be installed on slopes of 6:1 or flatter with little constraint on placement
other than deflection limits. There are certain systems (Brifen and Gibraltor 4 rope) that
have been approved for slopes as steep as 4:1. The cable can usually be installed
sufficiently away from the paved surface so as to maintain a clear zone or recovery area
and to minimize ‘hits’. More constraints on placement exist when installing the barrier
on slopes steeper than 6:1. The topography and median width in the Hingham –
Weymouth study section should accommodate cable barrier.
4 – Rope Brifen System
3 Cable CASS System
Guardrail
Typically, guardrail is used where steep slopes or minimal recovery zones exist within
close proximity to the pavement surface. Guardrail is also utilized where the median
width is narrow and low deflections are required. In addition, guardrail can be placed in
the median where slopes are 10:1 or flatter. With the guardrail placed within several feet
of the pavement edge, the clear zone (or recovery area) would be eliminated at least on
one side. Deflection with the thrie-beam rail is in the 2 to 3 foot range. One consequence
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 19
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
of the guardrail placed at the edge of pavement is that there is a “bounce off” effect
when struck by a vehicle. This can potentially increase the number of vehicles affected
in the crash. Thrie-beam guardrail is used in the northern area of the study section
where median obstruction exist or the roadside slopes are relatively steep.
Per mile costs of the two basic types of median barrier treatment to be considered are
summarized in Table 6. The costs are based on MassHighway unit prices with planning
level assumptions and contingencies. In general, installation costs for the cable barrier
tend to be lower than guardrail costs.
TABLE 6
COMPARISON PER MILE COSTS
Cable vs. Guardrail
Costs/Mile
Cable
$144,000
Thrie beam
$213,0001
1 assumes single run & double faced thrie-beam
The section under study in Hingham and Weymouth has a median width and topography
that could accommodate a cable barrier. The placement could be sufficiently off the
pavement edge to allow for recovery. Assuming cable barrier is used in the estimated
3,500 feet of open median, a $125,000 cost is projected. If guardrail were to be used, it
likely needs to be placed within a few feet of the pavement edge. If this is the case,
single faced guardrail could be placed in both directions of Route 3 or double faced in a
single direction. Although preventing cross-over crashes, one disadvantage of the
guardrail would be vehicles deflecting off of it back into the traffic lanes possibly creating
multiple vehicle crashes. Costs for a single run of double faced thrie-beam in the open
median sections is estimated to cost $140,600.
The next section outlines a set of recommendations that address all the factors including
but not limited to the open median.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 20
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth 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. 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)). These actions are intended
to eliminate the chance of cross-median crashes as well as reduce the severity of all
crashes and improve the overall safety condition of this section of Route 3 in Hingham
and Weymouth.
A major recommendation by the RSA team is to install a median barrier in the existing
open median both north and south of the interchange. While some members of the
team suggested extending the existing guardrail, the extension would apply only in the
approximately 1,600 foot section north of the interchange. South of the interchange is
currently open without guardrail sections. Consequently, a new barrier would need to be
installed for about 1,900 feet. One option involves placing guardrail on one side of within
a few feet of the pavement edge. As stated previously, one consequence is that the
guardrail can result in redirecting the motorist back into the travel lanes, which if the
motorists cannot recover adequately, will result in potentially more serious crashes and
greater impact on traffic operations. Installing guardrail could also require work in
relation to the inside shoulder and median sections adjacent to the pavement. Although
this additional work would be positive and are included in other recommendations listed
by the RSA team, it may result in a higher implementation cost in the short range.
An alternative is to install a cable barrier. The cable barrier could likely be installed
independent of both widening the inside shoulder and regrading some of the median
near the pavement edge in the short range. The cable barrier would be a lower cost
action, prevent cross-median events and allow for a recovery area in both directions.
For these reasons, the RSA team recommends that cable barrier be given first
consideration as to the type of barrier in this study section.
In addition to the barrier, addressing the lane drop is another major action that the RSA
team believes important in addressing lane changing and median safety in this section.
To this end, it is recommended that the existing third lane be carried through the
interchange where the lane drop can be more safely transitioned. While this action is
more of a long term action, improving the lane drop warnings to motorists through
enhanced signage should be accomplished in the short term. While improved signage
would ideally include overhead signage (possibly electronic VMS), this would be a higher
cost action and could result in a longer implementation time. An alternative to the
overhead sign would be the use of oversized signs (5’x5’) with supplemental distances
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 21
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
added to the signs. A concept of this is included in the Appendix. This lower cost option
could be implemented in the short term and serve as an interim improvement at a
minimum.
Risk Factor
Median width is 53 feet or less and
open for approximately 3,500 feet
through the interchange
TABLE 7
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Risk
Recommended
Rating
Action
D
ƒ Install cable barrier
Estimated
Cost
$125,000
Estimated
Timeframe
ƒ short
term
ƒ long term
ƒ long term
Varying width of inside shoulder rumble strip is absent in certain
areas
D
ƒ Widen inside shoulder
ƒ Re-install rumble strips
$1.9M
$6,000
Condition of non-paved area just off
inside paved shoulder - Edge drop
off appears significant in certain
areas
D
ƒ Re-establish unpaved
portion of median
addressing edge
TBD (low)
could be done
as part of inside
shoulder work
1-2% of total
resurface cost
ƒ short
term
$2,000
ƒ short
term
TBD
ƒ short
term
TBD (low)
TBD (high)
ƒ short
term
ƒ Install safety edge
SB horizontal curve may affect
driver control and visibility - north of
interchange there is an elevation
difference between the two
directions
C
ƒ Install flexible, reflective
delineators
High travel speeds – excessive lane
changing – improper driver behavior
D
ƒ Increase enforcement
Acceleration-deceleraton lanes
appear to be shorter than ideal
C
ƒ Improve markings
ƒ Widen outside shoulder
ƒ long term
ƒ long term
Pavement broken up around catch
basins located in shoulder –
ponding of water reported in several
areas but most notably near
Pleasant Street
C
ƒ Repair pavement
ƒ Drainage improvements Pleasant Street area
TBD
Peak period travel in shoulder
C
ƒ Improve signage of travel
use – added warnings
$5,000
ƒ short
term
Southbound lane drop occurs
approximately 3,400 feet prior to
Interchange
D
ƒ Install new roadside signage
and markings of the lane
drop (3-4 signs)
ƒ Use of VMS overhead signs
ƒ Extend lane through
interchange
$10,000
ƒ short
term
TBD
$900,000
ƒ long term
ƒ long term
see above
ƒ short
term
ƒ long term
Section is dark affecting ability to
follow roadway
C
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
ƒ Improve delineation with
flexible reflector posts
ƒ Install lighting at interchange
TBD (high)
ƒ long term
as part of
rehabilita
tion
Page 22
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
Other actions suggested include improving signage for travel in the breakdown lane,
addressing drainage issues and improving the inside shoulder including a new, complete
rumble strip. The inside shoulder widening is a higher cost item. Assuming a
conservative widening of 6 feet (including a 3-foot box widening section in the existing
travel lane) on both sides, the cost is estimated at $1.9M with approximately 16,000 feet
of work. While in the short term signage and markings can be implemented to improve
the southbound lane drop guidance, a long term solution suggested by the team was to
extend the third lane through the interchange. It is assumed this would entail widening
the southbound section by approximately 12 feet for a length of approximately 5,500
feet. The estimated cost for that action is $900,000 assuming minimal work is necessary
in the area of the Derby Street overpass.
Short term, low cost actions to address the “darkness” factor would be to install flexible
delineator posts along the median edge in both directions. In the long term,
consideration for lighting at the interchange can be given, however, this is a higher cost
action that has also been noted by the RSA team members will result in higher cost
maintenance requirements.
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
Page 23
Route 3 Hingham and Weymouth Road Safety Audit
Appendix
•
•
•
•
•
MS Transportation Systems, Inc.
RSA Meeting Agenda
RSA Attendees List
Median Crash Diagram
Crash Data
Traffic Volume Data
Page 24
Road Safety Audit
Hingham – Route 3
Meeting Location: MassHighway District 5 Office
1000 County Street, Taunton
Thursday, May 22, 2008
10:00 AM – 12:00 PM
Type of meeting:
Cross Median – Road Safety Audit
Attendees:
Invited Participants to Comprise a Multidisciplinary Team
Please bring:
Thoughts and Enthusiasm!!
10:00 AM
Welcome and Introductions
10:15 AM
Introduction to Road Safety Audits and Cross Median Crashes
10:30 AM
Review of Site Specific Material
• Crash & Volume Summaries– provided in advance
• Existing Geometries and Conditions
• Video and Images
11:00 AM
Completion of RSA
• Identification of Safety Concerns – using RSA Prompt List as a guide
• Identification of Possible Countermeasures
12:00 PM
Adjourn for the Day – but the RSA has not ended
Instructions for Participants:
• Before attending the RSA on May 22nd participants are encouraged to drive
Route 3 in Hingham (Interchanges 14-16) 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 3 Hingham - May 22, 2008
Attendance List
Name
Tim White
Bill Travers
Seth Asante
Lyris Liautaud
Brett Loosian
Robert Gregory
Lisa Schletzbaum
Bonnie Polin
Dan Mulkern
Bill Scully
Agency/Dept.
FHWA
MHD Dist. 3 Highway Maint.
CTPS
MHD
MHD Dist. 4 Highway Maint.
MHD Dist. 5
MHD - Safety
MHD - Safety
MSP
MS Transportation Systmes, Inc.
Email
Timothy.A.White@fhwa.dot.gov
Bill.Travers@mhd.state.ma.us
Setha@ctps.org
Lyris.Liautaud@mhd.state.ma.us
Brett.Loosian@mhd.state.ma.us
Robert.Gregory@mhd.state.ma.us
Lisa.Schletzbaum@mhd.state.ma.us
bonnie.polin@mhd.state.ma.us
msinatick@earthlink.net
WAS
H ING
TO
W
AR
D
PLEASANT STREET
EE
T
ES
TR
M ID
DL
N
WI
RT
OU
C
R
TE
Route 3 Median Crashes
N ST
RE E
T
ST
±
RE
ET
1
16
18
1920
21
22
23
24
M IL
N
FR O
LS
TR
EE
T
CU SH ING ST
REET
Crash IDs
between 3-17
"
)
2
T ST
T
RE E
WE
25 26
27
RE E T
ST ST
28
29
30
)
"
18
31
33
32
WEYMOUTH
HINGHAM
34
GA
35
36
UE
AV EN
A RK
P
COL
U MB
IAN
S TR
EET
OA
T
WES
PA
RK
AV
EN
UE
Legend
Type of Median Crash 2004-2007 *
MajorUNRoads
IO
NS
EE T
Interstate
RA ND OLPH Non-Fatal Crash
Cross Median,
ST REET
Median,
HOLLNon-Fatal Crash
Arterial
CPrincipal
EN
TR
AL
ST
RE
Minor Arterial
ET
Municipal Boundary
Collector
RE E T
"
)
15
KS
TR
EE
DE RB
TI
NG
ST
R
37
T
EE
T
56
Crash IDs
between 38-54
)
"
3
57
58
60
59
Local
0.2
0.4
PO ND ST REET
* 2007 crash file has not yet been closed.
0
0.6
Miles
0.8
E
RE
55
TR
Cross Median, Fatal Crash
IS S T
P
RA L
T
RE E
T ST
LB O
A
T
H
W
HI
Y ST R EE T
NE
RD
T
RS
LIBERTY ST RE
ET
ROCKLAND
SH AR P ST REET
T
MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY SAFETY DIVISION
CRASH SUMMARY REVISED
ROADWAY:
RT 3
STUDY PERIOD:
NO.
CRASH NUMBER
CITY:
1/1/2004
TO
12/31/2007
TRAVEL
LIGHT
WEATHER
ROAD
REASON FOR
LANES
CONDITION
CONDITION
SURFACE
RUNNING OFF ROAD LEFT
ROCKLAND, HINGHAM, WEYMOUTH
LOCATION:
NEAR EXIT#15
VEHICLE
MEDIAN OR CROSS
DRIVER CONTRIBUTING
CRASH
MOVEMENT
MEDIAN CRASHES
CAUSE
SEVERITY
1
1998495
SB
Dark - Lighted
Rain
Wet
Lost control of vehicle in heavy thunderstorms and hydroplaned
Travel Lane to Median Barrier
Median
No Improper Driving
Non-Fatal Injury
2
1997927
SB
Dark - Not Lighted
Rain
Wet
Lost control of vehicle
Travel Lane to Median Concrete Barrier
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Property Damage Only
3
1801340
SB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Vehicle was cut-off by unknown vehicle and hit another vehicle in the rear
Travel Lane to Median Jersey Barrier
Median
Swerving or avoiding due to vehicle in roadway
Non-Fatal Injury
4
1892018
SB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Vehicle tried to avoid tire debris on the roadway and hit median barrier
Travel Lane to Median Barrier
Median
Swerving or avoiding due to object in roadway
Property Damage Only
5
1926241
SB
Daylight
Rain
Wet
Lost control of vehicle on wet surface and hit another vehicle on the right side
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail
Median
No Improper Driving
Non-Fatal Injury
6
1998427
SB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Lost control of vehicle and hit median guardrail
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail
Median
Operating Vehicle in Erratic, Reckless Manner
Property Damage Only
7
2132770
SB
Dark - Not Lighted
Rain
Wet
Lost control of vehicle and overturned
Travel Lane to Middle of the Median
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Non-Fatal Injury
8
2132943
SB
Dark - Not Lighted
Rain
Wet
Lost control of vehicle
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to Trees in the Median
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Non-Fatal Injury
9
1997970
SB
Dark - Lighted
Rain
Wet
Lost control of vehicle and overturned
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to the Right Guardrail
Median
No Improper Driving
Non-Fatal Injury
10
2133031
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Rain
Wet
Vehicle hit standing water and hydroplaned
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to Trees in the Median
Median
Exceeded Speed Limit
Property Damage Only
11
1836455
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Rain
Wet
Vehicle hit standing water and hydroplaned
Travel Lane to Right Guardrail to Median Guardrail
Median
Driving too fast for condition
Property Damage Only
12
1895008
NB
Dawn
Clear
Dry
Vehicle changed lanes to an already occupied lane and struck the side of another vehicle
Travel Lane to Trees in the Median
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Property Damage Only
13
1926303
NB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Lost control of vehicle for unknown reason and was struck by another vehicle on the side
Travel Lane to Median Barrier
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Non-Fatal Injury
14
1998160
NB
Dawn
Rain
Wet
Vehicle hit standing water and spun into median guardrail
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail
Median
No Improper Driving
Property Damage Only
15
2093912
NB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
After mechanical failure vehicle rear ended another vehicle and swerved into the median
Travel Lane to Median to Breakdown Lane to Old Rest Area Exit Sign
Median
No Improper Driving
Property Damage Only
16
2132782
NB
Daylight
Rain
Wet
Lost control of vehicle due to bad tires
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail
Median
Operating defective equipment
Property Damage Only
17
2133762
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Rain
Wet
Lost control of vehicle and hydroplaned due to tractor trailer speeding behind vehicle
Travel Lane to Median End of Guardrail
Median
Exceeded Speed Limit
Property Damage Only
18
1892071
SB
Dusk
Snow
Snow
Lost control of vehicle for unknown reason
Travel Lane to Median Barrier to the Trees in the Right Shoulder
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Property Damage Only
19
2053451
SB
Dark - Not Lighted
Cloudy
Not Reported
Lost control of vehicle and ran off road to the left
Travel Lane to Trees in the Median
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Property Damage Only
20
2015626
SB
Dawn
Rain
Wet
Vehicle hit standing water and overturned
Travel Lane to Median Ditch
Median
No Improper Driving
Property Damage Only
21
2133062
SB
Dark - Not Lighted
Clear
Dry
Lost control of vehicle for unknown reasons
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to the Right Breakdown Lane
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Property Damage Only
22
1998222
SB
Dark - Not Lighted
Clear
Dry
Distracted due seeing something in the rear view mirror, swerved to the left and right and overturned
Travel Lane to Median Brush
Median
Over-correcting/Over-steering
Non-Fatal Injury
23
1997921
SB
Dark - Lighted
Rain
Wet
Vehicle was cut-off by unknown vehicle
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to the Right Breakdown Lane
Median
Swerving or avoiding due to vehicle in roadway
Non-Fatal Injury
24
1926205
SB
Daylight
Rain
Wet
Lost control of vehicle
Travel Lane to Trees in the Median
Median
No Improper Driving
Not Reported
25
1998399
NB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Lost control of vehicle and overturned
Travel Lane to Median Embankment
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Non-Fatal Injury
26
1998029
NB
Daylight
Rain
Wet
Lost control of vehicle on wet surface and hit another vehicle on the right side
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to the Right Breakdown Lane
Median
Swerving due to slippery surface in roadway
Property Damage Only
27
1891757
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Rain
Water
Vehicle hit standing water and spun into median guardrail
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to the Right Guardrail
Median
Driving too fast for condition
Property Damage Only
28
2094084
SB
Dark - Not Lighted
Rain
Wet
Vehicle hit standing water and hydroplaned
Travel Lane to Trees in the Median
Median
No Improper Driving
Non-Fatal Injury
29
1997871
NB
Daylight
Cloudy
Dry
Lost control of vehicle due to slowing traffic and hit another vehicle on the right side
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to the Right Guardrail to Breakdown Lane
Median
Followed too closely
Non-Fatal Injury
30
1997905
NB
Dark - Lighted
Clear
Dry
Vehicle hit another vehicle on the right side and caused the vehicle to collide into the median guardrail
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to the Right Guardrail
Median
Exceeded Speed Limit
Non-Fatal Injury
31
1868026
NB
Daylight
Cloudy
Wet
Vehicle rear ended another vehicle and caused the vehicle to strike the guardrail
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Not Reported
32
1926321
SB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Lost control of vehicle and overturned
Travel Lane to Trees in the Median
Median
Operating Vehicle in Erratic, Reckless Manner and Alcohol
Property Damage Only
33
1891886
NB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Vehicle tried to avoid a raccoon and overturned in the median
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail on S/B
Median
Swerving or avoiding due to animal in roadway
Non-Fatal Injury
34
2263390
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Not Reported
Dry
Driver dropped his cellular phone, veered to the right and overcorrected
Travel Lane to Breakdown Lane to Trees in the Median
Median
Over-correcting/Over-steering
Property Damage Only
35
1925523
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Snow
Snow
Vehicle struck a piece of metal debris and swerved into median
Travel Lane to Median
Median
No Improper Driving
Property Damage Only
36
1891887
NB
Daylight
Rain
Wet
Vehicle hit standing water and hydroplaned
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to the Right Guardrail
Median
No Improper Driving
Non-Fatal Injury
37
2022675
SB
Dark - Not Lighted
Clear
Dry
Driver operated the vehicle in erratic manner, rear ended another vehicle and crossed the median
S/B Travel Lane to N/B Grass Area Adjacent to Breakdown Lane and Northbound On-Ramp
Cross Median
Operating Vehicle in Erratic, Reckless Manner
Fatal Injury
38
1891780
NB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Crash avoidance with vehicle from slowing traffic
Travel Lane to Median Barrier to Grass Infield of the Ramp Complex
Median
Followed too closely
Property Damage Only
39
1926063
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Clear
Dry
Lost control of vehicle for unknown reason
Travel Lane to Median Barrier (Construction Zone)
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Property Damage Only
40
2117393
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Clear
Dry
Lost control of vehicle, veered off roadway and vehicle caught on fire
N/B Travel Lane to S/B Travel Lane
Cross Median
Alcohol
Non-Fatal Injury
41
2133056
NB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Vehicle was rear ended by another vehicle and skidded into the median guardrail
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail
Median
Followed too closely
Property Damage Only
42
1998440
NB
Dawn
Cloudy
Dry
Vehicle rear tire blew out and overturned
Travel Lane to Median
Median
No Improper Driving
Property Damage Only
43
2133695
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Clear
Dry
Vehicle rear ended another vehicle and caused the vehicle to struck the guardrail
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to Travel Lane
Median
Exceeded Speed Limit
Property Damage Only
44
1998232
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Cloudy
Dry
Driver failed to negotiate on ramp and traveled across all travel lanes
Travel Lane to Median
Median
Operating Vehicle in Erratic, Reckless Manner and Alcohol
Non-Fatal Injury
45
2213000
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Cloudy
Dry
Vehicle tried to avoid deer and overturned
Travel Lane to Median to Breakdown Lane to Ditch on the Right Side
Median
Swerving or avoiding due to animal in roadway
Non-Fatal Injury
46
2224133
NB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Driver swerved from the left travel lane to the right travel lane, overcorrected and overturned
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to Right Guardrail to the Right Embankment
Median
Over-correcting/Over-steering
Non-Fatal Injury
47
1998536
SB
Dawn
Clear
Dry
Vehicle left front tire blew out
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to Travel Lane
Median
No Improper Driving
Non-Fatal Injury
48
2255351
SB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Vehicle tried to pass a tractor trailer, struck the right side of the trailer and spun into the guardrail
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail to Middle of the Median
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Property Damage Only
49
2015711
SB
Not Reported
Rain
Wet
Vehicle hit standing water and overturned
Travel Lane to Trees in the Median
Median
Driving too fast for condition
Property Damage Only
50
1891949
SB
Dark - Not Lighted
Clear
Dry
Unknown vehicle swerved into travel lane and caused other vehicle to leave roadway and overturn
Travel Lane to Median Embankment (Construction Zone)
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Property Damage Only
51
1926064
SB
Daylight
Cloudy
Dry
Vehicle tried to avoid tire debris on the roadway
Travel Lane to Trees in the Median
Median
Swerving or avoiding due to object in roadway
Property Damage Only
52
1926185
SB
Dark - Not Lighted
Clear
Dry
Vehicle rear ended another vehicle and traveled off to the median
Travel Lane to Median
Median
Exceeded Speed Limit and Alcohol
Non-Fatal Injury
53
1998139
SB
Dark - Not Lighted
Clear
Dry
Vehicle rear ended by another vehicle and overturned
Travel Lane to Median Embankment
Median
Exceeded Speed Limit
Non-Fatal Injury
54
1998351
SB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Vehicle was cut-off by another vehicle, which drifted into his travel lane
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail
Median
Operating Vehicle in Erratic, Reckless Manner
Non-Fatal Injury
55
2133720
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Clear
Dry
Lost control of vehicle and ran off road left
Travel Lane to Median
Median
Exceeded Speed Limit and Alcohol
Unknown
MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY SAFETY DIVISION
CRASH SUMMARY REVISED
ROADWAY:
RT 3
STUDY PERIOD:
NO.
CRASH NUMBER
CITY:
1/1/2004
TO
12/31/2007
TRAVEL
LIGHT
WEATHER
ROAD
REASON FOR
LANES
CONDITION
CONDITION
SURFACE
RUNNING OFF ROAD LEFT
ROCKLAND, HINGHAM, WEYMOUTH
LOCATION:
NEAR EXIT#15
VEHICLE
MEDIAN OR CROSS
DRIVER CONTRIBUTING
CRASH
MOVEMENT
MEDIAN CRASHES
CAUSE
SEVERITY
56
2065652
NB
Dusk
Clear
Dry
Lost control of vehicle and fishtailed
Travel Lane to Right Guardrail to Median Guardrail to Travel Lane
Median
Over-correcting/Over-steering
Property Damage Only
57
2015594
NB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Vehicle cruise control looked up and fishtailed off the roadway
Travel Lane to Trees in the Median
Median
No Improper Driving
Property Damage Only
58
2015741
SB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Vehicle was cut-off by unknown vehicle and swerved to the right
Travel Lane to Right Guardrail to Median Guardrail
Median
Swerving or avoiding due to vehicle in roadway
Non-Fatal Injury
59
1894891
SB
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Vehicle changed lanes to an already occupied lane and overturned
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Property Damage Only
60
1891837
NB
Dark - Not Lighted
Clear
Dry
Lost control of vehicle and ran off road left
Travel Lane to Median Guardrail Attenuator
Median
Failure to keep in proper lane
Property Damage Only
LIGHT CONDITION
WEATHER CONDITION
TOTAL NO.
DAYLIGHT
DAWN
DUSK
DARK - LIGHTED
DARK - NOT LIGHTED
NOT REPORTED
CLEAR
60
25
5
2
4
24
1
31
7
100%
42%
8%
3%
7%
40%
2%
52%
12%
WEATHER CONDITION
RAIN
SNOW
ROAD SURFACE
NOT REPORTED
DRY
WET
WATER
SNOW
NOT REPORTED
19
2
1
37
19
1
2
1
32%
3%
2%
62%
32%
2%
3%
2%
MEDIAN OR CROSS MEDIAN
MEDIAN
CRASH SEVERITY
CROSS MEDIAN
CLOUDY
PROPERTY DAMAGE
NON-FATAL
ONLY
INJURY
DRIVER CONTRIBUTING CAUSE
FATAL INJURY
NOT REPORTED
UNKNOWN
NO IMPROPER DRIVING
EXCEEDED SPEED
LIMIT
58
2
32
24
1
2
1
13
5
97%
3%
53%
40%
2%
3%
2%
22%
8%
OPERATING VEHICLE IN ERRATIC, RECKLESS MANNER & ALCOHOL
SWERVING OR AVOIDING DUE TO VEHICLE IN ROADWAY
DRIVER CONTRIBUTING CAUSE
EXCEEDED SPEED LIMIT &
ALCOHOL
ALCOHOL
DRIVING TOO FAST
FOLLOWED TOO
FAILURE TO KEEP IN
OPERATING VEHICLE IN
FOR CONDITION
CLOSELY
PROPER LANE
ERRATIC, RECKLESS MANNER
SWERVING DUE TO SLIPPERY
SURFACE IN ROADWAY
2
1
3
3
15
3
2
3
1
3%
2%
5%
5%
25%
5%
3%
5%
2%
DRIVER CONTRIBUTING CAUSE
SWERVING OR AVOIDING DUE SWERVING OR AVOIDING DUE OVER-CORRECTING/ OPERATING DEFECTIVE
TO ANIMAL IN ROADWAY
TO OBJECT IN ROADWAY
OVER-STEERING
EQUIPMENT
2
2
4
1
3%
3%
7%
2%
2007 CRASH INFORMATION ARE NOT COMPLETE
CRASH SUMMARY IS BASED ON CRASH REPORTS WITH STATE POLICE NARRATIVES
Daily Total
48282
52601
100883
Directional Traffic Volumes along Rte 3, South of Derby
Street in Hingham
Thursday, October 5, 2006
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
:0
0
2: AM
00
4: AM
00
6: AM
00
8: AM
0
10 0 A
:0 M
12 0 A
:0 M
0
2: PM
00
4: PM
00
6: PM
00
8: PM
0
10 0 P
:0 M
0
PM
Northbound Direction
Southbound Direction
12
Hourly Volume (Number of
Vehicles)
Route 3, South of Derby Street (October 5, 2006)
Northbound Southbound
Direction
Direction
TOTAL
Start time
12:00 AM
216
520
736
1:00 AM
111
218
329
2:00 AM
108
142
250
3:00 AM
196
109
305
4:00 AM
723
188
911
5:00 AM
3175
689
3864
6:00 AM
3561
1884
5445
7:00 AM
2607
2685
5292
8:00 AM
2546
2734
5280
9:00 AM
3192
2460
5652
10:00 AM
3116
2547
5663
11:00 AM
2905
2679
5584
12:00 PM
2880
2664
5544
1:00 PM
2736
2670
5406
2:00 PM
2967
3247
6214
3:00 PM
2941
3980
6921
4:00 PM
3314
4264
7578
5:00 PM
3247
4446
7693
6:00 PM
2352
4116
6468
7:00 PM
1776
3397
5173
8:00 PM
1270
2704
3974
9:00 PM
1110
1797
2907
10:00 PM
795
1444
2239
11:00 PM
438
1017
1455
Time of Day