Lane Departure Road Safety Audit for
Interstate 195 through Swansea,
Massachusetts
Prepared by
The Southeast Regional Planning & Economic Development District
and
The University of Massachusetts Traffic Safety Research Program
Prepared for
Massachusetts Highway Department
Federal Highway Administration
1.0 Introduction to Road Safety Audits & Lane Departure Crashes in Massachusetts
The Federal Highway Administration defines a Road Safety Audit (RSA) as the formal safety
examination of an existing or future road or intersection by an independent, multidisciplinary team.
The purpose of an RSA is to identify potential safety issues and possible opportunities for safety
improvements considering all roadway users. Specific objectives of an RSA include, but are not
limited to the following:
•
•
Minimizing the risk and severity of road crashes that may be affected by the existing or future
roadway at a specific location or nearby network;
Improving the awareness of safe design practices which are likely to result in safety benefits
based upon potential safety concerns.
Although RSA’s have been employed in other countries for some time, they are being fully embraced
across the United States as a low cost opportunity to make significant safety improvements at any
number of stages ranging from project development and planning through existing operation.
Furthermore, RSA’s have proven to be effective on projects of all shapes and sizes. The RSA program
here in the Commonwealth presents a unique and exciting opportunity for improvements in roadway
safety.
The RSA program in Massachusetts is being implemented in accordance with the Commonwealth’s
role as a lead state in preventing run-off the road (lane departure) crashes and in conjunction with the
Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). Lane departure crashes are a notable problem area for
Massachusetts, especially for crashes with high injury severities. Between 2002 and 2004, lane
departure crashes accounted for nearly 20 percent of all crashes in Massachusetts and approximately
one-quarter of crashes involving an incapacitating injury. Almost one-half of fatal crashes between
2002 and 2004 were lane departure crashes. As the crash severity increases, so too does the percent of
crashes that is lane departures as shown in Figure 1.
All Massachusetts Crashes,
2002-2004
Massachusetts Incapacitating
Injury Crashes, 2002-2004
18.7%
Lane Departure Crashes
Massachusetts Fatal Crashes, 20022004
24.5%
46.2%
Other Crashes
Figure 1. Relationship Between Lane Departure Crashes and Injury Severity
In an effort to combat the lane departure problem, a strategy was developed for the SHSP to identify
hot spot lane departure locations, perform road safety audits and implement low-cost comprehensive
countermeasures. The following report summarizes the findings of a RSA focused on lane departure
crashes (LD) along Interstate 195 through Swansea, Massachusetts.
Page 2
2.0 Background Material for Interstate 195 through Swansea
Across the southeastern portion of Massachusetts, Interstate 195 serves as a major east-west corridor
and connects Providence, RI and Interstate 95 with Wareham, MA and Interstate 495 (see Figure 2
below). Specifically, 195 extends 44.55 miles with 40.73 of those miles in Massachusetts. One of the
municipalities connected by 195 is Swansea, a Massachusetts town located in Bristol County with
nearly 16,000 residents (census 2000). Within Swansea, 195 has two sets of ramps, both with an
entrance and exit for each direction of travel; a third set ramps is located just across Swansea’s eastern
border in Somerset. In total, the length of 195 through Swansea is approximately 6½ miles with 3
travel lanes and a full breakdown lane in both the eastbound and westbound directions. Through
Swansea, 195 is relatively level, with limited horizontal curvature. Also shown in Figure 2, is a plan
view of the 195 cross-section through Swansea. Some of the major characteristics, including crash
clusters for 195 through Swansea, are summarized in Figure 3.
Swansea, MA
Interstate 195
Figure 2. Interstate 195 Locations & Cross-Section Plan view through Swansea
The LD-RSA for Interstate 195 was held on August 20, 2007 at Fire Station #2 in Swansea. In total,
16 team members participated in the road safety audit as listed in Table 1. As indicated in Table 1
representatives were present from Federal, State, Regional and Local agencies and included a crosssection of engineering/planning, education, and enforcement expertise.
Table 1 Participating Audit Team Members
Audit Team
Members
Bonnie Polin
Lisa Estela-Pedro
Paul Mission
Jim Hadfield
Neil Boudreau
Agency/Affiliation
Massachusetts Highway Department –
Safety Section
Southeast Regional Planning &
Economic Development District
Southeast Regional Planning &
Economic Development District
Southeast Regional Planning &
Economic Development District
Massachusetts Highway Department –
Traffic Engineering
Audit Team
Members
Xian Chen
Jemal Ali
George Arruda
Swansea Police Department
Peter Burke
Swansea Fire Department
Jose Gonsalves
Massachusetts State Police
Tim White
Federal Highway Administration
Moe Puklis
Carl Sanesko
Swansea Emergency Management
Samuel Gregorio
University of Massachusetts - Amherst
Robert Gregory
Michael Knodler
Agency/Affiliation
Massachusetts Highway Department –
Safety Section
Massachusetts Highway Department –
Highway Design
Swansea Highway Department
Massachusetts Highway Department –
Safety Section
Massachusetts Highway Department –
District 5
Page 3
Exit 2 Ramps –
Cluster of EB crashes
Cluster of WB Crashes
Towards Providence, R.I.
Swansea Mall serves as a
major area attraction
Cluster of EB crashes
Exit 3 Ramps – Cluster of
crashes both EB & WB
Towards Somerset, Fall
River & Wareham
Exit 4 Ramps in Somerset
Figure 3. Characterization of Roadway Features for Interstate 195 through Swansea
Page 4
Members of the lane departure road safety audit team were asked to visit the stretch of 195 through
Swansea in advance of the meeting to familiarize themselves with the roadway attributes and
characteristics. A significant amount of data and information was compiled by the Southeast Regional
Planning & Economic Development District (SRPEDD) with support from MassHighway prior to the
RSA meeting and shared with participants in advance. Additional information provided pertained to
the LD-RSA safety initiative and included traffic volumes and speeds, as well as a description of
relevant crashes. Appendix A provides a full version of the meeting material, and a summary of the
compiled data as follows:
•
•
Based upon Massachusetts Highway Department (MassHighway) traffic count data, Interstate
195 in Swansea carries 65,000 vehicles per day and has posted speed limits of 65 mph.
SRPEDD compiled crash data for the period between 2003 and 2005. There were 24 reported
crashes in the westbound direction consistent with the lane departure initiative. By comparison
there were 20 reported crashes in the eastbound direction classified as lane departure crashes.
Some preliminary safety findings completed by SRPEDD which were presented to audit team
members prior to the meeting are summarized in Table 2 below. Maps of the crash type and
location are presented in Figures 4 and 5 for the EB and WB directions, respectively.
Additional resources made available to the team during the audit meeting included field videos from
several drives along Interstate 195, which were used in aiding discussion of specific roadway elements.
Also available were possible resources including the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan and the
related National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) 500 series reports.
Table 2 Summary of Preliminary 195 Safety Findings Presented to the RSA Team
Eastbound
Westbound
• The breakdown of injury severity for
• The breakdown of injury severity for
the 20 total crashes was as follows:
the 20 total crashes was as follows:
- 1 Fatal (possibly 2)
- 2 Fatal
- 4 Incapacitating Injury
- 2 Incapacitating Injury
- 1 Possible Injury
- 2 Possible Injury
- 10 Non Incapacitating Injury
- 5 Non Incapacitating Injury
- 4 No injury
- 13 No injury
• The primary factors were listed as:
• The primary factors were listed as:
- 7 Speed-related
- 9 Weather (8 snow/ice)
- 1 Reckless
- 7 Speed-related
- 6 Failure to stay in lane
- 1 Reckless
- 2 Alcohol-related
- 7 Failure to stay in lane
- 1 Weather-related
- 2 Unsafe lane change
- 3 Oversteering
- 2 Animal crashes (deer)
- 1 Possible alcohol-related
• Seat belts were more likely reported
• Seat belts were reportedly not worn
as worn in crashes that were minor
in only 2 crashes both of which were
and no injury than in fatal or
incapacitating injury crashes.
incapacitating injury.
• There were 8 reported crashes where
• There were 3 reported crashes where
the vehicle overturned.
the vehicle overturned.
Page 5
Figure 4. 2003 to 2005 Summary of I-195 Eastbound Crashes in Swansea
Page 6
Figure 5. 2003 to 2005 Summary of I-195 Westbound Crashes in Swansea
Page 7
3.0 Characterization of Major Traffic Safety Challenges
Following a brief introduction to the RSA process in general, the meeting participants were asked to
summarize and characterize potential safety considerations along Interstate 195 in Swansea. The
initial characterization of the major safety considerations focused on several key elements as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Among the reported crashes, 34 percent were speed or reckless driving related, which was
listed as a safety concern for this stretch of roadway. Considering time periods, most of the
speed-related crashes occurred during the PM peaks or in the middle of the night. Several in
attendance were not surprised by the late night crashes citing that many travel to Providence
bars and clubs before returning to southeastern Massachusetts.
Another characterization of crashes was
related to guard rails (see figure inset).
Again using SRPEDD data, it was
reported that guard rails along the corridor
were likely responsible for the prevention
of injury in no less than 10 crashes and
prevented more serious injury in at least
one more crash. Along the same lines, it
was speculated that guardrails, if present,
may have proved helpful in preventing or
minimizing the severity of 9 of the 11
Figure 6. Typical Roadside Shoulder and Guard
crashes where the vehicle overturned.
The clusters of crashes located around both Rail
sets of ramps were discussed by the RSA
team. The opinion of the team was that there are adequate merge areas, however some
contributing factors may be related to available sight distance, including visibility of exit signs.
Additionally, there was discussion regarding the granite material used in the gore areas of the
exit ramps, but it should be noted that this was not correlated to any of the reported crashes
being reviewed.
Reviewing the reported crash data, there were 10 crashes that involved a vehicle striking a tree,
which is not commonly associated with Interstate crashes. Only two of these 10 crashes did not
result in an injury or possible injury and one involved a fatality.
Weather conditions, particularly snow and ice, were cited as a major factor in 8 crashes in the
westbound direction. There was speculation that a plowing/sanding issue or a drainage problem
may be present along the westbound segment of the corridor.
An additional driver-related factor that was discussed at this stage was the impact of safety
belts in crashes. Specifically cited was the lack of safety belt usage in the severe injury crashes.
The overall Massachusetts safety belt usage is 69 percent, and this region has a safety belt
usage rate lower than the statewide average at 67 percent, however it is worth noting that
Interstate roadways have the highest observed safety belt usage.
4.0 Summary of Short Term Recommendations for Interstate 195 in Swansea
The formal review of potential safety concerns along Interstate 195 was completed by the entire audit
team. Following identification of a potential safety issue the dialogue subsequently focused on
possible countermeasures with some preliminary discussion regarding the feasibility of implementation
(timeframe and cost) as well as the potential payoff of safety benefits. Given the potential for an
Page 8
immediate impact there was an added focus on short term (less than 1 year) and low cost (less than
$10,000) improvements that could be done almost instantaneously resulting in a positive safety impact.
Unlike other roadways being evaluated as part of the Massachusetts LD-RSA process some of the
opportunities for 195 are limited because of its Interstate classification. Additionally, it may be
expected that associated costs for recommended strategies may be higher again because of the
Interstate classification. For example routine maintenance may cost more in this application because of
the challenges and requirements for completing this along the Interstate. Nevertheless, resulting
recommendations for immediate actions along Interstate 195 include the following:
•
•
•
•
•
Given the presence of the exits (i.e. merging traffic) and reported impact of speed, it is
recommended that this stretch of roadway continue to be part of a sustained enforcement
program. Speed data collection by MassHighway would likely prove useful for the
Massachusetts State Police in the identification of existing speeds, optimal time periods for
enforcement, and enforcement thresholds. Additionally, some consideration may be given to
the idea of installing signage which signifies either “high
enforcement area” or “radar in use.”
As previously noted there are specific strategies associated
with the weather and drainage characteristics (see figure
inset). Discussed at the RSA meeting was that this stretch
of roadway is slated for resurfacing in 2009. The short
term recommendation from the RSA team is that all efforts
be made to assure this remains the case. The resurfacing
will likely aid with weather and drainage issues in addition
Figure 7. Typical Roadside
to typical roadway operations.
Drainage
Because there are opportunities to lessen the injury severity
of crashes through the installation of guard rails it is
recommended that a plan for added guard rail be devised. In the shorter term it is
recommended that the single guard rail location which has a buried end be replaced with the
current crash cushion standard. Long term candidate locations, based upon the SRPEDD crash
analysis identifying locations for rollover vehicles, would include the following: Westbound vicinity of MM 6.6 to 6.4 (right side), vicinity of MM 6.2 to 6.1 (right side). Eastbound vicinity of MM 4.6 to 4.8 (right and median side), vicinity of MM 6.6 to 6.8 (median side),
vicinity of MM 7.2 to 7.5 (median side), vicinity MM 8.2 to 8.4 (median side). In some cases
this may involve extending the length of existing guardrail.
It is recommended that continued maintenance be performed along the roadway with respect to
trees. In the event that guard rails are not installed (see previous bullet) the removal of trees
within the roadway clear zone is recommended. An additional tree maintenance strategy is the
trimming of overgrowth which may inhibit driver visibility of signage, including exit signs.
Based upon the benefits of belt usage for I-195 crashes coupled with the low belt usage in this
region of the Commonwealth it is recommended that the possibility for grant funding from the
Highway Safety Division (HSD, formerly the Governor’s Highway Safety Bureau) be
explored. Typical HSD funding includes both public information and education (PI&E) as well
as enforcement activities.
Page 9
5.0 Summary of Additional Interstate 195 Countermeasures
Although an emphasis was placed upon short term and low cost improvements that could be carried
out immediately, the focus of the team was not limited to those constraints. The following section
details countermeasures discussed by the team, which are reflective of all costs and timeframes and
includes both general (entire corridor) and specific safety opportunities. Please note that with respect to
the timeframe there are some unknown variables that must be further explored. Additionally, some of
the potential treatments discussed were experimental in nature, resulting in an unknown level of safety
benefit. Several definitions exist for low, mid, and high cost as well as for short, mid and long term
implementation timeframes. For purposes of this report, low cost improvements will be under $10,000,
mid costs will be under $50,000, and high costs will be above $50,000. From a timeframe perspective
short term will refer to less than 1 year while mid and long term will refer to countermeasures that will
take 1 to 3, and greater than 3 years, respectively.
Page 10
Potential
Safety Issue
Speed-related
issues along
Interstate 195
Possible Countermeasures
Continue and expand upon a
concentrated
enforcement
and
educational (i.e. speed feedback,
community meetings, etc) effort.
Implementation
Timeframe
Potential Safety
& Cost
Payoff
Short Term &
Low/Mid Cost
Mid
Seat belts and/or
alcohol
The potential for safety belts
coupled with the known low belt
usage is suggestive of seeking HSD
funding for PI&E as well as
enforcement activities.
Mid Term &
Low Cost
Low
Markings &
delineation
At the time of the resurfacing it is
recommended that highly reflective
pavement markings be installed.
Additionally roadside reflectors
should be installed as budget allows.
Mid Term &
Mid/High Cost
Mid
Guard rail
opportunities
As evidenced by the 11 rollover
crashes and the presence of roadside
trees it is recommended that
opportunities
for
guard
rail
installation be explored. Please see
Section 4.0 for specific locations.
Mid Term &
Mid/High Cost
Mid
Consider the possibility of signage
signifying “high enforcement area”
or “radar in use” signage.
Photos
Page 11
Potential
Safety Issue
Presence of trees
along roadside
Expand ITS
related activity
Possible Countermeasures
Implementation
Timeframe
& Cost
Potential
Safety Payoff
Install guardrail (previous) near
hazardous trees along roadside or
remove trees altogether.
Short Term &
Low Cost
Mid
Clear brush/tree limbs from roadside
which obstructs signs.
Short Term &
High Cost
Low
Integrate ITS technology such as
cameras and variable message signs,
which can be employed monitoring Mid Term & Mid
(operations or crashes), driver
Cost
feedback regarding congestions,
weather conditions.
Low
Photos
WINTER
WEATHER
Page 12
6.0 Discussion
As previously noted, the opportunities for safety improvements for 195 may be more restrictive or
expensive than on other roadways. Nevertheless, it is important to note that for the safety
improvement opportunities described in the previous sections: 1) many treatments are both low cost
and short term; and 2) there is a complimentary nature of many of the safety strategies in that one
improvement will aid with multiple safety issues. Please note that although this document provides a
series of specific recommendations which warrant short term implementation, it should be noted that
the approach towards improved safety is dynamic in nature and warrants revisiting over time.
Several additional topics that were discussed at the audit meeting and warrant consideration include the
following:
•
•
•
Although documented previously, it is worth noting that this stretch of roadway is currently
scheduled for resurfacing in 2009. The RSA team would like to recommended that all efforts
to maintain this schedule are taken. The pavement condition has selected defects, some
drainage issues (hydroplaning), and weather issues in general which will all benefit from the
new surface.
There were several collisions involving deer in the study location. While no specific migration
paths or densely populated areas were identified this should continue to be monitored.
Most of the safety issues identified by the RSA team were ultimately related to driver errors,
including but not limited to speed, alcohol, safety belts, improper lane changes, and failure to
compensate for weather conditions.
Page 13
7.0 Appendix A: Distributed RSA Meeting Materials
Materials provided to RSA team members in advance of the meeting included the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Agenda
RSA and Lane Departure Introduction
SRPEDD Crash Data Summary
Tabulated Crash Summary
Map of Geolocated Crashes
LD-RSA Checklist
Page 14
Road Safety Audit for I-195 in Swansea
Meeting Location: Fire Station #2,
50 Gardners Neck Road, Swansea, MA
Monday, August 20, 2007
9:00 AM to 11:00 AM
Type of meeting:
Lane Departure – Road Safety Audit (RSA)
Attendees:
Invited Participants to Comprise a Multidisciplinary Team
Please bring:
Thoughts and Enthusiasm!!
9:00 AM
Welcome and Introductions
9:15 AM
Introduction to Road Safety Audits and Lane Departure Crashes
9:30 AM
Review of Site Specific Material
• Crash & Volume – provided in advance
• Existing Geometries and Conditions
• Video and Images
10:00 AM
Completion of RSA
• Identification of Safety Concerns – using checklists as a guide
• Identification of Possible Countermeasures
11:00 AM
Adjourn for the Day – but the RSA has not ended
Instructions for Participants:
• Before attending the RSA on August 20th participants are encouraged to drive
I-195 within Swansea, MA and complete/consider elements on the RSA advisory
checklist with a focus on safety factors affecting roadway departure 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.
Page 15
Introduction to Road Safety Audits & Lane Departure Crashes in Massachusetts
The Federal Highway Administration defines a Road Safety Audit (RSA) as the formal safety
examination of an existing or future road or intersection by an independent, multidisciplinary team.
The purpose of an RSA is to identify potential safety issues and possible opportunities for safety
improvements considering all roadway users. Specific objectives of an RSA include, but are not
limited to the following:
•
•
Minimize the risk and severity of road crashes that may be affected by the existing or future
roadway at a specific location or nearby network;
Improve the awareness of safe design practices which are likely to result in safety benefits
based upon potential safety concerns.
Although RSA’s have been employed in other countries for some time, they are being fully embraced
across the United States as a low cost opportunity to make significant safety improvements at any
number of stages ranging from project development and planning through existing operation.
Furthermore, RSA’s have proven to be effective on projects of all shapes and sizes. The RSA program
here in the Commonwealth prevents a unique and exciting opportunity for improvements in roadway
safety.
The RSA program in Massachusetts is being implemented in accordance with the Commonwealth’s
role as a Lead State in preventing run-off the road (lane departure) crashes and in conjunction with the
Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). Lane departure crashes are a notable problem area for
Massachusetts, especially for crashes with higher injury severities. Between 2002 and 2004, lane
departure crashes accounted for nearly 20 percent of all crashes in Massachusetts and approximately
one-quarter of crashes involving an incapacitating injury. Almost one-half of fatal crashes between
2002 and 2004 were lane departure crashes. As the crash severity increases, so does the percent of
crashes that are lane departures as shown in the figure below.
All Massachusetts Crashes,
2002-2004
Massachusetts Incapacitating
Injury Crashes, 2002-2004
18.7%
Lane Departure Crashes
Massachusetts Fatal Crashes, 20022004
24.5%
46.2%
Other Crashes
In an effort to combat the lane departure problem, a strategy was developed for the SHSP to identify
hot spot lane departure location, perform road safety audits and implement low-cost comprehensive
countermeasures.
Page 16
SRPEDD Crash Data Summary
I-195 Eastbound, Swansea
Total Crashes - 20
Fatal - 1 (possibly 2)
Incapacitating - 4
Possible injury - 1
Non-incapacitating - 10
No injury - 4 (Injury may have been prevented by guardrails in 3 of the 4)
Primary Factor
Speed - 7
Reckless - 1
Failure to Stay in Lane - 6
DUI - 2
Weather - 1
Overcorrected steering - 3
Seat Belt Use
Yes - 12
No - 7
Unknown - 1
Fatal
0
1
Incap Inj
1
2
1
Non Incap
7
3
No Injury
4
0
There were 8 crashes where the vehicle overturned.
Fatal - 1 (possibly 2)
Incapacitating - 3
Non-incapacitating - 4
In 6 of the 8 overturn crashes, guardrails may have prevented the outcome.
Data clearly show the significance of seat belt use in preventing more serious injuries. The data also
appears to indicate that guardrails may have reduced the severity of several crashes.
Page 17
SRPEDD Crash Data Summary
I-195 Westbound, Swansea
Total Crashes - 24
Fatal - 2
Incapacitating - 2
Possible injury - 2
Non-incapacitating - 5
No injury - 13 (Injury may have been prevented by guardrails in 7 of the 13)
Primary Factors
Weather - 9 (8 involved snow/ice conditions)
Speed - 7
Reckless - 1
Failure to Stay in Lane - 7
Unsafe Lane Change - 2
Animal-Deer - 2
Possible DUI - 1
Seat Belt Use
Yes - 22
No - 2
Fatal
2
0
Incap Inj
0
2
Non Incap
5
0
No Injury
13
0
There were 3 crashes where the vehicle overturned.
Incapacitating - 1
Non-incapacitating - 2
In all 3 overturn crashes, guardrails may have prevented the outcome.
8 crashes occurred in snow/ice conditions. Is there an issue with plowing/sanding on I-195 WB?
Guardrails may have prevented injury in 7 crashes and more serious injury in 1 crash.
Page 18
WB Report #
Location
Date
Age of Driver
Time
Direction of travel
# of Vehicles
Light Cond
Weather
Road Surface
Manner of Coll.
1st Harmful location
WB 1
I-195 West
04/24/05
45
12:01 AM
WB
2
Dark - Road not lit
Cloudy
Dry
2 vehicles
Roadway
Motor vehicle In
traffic
Straight
ROR right
Overturned
WB 2
I-195 West
11/13/04
28
2:39 AM
WB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Snow
Snow
Single vehicle
Median
WB 3
I-195 West
11/13/04
46
3:32 AM
WB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Snow
Snow
Single vehicle
Median
WB 4
I-195 West
11/29/04
29
9:45 PM
WB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
WB 5
W of MM 8.9
07/11/04
32
5:04 AM
WB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
WB 6
100' E of MM 8.8
09/27/04
22
1:12 AM
WB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Median
Tree
Straight
ROR left
Tree
Guardrail
Straight
ROR left
Guardrail
Deer
Straight
Deer
Ditch
Leaving travel lane
Ditch
Tree
Overturned
Tree
Guardrail
Deer
Guardrail
Straight
ROR left
Guardrail
ROR right
Guardrail
Guardrail
Following too close
Speed
Yes
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Veh. 2 rear-ends
veh.1 who then spins
out to right and
overturns
Yes
Possible
EMS-Hospital
Slid off road due to
snow. Driving too fast
for conditions.
Yes
No injury
Yes
No injury
Yes
No injury
Veh. Slid due to
snow.
Driver struck deer in
road.
Driver fell asleep at
wheel.
Yes
Non-incapacitating
No
Operator fell asleep,
veered into median.
Conclusions
Driver error
Driver error/Weather
Weather
Guardrail may have
prevented injury
Environmental
Deer
Driver error
Guardrail may have
prevented injury
Possible remedy
Guardrail?
Guardrail/Plowing/sand?
Plowing/sanding?
Deer xings?
1st Harmful Event
Veh. Prior to coll.
Sequence of events 1
Sequence of events 2
Sequence of events 3
Sequence of events 4
Most harmful event
Driver factor 1
Driver factor 2
Seat Belt Used?
Injury Status
Medical
Circumstances
No improper driving
Ditch
Failure to stay in
lane
Driver error
Fatigue
Page 19
WB Report #
Location
Date
Age of Driver
Time
Direction of travel
# of Vehicles
Light Cond
Weather
Road Surface
Manner of Coll.
1st Harmful location
WB 7
W of MM 8.7
03/12/05
39
8:35 AM
WB
1
Daylight
Snow
Snow
Single vehicle
Roadway
WB 8
W of MM 8.5
08/04/03
20/60
5:55 AM
WB
2
Daylight
Cloudy
Dry
Sideswipe-same dir.
Roadway
WB 9
1/2 mi. E of Exit 3
10/15/04
18
10:20 PM
WB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Rain
Wet
Single vehicle
Roadside
WB 10
W of Exit 3 ramp
11/13/04
27
2:40 AM
WB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Snow
Snow
Single vehicle
Median
1st Harmful Event
Veh. Prior to coll.
Sequence of events 1
Sequence of events 2
Sequence of events 3
Sequence of events 4
Most harmful event
Driver factor 1
Guardrail
Straight
Guardrail
Motor vehicle in traffic
Changing lanes
Guardrail
Straight
Guardrail
Tree
Straight
ROR left
Tree
Driver factor 2
Seat Belt Used?
Injury Status
Medical
Guardrail
No improper driving
No
Incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Lost control due to
snow
Circumstances
Conclusions
Weather
Possible remedy
Plowing/sanding?
Tree
Speed
Unsafe lane change
Vehicular homicide
Yes
Fatal
Unlicensed driver
made unsafe lane
change, striking
adjacent veh.
Causing it to hit
guardrail & rollover.
Driver error
WB 11
W of Exit 3
12/25/04
82/24
10:16 AM
WB
2
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Sideswipe-same dir.
Roadway
Motor vehicle in
traffic
Straight
No improper driving
Yes
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Skids into guardrail
on right, spins left
into median.
Yes
Possible
EMS-Hospital
Operating too fast for
conditions, slides off
road into median on left.
Yes
No injury
Weather
Guardrail may have
prevented more
serious injury.
Weather
Driver error
Innattention
Veh. slowing as
entering breakdown
lane, struck by
following veh.
WB 12
W of Exit 3
11/06/05
21/46
3:49 PM
WB
2
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
Tree
Straight
ROR left
Embankment
Tree
Tree
Speed
Fail to use care
stopping
Yes
No injury
Speeding motorist
sees police &
abruptly slows
causing other veh. to
swerve, loose
control, enter median
& hit tree.
Driver error
Speed
Guardrail/Plowing/sand?
Page 20
WB Report #
Location
Date
Age of Driver
Time
Direction of travel
# of Vehicles
Light Cond
Weather
Road Surface
Manner of Coll.
1st Harmful location
1st Harmful Event
Veh. Prior to coll.
Sequence of events 1
Sequence of events 2
Sequence of events 3
Sequence of events 4
Most harmful event
WB 13
W of Exit 3
02/22/05
39
5:35 PM
WB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadside
Other-non collision
Straight
ROR left
Struck small trees
WB 14
W of MM 7.3
09/30/04
71
10:34 AM
WB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
Guardrail
Straight
Guardrail
WB 15
MM 6.5
01/28/04
35
9:35 AM
WB
1
Daylight
Snow
Snow
Single vehicle
Roadway
Guardrail
Straight
Guardrail
Trees
Driver factor 1
Reckless driving
Guardrail
Failure to stay in
lane
Guardrail
Failure to stay in
lane
Driver factor 2
Seat Belt Used?
Injury Status
Medical
Circumstances
Conclusions
Possible remedy
Yes
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Driver fell asleep due
to medication taken
prior to driving.
Driver error
Fatigue
Yes
No injury
Yes
No injury
Motorist lost control.
Lost control on
slippery pvmt. When
other veh. merged in
front.
Driver error
Guardrail may have
prevented injury
Driver error/Weather
Guardrail may have
prevented injury
Plowing/sanding?
WB 16
MM 6.5
06/03/05
18
6:05 PM
WB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Off road
Ditch
Changing lanes
ROR right
Ditch
Overturn
Tree
Overturned
WB 17
E of MM 6.2
03/06/05
28
5:54 PM
WB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadside
Ditch
Straight
ROR left
ROR right
Overturned
WB 18
E of MM 5.3
01/18/04
35
8:15 AM
WB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Cloudy
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
Tree
Straight
ROR left
Tree
Overturned
Overturned
Speed
Speed
Failure to stay in
lane
Yes
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Lost control due to
speeding, swerves
left, then right, & rolls
over several times.
Tree
Failure to stay in
lane
Unsafe lane change
No
Incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Lost control upon
passing other
vehicle. Overturned
as front end digs into
soil. One injury is life
threatenting.
Driver error
Speed
Guardrail?
Driver error
Seat belt likely
prevented more
serious injury.
Yes
No injury
Driver claims lost
control due to ice. He
was not injured & left
the scene, & notifies
police 5 days later.
Possible DUI
Guardrail?
Page 21
WB Report #
Location
Date
Age of Driver
Time
Direction of travel
# of Vehicles
Light Cond
Weather
Road Surface
Manner of Coll.
1st Harmful location
1st Harmful Event
Veh. Prior to coll.
Sequence of events 1
Sequence of events 2
Sequence of events 3
Sequence of events 4
Most harmful event
WB 19
W of MM 5.3
01/06/05
54/24
3:50 AM
WB
2
Dark - Road not lit
Snow
Snow
Angle
Roadway
Motor vehicle In
traffic
Straight
Guardrail
WB 20
E of MM 4.8
01/06/05
45/24
10:30 AM
WB
2
Daylight
Cloudy
Snow
Angle
Roadway
WB 21
W of MM 4.5
12/09/05
35
10:00 AM
WB
1
Daylight
Cloudy
Ice
Single vehicle
Roadway
WB 22
W of MM 4.4
04/13/05
19
3:45 PM
WB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Breakdown lane
Motor vehicle In traffic
Passing
Other-non collision
Straight
Other-non collision
Guardrail
Guardrail
Straight
Guardrail
Guardrail
Guardrail
WB 23
1/2 mi E of Exit 2
11/19/05
32
9:55 PM
WB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
Motor vehicle In
traffic
Straight
Deer
WB 24
Exit 2 off-ramp
09/07/05
29
9:15 PM
WB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Off-ramp
Guardrail
Failure to stay in
lane
Deer
Tree
Yes
No injury
Yes
No injury
Yes
No injury
Speed
Failure to stay in
lane
Yes
No injury
No injury
Slid off road due to
snow. Driving too
fast for conditions.
While passing, lost
control, struck
adjacent veh.
Spun out on ice, into
guardrail.
Spun out and struck
guardrail on right.
Struck deer in road
Conclusions
Driver error/Weather
Guardrail may have
prevented injury
Driver error/Weather
Weather
Guardrail may have
prevented injury
Driver error
Guardrail may have
prevented injury
Other
Deer
Possible remedy
Plowing/sanding?
Plowing/sanding?
Sanding?
Driver factor 1
Driver factor 2
Seat Belt Used?
Injury Status
Medical
Circumstances
Yes
Tree
Straight
ROR left
ROR right
Tree
Speed
Yes
Fatal
Lost control, ROR,
collided with several
trees.
Guardrail?
Page 22
EB Report #
E of Exit 2
01/15/04
60
12:19 AM
EB
2
Dark - Road not lit
Clear
Dry
Rear-end
Roadway
Motor vehicle In
traffic
Straight
E of Exit 2
11/09/05
37
1:40 PM
EB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
75' E of Exit 2
12/10/05
48
8:15 PM
EB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
EB 4
150' E of MM 4.5
Exit 2
05/02/05
57
2:10 PM
EB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Median
Ditch
Straight
Ditch
Guardrail
Straight
ROR right
Guardrail
Other vehicle
Overturned
Speed
Overcorrect steering
Circumstances
Yes
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Veh 2 (70 MPH)
rear-ended Veh 1
(40 MPH) in right
lane
Conclusions
Driver error
Location
Date
Age of Driver
Time
Direction of travel
# of Vehicles
Light Cond
Weather
Road Surface
Manner of Coll.
1st Harmful location
1st Harmful Event
Veh. Prior to coll.
Sequence of events 1
Sequence of events 2
Sequence of events 3
Sequence of events 4
Most harmful event
Driver factor 1
Driver factor 2
Seat Belt Used?
Injury Status
Medical
Possible remedy
EB 1
EB 2
EB 3
EB 5
EB 6
E of Exit 2
11/12/05
39
6:40 PM
EB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Off-ramp
1/2 mi. E of Exit 2
06/03/04
17
10;14
EB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
Tree
Changing lanes
ROR left
Tree
Light pole
Straight
Light pole
Guardrail
Straight
Guardrail - right side
Guardrail
Failure to stay in
lane
Tree
HFO
Guardrail
Speed
Yes
Incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Lost control, spun
out into ditch and
overturned.
Yes
No injury
No
Lost control, hit
guardrail.
Yes
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Forced into median
while passing veh. In
center lane.
Dui
Reckless
Yes
No injury
No
Driver hit sign post,
continued on, &
arrested in
Dartmouth.
Driver error
Driver error
Guardrail may have
prevented injury.
Driver error
Other motorist error
Guardrail?
Driver error
DUI
Yes
No injury
No
Driver states blown tire
caused loss of control,
striking guardrail.
Driver error / Vehicle
Possible blowout due to
striking guardrail?
Guardrail may have
prevented injury.
Enforcement?
Page 23
EB Report #
EB 7
Location
Date
Age of Driver
Time
Direction of travel
# of Vehicles
Light Cond
Weather
Road Surface
Manner of Coll.
1st Harmful location
MM 4.8
06/24/05
27
12:20 PM
EB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
1st Harmful Event
Veh. Prior to coll.
Sequence of events 1
Sequence of events 2
Sequence of events 3
Sequence of events 4
Most harmful event
Overturn
Straight
Lost control right
Overturned
Driver factor 1
Reckless
Driver factor 2
Seat Belt Used?
Injury Status
Medical
Overturned
EB 8
E of MM 5.8
07/09/05
27
2:30 AM
EB
2
Dark - Road not lit
Rain
Wet
Roadway
Motor vehicle In
traffic
Straight
Guardrail
Guardrail
Failure to stay in
lane
No
Possible
EMS-Hospital
Lost control right due
to passenger
"interaction" with
driver.
Yes
No injury
Conclusions
Driver error
Driver not paying
attention.
Weather
Guardrail may have
prevented injury.
Possible remedy
Guardrail?
Circumstances
Veh. hydroplaned &
struck veh in next
lane.
EB 9
Near Swansea rest
area
01/31/05
53
10:30 PM
EB
1
Dark - Road not lit
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadside
EB 10
EB 12
MM 6.7
08/19/05
29
1:40 PM
EB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
100' W of MM 7.3
01/18/04
20
10:10 AM
EB
1
Daylight
Snow
Wet
Single vehicle
Roadway
Overturn
Passing
ROR left
Overturn
Tree
Straight
Tree
Overturned
Tree
Speed
Speed
No
Incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Veh. in middle lane
lost control &
sideswipped veh. in
left lane. Veh. 1
overturned in
median.
No
Incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Lost control while
being pursued by
police for speeding.
Yes
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Lost control on
wet/snow pvmt., spun
out into median &
struck a tree.
Driver error
DUI
Driver error
Driver error
Speed, police chase.
Driver error/weather
Too fast for conditions
Enforcement?
Guardrail?
Enforcement?
Enforcement?
Tree
Straight
ROR left
Struck small trees
Trees
DUI
Failure to stay in
lane
Yes
Non-incapacitating
No
DUI-arrested
E of MM 6.0/Exit 3
08/14/05
31/22
3:04 AM
EB
2
Dark - Road not lit
Clear
Dry
EB 11
Roadway
Motor vehicle In
traffic
Straight
Other vehicle
Failure to stay in
lane
Page 24
EB Report #
EB 13
EB 14
Location
Date
Age of Driver
Time
Direction of travel
# of Vehicles
Light Cond
Weather
Road Surface
Manner of Coll.
1st Harmful location
1st Harmful Event
Veh. Prior to coll.
Sequence of events 1
Sequence of events 2
Sequence of events 3
Sequence of events 4
Most harmful event
50' W of MM 7.3
01/18/04
31
2:05 PM
EB
1
Daylight
Snow
Wet
Single vehicle
Roadway
Tree
Straight
Tree
W of Maple AvOvps
10/17/05
56
2:23 PM
EB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Median
Overturn
Straight
ROR left
Overturn
Tree
Driver factor 1
Driver factor 2
Seat Belt Used?
Injury Status
Medical
Speed
Inattention
Yes
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Lost control on
wet/snow pvmt.,
spun out into median
& struck a tree.
Overturned
Failure to stay in
lane
Circumstances
EB15
Exit 3 on-ramp to
195E
01/29/05
32
10:15 PM
EB
2
Dark - Road not lit
Cloudy
Wet
Single vehicle
Shoulder
Embankment
Straight
ROR left
Struck snow bank
Overturned
2nd veh sideswiped
Overturned
Failure to stay in
lane
No
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Lost control,
overturned in
median.
Yes
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Veh 1 hit snow bank
& overturned. A
2nd veh. collided
with 1st veh. after
rollover
Driver error
Conclusions
Driver error/weather
Too fast for
conditions
Driver error
Possible remedy
Enforcement?
Guardrail?
EB16
Exit 3
10/01/05
22
3:29 PM
EB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadside
Tree
Straight
Curb
Overturn
Tree
EB 17
MM 7.7 E of Exit 3
01/15/04
29
10:15 AM
Daylight
Clear
Wet
Single vehicle
Median
Tree
Straight
ROR left
Tree
EB 18
E of Exit 3
01/01/05
33
7:00 AM
EB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Roadway
Ditch
Straight
ROR right side
Ditch
Overturned
Overturned
Tree
Overturned
Overcorrect steering
No citations
Yes
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Swerve to avoid
debris in road, hit
curb at exit 3,
overturned into tree
line.
Glare
Speed
No
Non-incapacitating
EMS-Hospital
Glare from sun
reflecting off wet
pvmt. & salt on
windshield obscurred
visibility. Veered left
into median & struck
tree.
Unknown
Incapacitating
Med flight to hospital
Speed exceeding 100
MPH. Injury could
have resulted in
death.
Environmental error
Driver error
Possible fatal
Other
Debris in road
Guardrail?
Guardrail/Enforcement?
Page 25
EB Report #
Location
Date
Age of Driver
Time
Direction of travel
# of Vehicles
Light Cond
Weather
Road Surface
Manner of Coll.
1st Harmful location
1st Harmful Event
Veh. Prior to coll.
Sequence of events 1
Sequence of events 2
Sequence of events 3
Sequence of events 4
Most harmful event
Driver factor 1
Driver factor 2
Seat Belt Used?
Injury Status
Medical
Circumstances
Conclusions
Possible remedy
EB19
30' E of MM 8.3
03/29/03
89
2:10 PM
EB
1
Daylight
Clear
Dry
Single vehicle
Shoulder
Motor vehicle In
traffic
Straight
ROR right side
Hit guardrail right
side
ROR left side
Overturned left side
Overturned
Overcorrect steering
No
Fatal
EMS-Hospital
Applied brakes due
to slow-down ahead.
Oversteared, lost
control, hit guardrail
on right, crossed
over to left, tires dug
in, veh, overturned.
Driver error
Overcorrected
steering, Speed?
EB20
W of MM 8.8
12/04/05
30
11:24 AM
EB
1
Daylight
Rain
Slush
Single vehicle
Roadside
Guardrail
Changing lanes
Hit guardrail
Guardrail
Speed
No
Non-incapacitating
No
Driving too fast for
road conditions
(slush).
Driver error
Guardrail may have
prevented more
serious injury.
Guardrail on left?
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
GEOMETRIC DESIGN – Interstate 195, Swansea
Issue
Comment
A. Speed – (Design Speed; Speed Limit & Zoning; Sight Distance; Overtaking
Are there speed-related issues along the corridor?
Please consider the following elements:
• Horizontal and vertical alignment;
• Posted and advisory speeds
• Driver compliance with speed limits
• Approximate sight distance
• Safety passing opportunities
B. Road alignment and cross section
With respect to the roadway alignment and crosssection please consider the appropriateness of the
following elements:
• Functional class (Urban Principal Arterial)
• Delineation of alignment;
• Widths (lanes, shoulders, medians);
• Sight distance for access points;
• Cross-slopes
• Curbs and gutters
Drainage features
C. Intersections
For intersections along the corridor please consider all
potential safety issues. Some specific considerations
should include the following:
• Intersections fit alignment (i.e. curvature)
• Traffic control devices’’ alert motorists as
necessary
• Sight distance and sight lines seem appropriate
• Vehicles can safely slow/stop for turns
• Conflict point management
• Adequate spacing for various vehicle types
Capacity problems that result in safety problems
D. Auxiliary lanes
• Do auxiliary lanes appear to be adequate?
• Could the taper locations and alignments be
causing safety deficiencies?
• Are should widths at merges causing safety
deficiencies?
Page 29
E. Clear zones and crash barriers
For the roadside the major considerations are clear
zone issues and crash barriers. Consider the following:
• Do there appear to be clear zones issues?
⎯ Are hazards located too close the road?
⎯ Are side slopes acceptable?
• Are suitable crash barriers (i.e, guard rails,
curbs, etc.) appropriate for minimizing crash
severity?
• Barrier features: end treatments, visibility, etc.
F. Bridges and culverts – (if necessary)
Are there specific issues related to bridges and culverts
that may result in safety concerns?
G. Pavement – (Defects, Skid Resistance, and Flooding)
• Is the pavement free of defects including
excessive roughness or rutting, potholes, loose
material, edge drop-offs, etc.) that could result
in safety problems (for example, loss of
steering control)?
• Does the pavement appear to have adequate
skid resistance, particularly on curves, step
grades and approaches to intersections?
• Is the pavement free of areas where flooding or
sheet flow of water could contribute to safety
problems?
• In general, is the pavement quality sufficient
for safe travel of heavy and oversized vehicles?
H. Lighting (Lighting and Glare)
It is important to consider to the impacts of lighting.
Some specifics include the following:
Is lighting required and, if so, has it been
adequately provided?
Are there glare issues resulting from headlights
during night time operations or from sunlight?
Page 30
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES
Issue
Comment
I. Signs
Signage is a critical element in providing a safe
roadway environment. Please consider the following:
• Are all current signs visible? Are they
conspicuous and clear? Are the correct signs
used for each situation?
• Are signs visible (consider both night and day)?
• Does the retroreflectivity or illumination appear
satisfactory?
• Are there any concerns regarding sign
supports?
J. Traffic signals
Although the focus of this RSA are lane departures,
this does present an opportunity for us to consider any
traffic signals. Specifically:
• If present, do the traffic signals appear to be
designed, installed, and operating correctly?
• Is the controller located in a safe position?
(where it is unlikely to be hit, but maintenance
access is safe)
• Is there adequate sight distance to the ends of
possible vehicle queues?
K. Marking and delineation
• Is the line marking and delineation:
⎯ appropriate for the function of the road?
⎯ consistent along the route?
⎯ likely to be effective under all expected
conditions? (day, night, wet, dry, fog, rising
and setting sun, oncoming headlights, etc.)
• Are centerlines, edgelines, and lane lines
provided? If not, do drivers have adequate
guidance?
Page 31
ROADWAY ACTIVITY
Issue
With respect to roadway activity please consider safety
elements related to the following:
• Pedestrians
• Bicycles
• Public transportation vehicles and riders
• Emergency vehicles
• Commercial vehicles
• Slow moving vehicles
Comment
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
Issue
Comment
Weather & Animals
From an environmental perspective it is important to
consider any potential impacts. Most notably is likely
to be the impacts of weather or animals, including:
• Possible effects of rain, fog, snow, ice, wind on
design features.
• Has snow fall accumulation been considered in
the design (storage, sight distance around
snowbanks, etc.)?
• Are there any known animal travel/migration
routes in surrounding areas which could affect
design?
Page 32