Washington 2006 Five Percent Report
This report is in response to the Federal requirement that each state describe at least 5 percent of its locations currently exhibiting the most severe highway safety needs, in accordance with Sections 148(c)(1)(D) and 148(g)(3)(A), of Title 23, United States Code. Each state’s report is to include potential remedies to the hazardous locations identified; estimated costs of the remedies; and impediments to implementation of the remedies other than costs. The reports included on this Web site represent a variety of methods utilized and various degrees of road coverage. Therefore, this report cannot be compared with the other reports included on this Web site.
Protection from Discovery and Admission into Evidence—Under 23 U.S.C. 148(g)(4) information collected or compiled for any purpose directly relating to this report shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports. |
Additional information, including the specific legislative requirements, can be found in the guidance provided by the Federal Highway Administration,
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/fiveguidance.htm.
5% Report
Washington State Report
FFY 06
Collision Analysis Capabilities
Washington State presently has a statewide collision records system that contains data from 2001 forward for all reported collisions on public roads, including federal, state, tribal, and city or county jurisdictions. By state law all collisions involving an injury or more than $700 damage have to be reported to the state via an officer's report or by the citizen driving the vehicle involved in the collision.
The responsibility for all data was shifted from the Washington State Patrol and became the responsibility of the Washington State Dept of Transportation (WSDOT) in 2002.
We have roadway geometric and traffic data information available on the state highway system that allows us to do statistically valid deficiency analysis. Our level of geometric and traffic data for city, tribal and county roads is significantly less. So our ability to do any type of in-depth, sophisticated statewide analysis is severely hampered, due to the lack of complete and comprehensive vehicle miles of travel and other exposure measures for these jurisdictions.
In order to improve the level of analysis and quality of data, we are planning to do the following projects in the next several years. The eTRIP initiative is presently funded, as is the development/purchase of a collision data analysis tool. The other five projects are dependent on funding becoming available, but they are all part of our Traffic Records Strategic Plan that was used as a basis for applying for NHTSA grants.
eTRIP
The eTRIP initiative is a collaborative effort among state and local agencies to create a seamless and integrated system through which traffic-related information can travel from its point of origin to its end use and analysis. The heart of this undertaking is to eliminate the excessive inefficiencies characteristic of our state's current paper-based process of collecting and exchanging core business information.
Initially, eTRIP will develop and implement an automated system that will enable law enforcement agencies (LEA's) to electronically create tickets and collision reports in the field and transmit this data to state repositories and authorized users. The eTRIP initiative has been divided into separate projects that will be completed over several phases. Together, these projects will carry out the following three (3) objectives:
- Support efforts to provide law enforcement officers methods to electronically capture ticket data, collision report data and other data in the field. This includes developing the SECTOR application for distribution to the LEAs.
- Develop a statewide data exchange network to allow this data to be transmitted electronically to users
- Prepare agency systems and repositories to receive electronic traffic data
Incident Location Tool for Officers
An electronic map-based computer application will be developed that will enable law enforcement officers and others to locate collisions and other incidents. This will be done by using either a stylus or mouse to indicate on the map where the incident occurred. The application will then populate the data record with the appropriate location information, e.g., state route # and milepost, street name, latitude/longitude, etc. This application will also support the input of GPS coordinates from hand-held devices. Once the location has been identified, the application will integrate this information into the state-sponsored electronic collision and ticketing software application, SECTOR. This tool would also have the potential to be used in other business areas, such as maintenance, incident response, etc.
Collision Analysis Tool
We are investigating the best way to be able to conduct analyses involving Safety Performance Functions and Potential Safety Improvements on state highways. We are also trying to find the best analytical tool for collisions on city streets and county roads. This tool would be used both by WSDOT to do statewide analyses, as well as by individual local agencies to do analysis of their road systems.
Collision Location Update Capability for Cities
A secured internet web site will be developed that will allow authorized staff from cities in Washington State to review and edit up to a dozen data fields that pertain to location information for collisions occurring within their jurisdiction. This will result in more consistent and accurate locations for city street collisions, thus improving the quality and usefulness of this data. This project will incorporate many of the features that have been previously developed for county engineers in the state. Once implemented, this capability will be available only for those cities that request the access.
Web-based Citizen Collision Report Submittal
A secured internet web site will be developed that will allow citizens involved in traffic collisions in Washington State to access, complete and submit an electronic version of the current paper collision report form. The electronic version of the form will incorporate business edits to (1) help guide the person submitting the collision report to enter the correct information, and (2) validate the authenticity of the report. This will result in more complete and accurate data for those collisions that are not investigated by a law enforcement officer.
CLAS EDWMS Re-design for Improved Efficiencies
This project will add enhancements and updates to WSDOT's statewide collision records and imaging system (CLAS EDWMS). This will improve efficiencies as follows:
- Upgrade all collision location and analysis system applications (Convert TARIS from PowerBuilder to .Net; upgrade Acorde and Kofax to current versions)
- Better integrate current data and imaging systems to replace some remaining manual processes with automated ones
- Provide the option for single queue or multi queue processing of a collision report
- Add records retention and disposal capabilities for collision report images and data
Status of Data
The following tables (last 2 pages) show the top 5% of collision locations, based on total societal cost, on Washington state routes using existing high crash location and high crash corridor methodologies (top 5% from each methodology are included). As data becomes available in the future, a statewide analysis will be completed. It should be noted that project costs are estimates, some of these funds are only project matching funds (not total costs), and some costs are for improvements that far exceed the identified location (location is a small part of a larger project area).
High Crash Location Methodology
Defined as spot locations less than a mile long which have experienced a higher than average rate of severe crashes during the previous two years. In order to give added weight to fatal and serious injury crashes, each collision is assigned points based on its severity:
- 10 points per fatal crash
- 9 points per disabling injury crash
- 3 points per evident injury crash
- 2 points per possible injury crash
- 1 point per property damage only crash
- The first part of the process involves identifying those state highway locations which meet all of the following criteria:
- The location must be 0.1 mile or less in length.
- The sum of the severity points (see above) for reported collisions at the location during the 2-year analysis period must be at least 10 or greater.
- During the 2-year analysis period, there must be an average of at least 3 crashes per year at the location.
Spots that meet these criteria are called severe crash locations (SCL). Where two or more SCL's overlap, the location with the highest total of severity points is identified as the "Rated" section, while the entire location including overlaps is identified as the "Overall" section. An average daily traffic (ADT) volume is then assigned to each rated SCL.
- A severity rate per million vehicles is calculated for each rated SCL. This is done using the following formula:
where Exposure=ADT X 365 X Number of years (2)
- All rated SCL's are then assigned to one of the following roadway access categories:
- Rural, full access control
- Rural, 2 lanes, no full access control
- Rural, 4 or more lanes, no full access control
- Urban, full access control
- Urban, 2 lanes, no full access control
- Urban, 4 or more lanes, no full access control
- Within each roadway access category, the following calculations take place:
- The exposures for all the individual rated SCL's are summed. This yields the total exposure.
- The severity points for all the individual rated SCL's are summed. This yields the accumulated severity.
- The accumulated severity rate per million vehicles is calculated:
- The average severity rate per million vehicles is calculated:
- In order for a SCL to become a HCL, it must pass one last test. The SCL's severity rate must equal or exceed the critical severity rate. The critical severity rate is a method of determining if the difference between the location's severity rate and the average severity rate for that roadway access category is statistically significant.
- Where more than one HCL overlaps, the location with the highest severity total is identified as the "Rated" section, while the entire location including overlaps is identified as the "Overall" section.
- A similar process is used to identify fatal crash locations (FCL's). These are locations 0.1 mile or less in length with at least 2 fatal crashes occurring during the 2-year analysis period. An average daily traffic (ADT) volume is assigned to each FCL.
High Crash Corridor Methodology
Defined as sections of state highway one or more miles long, which have a higher than average number of severe accidents over a continuous period of time. The same severity points scale (1-10) used for HCL's is also used for HCC's. The previous five years of collision data is analyzed.
- For the five year analysis period, the following statewide benchmark averages are calculated for each of the six roadway access categories below:
- Total severity points per mile
- Total crashes per mile
- Severity points per crash per mile
- Rural, full access control
- Rural, 2 lanes, no full access control
- Rural, 4 or more lanes, no full access control
- Urban, full access control
- Urban, 2 lanes, no full access control
- Urban, 4 or more lanes, no full access control
- Using a one-mile long analysis interval, incremented every 0.5 miles, each state highway's collision data is used to identify those sections within each of the six roadway access categories that equal or exceed all three of the above statewide benchmark averages. These one-mile sections are retained for further analysis; all other sections are dropped from further consideration. It should be noted that in some cases it is not possible to identify a full one-mile section, due to the highway's ending point or the highway going from one roadway access category to another. In these instances, if the section equals or exceeds all three of the statewide benchmark averages for that roadway access category, it is retained for further analysis regardless of its length.
- On each state highway, if a series of contiguous one-mile sections within the same roadway access category exceeds all three of the benchmark averages, then that series is considered to be a HCC. If a one-mile section cannot be combined with any adjacent sections, it is still retained as a single HCC.
- Once the combined and single HCC's have been identified, the individual HCC's societal cost per mile per year, as well as its collisions per mile, severity points per mile and severity points per collision per mile are calculated.
- Within each of the six roadway access categories, the statewide average societal cost per mile per year is then calculated, using an average of the individual HCCs' societal cost per mile per year that were calculated in (4) above.
- Within each of the six roadway access categories, a new set of statewide benchmark averages for each roadway access category is calculated, using an average of the individual HCC's collisions per mile, severity points per mile and severity points per collision per mile that were calculated in (5) above.
The final HCC list is then composed of only those HCC's that meet either one of the following conditions:
- (1) The individual HCC's societal cost per mile per year equals or exceeds the statewide average societal cost per mile per year for that roadway access category
OR
- (2) The individual HCC's collisions per mile, severity points per mile and severity points per collision per mile all equal or exceed all three of the corresponding statewide benchmark averages for that roadway access category
| State Route | Mileposts | Identified Remedies | Estimated Cost (millions) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 291.18 - 291.53 | ||
| 5 (LX 17276) | 0.00 - 0.12 | Remove the existing rolled gutters and curbing on the SB off ramp. Resurface existing roadway pavement. | 1.3 |
| 5 (CI 13135) | 0.25 - 0.87 | Upgrade facility during HOV improvements. | 103.8 |
| 5 | 132.30 - 133.79 | Upgrade facility during HOV improvements. | 291.7 |
| 7 | 47.86 - 48.60 | Construct sidewalks, retaining walls, lighting, upgrade signal systems and consolidate highway approach points. | 20.2 |
| 7 | 51.18 - 52.61 | Construct sidewalks, retaining walls, lighting, upgrade signal systems and consolidate highway approach points. | 20.2 |
| 7 | 54.69 - 55.12 | ||
| 99 | 37.33 - 37.75 | ||
| 99 | 39.36 - 39.96 | ||
| 99 | 39.99 - 40.66 | ||
| 99 | 42.94 - 43.34 | Upgrade HOV facilities, right turn lane, median, lighting, and sidewalks. | 20.0 |
| 99 | 44.42 - 44.80 | ||
| 99 | 44.88 - 45.34 | ||
| 99 | 47.70 - 48.58 | ||
| 101 | 366.90 - 367.41 | Install median crossover protection. | 0.6 |
| 161 | 23.64 - 24.41 | Construct sidewalks, continuous lighting, consolidate approaches and bus pullouts. | 9.9 |
| 161 | 24.45 - 25.31 | ||
| 164 | 1.80 - 2.17 | ||
| 205 (LX 02833) | 0.02 - 0.28 | Construct NB off and SB on ramps and connect roads. Construct a new ramp from the I-205/Mill Plain NB off ramp to NE 112th Ave. | 75.5 |
| 303 | 2.37 - 3.08 | ||
| 395 | 18.42 - 19.19 | Install variable message sign and other ITS devices. | 0.4 |
| 405 | 0.70 - 1.69 | Construct one additional NB general purpose lane. Extend SB HOV lane. | 123.6 |
| 515 | 0.88 - 1.29 | ||
| 516 | 5.68 - 5.97 | ||
| 516 | 7.15 - 7.75 | ||
| 524 | 4.24 - 4.52 | ||
| 524 | 4.62 - 5.20 | ||
| 527 | 2.20 - 2.80 | ||
| 531 | 6.42 - 6.89 | Replace existing two way left turn lane with left turn lanes, traffic curbing, and raised traffic islands. Construct a bus pullout/U-turn pocket. | 0.9 |
| 538 | 0.91 - 1.30 | ||
| 900 | 5.93 - 6.02 | Reconfigure the I-5/SR 16 interchange. | 291.7 |
| State Route | Mileposts | Identified Remedies | Estimated Cost (millions) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 289.19 - 292.18 | ||
| 5 | 130.95 - 132.94 | Rebuild interchange with SR 16. Add HOV facilities. | 291.7 |
| 5 | 133.95 - 135.44 | Rebuild interchange with SR 7 / I-705. Add HOV facilities. | 168.1 |
| 5 | 152.50 - 156.99 | Upgrade facility during HOV improvements. | 26.0 |
| 7 | 50.08 - 52.07 | Construct sidewalks, retaining walls, lighting, upgrade signal systems and consolidate highway approach points. | 20.2 |
| 7 | 54.58 - 56.57 | ||
| 99 | 15.65 - 20.14 | ||
| 99 | 27.17 - 28.12 | Construct additional bridge to separate directions of traffic. | 153.7 |
| 99 | 31.72 - 33.21 | ||
| 99 | 36.22 - 40.71 | ||
| 99 | 41.72 - 46.72 | Upgrade HOV facilities, right turn lane, median, lighting, and sidewalks. | 20.0 |
| 99 | 47.73 - 48.72 | ||
| 99 | 50.76 - 52.25 | Add sidewalks. | 1.3 |
| 167 | 0.28 - 1.27 | Construct new freeway facility. | 119.4 |
| 405 | 0.00 - 1.99 | Construct one additional NB general purpose lane. Extend SB HOV lane. | 123.6 |
| 515 | 1.00 - 1.99 | Pavement overlay. | |
| 515 | 3.03 - 4.02 | ||
| 516 | 7.78 - 8.77 | ||
| 522 | 5.06 - 8.05 | Multimodal improvements. | 22.6 |
| 527 | 2.81 - 4.30 |
