New Mexico 2007 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.
New Mexico FY 2007 Five Percent Most Severe Safety Needs Report
1 Introduction
Effective October 1, 2005, Section 148 of SAFETEA LU was amended to create a new Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). The purpose of HSIP is to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries on public roads.
As part of the new HSIP, states are required to submit to FHWA an annual "Five Percent Report" that lists not less than 5 percent of the roadway locations exhibiting the most severe safety needs. The report is required to:
Contain a discussion of potential remedies for each location;
Estimate the costs of remedies and impediments to implementation other than cost;
Specify the extent of coverage of public roads in the states;
Identify the methodology used to determine the location rankings; and
Be submitted electronically to the FHWA Division Offices on or before August 31 of each year.
In New Mexico the HSIP has the responsibility to systematically analyze roadways and available crash data to identify locations that are determined as current or possible locations with severe safety needs. The New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT) uses certain procedures for HSIP project selection. These procedures are meant to provide guidance for the ongoing analysis of environmental issues affecting the overall safe performance of travel on New Mexico's public roadways. The HSIP is also expected to accomplish safety improvement project programming in support of the New Mexico Comprehensive Transportation Safety Plan (CTSP).
The CTSP was developed by the NMDOT, and many safety partners and stakeholders, to coordinate activities and resources to achieve safer transportation conditions in New Mexico and to be consistent with the new Federal Surface Transportation Act, SAFETEA LU. The CTSP provides the traffic safety agency stakeholders with a new planning and coordination tool to allow better collaboration among various agencies. The overall goal is to reduce traffic-related injuries and fatalities.
2 Available Data
State Roadway System
For the purpose of this report, state roadways and intersections are divided into three categories, as indicated below, and are analyzed separately:
Rural State-System and Interstate Roadways;
Urban Intersections and Roadways; and
Rural Off-System Roadways.
Traffic Volume Data
Traffic volume was obtained from the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) and also from the University of New Mexico, Division of Government Research.
Crash Data
The New Mexico State Police or local enforcement agencies are required to report all investigated crashes to the NMDOT within 24 hours of completing the investigation. The Crash Records Section of NMDOT codes and enters crash data. Crash data on the state highway system is generally located by route name and milepost.
For this analysis, available statewide crash data for the most recent five years, 2001-2005, have been collected from the NMDOT.
Limitations on the Data
Some of the reports of crashes at an intersection are not clear in identifying if the crash occurred within the intersection or at an approach to the intersection, and if so, how far back from the intersection. The cause and type of the accident are based on the officers' judgments, and not an engineering analysis. The contributing factors are not always clear in the reports.
Most of the rural off-system roadways do not have mileposts, so the indicated location of a crash is approximate, and is based on the crossing roadways. Manual review of the crash data is necessary to determine if specific segments of these routes meet the criteria for high-crash locations. The NMDOT is in the process of replacing the legacy system for roadway data with a modern, GIS-linked data system. The more extensive data integration of this system will improve the availability of roadway data for both on-system and off-system roadways. Also, a major effort is underway to improve and integrate traffic records systems statewide. New Mexico has adopted the TRACs system for law enforcement automation. A pilot test of the application is complete and roll-out among the pilot agencies is underway. Electronic data transfer initiatives are underway in a number of areas.
The crash data, as well as the volume data on tribal roads are not all reported to the NMDOT. The crashes at the rural intersections are covered with the rural roadway segments and are not identified separately.
Schedule for Upgrading the Data
NMDOT continuously strives to clarify the crash reports and provide a more accurate crash history of the State roadway system. As indicated above, efforts are being undertaken in cooperation with local enforcement agencies to provide greater detailed documentation of crash reports on local and off-system roads.
3 Methodology for Developing the Five Percent Lists
Serious crashes are defined as those crashes resulting in at least one fatal, incapacitating, or visible injury, here referred to as KAB crashes.
A high-crash location is defined as either:
A one-mile segment of road with at least 10 KAB crashes in five years; or
An urban intersection with at least 10 KAB crashes in five years.
These criteria were set to ensure segments and intersections with a sufficient number of crashes are analyzed and at the same time to ensure low-volume roadways with high crash rates would also receive consideration.
The methodology for each of the state roadway categories is discussed below:
Rural State-System and Interstate Roadways
There are approximately 11,100 miles of rural state roadways and interstates in New Mexico, which were assessed for analysis in this report. The rural intersections on those roadways are also included in this category.
A sliding-window technique is used to identify the rural state roads, interstates, and rural intersections, with the highest crash rates. A one-mile-long "window" is "slid" along each route. Based on the 2001-2005 crash data, this procedure identified 86 roadway segments with at least 10 serious crashes (frequency). Approximately 20 percent of the total serious crashes in five years occurred in these 86 segments.
The crash rates for these segments are then calculated to rank the locations. The crash rate is defined as the number of crashes per 100 million vehicle miles of travel (MVM). The top 25 percent of the revised list, which includes 22 segments, constitutes the list of 5 percent of locations with the highest crash rates in 2001-2005. These 22 segments make up approximately 0.2 percent of the total miles of rural state roadways and interstates and are shown in Table II-1.
Table II-1 Five Percent List of Rural State System and Interstates with Ten or more KAB crashes in Five Years
| Route | County | Starting Mile Post | End Mile Post | Length (Mile) | 100 Million Vehicle Miles per Year | # of KAB Crashes in 5 years | Crash Rate (# of KAB Crashes per 100MVM) | RANK |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NM 130 | OTERO | 9.9 | 10.6 | 0.7 | 0.000460 | 11 | 4783 | 1 |
| NM 4 | SANDOVAL | 24.0 | 25.0 | 1.0 | 0.007278 | 11 | 302 | 2 |
| US 64 | TAOS | 271.9 | 273.7 | 1.8 | 0.014467 | 14 | 194 | 3 |
| US 82 | OTERO | 6.6 | 7.6 | 1.0 | 0.016002 | 13 | 162 | 4 |
| I-25 | DONA ANA | 1.7 | 3.5 | 1.8 | 0.126875 | 83 | 131 | 5 |
| I-25 | DONA ANA | 43.6 | 44.8 | 1.2 | 0.022815 | 12 | 105 | 6 |
| NM 76 | SANTA FE | 1.9 | 2.8 | 0.9 | 0.019329 | 10 | 103 | 7 |
| NM 76 | RIO ARRIBA | 5.0 | 7.9 | 2.9 | 0.062282 | 30 | 96 | 8 |
| NM 502 | SANTA FE | 7.0 | 7.9 | 0.9 | 0.040668 | 17 | 84 | 9 |
| NM 47 | VALENCIA | 18.3 | 19.5 | 1.2 | 0.028718 | 12 | 84 | 10 |
| I-25 | SAN MIGUEL | 336.3 | 337.0 | 0.7 | 0.024221 | 10 | 83 | 11 |
| NM 68 | RIO ARRIBA | 18.6 | 19.6 | 1.0 | 0.024882 | 10 | 80 | 12 |
| NM 478 | DONA ANA | 19.4 | 21.0 | 1.6 | 0.051834 | 17 | 66 | 13 |
| I-25 | SANTA FE | 301.2 | 302.4 | 1.2 | 0.040826 | 13 | 64 | 14 |
| US 70 | ROOSEVELT | 425.7 | 426.9 | 1.2 | 0.049058 | 15 | 61 | 15 |
| I-25 | DONA ANA | 8.5 | 9.5 | 1.0 | 0.038424 | 11 | 57 | 16 |
| I-25 | SAN MIGUEL | 330.8 | 332.4 | 1.6 | 0.051111 | 14 | 55 | 17 |
| NM 599 | SANTA FE | 0.1 | 1.6 | 1.5 | 0.069458 | 19 | 55 | 18 |
| NM 314 | VALENCIA | 3.3 | 4.4 | 1.1 | 0.044980 | 12 | 53 | 19 |
| NM 263 | VALENCIA | 3.3 | 5.4 | 2.1 | 0.080375 | 20 | 50 | 20 |
| I-40 | GUADALUPE | 287.6 | 288.4 | 0.8 | 0.042857 | 10 | 47 | 21 |
| US 64 | SAN JUAN | 36.8 | 37.8 | 1.0 | 0.049169 | 11 | 45 | 22 |
Figures II-1 through II-6 illustrate the rural and interstate roadway segments with high rates of KAB crash. Each figure illustrates one of the NMDOT's six Maintenance Districts.
Urban Intersections and Roadways
Urban roadway and intersection crashes are included in this data, all coded to the nearest intersection. The data also show whether the crashes occurred at an intersection, driveway, or non-intersection.
Every urban crash is included in the database. Local streets, as well as major roadways, are included in the definition of an intersection, (i.e., any place where two named public streets intersect). In this case each intersection coded covers the "general area" of that intersection. The intersections that are some distance away from any other intersection cover a larger "general area" than intersections in denser areas.
For crashes that did not occur at an intersection, the distance and direction from the intersection, if known, are coded. To the extent possible, all crashes are identified with a standardized intersection name.
Crashes are counted for each intersection, and those with 10 or more KAB crashes in five years are considered high-crash locations. A total of 143,740 crashes occurred at urban intersections in 2001-2005, of which 14,921 were KAB crashes.
The data shows 255 signalized urban intersections that meet the criteria of 10 or more serious crashes in a five-year period. These 255 intersections accounted for 3,952 (26 percent) of the serious crashes and 41,527 (29 percent) of all crashes. The top 10 percent of these intersections, 26 intersections, are selected for further analysis.
The intersections are then ranked based on their KAB crash rate, which is the total number of KAB crashes per million vehicles entering the intersection, and are shown in Table II 2. Figures II 7, II 9, and II 9 illustrate the locations of their interactions with high rates of KAB crashes.
Rural Off-System Roadways
Off-system roads are all rural public roads not in the state maintained system, such as county and tribal roads. Crashes on these roads are usually coded by the intersection approach. Some crashes on these roads are coded with a route and milepost, if available. Most of these roads are low-volume roads with a low number of crashes. The crash data on some of these roads, specifically the tribal routes, are not available, due to the fact that they are not reported to the NMDOT. The volume data, also on the tribal routes, is not always complete.
Serious crashes are coded by county and route name. Routes with at least 10 KAB crashes in five years are selected for further analysis. From the 2001-2005 crash data, there are 18 routes with 10 or more KAB crashes in 5 years. These routes account for 960 total crashes; 265 of which meet the definition of serious crashes. These routes are ranked based on the number of KAB crashes for the five-year period and are shown in Table II 3.
Table II-2 Five Percent List of Urban Intersections and Urban Roadways with Ten or more KAB crashes in Five Years
| City | Primary Street | Secondary Street | Total # of KAB crashes in 5 yrs. | Total volume in 5 years | RATE (# of KAB crashes per MV) | RANK |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ABQ. | Coors Blvd. SW | Bridge SW | 29 | 63,724,985 | 0.455 | 1 |
| ABQ. | Coors Blvd. NW | 7 Bar Loop NW | 22 | 49,318,435 | 0.446 | 2 |
| ABQ. | Central Ave. NW | UNSER BLVD NW | 24 | 55,592,420 | 0.432 | 3 |
| Las Cruces | El Paseo Rd. | Idaho Ave. | 24 | 56,618,070 | 0.424 | 4 |
| Santa Fe | Beckner Rd. | Cerrillos Rd. | 22 | 59,586,250 | 0.369 | 5 |
| Las Cruces | Main St. | Solano Dr. | 22 | 62,556,255 | 0.352 | 6 |
| ABQ. | Zuni Rd. SE | Wyoming Blvd. | 22 | 63,646,510 | 0.346 | 7 |
| ABQ. | Central Ave. NW | Coors Blvd. NW | 33 | 101,835,365 | 0.324 | 8 |
| ABQ. | Montgomery Blvd.NE | Morris Rd. NE | 24 | 76,593,425 | 0.313 | 9 |
| ABQ. | Lomas Blvd. NE | Juan Tabo Blvd. NE | 34 | 111,663,720 | 0.304 | 10 |
| ABQ. | Paseo Del Norte | Jefferson | 42 | 141,215,215 | 0.297 | 11 |
| ABQ. | Central | Louisiana NE | 29 | 100,753,870 | 0.288 | 12 |
| ABQ. | Spain NE | Wyoming Blvd. NE | 28 | 100,966,665 | 0.277 | 13 |
| ABQ. | Montgomery Blvd.NE | San Mateo Blvd. NE | 44 | 159,938,255 | 0.275 | 14 |
| ABQ. | Coors By Pass NW | Eagle Ranch Rd. NW | 26 | 95,033,590 | 0.274 | 15 |
| ABQ. | Osuna Rd. NE | San Mateo Blvd. NE | 24 | 92,652,330 | 0.259 | 16 |
| ABQ. | Canderlaria Rd. NE | Carlisle Blvd. NE | 22 | 85,341,015 | 0.258 | 17 |
| ABQ. | Montgomery Blvd.NE | San Pedro NE | 27 | 108,233,815 | 0.249 | 18 |
| ABQ. | Carlisle Blvd. NE | Montgomery Blvd. NE | 27 | 108,770,000 | 0.248 | 19 |
| ABQ. | Central | San Mateo Blvd. NE | 29 | 120,562,420 | 0.241 | 20 |
| ABQ. | Central Ave NE | Juan Tabo Blvd. NE | 22 | 91,947,880 | 0.239 | 21 |
| ABQ. | Iliff NW | Coors Blvd.NW | 24 | 100,639,260 | 0.238 | 22 |
| ABQ. | Montgomery Blvd.NE | Pan American Hwy NE | 24 | 103,438,080 | 0.232 | 23 |
| ABQ. | Canderlaria Rd. NE | San Mateo Blvd. NE | 27 | 118,061,440 | 0.229 | 24 |
| Rio Rancho | Rio Rancho Rd. | Sara Rd. | 22 | 101,697,030 | 0.216 | 25 |
| Santa Fe | Siringo Rd. | St. Francis Dr. | 23 | 111,160,750 | 0.207 | 26 |
Table II-3 Rural Off-System Roadways with Ten or More KAB Crashes in Five Years
| Route | County | # of KAB crashes in 5 yrs. |
Segment Length (Miles) |
RANK |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IR 36 | SAN JUAN | 31 | 24.00* | 1 |
| CR 3000 | SAN JUAN | 22 | 15.00* | 2 |
| IR 9 | MCKINLEY | 20 | 12.22 | 3 |
| Manzano Express | VALENCIA | 18 | 12.85 | 4 |
| Meadow Lake | VALENCIA | 18 | 8.62 | 5 |
| IR 12 | MCKINLEY | 15 | 26.46 | 6 |
| CR 206 | EDDY | 14 | 23.43 | 7 |
| CR 56 | SANTA FE | 14 | 5.69 | 8 |
| CR 3500 | SAN JUAN | 13 | 5.33 | 9 |
| CR 6480 | SAN JUAN | 13 | 5.31 | 10 |
| CR 5500 | SAN JUAN | 12 | 7.1 | 11 |
| Dona Ana RD | DONA ANA | 12 | 7.13 | 12 |
| CR 1980 | SAN JUAN | 11 | Not Known | 13 |
| IR 30 | CIBOLA | 11 | Not Known | 14 |
| IR 49 | MCKINLEY | 11 | Not Known | 15 |
| CR 3100 | SAN JUAN | 10 | 8.00* | 16 |
| CR 67 | SANTA FE | 10 | 7.62 | 17 |
| El Cerro Mission | VALENCIA | 10 | 2.74 | 18 |
| TOTAL | 265 |
* Estimated Length.
The exact total length of off-system roads in New Mexico is not known.
Figure II 10 illustrates the locations of rural off-system roadways with high frequencies of KAB crashes in the last five years.
4 Proposed Mitigations
In 2006, 2,248 fatal and serious injury lane departure crashes occurred in New Mexico, which account for 21 percent of all combined fatal and serious injury crashes and 63 percent of fatal crashes. New Mexico also has one of the highest pedestrian fatality rates in the United States. The following measures are proposed for reducing the number of KAB crashes on New Mexico roads:
Upgrade existing or install new pavement markings, regulatory signage, and warning signage where warranted;
Install lighting along roadways and at intersections and at freeway interchanges to reduce night time crashes;
Regrade unpaved shoulders on rural paved roadways to eliminate eroded pavement drop offs and steep roadside side slopes;
Install guardrail on shoulders and medians where warranted by steep side slopes in roadside areas;
Install appropriate advance warning signs on approaches to moderate to severe horizontal curves on rural roadways;
Install chevrons or delineators on moderate to severe horizontal curves on rural roadways;
Install new generation bridge approach terminals and attenuation systems to reduce severity of fixed object, lane departure crashes;
Construct deceleration lanes or acceleration lanes at interchange ramps or roadway intersections;
Perform speed studies, and modify speed limits if needed;
Install median barriers on rural interstate roadways if a moderately narrow median exists to reduce cross median, head-on crashes;
Install shoulder rumble strips for rural roadways where shoulders of sufficient width and pavement condition exist;
Increase access control on urban roadways through driveway removal and relocation, additional barrier medians, and turning restrictions;
Construct channelized modifications to select urban intersections with existing signals;
Perform signal warrant studies for urban unsignalized intersections;
Install traffic signals for unsignalized intersections if they are warranted;
Construct new or improved pedestrian facilities;
Construct enhanced pedestrian crosswalks including bicycle/pedestrian trail crosswalks on roadways with pedestrian detection devices;
Construct new or improved bicycle routes, lanes, and trails;
Construct grade drainage improvements on roadway sections subject to rain storm runoff flooding, causing lane departure crashes to motorists;
Construct wider shoulders for rural roadways with narrow or nonexistent shoulders to reduce likelihood of lane departure crashes;
Construct center two-way left turn lanes in the paved median of urban roadways;
Construct ramp realignment to reduce lane departure and intersection type crashes;
Restore failed surfaces of at-grade highway-railroad crossing platforms and install signs, markings, vehicle detectors, signals, and gates;
Install rock fall mitigations, clear or relocate roadside obstructions, including utility poles, trees, vegetation, and existing posted signs, and install special fencing systems, including animal detection devices, in order to reduce the severity of lane departure crashes in the roadside and to reduce animal crashes;
Purchase additional courtesy patrol vehicles to increase level of response to disabled vehicles on urban freeway systems to reduce exposure to hazards of severe collisions between traveling vehicles and disabled vehicles;
Install additional vehicle detection, changeable message, and motorist information subsystems as improvements to the New Mexico Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Network in order to provide improved real-time information to motorists to allow them to drive more safely and avoid potential traffic hazards; and
Install experimental devices and systems, using ITS technology on a limited, trial basis, at select locations for purposes of reducing particular types of crashes, such as collisions at intersections due to red light-running motorists.
Estimated costs for select certain types of proposed mitigation are as follow:
Installation of new traffic signal: $250,000 and higher;
New signs and new markings: $20,000/mile to $150,000/mile;
Perform speed studies, signal warrant studies: $10,000 and higher;
Install median cable barriers: $150,000/mile;
Install shoulder rumble strips: $1,500/mile; and
Channelized modifications at intersection: $20,000 to $250,000 and higher.
It should be emphasized that the above figures are approximate costs for each type of mitigation. A thorough analysis of each proposed construction is needed to more precisely determine the estimated costs.
The expected impediments to implementation of proposed mitigations are as follow:
Full cooperation from MPOs, municipalities, counties, and tribes are needed for successful implementation of remedies; and
Complete and accurate crash reports and traffic volume counts for the off-system roads are needed from the MPOs, municipalities, counties, and tribes.
5 State Contact
Steve Eagan, P.E.
Safety Planning Manager
New Mexico Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 1149
Santa Fe, NM 87504 1149
Office: (505) 827 3248
E mail: Steve.Eagan@state.nm.us
