U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000
| < Previous | Table of Contents | Next > |
This is the first Road Safety Audit (RSA) of Phase II, of this two-phased program. In fiscal year 2007 (Phase I), three RSAs were conducted in three different environments – urban, suburban and rural. The work is now being continued in fiscal year 2008 in which several RSAs will be conducted. This project represents the coordination of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission’s (DVRPC) Planning Work Program and Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) District 6 Safety Plan. DVRPC’s planning work program includes a RSA Program. All state departments of transportation are required to develop a Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) in order to draw on safety funds according to SAFETEA-LU, the federal transportation legislation. In Pennsylvania each district is required to have a Safety Plan to be incorporated in the state’s SHSP. In PennDOT’s District 6 Safety Plan several corridors are identified under Section 148 Planned Safety Projects eligible for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding. This was an opportunity to analyze corridors which were already on the plan and eligible for dedicated funding.
Whereas, the goal of this project is to improve and promote transportation safety on the region’s roadways while maintaining mobility, the main objective is to address the safe operation of the roadway and ensure a high level of safety for all road users. The road safety audit program is conducted to generate improvement recommendations and countermeasures for roadway segments demonstrating a history of, or potential for a high incidence of motor vehicle crashes. The emphasis is placed on identifying low cost, quick turnaround safety projects to address the issues where possible but will not exclude the more complex projects.
Prior to the road safety audit activities on site, DVRPC collected, reviewed and analyzed data (video of roadway under different conditions, traffic volume data, turning movement counts, maps, aerial photographs, previous traffic reports and crash data). Using the crash data, crash clusters were identified and mapped for locations along Aquetong and Windy Bush Roads. These locations were the main focus of the road safety audit.
The Road Safety Audit was conducted on Friday, August 17, 2007. The Pre-Audit meeting involved the definition of road safety audit and how it differs from a corridor study process; the required steps of an audit; presentation of the corridor issues and an exchange of ideas and knowledge of the roadway. A video showing the corridor under night time conditions was also shown. The field view involved the audit team which was made up of federal, state, and local officials and other stakeholders walking the corridor and identifying transportation safety problems. See Appendix A for the list of audit team members. The post-audit meeting was spent discussing the findings from the field view and determining priorities.
The study area consists of 1.8 miles of Aquetong Road (SR 1003) from Covered Bridge Road to Solebury Mountain Road, and 0.4 mile of Windy Bush Road (SR 232) from Aquetong Road to Cornwell Drive in Solebury Township, Bucks County; see Appendix B for Study Area Map. At the request of PennDOT the audit team also looked at Windy Bush Road from Aquetong Road to Pidcock Creek Road. Aquetong Road is functionally classified as a rural major collector east of Windy Bush Road and an urban collector west of this point. This road runs in a north-west to south-easterly direction. Windy Bush Road is functionally classified a rural major collector south of Aquetong Road and an urban collector north of Aquetong Road. The land use in the corridor is predominantly residential with large lot single family homes. There are spots of commercial and institutional uses. The area is distinctly suburban and rural in character.
Aquetong Road has two lanes throughout its length, one travel lane in each direction with no shoulders or curb. The roadway consists of numerous curves and steep grades; with no sidewalks. Windy Bush Road has two lanes throughout its length, one travel lane in each direction with narrow shoulders. There are six unsignalized intersections along Aquetong Road within the study corridor with a 4-way stop at Windy Bush Road and a 2-way stop at the Sugan Road T-intersection.
Traffic volumes in the corridor vary. Volumes collected this summer showed that there are higher volumes on Aquetong Road east of Windy Bush Road than west. This is consistent with volumes collected in the late 1990s and early 2000s. The 2007 volumes registered AADT of 2,370 vehicles between Covered Bridge Road and Rockwood Path; and 1,954 vehicles just east of Solebury Mountain Road. An AADT of 2,398 vehicles were recorded on Windy Bush Road between Old Windy Bush Road and Cornwell Drive. This is consistent with the 1995 volumes. The speed limit along the corridor is 45 MPH with curve warning speed limit of 25 MPH.
According to PennDOT’s crash data there were 25 reportable crashes between 2003 and 2005. Reportable crashes are crashes which may result in a fatality, injury and/or property damage rendering the vehicle disabled, requiring it be towed from the scene. A comprehensive analysis of the crash data is shown in Appendix C. Of the reportable crashes, there were 16 crashes in 2003 (64%); 2 crashes in 2004 (8%); and 7 crashes in 2005 (28%). When analyzing crash frequency by month, February had the highest number of crashes with 5 (20%), April was next with 4 crashes and January, May and September had 3 crashes each. The months of March, June and October had no reportable crashes recorded.
Angle (12) and hit fixed object (7) crashes represented 76% of the 25 reportable crashes. There were no fatal crashes during the study period, 11 injury crashes of varying levels of severity, and 14 property damage only crashes. The majority of the crashes occurred during fair weather (60%) with 32% occurring during rainy, snowy or sleeting conditions. In an analysis of roadway surface conditions the occurrence of crashes are about evenly split with 44% occurring on dry road surface and 42% occurring on inclement (wet, snow covered) road surface conditions. Sixty-four percent of the crashes occurred during daylight hours.
| < Previous | Table of Contents | Next > |
