Resolution_Adoption of Safety Plan

Home Browse Search

Table 3. Scoring criteria and weighted score values used in assessing road safety project priority for 2021. Higher scores indicate a higher priority road segment andlor higher countermeasure needs. Development of Road Segment Safety Improvements After roadway segments were prioritized using the risk-based scoring as described above, the results were reviewed, and the list was shortened so the plan could focus on the segments that would see the most benefit from safety improvements and eliminated erroneous results or locations reflecting outdated information. Road segments with a score lower than 55 were removed from consideration in an attempt to break segments down into higher priority rating and lower priority rating groups. Road segments that were within the scope of current improvement projects or recently completed improvement projects were also removed. Each accident report was examined for further details regarding the incident to further identify contributing factors, driver actions, alcohol or drug influence, intersection related, and any countermeasures already in place. The list of candidate locations was further reduced by eliminating roadway segments where accidents were alcohol or drug related with no hazard at the site and segments where countermeasures were already in place and or where no countermeasures would have prevented the accident. While these road segments are important to monitor, focus is given to other locations where collisions due to deficiencies in the road structure can be addressed. The remaining roadway segments were then evaluated for potential safety improvements and countermeasures. 9 Scoring Criteria and Weighted Scores MGM Number Factors and Collision Types scone 1 OVERALL CRITERIA MET: Meets minimum criteria and was included in previous local safety plan 20 Meets minimum criteria but not included in previous local safety plan 10 Does not meet minimum criteria and was included in previous local safety plan. 5 2 Inadequate clear zone with steep embankment or ditches noguardrail) Over 50% of the side slopes are too steep 20 About 10% to 50% of side slopes too steep 10 At least one section has side slopes too steep 5 3 Fixed objects in clear zone fences, utility poles, trees, mailboxes, etc, Over 50% of the road has fixed objects in clear zone 20 About 10% to 50% of the road has fixed objects in clear zone 10 At least one section of the road has fixed objects in clear zone 5 4 Roadway Curvature — Horizontal Curve Over 50% of the road is in a horizontal curve 20 About 10% to 50% of the road is in a horizontal curve 10 At least one section of the road is in a horizontal curve 3- 5 ONE OR MORE FATAL OR SERIOUS INJURY COLLISION(S) — 2015 THROUGH 2019 Fatality (per erson1s 50 ea. Serious Injury (per rson1s 40 ea. 6 INJURY(perperson/9) 15 ea. Development of Road Segment Safety Improvements After roadway segments were prioritized using the risk-based scoring as described above, the results were reviewed, and the list was shortened so the plan could focus on the segments that would see the most benefit from safety improvements and eliminated erroneous results or locations reflecting outdated information. Road segments with a score lower than 55 were removed from consideration in an attempt to break segments down into higher priority rating and lower priority rating groups. Road segments that were within the scope of current improvement projects or recently completed improvement projects were also removed. Each accident report was examined for further details regarding the incident to further identify contributing factors, driver actions, alcohol or drug influence, intersection related, and any countermeasures already in place. The list of candidate locations was further reduced by eliminating roadway segments where accidents were alcohol or drug related with no hazard at the site and segments where countermeasures were already in place and or where no countermeasures would have prevented the accident. While these road segments are important to monitor, focus is given to other locations where collisions due to deficiencies in the road structure can be addressed. The remaining roadway segments were then evaluated for potential safety improvements and countermeasures. 9