and Decision Making Processes Using Safety Data Washington State Department of Transportation

Transcription

1 The Institutionalization of Safety and Decision Making Processes Using Safety Data John Milton, Ph.D., P.E. Washington State Department of Transportation 27 July 2010 New Orleans, Louisiana Policy & Paradigm Shift Safety Performance Goals Institutionalization of the HSM Technical Processes & Procedures 2 1

2 TARGET ZERO A strategic plan for highway safety HOW DO WE MEET OUR GOALS? 3 Integrate safety Policy Procedures Methods 4 2

3 Incorporating safety in decision-making at all levels Programming and prioritization System planning Program administration Policy development Public Affairs Interagency coordination Project development Design Construction Operations and Maintenance 5 How do you currently account for Safety (pre HSM)? Our design standards tell us what to do. I don t because I have no basis for doing so. I don t know how. I do sometimes but frankly I don t trust the results. I don t because I don t believe you can predict safety. I don t because I don t have to and there are too many other things that are required of me. I don t because if I do, I will get sued if something goes wrong. That statistical stuff is too complicated for me. 6 3

4 Implementing the HSM PARADIGM SHIFT 7 Policy Driver for change across the agency Clear message to give direction 8 4

5 Nominal Safety Examined in reference to compliance with standards, warrants, guidelines and design procedures Substantive Safety The expected or actual crash hfrequency and severity for a highway or roadway 9 vs Crash Reduction & Prediction

6 INCREASE Nominal safety is an ABSOLUTE CRASH RISK Substantive safety is a CONTINUUM INCREASE DESIGN DESIGN DIMENSION DIMENSION (Lane width, curve radius, stopping sight distance, etc.) The HSM provides insights to designers faced with design exception decisions 11 Implementing the HSM INSTITUTIONALIZATION PROCESS 12 6

7 Institutionalize Proficiency Compliance Initiation Institutionalization of the 13 Initiation Identify individuals across agency and establish functional expert groups Assess Organizational Readiness Develop policy Develop mission, vision, goals, performance measures 14 7

8 Align resources Compliance Cascading vision & strategies agency-wide 15 Training Proficiency Updating business processes to support institutionalization 16 8

9 Institutionalize Implementation of tools (SafetyAnalyst, IHSDM, integration ti into existing tools) Monitor progress Review results Update & refine 17 Implementing the HSM PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 18 9

10 System Evaluate System Needs Identify Potential Projects Quantify Safety Benefits Systemwide Prioritize Projects System Project Design & Construction Operations & Maintenance 19 Systemwide Safety Improvement Programs 20 10

11 Proje ect -EIS >> 0 >> 1 >> 2 >> 3 >> 4 >> Project Define problem(s) /assist scoping Identify potential solutions Evaluate alternatives & expected quantitative safety effects ID preferred alternative System Project Design & Construction Operations & Maintenance 22 11

12 Design Existing Conditions Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 >> 0 >> 1 >> 2 >> 3 >> 4 >> Design and Construction Evaluate safety of alternative designs Review & document design exceptions, variances and waivers Inform construction decisions System Project Design & Construction Operations & Maintenance 24 12

13 Operations >> 0 >> 1 >> 2 >> 3 >> 4 >> Operations and Maintenance Monitor operations balance - safety, mobility and access Evaluate improvement effectiveness System Project Design & Construction Operations & Maintenance 26 13

14 Using the HSM in the design process EXAMPLES 27 Two-lane to Four-lane Corridor Studies Part C -- Chapter 10 Establish purpose and need Assess performance of no-build Part C Chapter 11 Evaluate and compare safety performance of alignment and cross section alternatives Estimate performance of the preferred build Calculate benefits (crash reductions) of preferred 28 14

15 Urban Arterial Corridor Studies Part C -- Chapter 12 Establish purpose and need (safety problem?) Assess safety performance of no-build Part C Chapter 12 Evaluate safety performance of cross section and access alternatives Estimate safety performance of preferred build Calculate benefits (crash reductions) of preferred vs no-build 29 Multi-objective resource allocation is a common decision tool for complex projects Where Where does does the the input input for for this this criterion criterion come come from? from? ALTERNATIVE C C Criterion Criterion Performance Measured Weight ALTERNATIVE B Measures B Value Score Criterion Criterion Affordability Performance Measured ALTERNATIVE A A Score = 125 Measures Value Criterion Performance Measured C Weight Criterion 3 X 3 Affordability Economic 4 X 25 Measures Value X Score = Development 40 = 1205 C 3 X 3 Economic Affordability 4 X Score for Alternative 5 A Reduce 6 25 X = Development = X 35 Congestion C = 70 Score 3 X for Alternative 3 Improve A Reduce 7 9X X 35 = 5 Safety 40 = 280 Congestion 315 Reduce Congestion Score Score for for Alternative Alternative C A Score 6 X for Alternative 35 = B Score for Alternative A

16 Interchange Warrant Studies (Rural Multilane Highways) Part C -- Chapter 11 Establish purpose and need Assess performance of nobuild Part D Chapter 15 Estimate performance of conversion Estimate performance of preferred build Calculate benefits (crash reductions) of conversion 31 Resources & Contacts Highway Safety Manual Website AASHTO Kelly Hardy: khardy@aashto.org AASHTO JOINT TASK COMMITTEE FOR THE HSM: Don Vaughn, ALDOT, vaughnd@dot.state.al.us Priscilla Tobias, IDOT, Priscilla.Tobias@illinois.gov FHWA Mike Griffith, mike.griffith@dot.gov Ray Krammes, Ray.Krammes@dot.gov TRB HSM Task Force/ TRB Committee on Highway Safety Performance John Milton, WSDOT, miltonj@wsdot.wa.gov