FHWA’s Roadway Safety Data Program focuses on the roadway inventory and traffic volume data elements needed to complement crash data in supporting infrastructure‐oriented safety investment decision making.
1
Supports DDSA, We could discuss which comes first the chicken or the egg but they do support one another.
2
• Safety data systems can be the Paths to funding for safety improvements (HSIP)• Funding to develop safety data systems (HSIP)
3
• Perform analysis consider all road users, MC, bike, ped, and other users.• Prioritize • Evaluate
4
• Perform analysis consider all road users, MC, bike, ped, and other users.• Prioritize • Evaluate
5
The roadway safety management process is an integral part of the project development process. The results provide information for system planning, project planning, design and construction, and operations and maintenance of a transportation system. The first 3 guides in the series cover network screening, diagnosis, and countermeasure selection.Step 1. Network screening is the process of analyzing the network to identify sites for further investigation. Step 2. Diagnosis is the process of further investigating sites identified in network screening to identify existing and potential safety issues. Step 3. Countermeasure selection is the process of assessing ways to address or mitigate the underlying safety issues identified in diagnosis. Steps 4 and 5 cover economic appraisal and project prioritization. Economic appraisal is the process of comparing the relative costs and benefits of the various alternatives when it is not feasible or practical to implement all potential countermeasures. Project prioritization is the process of developing a portfolio of projects for construction based on available funding in a given fiscal year. There are not separate guides for economic appraisal or project prioritization in this series because these involve policy‐level decisions such as: appropriate crash costs, discount rates, selected economic method, non‐monetary local considerations, and overall agency goals.The fourth guide covers safety effectiveness evaluation, which is the process of estimating the safety impacts of implemented projects, which provides a critical feedback link for future decisions. The fifth guide focuses on the systemic approach to safe8oty management, which describes a complementary approach to the methods described in the network screening,
6
diagnosis, and countermeasure selection guides.
The purpose of this series is to demonstrate the value of more reliable methods in these activities, and demonstrate limitations of traditional (less reliable) methods.
6
7
• MIRE FDE varies based on functional classification, surface type, and subcategories of data elements (segments, intersection, and interchanges)
• Subtype (three leg intersection, four way stop, four way signalized…)
8
• No gravel data, no HSIP funding required• Minimum elements for network screening – Table 1
9
• Plan for data improvements by July 1, 2017• Access to all FDE by September 20, 2026
10
• Planning should be: specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time bound
11
Repeat?Improve and evaluate
12
Collect, create, improve, evaluate
13
Store, develop analysis, buy and implement tools
14
FHWA’s Roadway Safety Data Program focuses on the roadway inventory and traffic volume data elements needed to complement crash data in supporting infrastructure‐oriented safety investment decision making.
15
4/1/2019
1
Project Objectives
16
• The objective of this FHWA project is to develop an informational guide and data collection/verification/update tools to enable agencies to meet the MAP‐21 and FAST acts requirements to improve safety. The purpose of the guide and tools will be to facilitate data collection on non‐State‐owned roadways by giving the agencies definitive guidance on how to collect and integrate with broader statewide systems, provide tools that can be applied during collection, and to initiate collection efforts through in‐person onsite trainings.
Proposed Guide
17
• Outline– Introduction– Objectives (of the guide itself and effort as a whole)– Data needs and responsibilities (for both State DOT and local agencies)– Data structure and format (HPMS and MIRE FDE)– Tool overviews and descriptions (for each tool)– Technical processes and workflows– User manuals– Data structure and format– Pertinent examples– Case studies (as additional reference material for future agencies using
the guide and developed tools)
4/1/2019
2
MIRE and FDE
18
• MAP‐21 and the FAST Act required the Secretary to establish a subset of the MIRE that are useful for the inventory of roadway safety and ensure that States adopt and use the subset to improve data collection. FHWA established a subset of the MIRE as part of the HSIP Final Rule, effective April 14, 2016. This MIRE subset is referred to as the fundamental data elements (FDEs). The FDEs are categorized by roadway functional classification and surface type and include three categories for roadway segments, one each for non‐local paved roads, local paved roads, and unpaved roads. They are further refined, for non‐local paved roads, into subcategories of data elements for intersections and interchanges.
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/fde/
Proposed Data Exchange
19
State to Local agency
4/1/2019
3
Proposed Data Exchange
20
Local agency to State
The Process
21
• Develop data standards– MIRE based– Definitions– State input
• Draft tools:– Excel based spreadsheet– Open source GIS
• Conduct pilot testing:– CT DOT (complete)
4/1/2019
4
The Process
22
• Technical Assistance
• Finalize tools
• Develop the guide
• Additional technical assistance? (based on available funding from FHWA)
Technical Assistance
23
• Work with the state DOTs and regional/local agencies• Establish data needs• Provide technical assistance to use the tools• Provide hands‐on training and support• Implement the tools• Support the data integration
• Process:– 3 states are budgeted (CT might be the first)– Work FHWA (Stuart Thompson) ‐ [email protected]– (202) 366 ‐ 8090
4/1/2019
5
Technical Assistance
24
• CT DOT:
– One local agency:• Small town• Utilize the spreadsheet tool
– One regional agency:• Large MPO• Utilize the GIS tool
– Input and feedback regarding:• Data requirements• Effort required• Usability
25
Data Standards
4/1/2019
6
Data Standards
26
Data Standards
27
4/1/2019
7
Data Standards
28
The Tools
29
4/1/2019
8
The Tools
30
Setup Google Earth and KML Paths
The Tools
31
Segment entry form
4/1/2019
9
The Tools
32
The Tools
33
4/1/2019
10
Loaded Data
34
The Tools
35
4/1/2019
11
The Tools
36
The Tools
37
4/1/2019
12
ContactsRobert [email protected]
Esther [email protected]
Stuart [email protected]
38
Questions!
