Lighting Justification Report - FDOT District 6 Justification Report SR 847 / NW 47 th Avenue...

Lighting Justification Report

SR 847 / NW 47th Avenue

Project Development & Environment Study

From SR 860/NW 183rd Street to Premier Parkway

County: Miami-Dade and Broward

Efficient Transportation Decision Making Number: 13768

Financial Management Number: 430637-1-22-01

Federal Aid Project: 6107-002 U

November 2013

i Lighting Justification Report

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1

EXISTING LIGHTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................ 1

AASHTO WARRANTS .................................................................................................... 1

ANALYSIS OF THE HIGHWAY LIGHTING JUSTIFICATION ................................. 2

A. Number of Poles, Luminaires, and Wattage ....................................................... 2

B. Night Accident Rate Unlighted .......................................................................... 3

C. Average Crash Cost ............................................................................................ 3

D. Construction Cost per Pole ................................................................................. 3

E. Electrical Energy Cost ........................................................................................ 4

F. Interest Rate ........................................................................................................ 4

G. Accident (Crash) Reduction Factor ..................................................................... 4

H. Annual Maintenance Cost Per Luminaire ........................................................... 4

CALCULATION OF BENEFIT-COST RATIO ............................................................... 5

CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................. 5

APPENDICES

FDOT MUTS Chapter 15 Highway Lighting Justification Procedure..............Appendix A

FDOT Crash Data……………………………………………………..............Appendix B

State Safety Office Bulletin 10-01.................................................................... Appendix C

Cost Estimate per Light Pole…………………………………………..............Appendix D

Photometric Analysis…………….................................................................... Appendix E

1

SR 847 (NW 47

th Avenue) – NW 183

rd Street to Premier Parkway

FPID No. 430637-1-22-01

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to outline the warrants and justification of Highway Lighting for

State Road 847 (SR 847) / NW 47th

Avenue from NW 183rd

Street (MP 0.00) to Premier

Parkway, located in northern Miami-Dade and southern Broward Counties. The project length is

approximately 2.3 miles. The lighting justification is for the proposed future widening of SR

847 from two-lane undivided to four-lane divided urban minor arterial with median width

varying from 16.5 ft to 26 ft.

The Highway Lighting warranting conditions will be those set forth by the American Association

of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and shall be used for the purpose of

establishing a basis on which lighting may be justified. These warrants will be referenced from

AASHTO's "Roadway Lighting Design Guide", and specifically the section on highways. Upon

establishing such warranting conditions, justification of the highway lighting will be documented

in accordance with the FDOT's Manual on Uniform Traffic Studies (MUTS) Chapter 15,

Highway Lighting Justification Procedure. Proposed lighting will satisfy conventional roadway

lighting criteria set forth in Table 7.3.1, FDOT Plans Preparation Manual (PPM) Volume 1.

EXISTING LIGHTING CONDITIONS There are currently no existing street lights consistently along the SR 847 project segment.

Lighting is present at the signalized intersections and along the frontage road (NW 196 Terrace

to NW 199 Street), while some light poles are located along the west side from NW 185 Street to

NW 191 Street. At the intersection of NW 183rd

Street there are two standard aluminum light

poles with cobra light fixtures mounted on bracket arms on the NE, NW and SW corners. At

191st Street intersection, there is a joint use light pole (light fixture attached to FPL wood pole)

on the northbound approach and one on the eastbound approach. The 195th

Street intersection

has one stand-alone light pole on the south leg and one on the north leg. The intersection of

199th

Street has one light pole each on the west and east legs.

The proposed four-lane widening of the mainline SR 847 for the build alternative will include

widening of these intersections. Since the existing condition of SR 847 has no consistent street

lights and low frequency of night time crashes, the proposed roadway design was analyzed to

determine if SR 847 will meet the Lighting Design Justification as identified in the FDOT

MUTS Chapter 15 (Appendix A).

AASHTO WARRANTS The warrants for Highway Lighting will be used to provide minimum conditions under which

lighting may be justified. The AASHTO warrants are the primary set of guidelines to be met.

FDOT follows the warrants for roadway lighting established by the AASHTO guidelines. The

following section addresses the MUTS Chapter 15 Highway Lighting Justification procedures.

Street lighting may be considered for those locations where the respective governmental agencies

concur that lighting will contribute substantially to the efficiency and comfort of vehicular or

pedestrian traffic. Lighting may be provided for all major arterials in urbanized areas and for

2

locations or sections of streets and highways where the ratio of night to day accident rates is

higher than the statewide average for similar locations, and a study indicates that lighting may be

expected to significantly reduce the night accident rate. In these cases, the determinations to

install lighting have been made on the basis of experience and accident data under certain

existing conditions. These conditions include the average daily traffic for the roadway for

existing and build out and the accidents rate. The supporting data for this corridor's Average

Daily Traffic (ADT) is as follows:

• ADT (current year 2012) = 18,918

• Night time ADT (existing 2012) = 4,248

The FDOT MUTS roadway lighting justification procedure is used to determine if the project is

justified based on its benefit-cost ratio. If the benefit-cost ratio is equal to 1.0 or more, then

lighting is justified for the high crash locations as identified by the State Safety office. The

following equation is used to calculate the benefit-cost (B-C) ratio:

Benefit-cost ratio = ADT x %ADTn x 365 days x NRU x CRF x ACC

(AIC + TMC + AEC) x 1,000,000

ADT = Average Daily Traffic

%ADTn = Percent of ADT at night

NRU = Night crash rate unlighted

CRF = Crash reduction factor

ACC = Average crash cost

AIC = Annualized installation cost

TMC = Total annual maintenance cost

AEC = Annual energy cost

ANALYSIS OF THE HIGHWAY LIGHTING JUSTIFICATION The FDOT MUTS Chapter 15 Highway Lighting Justification Procedure is developed to analyze

the B-C ratio of installing the lighting system. The benefits to the public, measured in terms of

accident reductions and reductions in economic loss, are compared to the costs for installation,

maintenance, and operation of the system. In general, lighting systems are considered to be

justified if the benefit cost ratio is 1.0 or greater for high accident locations. At other locations

this ratio should be 2.0 or greater.

In applying this benefit-cost analysis, several preliminary measures were taken. Among these

were an estimate of the number of lighting poles and luminaires necessary in the calculations for

the NRU, and calculations for the Average Crash Cost (ACC). The preliminary items mentioned

above are used as inputs to the Highway Lighting Justification Procedure, of which these inputs,

as well as the remaining ones, are outlined in the following paragraphs.

A. NUMBER OF POLES, LUMINAIRES, AND WATTAGE

There are currently no existing street lights along the mainline segments of SR 847 which

include the existing Snake Creek Canal Bridge. The segment from NW 183rd

Street to

3

NW 207th

Drive traverses through a heavily urbanized corridor and from NW 207th

Street

to Premier Parkway, it is mostly rural corridor. As mentioned, there are sporadic existing

street lights at the signalized intersections.

A lighting analysis considered the proposed four-lane widening of SR 847 for spacing,

type of luminaires and wattage. The existing ADT was used for the build benefit-cost

ratio analysis.

B. NIGHT ACCIDENT RATE UNLIGHTED

The calculation of the Night Rate Unlighted (NRU) involved utilization of FDOT Crash

Analysis Report (CAR) accident data for the period of 2007 to 2011 which is provided in

Appendix B of this report. Accident data pertaining to unlighted conditions were

reviewed in the CAR.

Number of night crashes, along with the ADT, the percent of ADT at night (% ADTn),

and the project length were then used to compute the NRU. The % ADTn was calculated

from available traffic data (4 years). The resultant average for % ADTn is:

% ADTn = 22.37%

The limits of actual accident data for the analysis were taken from the FDOT CAR for the

2007-2011 five year period for the SR 847 project segment. The project segment from

NW 183rd

Street to Premier Parkway has an approximate total length of 2.3 miles which

was used for the basis of calculating the NRU. The NRU was calculated as follows:

NRU = (Night Accidents)(1 x 10

6)

(ADTexist)(%ADTn) (365) (project length)

= (19 x 106) / (18,918 x 22.37% x 365 x 2.3) = 5.34

C. AVERAGE CRASH COST

ACC = average crash cost

The ACC for a 4-lane divided urban roadway obtained from FDOT’s State Safety Office Bulletin

10-01 dated August 5, 2010 is $83,359 (Appendix C).

D. CONSTRUCTION COST PER POLE

The construction cost per pole is estimated to be $13,318 based on FDOT average unit

prices. A breakdown of this cost is provided in Appendix D.

4

The number of poles per mile = 5280 ft/mile x 1 pole/242 ft* x 2 sides = 44

*242 ft spacing per lighting analysis (Appendix E), meeting FDOT lighting criteria

Annualized Installation Cost (AIC) is $13,318 x Capital Recovery Factor x #poles/mile

Interest rate = 4%; Service life = 15 years

Capital Recovery Factor = 0.04 x (1.04)^15

1.04^15

-1

= 0.0899

AIC (urban) = $13,318 x 0.0899 x 44 poles (@242 ft spacing) = $52,681

E. ELECTRICAL ENERGY COST

The electrical cost is based on the Average Electrical Cost (AEC) in Florida which is

estimated at 0.08 $/KHW.

AEC = No. of Poles/mile x luminaire/pole x watts/luminaire x kw/1000w x cents/kwh x

11 hours/day x$/100 cent x 365 day/year

AEC = 44 poles/mile x 1 luminaire/pole x 400 watts/luminaire x kw/1000w x 8

cent /KWH x $/100 cent x 11 hour/day x 365 day/year = $5,653

F. INTEREST RATE

The interest rate used for the justification is 4%. This is the interest rate used in

generating a capital recovery factor (CRF). The service life used is 15 years to determine

the CRF.

G. ACCIDENT (CRASH) REDUCTION FACTOR

The Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) for SR 847 based on Figure 15-1 per FDOT MUTS,

the rural and urban mainline CRF are the following:

Mainline CRF (urban 5%) = 0.20 (Figure 15-1 CRFs, FDOT MUTS Chapter 15)

H. ANNUAL MAINTENANCE COST PER LUMINAIRE

The annual maintenance cost per standard lighting luminaire is based on the typical value

of $240 per luminaire pole. This information was then used as inputs to the Highway

Lighting Justification Program and the results showed the following total annual

maintenance costs (TMC).

5

TMC = No. of poles/mile x Luminaries/pole x annual maintenance cost

TMC = 44 x 1 x $240

TMC (urban 5%) = $10,560

CALCULATION OF BENEFIT- COST RATIO

Using the FDOT MUTS benefit-cost equations, the following benefit-cost ratio is calculated:

Benefit-cost ratio = ADT x %ADTn x 365 days x NRU x CRF x ACC

(AIC + TMC + AEC) x 1,000,000

ADT = Average Daily Traffic (existing): 18,918

%ADTn = Percent of ADT at night: 22.37%

NRU = Night crash rate unlighted: 5.34

CRF = Crash reduction factor: 0.20

ACC = Average crash cost: $83,359

AIC = Annualized installation cost: $52,681

TMC = Total annual maintenance cost: $10,560

AEC = Annual energy cost: $5,653

SR 847 from NW 183rd

Street to Premier Parkway (urban 5% commercial segment)

Mainline urban B-C = 18,918 x 0.2237 x 365 days x 5.34 x 0.20 x $83,359

(52,681 + 10,560 + 5,653) x 1,000,000

= 2.0

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous roadway lighting is generally justified when the B-C ratio is 2.0 or greater.

Therefore, the calculated mainline urban B-C ratio of 2.0 indicates that lighting is justified along

the limits of the proposed four-lane project. Additionally, continuous roadway lighting

throughout the project limits would contribute to the safety of bicycle traffic travelling in the

bike lanes along with pedestrian traffic along the sidewalks.

The proposed lighting system would consist of 400+W luminaires mounted on conventional

aluminum light poles at 40 ft mounting height with a 12 ft bracket arm. The number of poles is

based on a pole-to-pole spacing estimate of 242 ft for the project segment. A spacing of 274 ft

can be provided where the proposed median width is reduced to 16.5 ft. The light poles would be

located on both side of the roadway in a staggered pattern. Alternative designs/layouts would

require that the cost be recalculated and re-used in the calculation of the B-C ratio.

Appendix A

FDOT MUTS Chapter 15 Highway Lighting Justification Procedure

15-1

January 2000Topic No. 750-020-007

Highway Lighting Justification Procedure

Manual on Uniform Traffic Studies

Chapter 15

HIGHWAY LIGHTING JUSTIFICATION PROCEDURE

Note: At the time of publication, the Department had formed a task team to re-analyze this procedure. Changes to this chapter will be forthcoming afterrecommendations from the task team are completed. These changes will bedistributed as a revision to the manual and sent to all registered holders.

15.1 PURPOSE

(1) The Department, in cooperation with the University of Florida TransportationResearch Center, has developed a procedure for analyzing and justifyingroadway lighting systems. This procedure is based on the benefit-cost ratio for alighting project. This chapter includes a summary of the procedure, an exampleproblem, and documentation. The procedure explained herein is a modified andimproved practical version of the original procedure developed by the Universityof Florida explained in Alternatives for Reducing Energy Consumption inHighway Lighting (Transportation Research Center Technical Report No.D84-1, March 1977).

(2) The procedure allows lighting projects to be ranked according to priority forconstruction. Those with a higher benefit-cost ratio have more value in benefitsto the public than those with a lower ratio. The procedure compares benefits tothe public from crash reduction to the government’s cost for installation,maintenance, and operation. Analysis of existing lighting systems to determine ifthey should be retained is also discussed.

15.2 STEP 1: AASHTO WARRANTS

(1) The Department currently follows the warrants for roadway lighting establishedby the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO). The warrants outline specific conditions for continuous freewaylighting, the complete partial lighting of interchanges on unlighted freeways, andlighting of other streets and highways. The warrants are based on Average DailyTraffic (ADT), the ratio of night to day crashes, local government participation inthe cost, and other factors. We also use NCHRP Report 152, Warrants forHighway Lighting as a supplement to AASHTO on arterials.

15-2 Highway Lighting Justification Procedure



(2) It should be noted that the conditions described in the AASHTO warrantguidelines are roadway conditions under which lighting may be consideredwarranted and do not necessarily describe the sites where lighting is specificallyjustified. Designers should first address AASHTO warrants and Rule 14-64,F.A.C., Illumination of the State Highway System. If these conditions are met,then a benefit-cost analysis should be made.

15.3 STEP 2: BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS

(1) The purpose of this step in the roadway lighting justification procedure is todetermine if the project is justified based on its benefit-cost ratio. If the benefit-cost ratiois equal to 1.0 or more, then lighting is justified for high crash locations as identified bythe State Safety office. At other locations the benefit-cost ratio should be 2.0 or greater.However, projects should be ranked according to their value in benefit to the public.Those with a higher ratio offer more value than those with a lower ratio. The procedurecan be used to analyze either an existing or proposed lighting system. There are twoprimary differences between the two analyses.

(2) First, for an existing lighting system, the night unlighted crash rate is assumed tobe 1.5 times the night lighted rate. This insures an adequate safety factor in theanalytical process and assumptions. But for a proposed system, the night unlightedcrash rate is based on actual crash data collected at the site. In cases when reliablecrash data are not available, a minimum unlighted crash rate of 3.0 crashes per millionvehicle miles has been determined to be a reasonable “default” value for conditions inFlorida.

(3) The second difference between the analyses is that if an existing lighting systemis being evaluated to determine if it should continue to operate, the cost of theinstallation is not considered because it is a sunk cost. This recognizes that the initialinvestment in lighting hardware has already been made.

(4) It must be stressed that while defaults are suggested in this report, they do notappear to be the best value to describe local cost scale nor can they be used withoutyearly cost adjustment. It is the user’s responsibility to justify the value to adopt inanalysis.

(5) The following equations are used to calculate the benefit-cost ratio.

15.3.1 Analysis of New Roadway Lighting Systems

Benefit-Cost Ratio = ADT x %ADTn x 365 x NRU x CRF x ACCfor Lighting (AIC + TMC + AEC) x 1,000,000Installation

15-3




15.3.2 Analysis of Existing Roadway Lighting Systems

Benefit-Cost Ratio = ADT x %ADTn x 365 x NRU x CRF x ACCfor Lighting (TMC + AEC) x 1,000,000Retention

Where:

ADT = Average Daily Traffic (Existing or Projected)%ADTn = Percent of ADT at nightNRU = Night crash rate unlightedCRF = Crash reduction factorACC = Average crash cost (U.S. dollars per crash)AIC = Annualized installation costTMC = Total annual maintenance costAEC = Annual energy cost

15.3.3 Costs

Annualized installation cost, total annual maintenance cost, and annual energy cost areexpressed on a U.S. dollar per mile basis for mainline sections and as a total U.S. dollarvalue for interchanges.

15.3.4 Night Crash Rate Unlighted (NRU)

(1) NRU is expressed as crashes per million vehicle miles for mainline sections orcrashes per million entering vehicles for interchanges.

(2) The annual lighting cost is the sum of electrical costs, maintenance costs, andinstallation costs (proposed systems only). The NRU is obtained by searchingcrash records provided by local or state agencies. The percent of ADT at night(% ADTn) can be determined by examining traffic data.

(3) The following data from the FHWA's Technical Advisory T7570.1 (January 30,1988), may be used for computation of the average crash cost at any particularlocation.

• $1.7 million/fatality• $14,000/injury• $3,000/property damage

(4) Crash reduction factors for various geometric configurations are given in Figure15-1. The crash reduction factor is a numerical value assigned to certain types offacilities and locations. It is based on an estimate of the crash reduction potentialdue to the installation of lighting.




(5) Calculation of the benefit-cost ratio can be performed manually or by using acomputer based program. The program is much faster and provides a printedone-page documentation of the analysis. The process can be better understoodby following the manual calculation in the example problem below.

15.3.5 Example of the Benefit-Cost Ratio (Manual Calculation)

• High crash location• New lighting system• Mainline urban freeway• Night crash rate unlighted: 2.0 crashes per million vehicle miles

• ADT: 41,800 vehicles/day• Percentage ADT at night: 35 percent• Average crash cost: $28,850• Energy costs: $.04/KWH• Conventional as opposed to high mast lighting (cost per pole: $3,000)• Crash reduction factor: .20 (as determined by Figure 15-1)

Site Description CRF

Urban Freeway Interchange 0.80

Urban Freeway Mainline 0.20

Rural Freeway Interchange 0.80

Rural Freeway Mainline 0.20

Non-Controlled Access Roadways

Rural Intersection 0.20

Rural Mainline 0.10

Urban Intersection 0.20

Urban Mainline(Commercial) 0.40

Urban Mainline(25% Commercial) 0.30

Urban Mainline(5% Commercial) 0.20

Figure 15-1. Crash Reduction Factors (CRF)

15-5




Historical Values Typical in Similar Locations

• Poles on both sides of road• Spacing between poles: 300 feet• Luminary wattage: 400 W• One luminary per pole• Interest rate: 10 percent• Annual maintenance cost per luminary: $80

Objective: Find the benefit-cost ratio to determine if the proposed lighting system isjustified.

Procedure: Calculate the benefit-cost ratio. If the benefit-cost ratio is equal to orgreater than 1.0, the lighting system is considered to be justified for a highcrash location.

Calculations:

Capital Recover = (IR/100 ) x (1 + (IR/100 ) 15

(CRF, IR=10%,15 yr) ( 1 + (IR/100)15 - 1= 0.1315

No. of Poles = 5,280 ft x 1 pole x No. sides lighted Miles or Inter. mile spacing (ft)

= 5,280 ft x 1 pole x 2 sides mile 300 ft

= 35

AIC = Initial Cost/Pole x CRF x No. of Poles Mile or Inter.

= 3,000 x 0.1315 x 35= 13,885

TMC = No.of Poles x Luminaries x Annual Maintenance Costmiles or Inter. Pole Luminary

= 35 x 1 x $80= 2,816

AEC = No. of Poles x Luminaries x Watts x KWMile or Inter. Pole Luminaire 1000 W

x Cents x 11 Hours x $ x 365 DaysKWH Day 100 Cents Year

= 35 x 1 x 400 x 1/1000 x 4 x 11 x 1/100 x 365= 2,261




B-C Ratio = ADT x %ADTn x 365 x NRU x CRF x ACC(AIC + TMC + AEC) x 1,000,000

= 41,800 x 0.35 x 365 x 2.0 x 0.20 x $28,850 (13,886 + 2,816 +2,261) x 1,000,000

= 3.25

The Benefit-Cost ratio is equal to or greater than 1.0, therefore lighting is justified.However, any project with a higher ratio should be given a higher priority forconstruction.

Note:

• A service life of 15 years is used in the capital recovery factor.

• Initial Cost/Pole should be based on historical data for similar projects. It shouldbe calculated by dividing the total lighting project cost, including engineering, bythe number of poles.

• Annual energy cost is based on an average of 11 hours of darkness per day inFlorida.

15.4 DETERMINING OPERATIONAL STATUS OF EXISTINGLIGHTING: FREEWAYS

(1) Existing highway lighting systems are subject to various causes of electrical ormechanical malfunction. Pole knockdowns, lightning strikes, damaged-circuits,blown fuses, burned-out bulbs, and other causes result in an operational statusthat is almost always less than 100 percent.

(2) This guideline sets forth a procedure that can assist the engineer in determiningwhen a certain section of existing lighting is operating below an acceptable level.The procedure calculates an “operational ratio” of the actual lighting operationlevel to the base lighting operation level. An acceptable range of operational ratiois between 0.90 and 1.00 for interchanges and for the total lighting system.However, a range between 0.75 and 1.00 is acceptable for mainline systems.

(3) This technique should only be used as a guideline and should not form the basisin all cases for determining when corrective repair work is scheduled for ahighway lighting system. The procedure does, however, recognize that cost-effective management of lighting system maintenance involves a valuejudgement relating to the seriousness of various types, patterns, locations, andthe number of failed fixtures.

15-7




(4) Figures 15-3 and 15-4 include a graphical presentation of the procedure.Unacceptable levels of operation are defined in Figure 15-2.

(5) It has been estimated that approximately 0.6 hour of data collection team time isneeded for each mile of the study site. Approximately one-fourth of the inspectiontime should be spent during daylight hours during which time the number ofinstallations and knockdowns should be counted. The remaining three-fourths ofthe inspection time should be spent during nighttime hours counting burned outluminaires and tabulating data. Examples of completed tables and calculationtechniques are provided in Figures 15-5, 15-6, and 15-7.

15.5 FORMS ACCESS

Reproducible copies of the Guidelines for Determining the Operational Status ofExisting Lighting Systems on Freeway Facilities (Form Nos. 750-020-15, 750-020-16, and 750-020-17) are in the Appendix. These forms are also available in theDepartment's Forms Library.




TYPE AREA DESCRIPTION

OPERATIONALPOINTS FOR

EACHAREA/SECTION

MINIMUMUNACCEPTABLE

OPERATINGCONDITION

Gore Area The area that begins at theramp taper and ends at thebeginning of the physicalgore.

30

Two inoperative fixtureswithin the gore area.

Terminal Area The area (or groups of areas)within a 250 foot radiusmeasured from the center ofthe ramp pavement where itjoins the edge of acrossroad.

20

Twenty-five percent of thefixtures inoperative withinthe terminal area.

Ramp Area Any section of ramp roadwaynot considered in a gore orterminal area. 15

Three consecutivefixtures or 50 percent ofthe total fixturesinoperative along theramp section.

MainlineSection

Any section of one-waymainline roadway betweengore areas.

10

If a mainline section hasone or more groups withthree or moreconsecutive luminairesinoperative, the sum ofthe numbers in thegroups is multiplied bytwo and added to theremaining number ofinoperative luminaires.*

CrossroadSection

The two-way traffic sectionbetween terminal areas orfrom terminal areas to theends of the lightingmaintenance. 5

Three consecutivefixtures inoperative alongthe one side of thecrossroad or twoconsecutive fixturesinoperative along oneside of the crossroadopposite two consecutiveinoperative fixtures.

High MastInterchange

When high lighting towers areinvolved, none of the abovesub-areas shall be identifiedwithin the interchange. Theinterchange is defined as thelimits of the interchange highmast lighting.

30

Twenty-five percent of thefixtures inoperative or twoadjacent towers with allfixtures inoperative.

High MastMainline

Mainline high mast lightingshall only apply when towersexist for at least one milecontinuously between the endof ramp tapers at successiveinterchanges.

10

Twenty-five percent of thefixtures inoperative or twoadjacent towers with allfixtures inoperative.

*If the sum is greater than 25 percent of the total number of luminaires, then the section isunacceptable.

Figure 15-2. Guidelines for Assessing Operational Level of Highway Lighting

15-9




Figure 15-3. Example Application of Procedure




Figure 15-4. Graphical Representation

“Terminal Area”

Area within 250 feet of ramp terminal.Each ramp has only one terminalarea, regardless of channelization.There are six fixtures in one terminalarea shown at right.

“Ramp Limits”

From physical gore to 250 feetfrom terminal.

“Gore Area”

The area that begins at the ramp taperand ends at the beginning of thephysical gore.

GO

RE

AR

EA

RA

MP

250'

250'

15-11




Figure 15-5




Figure 15-6

15-13




Figure 15-7




Appendix B

FDOT Crash Data

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONCRASH SUMMARY

SECTION: 87012000 STATE ROUTE: 847

INTERSECTING ROADWAY: SR 860-Premier Pkwy M.P. 0 TO 2.144 ENGINEER: Bao Ying

STUDY PERIOD: FROM 1/ 07 TO 12/ 07 COUNTY: Miami Dade

Crash Number No. Mile Post DATE DAY TIME TYPE FATAL INJURYPROP DAM

DAY / NT WET / DRY CONTRIBUTING CAUSE

727735640 1 0 11/6/2007 Tue 1100 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry Unknown

802292740 2 0 12/30/2007 Sun 800 Left-Turn 0 1 0 Nite Dry Unknown

704074610 3 0.001 6/12/2007 Tue 1300 Rear-End 0 1 0 Day Dry Unknown

745901400 4 0.028 2/26/2007 Mon 2300 Coll. W/ Pedestrian 0 0 1 Nite Wet Unknown

745846830 5 0.028 9/25/2007 Tue 800 Left-Turn 0 1 0 Day Wet Unknown

743146050 6 0.038 7/16/2007 Mon 1700 Rear-End 0 1 0 Day Dry All Other

708457300 7 0.057 3/28/2007 Wed 1300 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

909482700 8 0.152 11/13/2007 Tue 1500 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving


769415320 10 0.181 2/7/2007 Wed 1900 Rear-End 0 1 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

745600260 11 0.181 6/11/2007 Mon 1700 All other 0 3 0 Day Dry Unknown

745846090 12 0.404 7/1/2007 Sun 1900 Rear-End 0 1 0 Day Wet Unknown

802292820 13 0.496 12/31/2007 Mon 2200Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 2 0 Nite Dry Improper Turn

744823390 14 0.499 4/18/2007 Wed 500 Angle 0 0 1 Nite Dry Unknown

744833350 15 0.499 5/5/2007 Sat 1500 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

745622210 16 0.499 8/5/2007 Sun 2300 All other 0 0 1 Unk Other Unknown

745600800 17 0.499 11/24/2007 Sat 1700 Angle 0 0 1 Nite Dry All Other

742891720 18 0.5 3/8/2007 Thu 1500 All other 0 2 0 Day Dry Unknown

744823190 19 0.624 4/1/2007 Sun 1800 Overturned 0 1 0 Day Dry All Other

727732990 20 0.73 9/17/2007 Mon 900 Rear-End 0 1 0 Day Dry Unknown

704059680 21 0.749 4/11/2007 Wed 2100 Left-Turn 0 2 0 Nite Dry Unknown

756417920 22 0.749 8/10/2007 Fri 1300 Left-Turn 0 2 0 Day Dry Unknown

802292700 23 0.797 12/29/2007 Sat 1100 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

754726740 24 0.816 5/4/2007 Fri 2000 All other 0 0 1 Nite Dry Unknown

745845520 25 0.816 5/25/2007 Fri 1700 Rear-End 0 1 0 Day Dry Unknown

745917560 26 0.988 8/28/2007 Tue 700 Left-Turn 0 1 0 Day Dry Unknown

754974160 27 0.992 3/6/2007 Tue 1800 Left-Turn 0 1 0 Nite Dry Unknown

745607890 28 0.992 3/9/2007 Fri 1600 All other 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

727715000 29 0.992 5/18/2007 Fri 600 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

909483710 30 0.992 9/25/2007 Tue 600 Coll. W/ Pedestrian 0 1 0 Nite Slippery Unknown

802292620 31 0.992 12/27/2007 Thu 1800 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving



772006280 34 1 8/7/2007 Tue 1600 Rear-End 0 2 0 Day Dry Careless Driving

769420340 35 1.003 3/19/2007 Mon 900 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

772032270 36 1.021 10/30/2007 Tue 1200 Right-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry All Other

769414740 37 1.022 2/11/2007 Sun 1900 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Nite Wet Disregarded Traffic Signal

769437690 38 1.022 2/16/2007 Fri 500 Rear-End 0 2 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

769371890 39 1.022 2/28/2007 Wed 1400 Coll w/Utility Pole 0 1 0 Day Dry Unknown

769399350 40 1.022 3/1/2007 Thu 500 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Turn

769438670 41 1.022 3/3/2007 Sat 1900 Angle 0 3 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

769439420 42 1.022 3/11/2007 Sun 500 Angle 0 2 0 Nite Dry Disregarded Traffic Signal

769420320 43 1.022 3/16/2007 Fri 1000 Sideswipe 0 4 0 Day Wet Improper Turn

769460030 44 1.022 3/17/2007 Sat 800 Right-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Turn

769450140 45 1.022 3/19/2007 Mon 2300 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

769330580 46 1.022 3/22/2007 Thu 1300 Right-Turn 0 0 1 Day Wet Improper Turn

739584810 47 1.022 4/18/2007 Wed 1700 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

769442970 48 1.022 4/24/2007 Tue 1300 Left-Turn 0 3 0 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

769440840 49 1.022 5/6/2007 Sun 300 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Nite Dry Disregarded Traffic Signal

769476750 50 1.022 7/7/2007 Sat 100 Angle 0 4 0 Nite Other Disregarded Traffic Signal


769497600 52 1.022 8/8/2007 Wed 1800 Left-Turn 0 1 0 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

772036220 53 1.022 10/22/2007 Mon 1000 All other 0 1 0 Day Dry Disregarded Traffic Signal

772057650 54 1.022 11/8/2007 Thu 1800 Head-On 0 2 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

755987670 55 1.033 2/27/2007 Tue 1100 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry All Other

745602060 56 1.294 11/8/2007 Thu 1700 Rear-End 0 4 0 Day Dry Unknown

745618310 57 1.466 3/18/2007 Sun 2100 Coll w/Bicycle 1 0 0 Nite Dry Alcohol - Under Influence

704086390 58 1.488 3/4/2007 Sun 300 Hit Guardrail 0 2 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

802292040 59 1.69 12/17/2007 Mon 1200 Explosion 0 1 0 Day Dry All Other

744845050 60 2.144 5/17/2007 Thu 1400 All other 0 2 0 Day Dry Unknown

909483200 61 2.144 10/25/2007 Thu 600 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Nite Dry Unknown


Total No. Fatal Injury PDO AngleFixed Object Right Turn Rear End Side swipe Ped/Bike

62 1 61 26 9 1 3 17 3 3

14.52% 1.61% 4.84% 27.42% 4.84% 4.84%

One Vehicle Day Night Wet DryExcess Speed FTYR/W DUI

5 40 22 6 53 0 7 3

8.06% 64.52% 35.48% 9.68% 85.48% 0.00% 11.29% 4.84%

TOTAL VEHICLES ENTERING / ADT : 19,100 SPOT ACCIDENT RATE: 8.893 /MV

SEGMENT ACCIDENT RATE: 4.148 /MVM







802300100 1 0 4/7/2008 Mon 1800 Angle 0 0 1 Day Wet Failed to Yield R/W

772124350 2 0 6/13/2008 Fri 1500 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

802313480 3 0 8/29/2008 Fri 1400 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Lane Change

727719110 4 0.002 2/15/2008 Fri 2000 Backed Into 0 0 1 Nite Dry Unknown

745821950 5 0.009 3/30/2008 Sun 1800 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Day Wet Unknown

727731680 6 0.009 6/21/2008 Sat 1700 Rear-End 0 2 0 Day Other Unknown

909725050 7 0.009 8/1/2008 Fri 1200 Right-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown


704074930 9 0.019 12/17/2008 Wed 700 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

802306420 10 0.028 6/14/2008 Sat 2100 Rear-End 0 0 1 Nite Dry Followed too Closely

802322940 11 0.028 12/10/2008 Wed 1500Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Day Dry Followed too Closely

742626850 12 0.038 4/19/2008 Sat 2300 Angle 0 0 1 Nite Dry Unknown

802316060 13 0.038 9/28/2008 Sun 2100 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Nite Wet Failed to Yield R/W

802298840 14 0.047 3/25/2008 Tue 1600 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Followed too Closely

727730200 15 0.25 9/16/2008 Tue 2100 Left-Turn 0 1 0 Nite Dry Unknown

802323200 16 0.495 12/13/2008 Sat 800 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving

802294210 17 0.499 1/27/2008 Sun 200 Angle 0 2 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

802311490 18 0.499 8/8/2008 Fri 100 Angle 0 2 0 Nite Dry Unknown

802312280 19 0.499 8/15/2008 Fri 1800 Right-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W



727719360 22 0.624 11/27/2008 Thu 2300 Sideswipe 0 1 0 Nite Dry Unknown


802314040 24 0.743 9/5/2008 Fri 1700 Rear-End 0 1 0 Day Dry Careless Driving

704074850 25 0.749 9/5/2008 Fri 600 Left-Turn 0 1 0 Nite Wet Failed to Yield R/W


727731550 27 0.768 5/16/2008 Fri 1800 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown


705811030 29 0.816 4/22/2008 Tue 1000 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

772065810 30 0.984 1/7/2008 Mon 1800 Rear-End 0 2 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

802294170 31 0.992 1/26/2008 Sat 1700Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 1 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving


802303230 33 0.992 5/12/2008 Mon 1000 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

802310350 34 0.992 7/26/2008 Sat 400 Hit Sign/Sign Post 0 0 1 Nite Dry Careless Driving

802317910 35 0.992 10/17/2008 Fri 2000 All other 0 2 0 Nite Dry Unknown

802317990 36 0.992 10/18/2008 Sat 1900 Angle 0 0 1 Nite Dry Disregarded Traffic Signal

802322130 37 0.992 12/2/2008 Tue 600 Head-On 0 0 1 Nite Dry Disregarded Traffic Signal

772154070 38 1.003 7/18/2008 Fri 500 Rear-End 0 1 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

772212540 39 1.02 12/27/2008 Sat 1900 Coll. W/ Pedestrian 0 1 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

772037400 40 1.022 1/7/2008 Mon 1900 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Nite Dry Disregarded Traffic Signal


772076440 42 1.022 3/17/2008 Mon 2300 Sideswipe 0 2 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

802298020 43 1.022 3/17/2008 Mon 1800 Backed Into 0 1 0 Day Dry Improper Backing

802298500 44 1.022 3/22/2008 Sat 1400 Head-On 0 0 1 Day Wet Failed to Yield R/W


772123010 46 1.022 4/13/2008 Sun 2200 Rear-End 0 0 1 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

727739640 47 1.022 4/15/2008 Tue 800 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

772156530 48 1.022 7/18/2008 Fri 1700 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Passing

802317380 49 1.022 10/12/2008 Sun 1700 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Lane Change

802318170 50 1.022 10/20/2008 Mon 1400 Left-Turn 0 1 0 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

802321460 51 1.022 11/24/2008 Mon 1100 Sideswipe 0 1 0 Day Dry Disregarded Stop Sign

802322780 52 1.022 12/8/2008 Mon 1900 Right-Turn 0 0 1 Nite Dry Improper Turn



802322520 55 1.028 12/5/2008 Fri 1900 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Nite Dry Improper Lane Change

754707190 56 1.03 1/21/2008 Mon 2000 Coll. W/ Pedestrian 1 0 0 Nite Dry Unknown

802324940 57 1.06 12/30/2008 Tue 1700 All other 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Lane Change

727718000 58 1.223 2/13/2008 Wed 1700 Angle 0 2 0 Nite Wet Unknown

911715380 59 1.288 12/18/2008 Thu 1700 Rear-End 0 0 1 Nite Dry Careless Driving

742628660 60 1.479 4/18/2008 Fri 1400 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

727719150 61 1.644 4/18/2008 Fri 1500 Coll w/ Parked Car 0 3 0 Day Dry Unknown

802300190 62 2.144 4/8/2008 Tue 1700 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Wet Careless Driving

727736460 63 2.144 7/6/2008 Sun 1100 Angle 1 4 0 Day Dry Unknown

802315780 64 2.144 9/24/2008 Wed 1500 Rear-End 0 1 0 Day Wet Followed too Closely


64 2 38 38 15 1 3 19 8 2

23.44% 1.56% 4.69% 29.69% 12.50% 3.13%


3 36 28 8 55 0 14 1

4.69% 56.25% 43.75% 12.50% 85.94% 0.00% 21.88% 1.56%









802337050 1 0 6/2/2009 Tue 1000 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

810212020 2 0 8/19/2009 Wed 900 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Lane Change

727738390 3 0 12/17/2009 Thu 2200 Rear-End 0 1 0 Nite Wet Followed too Closely

704061600 4 0.009 9/28/2009 Mon 800 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

745821720 5 0.019 2/3/2009 Tue 900 Fire 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

906840860 6 0.038 9/23/2009 Wed 1400 Angle 0 4 0 Day Dry Careless Driving

911717000 7 0.181 6/7/2009 Sun 2200 Angle 0 0 1 Nite Dry Careless Driving

911716890 8 0.246 6/7/2009 Sun 200 Coll w/ Parked Car 0 1 0 Nite Wet Careless Driving

727719880 9 0.25 5/9/2009 Sat 1500 Coll. W/ Pedestrian 0 1 0 Day Dry All Other


802330720 11 0.49 3/15/2009 Sun 1500 Backed Into 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Backing

802328960 12 0.497 2/21/2009 Sat 2000Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Nite Dry Followed too Closely


802331390 14 0.499 3/21/2009 Sat 1800 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Nite Wet All Other


810213190 16 0.499 9/1/2009 Tue 700Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving


810215460 18 0.499 10/4/2009 Sun 1500 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry All Other

810218020 19 0.499 11/12/2009 Thu 1700 Angle 0 1 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W


911671020 21 0.508 7/25/2009 Sat 2000 Rear-End 0 0 1 Nite Dry Careless Driving

911671050 22 0.575 11/17/2009 Tue 1800 Rear-End 0 0 1 Nite Dry All Other

810216680 23 0.624 10/22/2009 Thu 2000 Rear-End 0 0 1 Nite Dry Improper Lane Change

810219460 24 0.624 12/4/2009 Fri 700 Angle 0 0 1 Day Wet Disregarded Stop Sign

810220340 25 0.843 12/17/2009 Thu 2000 Coll. W/ Pedestrian 0 1 0 Nite Wet Unknown

911652070 26 0.846 6/23/2009 Tue 1100 Angle 0 1 0 Day Wet Failed to Yield R/W


802336560 28 0.973 5/27/2009 Wed 900Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Day Dry Followed too Closely


802327130 30 0.992 1/30/2009 Fri 1500Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Day Wet Failed to Yield R/W


704052290 32 0.992 5/12/2009 Tue 1000 Head-On 0 2 0 Day Dry Disregarded Traffic Signal

802336250 33 0.992 5/23/2009 Sat 1100 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Followed too Closely

906840890 34 0.992 9/30/2009 Wed 1200 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving

810215380 35 0.992 10/3/2009 Sat 1200 Head-On 0 0 1 Day Dry All Other

810218980 36 0.992 11/25/2009 Wed 1400 Sideswipe 0 1 0 Day Wet Careless Driving

772219630 37 1.003 2/2/2009 Mon 1900 Angle 0 1 0 Nite Wet Failed to Yield R/W

774540140 38 1.003 9/16/2009 Wed 900 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Lane Change

744831830 39 1.022 1/13/2009 Tue 2000 Angle 0 2 0 Nite Wet Unknown

802331580 40 1.022 3/25/2009 Wed 1100 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

802339700 41 1.022 7/13/2009 Mon 1700 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Lane Change

802339990 42 1.022 7/18/2009 Sat 2200 Angle 0 1 0 Nite Wet Failed to Yield R/W

774555400 43 1.022 11/19/2009 Thu 1900 Left-Turn 0 2 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

774569260 44 1.025 12/28/2009 Mon 1200 Rear-End 0 1 0 Day Dry Unknown

802332690 45 1.041 4/9/2009 Thu 1300 Coll. W/ Pedestrian 0 1 0 Day Dry All Other

802336670 46 1.041 5/28/2009 Thu 1600Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Day Wet Improper Lane Change

810216720 47 1.068 10/23/2009 Fri 2100 Angle 0 2 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

810219120 48 1.242 11/29/2009 Sun 600 Angle 0 2 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

802327970 49 2.144 2/10/2009 Tue 800 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving

802338130 50 2.144 6/18/2009 Thu 1800 Rear-End 0 1 0 Day Dry Followed too Closely

802339480 51 2.144 7/9/2009 Thu 1700 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W


51 0 32 29 16 0 0 13 7 3

31.37% 0.00% 0.00% 25.49% 13.73% 5.88%


4 31 20 12 39 0 9 0

7.84% 60.78% 39.22% 23.53% 76.47% 0.00% 17.65% 0.00%









810237710 1 0 8/17/2010 Tue 2200 Sideswipe 0 1 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

774711830 2 0 12/9/2010 Thu 1800 All other 0 0 1 Nite Dry Unknown

810242890 3 0.006 10/30/2010 Sat 100 All other 0 0 1 Nite Dry Careless Driving

810243240 4 0.009 11/3/2010 Wed 1200 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Day Wet Unknown


810238640 6 0.019 8/30/2010 Mon 1600 Coll. W/ Pedestrian 0 1 0 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

810240540 7 0.019 9/26/2010 Sun 2300 Angle 0 0 1 Nite Dry Improper Lane Change

810224180 8 0.047 2/15/2010 Mon 1200 Coll. W/ Pedestrian 0 1 0 Day Dry All Other

810245480 9 0.057 12/5/2010 Sun 0 Coll. W/ Pedestrian 0 1 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

810238320 10 0.118 8/26/2010 Thu 1500 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Lane Change


810226860 12 0.178 3/21/2010 Sun 2000 Rear-End 0 0 1 Nite Dry Followed too Closely

810230270 13 0.181 5/5/2010 Wed 1700 All other 0 2 0 Day Dry All Other

810240330 14 0.181 9/24/2010 Fri 1500 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

810240250 15 0.19 9/23/2010 Thu 1700 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Wet Followed too Closely

810246790 16 0.2 12/21/2010 Tue 2100 Rear-End 0 3 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

810238000 17 0.202 8/17/2010 Tue 1700 Tree/Shrubbery 0 0 1 Day Dry Fleeing Police


704061920 19 0.499 2/14/2010 Sun 1100 Left-Turn 0 1 0 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

909611100 20 0.499 9/30/2010 Thu 800 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving

810243860 21 0.499 11/12/2010 Fri 1800 Right-Turn 0 0 1 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

810224850 22 0.501 2/24/2010 Wed 1800 Rear-End 0 1 0 Nite Wet Careless Driving



810228950 25 0.749 4/15/2010 Thu 1300 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry Careless Driving

704060090 26 0.749 12/26/2010 Sun 100 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Nite Dry Careless Driving

810222320 27 0.816 1/17/2010 Sun 100 All other 0 0 1 Nite Dry Careless Driving

911652480 28 0.816 1/23/2010 Sat 2100 Left-Turn 0 1 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

810245780 29 0.825 12/8/2010 Wed 1900 Angle 0 1 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

810233290 30 0.845 6/13/2010 Sun 2000 Rear-End 0 4 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

910370000 31 0.99 3/21/2010 Sun 1100 Sideswipe 0 1 0 Day Dry All Other

810221840 32 0.992 1/9/2010 Sat 1700 Rear-End 0 0 1 Nite Wet Followed too Closely


810235530 34 0.992 7/15/2010 Thu 1500 Sideswipe 0 2 0 Day Dry All Other

810241880 35 0.992 10/14/2010 Thu 600Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving



774708310 38 0.994 12/2/2010 Thu 2000 Angle 0 0 1 Nite Dry Careless Driving


810242530 40 1.001 10/24/2010 Sun 1900 Rear-End 0 3 0 Nite Slippery Careless Driving


810226800 42 1.011 3/21/2010 Sun 1100 Hit Sign/Sign Post 0 2 0 Day Dry Careless Driving

774674990 43 1.016 11/15/2010 Mon 1500 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving

810226910 44 1.022 3/22/2010 Mon 1100 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Wet Careless Driving

774618760 45 1.022 4/2/2010 Fri 2300 Angle 0 1 0 Nite Dry Disregarded Traffic Signal

810227830 46 1.022 4/2/2010 Fri 100 Angle 0 0 1 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

909633100 47 1.022 4/14/2010 Wed 0 Angle 0 0 1 Nite Wet Disregarded Traffic Signal

810232100 48 1.022 5/28/2010 Fri 1800 Sideswipe 0 0 1 Day Wet Careless Driving

810232340 49 1.022 6/1/2010 Tue 500 Left-Turn 0 2 0 Nite Wet Failed to Yield R/W

810234020 50 1.022 6/22/2010 Tue 1700 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Turn

810236340 51 1.022 7/27/2010 Tue 900 All other 0 0 1 Day Dry All Other

810237900 52 1.022 8/20/2010 Fri 1800 Right-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Turn

774699640 53 1.022 9/1/2010 Wed 1800 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry Disregarded Traffic Signal

774697710 54 1.022 9/3/2010 Fri 1900 Angle 0 0 1 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

810241280 55 1.022 10/6/2010 Wed 1300 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry All Other

769291380 56 1.022 10/9/2010 Sat 1700 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Lane Change



810244390 59 1.031 11/19/2010 Fri 1700Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Nite Dry Careless Driving


810244580 61 1.242 11/21/2010 Sun 1900 Rear-End 0 0 1 Nite Wet Careless Driving

754982000 62 1.325 4/19/2010 Mon 1100 Coll w/Mv. Object 0 0 1 Day Wet Unknown

810223220 63 2.106 2/1/2010 Mon 1000Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 2 0 Day Wet Careless Driving

910361190 64 2.144 4/1/2010 Thu 1500 Angle 0 2 0 Day Dry Improper Turn

810231770 65 2.144 5/25/2010 Tue 1000 Rear-End 0 1 0 Day Dry Followed too Closely

810234720 66 2.144 7/2/2010 Fri 1900 Angle 0 4 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving

810241830 67 2.144 10/12/2010 Tue 2100 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

910360360 68 2.144 10/31/2010 Sun 1300 Rear-End 0 1 0 Day Wet Careless Driving

810243610 69 2.144 11/8/2010 Mon 1700 All other 0 0 1 Day Dry All Other

910363460 70 2.144 12/26/2010 Sun 2000 Angle 0 7 0 Nite Dry Improper Turn


70 0 57 37 19 2 2 21 6 3

27.14% 2.86% 2.86% 30.00% 8.57% 4.29%


4 43 27 12 57 0 15 4

5.71% 61.43% 38.57% 17.14% 81.43% 0.00% 21.43% 5.71%









810256440 1 0 4/25/2011 Mon 1400 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

824948370 2 0.028 1/26/2011 Wed 1900Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Nite Dry All Other

810254170 3 0.038 4/1/2011 Fri 1500 Coll. W/ Pedestrian 0 2 0 Day Dry Unknown

810259850 4 0.059 6/4/2011 Sat 1400 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

810261790 5 0.156 6/29/2011 Wed 2200 Head-On 0 0 1 Nite Dry All Other


824950640 7 0.189 3/21/2011 Mon 1800 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry All Other

810267280 8 0.219 9/9/2011 Fri 1100 Coll w/ Parked Car 0 0 1 Day Dry All Other

810263530 9 0.442 7/21/2011 Thu 1600 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Followed too Closely

810261390 10 0.461 6/24/2011 Fri 1200 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Followed too Closely

810251190 11 0.499 2/11/2011 Fri 800Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Nite Dry Careless Driving




824950130 15 0.501 2/28/2011 Mon 1600Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving

810251110 16 0.697 2/19/2011 Sat 1100Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving

810268460 17 0.749 9/26/2011 Mon 1000 Angle 0 0 1 Day Wet Improper Turn





820467460 22 0.984 1/3/2011 Mon 1800 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Passing

820467610 23 0.984 1/17/2011 Mon 1600 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Wet Careless Driving


824948110 25 0.992 1/21/2011 Fri 1900 #N/A 0 0 1 Nite Dry #N/A

824948130 26 0.992 1/22/2011 Sat 1400Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 6 0 Day Dry Disregarded Traffic Signal

824950180 27 0.992 3/2/2011 Wed 1800 Angle 0 1 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

810262390 28 0.992 7/6/2011 Wed 2200 Rear-End 0 0 1 Nite Wet Careless Driving

810266170 29 0.992 8/26/2011 Fri 1000 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry Disregarded Other Traffic Control

810268430 30 0.992 9/25/2011 Sun 2000 Rear-End 0 1 0 Nite Wet Followed too Closely



810247820 33 1.001 1/3/2011 Mon 1400 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Followed too Closely

820800040 34 1.003 5/28/2011 Sat 1900 #N/A 0 0 1 Nite Dry #N/A

820251530 35 1.022 1/17/2011 Mon 1300 Angle 0 4 0 Day Wet Disregarded Traffic Signal

820365120 36 1.022 1/26/2011 Wed 2100 Angle 0 1 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W



820411410 39 1.022 5/24/2011 Tue 2200 Angle 0 3 0 Nite Dry Disregarded Traffic Signal

810261100 40 1.022 6/19/2011 Sun 1600 Rear-End 0 4 0 Day Wet Careless Driving

824952710 41 1.022 6/30/2011 Thu 1800 Angle 0 0 1 Day Wet Disregarded Traffic Signal


824956450 43 1.022 12/9/2011 Fri 1300 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry All Other

810274800 44 1.022 12/12/2011 Mon 1500 Angle 0 0 1 Day Wet Failed to Yield R/W

810275250 45 1.022 12/19/2011 Mon 1600Coll w/ MV on Other Roadway 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

810247760 46 1.05 1/3/2011 Mon 1400 Coll w/Bicycle 0 0 1 Day Dry Unknown

810264620 47 1.06 8/5/2011 Fri 1600 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W


810272790 49 1.06 11/17/2011 Thu 2000 Coll w/ Parked Car 0 2 0 Nite Dry Careless Driving



810274680 52 1.29 12/11/2011 Sun 1200 Angle 0 0 1 Day Wet All Other

63527720 53 1.294 2/4/2011 Fri 0 Rear-End 0 0 1 Day Dry Followed too Closely

810264670 54 1.479 8/6/2011 Sat 1400 Angle 0 0 1 Day Dry Improper Turn

810251240 55 2.144 2/21/2011 Mon 500 Head-On 0 1 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

810252520 56 2.144 3/9/2011 Wed 800 Angle 0 1 0 Day Dry Failed to Yield R/W

810254990 57 2.144 4/8/2011 Fri 2000 Rear-End 0 0 1 Nite Dry Followed too Closely

810255000 58 2.144 4/8/2011 Fri 2200 Head-On 0 1 0 Nite Dry Failed to Yield R/W

810270630 59 2.144 10/19/2011 Wed 2100 Angle 0 0 1 Nite Dry Unknown

810275530 60 2.144 12/23/2011 Fri 1600 Left-Turn 0 0 1 Day Dry Careless Driving


60 0 47 35 21 0 0 21 0 2

35.00% 0.00% 0.00% 35.00% 0.00% 3.33%


1 40 20 9 51 1 12 1

1.67% 66.67% 33.33% 15.00% 85.00% 1.67% 20.00% 1.67%



Appendix C

State Safety Office Bulletin 10-01

Florida Department of TransportationCHARLIE CRIST

GOVERNOR605 Suwannee Street

Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450

STEPHANIE C. KOPELOUSOSSECRETARY

STATE SAFETY OFFICE BULLETIN 10-01ROADWAY DESIGN BULLETIN 10-09

DATE:

TO:

FROM:

COPIES:

SUBJECT:

August 5, 2010

District Design Engineers, District Traffic Operation Engineers, Distri t Safety En . eers, PlansPreparation Manual Holders

David C. O'Hagan, PE, State Roadway Design EngineeJoseph B. Santos, PE, Transportation Safety Engineer

Brian Blanchard, Robert Robertson, Marianne Trussell, Thomas Bane, Roosevelt Petithomme,Duane Brautigam, Chris Richter (FHWA)

Benefit/Cost Analysis, Roadside Safety Analysis Program and Discount (Interest) Rate

Benefit/Cost Analysis Background:The use of the Crash Reduction Factor (CRF) has not consistently been followed throughout the state. Resourceshave varied from the University of Florida 1988 Accident Reduction Factors for Use in Calculating Benefit/Cost tothe Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Desktop Reference for Crash Reduction Factors.

Requirements:To ensure that the items are used consistently, the following guidance is provided for obtaining the CRF in theBenefit/Cost analysis process (in the order of preference):

1. Florida Department of Transportation State Safety Office (550) - Crash Reduction Analysis System Hub (CRASH)CRASH is a web-based database application developed to systematically maintain statewide safetyimprovement project data to facilitate the continual process of updating CRFs. An excel spreadsheet ofthe CRFs is maintained on the 550 SharePoint:http://cosharepoint.dot.state.fl. us!sites!safety!Safety%20Engineering!references!defauIt.aspx

Without access to the 550 SharePoint, contact Joe Santos at [email protected]

CRF utilized should be based on crash type. If there are multiple crash types it is recommended to utilizethe CRF associated with the "Total" column. If there were less than 5 projects for the improvement typeto generate the CRF, the resulting CRF may not be appropriate for the analysis. Proceed to the FHWACrash Modification Factors (CMF) Clearinghouse.

2. FHWA Crash Modification Factors (CMF) Clearinghousehttp://www.cmfclearinghouse.org/

The Crash Modification Factors Clearinghouse houses a Web-based database of CMFs along withsupporting documentation to help transportation engineers identify the most appropriatecountermeasure for their safety needs. The FHWA Desktop Reference for Crash Reduction Factorspublication is contained within the database.

www.dot.state.fl.us

http://cosharepoint.dot.state.fl.us/sites/safety/Safety%20Engineering/references/default.aspx�

http://www.cmfclearinghouse.org/�

mailto:[email protected]

August 5, 2010 State Safety Office Bulletin 10-01

Roadway Design Bulletin 10-09 Page 2 of 3

www.dot.state.fl.us

The quality of the countermeasure is important (number of stars). The star rating is based on a scale (1 to 5), where a 5 indicates the highest or most reliable rating.

Implementation: These changes are effective immediately on all Design Exception and Variation submittals, and will be addressed in the January 1, 2011 Plans Preparation Manual (PPM) update. Roadside Safety Analysis Program and Discount (Interest) Rate Background:

The January 1, 2007 PPM contained changes to the methods for calculating the benefit/cost analysis for Design Exceptions and Variations. ROADSIDE 5.0 was replaced with RSAP. This Design Bulletin provides the updated crash cost figures to be utilized in the RSAP program.

The interest rate used in calculating the present value of expected yearly benefits and costs is known as the

discount rate. The discount rate should be appropriate for current economic conditions, in percent. The value may be adjusted to accommodate economic factors which provide the real difference of interest charged and annual inflation or satisfy a Rule requirement. In conducting a benefit-cost analysis the appropriate capital recovery factory must be applied in the calculation when using the Historical Crash Method. In recent years the various offices within Roadway Design and the State Safety Office have utilized different rates when conducting benefit-cost analysis. This bulleting provides one rate for all offices to use.

Requirements: In the Plans Preparation Manual, Volume 1, Section 23.5, replace item “y” with the following: y) For areas with crash histories or when a benefit to cost analysis is requested, provide a time value analysis

between the benefit to society quantified in dollars and the costs to society quantified in dollars over the life of the exception. In general practice the benefit to society is quantified by the reduction in crash cost foreseeable because of the proposed design and the cost due to the implementation of that change such as construction and maintenance costs over the life of the project. The Discount (interest) rate to be utilized in benefit/cost analysis is 4%.

Two acceptable methods for calculating a benefit/cost analysis are: 1. Roadside Safety Analysis Program (RSAP)

This method complements the Roadside Design Guide dated June 2002. When hazards cannot be removed or relocated, designers need to determine if a safety device, such as a guardrail or a crash cushion, is warranted to protect motorists from the roadside obstacle. This method can be used to perform a benefit/cost analysis comparing a safety treatment with the existing or baseline conditions (i.e., the do-nothing option) and/or alternative safety treatments. Based on the input (offsets, traffic, slopes, crash history, traffic accident severity levels, etc.) of information available to the user, the program will offer results which can be used in comparing courses of action.

When utilizing RSAP for analysis, the accident severity level costs to be should be revised as follows: Option 3: KABCO

Crash Severity Comprehensive Crash Cost Fatal (K) $6,380,000 Severe Injury (A) $521,768 Moderate Injury (B) $104,052 Minor Injury (C) $63,510 Property Damage Only (O) $6,500

Source: Florida Department of Transportation Crash Analysis Reporting (C.A.R.) System

August 5, 2010 State Safety Office Bulletin 10-01

Roadway Design Bulletin 10-09 Page 3 of 3

www.dot.state.fl.us

2. Historical Crash Method (HCM) This method can be used for sites with a crash history. It is basically the ratio (benefit/cost) of the estimated reduction in crash costs to the estimated increase in construction and maintenance cost. The annualized conversion will show whether the estimated expenditure of funds for the benefit will exceed the direct cost, thereby lending support as to whether the improvement should be done or not. The HCM uses the following Highway Safety Improvement Program Guideline (HSIPG) cost per crash by facility type to estimate benefit to society while the cost to society is estimated by the cost of right of way, construction, and maintenance.

HSIPG COST/CRASH BY FACILITY TYPE FACILITY TYPE

DIVIDED UNDIVIDED URBAN SUBURBAN RURAL URBAN SUBURBAN RURAL

2-3 Lanes $85,851 $151,015 $260,531 $92,847 $228,613 $402,003 4-5 Lanes $83,359 $181,265 $366,422 $83,359 $193,774 $94,171 6+ Lanes $107,658 $130,385 $478,263 n/a n/a n/a Interstate $141,197 n/a $295,810 n/a n/a n/a Turnpike $124,459 n/a $215,507 n/a n/a n/a

All State Roads Average Cost/Crash: $142,472 *The above values were derived from 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009 traffic crash and injury severity data for crashes on state roads in Florida, using the formulation described in FHWA Technical Advisory “Motor Vehicle Accident Costs”, T 7570.1, dated June 30, 1988 and FHWA Technical Advisory, T 7570.2, dated October 31, 1994 using updated fatality cost of $5.8 million as recommended in the U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Secretary Transportation memo, Treatment of the Economic Value of a Statistical Life in Department Analysis dated February 5, 2008 (http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/policy/reports/080205.htm).

Implementation: These changes are effective immediately on all Design Exception and Variation submittals. Please note that AASHTO has recently published the first edition of the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) which provides additional safety analysis tools and provides additional information on the CMFs. The Department is working on an implementation plan to address the use of the HSM and further guidance will be included in a future update to the PPM. Contacts: For Safety related issues: Joseph B. Santos, PE Transportation Safety Engineer (850) 245-1502 [email protected] For Roadway related issues: Rob Quigley, PE Roadway Design Engineer (850) 414-4356 [email protected]



Appendix D

Cost Estimate per Light Pole

SR 847 Cost Estimate per Light Pole

Item Description Unit Quantity Unit Cost Total

40’ Aluminum Light Pole (see Note 1) EA 1 $7,529.00 $7,529.00

Pull Box EA 1 $429.00 $429.00

2” PVC Conduit LF 260 $4.00 $1,040.00

Conductors (see Note 2) LF 1,300 $1.93 $2,509.00

Pole Cable Dist Sys, Conventional EA 1 $600.00 $600.00

Sub Total $12,107.00

Contingency (10%) $1,211.00

Total $13,318.00

Note 1: Includes pole, luminaire arm, transformer base and foundation

Note 2: Two (2) circuits per side of roadway

Appendix E

Photometric Analysis

Date post:	10-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	trinhkiet
View:	218 times
Download:	2 times

Lighting Justification Report - FDOT District 6 Justification Report SR 847 / NW 47 th Avenue...

Documents