ROAD SAFETY AUDIT - Massachusetts Department of … · Road Safety Audit—Main Street at...

ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

Main Street (Route 28) at Elm Street

Main Street (Route 28) at William Street

Town of Stoneham

January 19, 2011

Prepared For: MassDOT Highway Division

Prepared By: BETA Group, Inc.

Road Safety Audit—Main Street at Elm/William Streets—Stoneham, MA Prepared by BETA Group, Inc.

Table of Contents Project Data.................................................................................................................................1

Background .................................................................................................................................2

Project Description .....................................................................................................................2

Audit Observations .....................................................................................................................7

Potential Safety Enhancements ...............................................................................................11

Summary of Road Safety Audit...............................................................................................15

List of Appendices

Appendix A. RSA Meeting Agenda

Appendix B. RSA Audit Team Contact List

Appendix C. Detailed Crash Data

Appendix D. Speed Regulations

List of Figures

Figure 1. Location Map ......................................................................................................................... 3

List of Tables

Table 1. Participating Audit Team Members ....................................................................................... 1 Table 2. Estimated Time Frame and Costs Breakdown ..................................................................... 11 Table 3. Potential Safety Enhancement Summary ............................................................................. 16


Project Data

A Road Safety Audit for the intersections of Main Street (Route 28) at Elm Street and Main Street (Route

28) at William Street in the Town of Stoneham was held on November 30, 2010 at the Central

Elementary School in Stoneham, MA. As indicated in Table 1, the audit team consisted of representatives

from State, Regional and Local agencies and included a cross-section of engineering, planning and

emergency response expertise.

Table 1. Participating Audit Team Members Audit Team Member Agency/Affiliation

Bonnie Polin MassDOT Highway Division – Safety

Lisa Schletzbaum MassDOT Highway Division – Safety

Carrie Lavallee MassDOT Highway Division – Project Management

Dorothea Hass WalkBoston

Kevin Dandrade TEC

David Watson MassBike

David Ragucci Town Administrator, Town of Stoneham

Joseph Rolli Fire Chief, Town of Stoneham

Richard Bongiorno Police Chief, Town of Stoneham

Bob Grover DPW Director, Town of Stoneham

John Gregg MassDOT Highway Division – District 4 Traffic

Steve Timmins MassDOT Highway Division - Traffic

Chenyuan Wang Boston Region MPO

Greg Lucas BETA Group, Inc.

Christine Keches BETA Group, Inc.

Page 1


Background

The Federal Highway Administration defines a Road Safety Audit (RSA) as the formal safety

examination of an existing or future road or intersection by an independent, multidisciplinary team. The

purpose of an RSA is to identify potential safety issues and possible opportunities for safety

improvements considering all roadway users. A Road Safety Audit was scheduled for the intersections of

Main Street at Elm Street and Main Street at William Street because both intersections have been

identified as high crash locations and are located in the vicinity of the proposed Tri-Community Bikeway.

The RSA is intended to identify potential short and long term safety improvements that can be made at

the intersection, including how to manage bicycle traffic across the Main Street corridor.

Project Description

Main Street (Route 28) is functionally classified as an Urban Principal Arterial and is State-owned north

of Elm Street and Town-owned south of Elm Street. Main Street is a north-south corridor and is an

important regional roadway, running essentially parallel to I-93 and connecting to I-93 to the south and I-

95/Route 128 to the north. Main Street provides access from the highways to Stoneham and to

surrounding communities, and serves as an alternate route to the highways during times of heavy

congestion. The intersections of Main Street/Elm Street and Main Street/William Street, shown in Figure

1, are both signalized intersections approximately 500‟ apart and are discussed in detail below.

Main Street/Elm Street

Main Street and Elm Street form a 4-

way intersection under traffic signal

control. Main Street provides two

through travel lanes both north and

south of Elm Street, with left turn lanes

in each direction at Elm Street. Elm

Street provides an exclusive left turn

lane and a shared lane for through

vehicles and right turning vehicles at the

intersection, and typically provides a

single travel lane in each direction along

its length. Elm Street is a Town-owned

roadway functionally classified as an

Urban Minor Arterial west of Main

Street and as an Urban Principal Arterial

east of Main Street. Elm Street forms a

three way intersection with William

Street approximately 700 feet west of Main Street, and continues east into Wakefield, where it becomes

Albion Street. Central Street forms a signalized intersection with Elm Street approximately 200 feet east

of Main Street.

Main Street at Elm Street

Page 2

³

0 500 1,000 250 Feet

Study Intersections

LEGEND

CEN

TRAL

STR

EET

MA

IN S

TRE

ET (R

OU

TE 28) ELM STREET

WILLIAM STREET M

AIN

STR

EE

T (RO

UTE

28 )

ELM STREET

WILLIAM

S

LINDENWOOD ROAD

TREET

315 Norwood Park South Norwood, MA 02062

781.255.1982 [email protected]

Main Street (Rte 28) at Elm Street and William Street

ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

STONEHAM, MA

Figure 1

Location Map


The traffic signal at Elm Street provides protected/permissive phasing for the Main Street southbound left

turn to Elm Street eastbound, and for the Elm Street westbound left turn to Main Street southbound.

These protected/permissive movements coincide with the Main Street southbound and Elm Street

westbound through phases. The Main Street northbound and Elm Street eastbound left turns are

permissive movements only. The Main Street southbound protected left turn phase precedes the Main

Street northbound and southbound through phase, followed by the Elm Street westbound protected left

turn phase preceding the Elm Street eastbound and westbound through phase. An audit participant stated

that he had observed the signal serving the Main Street southbound protected left both before and after the

Main Street through movements, resulting in an unusual protected-permissive-protected pattern within the

Main Street phase time. It was also noted that the exclusive pedestrian phase is served after the Elm Street

(side street) phase, while MassDOT typically prefers for the pedestrian phase to be serviced between the

main street and side street phases.

Crosswalks are provided across all four legs of the intersection, with apex-type handicap accessible ramps

on all four corners. Continuous sidewalks are provided on both sides of both Main Street and Elm Street

in the vicinity of the study intersection. Land use of the surrounding area is primarily commercial along

Main Street and a mix of commercial and residential along Elm Street. There is a Walgreens pharmacy on

the southwest corner of the intersection. There is a vacant property on the northwest corner of the

intersection with a small newly paved parking area adjacent to Main Street. It appears based on the size of

the parking area that vehicles would typically back out into Main Street to exit this parking area. Town

personnel present at the audit stated that this property was formerly a Blockbuster Video store, and that

patrons typically utilized the larger parking area behind the building, which has access from Main Street

north of the building and from Elm Street west of the building.

Crash data were provided by the Stoneham Police Department. There were a total of twelve crashes at the

intersection within the period from January 2008 to October 2010. Angle-type crashes were the most

prevalent and comprised 58% of the total crashes. Angle crashes were reported in all four directions, and

three of the angle crashes were reported as red light running. There were two rear-end crashes at the

intersection, one in the northbound direction and one in the southbound direction. A fatal crash occurred

at the intersection in November 2008, when a vehicle turning left onto Elm Street from Main Street

southbound struck a pedestrian in the crosswalk. Crash data summaries and a collision diagram are

included in the Appendix.

In addition to the crash data provided by the Stoneham Police Department, MassDOT Safety personnel

reported that their database includes 22 crashes at the intersection from 2006 to 2008, which results in an

Equivalent Property Damage Only (EPDO) rating of 63. The EPDO rating is calculated using a weighted

system in which fatal crashes are weighted 10 times and injury crashes are weighted 5 times. The

difference in the number of crashes does not necessarily indicate a drop in crashes, but can result from

using different sources and a different definition of the intersection limits when compiling crash data. The

intersection is identified as a high crash location because it is in the top 5% of crashes for the

Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) region.

Speed regulations maintained by MassDOT Highway Division establish a 35 MPH speed limit for Main

Street north of Elm Street. Complete speed regulations for Route 28 in Stoneham are included in the

Appendix.

Page 4


Main Street/William Street

Main Street and William Street form a

4-way intersection under traffic signal

control. William Street intersects Main

Street at a skewed angle, with the

northwest and southeast corners

forming an acute angle. Main Street

provides two through travel lanes both

north and south of William Street,

with a separate left turn lane for

southbound traffic. William Street

provides two lanes on each approach;

the eastbound approach has two

general purpose lanes, while the

westbound approach has an exclusive

right turn lane and a shared lane for left

turns and through traffic. There are

delta islands on the northwest and southeast corners with a short channelized right turn lane. The

northbound right turn is controlled via the traffic signal, while the southbound right turn operates under

yield control. William Street is a Town-owned roadway classified as an Urban Minor Arterial, and

provides a connection via the local street network from Woburn to the west to Wakefield and Melrose to

the east. Central Street forms a signalized intersection with William Street approximately 100 feet east of

Main Street.

The traffic signal at Elm Street provides protected phasing for the Main Street southbound left turn to

William Street eastbound. The Main Street southbound protected left turn phase coincides with the Main

Street southbound through movement which continues, operating concurrently with the Main Street

northbound through movement, once the protected left turn phase is terminated. William Street

approaches operate concurrently following the Main Street phase. Pedestrians operate concurrently with

vehicle phases, which creates potential conflicts between turning vehicles and pedestrians.

Crosswalks are provided across all four legs of the intersection. The small delta islands on the northwest

and southeast corners of the intersection provide a refuge area for pedestrians, but a pedestrian crossing

from one side of William Street to the other must cross the channelized right turn lane, which has no

pedestrian signal control. Land use of the surrounding area is primarily commercial along Main Street and

a mix of commercial and residential along William Street. A Mobil gas station on the southeast corner of

the intersection fills the parcel between Main Street and Central Street and has access to both streets.

There is a Stop & Shop supermarket on the southwest corner of the intersection which has access to both

Main Street and William Street, with a Stop & Shop gas station on the corner of the property closest to

the intersection. This gas station has no connection to the Stop & Shop parking lot, but has direct access

to both Main Street and William Street.

Crash data were provided by the Stoneham Police Department. There were a total of 17 crashes at the

intersection within the period from January 2008 to October 2010. Angle-type crashes were the most

Main Street at William Street

(facing Northbound)

Page 5


prevalent and comprised 71% of the total crashes. Angle crashes were reported in all four directions, with

three involving a southbound through vehicle and a northbound left turning vehicle. There were two rear-

end crashes at the intersection, one in the eastbound direction and one southbound departing the

intersection. Three of the seventeen reported crashes involved vehicles entering and exiting Stop & Shop

on William Street. Crash data summaries and a collision diagram are included in the Appendix.

In addition to the crash data provided by the Stoneham Police Department, MassDOT Safety personnel

reported that their database includes 34 crashes at the intersection from 2006 to 2008, which results in an

Equivalent Property Damage Only (EPDO) rating of 66. The EPDO rating is calculated using a weighted

system in which fatal crashes are weighted 10 times and injury crashes are weighted 5 times. The

difference in the number of crashes does not necessarily indicate a drop in crashes, but can result from

using different sources and a different definition of the intersection limits when compiling crash data. The

intersection is identified as a high crash location because it is in the top 5% of crashes for the MAPC

region.

The Stoneham Police Department also provided crash data for the segment of Main Street between Elm

Street and William Street. Six crashes were reported in this segment of roadway between January 2008

and October 2010. Four of the six crashes involved vehicles entering or exiting businesses along the

corridor. The remaining two crashes were noted to have involved a driver operating under the influence

and a driver operating a vehicle in a reckless manner.

Page 6


Audit Observations

Following a brief introduction to the RSA process and a summary of crash and speed regulation

information, the audit participants were asked to discuss issues that affect safety at the intersections of

Main Street at Elm Street and Main Street at William Street. Audit participants then conducted a site visit

as a group, at which time they offered observations on safety concerns and deficiencies. A summary of

those major safety considerations is as follows, summarized by location:


Pedestrian Accommodations – A number of safety issues discussed during the audit relate to pedestrian accommodation at the intersection.

o Narrow shoulders provide no buffer between vehicles traveling the corridor and

pedestrians walking along the sidewalk.

o Apex type wheelchair ramps direct a wheelchair-bound pedestrian into the center of the

intersection, rather than in the direction they are intending to cross. This may also be a

concern for visually impaired pedestrians.

o The cross slope of the sidewalk appears to exceed MassDOT and ADA standards.

o Lack of detectable warning panels precludes feedback that informs a visually impaired

pedestrian that they are about to leave the sidewalk.

o Wide curb radii allows turning vehicles to navigate their turn at a higher speed.

o There is essentially no buffer between the sidewalk and the adjacent parking area on the

northwest corner. The parking area lies directly adjacent to the sidewalk surface with no

curbing or grass strip.

o Pedestrian pushbuttons are not uniformly located adjacent to the level landing for the

crossing they serve. In addition, there is a non-functioning pushbutton located in the nose

of the median on the east leg of Elm Street, where there is no pedestrian refuge area.

o Pedestrian timing may be inadequate to allow pedestrians to cross Main Street.

o One of the pedestrian signal indications was not properly displaying the hand symbol for

the “Don‟t Walk” indication.

o The exclusive pedestrian phase follows the side street green phase, which is atypical of

standard practice in Massachusetts, which provides the exclusive pedestrian phase

between the main street and side street phases.

Signal Equipment – A number of safety issues relating to signal equipment were discussed at the

audit.

Page 7


o The signal is not coordinated with other signals along Main Street or with the adjacent

signal at Elm Street and Central Street. Coordination would create vehicle platoons and

more effectively manage queues.

o All green signal indications appear to be LED, but many yellow and red signal

indications appear to be the older incandescent style, which is less visible and far less

efficient when compared to LEDs.

o Pedestrian pushbuttons and signs are a mix of different styles and sign legends.

o There are no backplates for vehicle signal heads. Installation of backplates would

increase visibility of the signal indications for approaching vehicles.

o There are no overhead signal indications for Elm Street.

o It was suggested that some of the loop detectors at the intersection are not working

properly. As a result, the approaches or lanes with malfunctioning loops are set to Min

Recall, which will serve a minimum green time on that approach in all cycles even if no

vehicles are present. This operation was observed during the audit.

o There was concern amongst audit participants that the all red clearance time is not

sufficient, specifically following the pedestrian phase.

o The existing R10-12 “Left Turn Yield on Green (ball)” sign mounted on the mast arm for

the northbound approach is potentially confusing, as this sign is typically used only for

protected/permissive movements, and may imply to a driver that they can expect a

protected left turn phase at this location. The northbound left turn is permissive only.

Left turn lanes – It was suggested that left turn lanes are narrow at the intersection, especially the

northbound left turn lane. It appeared that a median on the northbound approach was removed to

create the northbound left turn lane, likely as mitigation when Walgreens was built at the intersection.

It was also noted that lane control signage is inadequate.

Signage – It was noted that signs at the

intersection stating “Turning Traffic Must

Yield to Pedestrians” are fluorescent yellow-

green in color, but should be white because

they are regulatory signs. Only warning

signs, which are typically diamond-shaped,

should be fluorescent yellow-green in color.

It was also noted that placement of these

non-standard signs is less than optimal, and

that drivers may miss or forget the sign

message.

Page 8



Pedestrian Accommodations – A number of safety issues discussed during the audit relate to pedestrian accommodation at the intersection.

o Lack of detectable warning panels precludes feedback that informs a visually impaired

pedestrian that they are about to leave the sidewalk.

o Concurrent pedestrian phase operation creates potential conflicts between turning

vehicles and pedestrians, and also may be confusing to pedestrians who expect exclusive

phasing given the presence of exclusive phasing at other signalized crossings in the area,

such as Elm Street.

o There is essentially no buffer between the sidewalk area and the adjacent parking areas

on the southwest corner. The fueling aisle for the Stop&Shop gas stations lies directly

adjacent to the sidewalk surface with no curbing or grass strip.

Bicycle accommodation – The Tri-Community Bikeway will serve Woburn, Winchester and

Stoneham and uses an abandoned rail right-of-way to pass through Stoneham. The right-of-way

intersects William Street approximately 250‟ west of the Main Street/William Street intersection and

continues in an arc path across William Street, Main Street, and Central Street; however, current land

use and the need to cross Main Street at a signalized crossing discourage the use of the existing rail

right-of-way between William Street and Central Street. Instead, bikeway designers are considering a

path which requires bicyclists to dismount and travel through the Main Street/William Street

intersection to reach Central Street. Potential improvements at the intersection must consider bicycles.

Signal Equipment – A number of safety issues relating to signal equipment were discussed at the

audit.

o The signal is not coordinated with other signals along Main Street. Coordination would

create vehicle platoons and more effectively manage queues. The signal does operate in

conjunction with the traffic signal at William Street and Central Street.

o There are no backplates for vehicle signal heads. Installation of backplates would

increase visibility of the signal indications for approaching vehicles.

o Signal indications are mounted overhead for three of four approaches at the intersection,

but are ground mounted for the eastbound approach.

o It was suggested that some of the loop detectors at the intersection are not working

properly. As a result, the approaches or lanes with malfunctioning loops are set to Min

Recall, which will serve a minimum green time on that approach in all cycles even if no

vehicles are present.

o There is no R10-12 “Left Turn Yield on Green (ball)” sign for the Main Street

southbound left turn, which operates under protected/permissive phasing.

Page 9


Geometry/Lane Assignments – A number of safety issues related to the geometry of the intersection

and/or the lane assignments on each approach.

o The delta islands on the northwest and southeast corners create an unsignalized pedestrian crossing from the delta island to the sidewalk. The tight geometry of these corners creates a short reaction time for drivers, who may not be aware of pedestrians as they navigate the turn. This is especially a concern on the northwest corner, where a stone wall, hedges and a utility pole may restrict visibility of a pedestrian.

o Traffic operations at the intersection are affected by the close intersection spacing with

the William Street and Central Street intersection, which is approximately 100 feet west

of Main Street. Northbound right-turning traffic has limited time to react to a red

indication on William Street eastbound at Central Street. Similarly, there are queuing

impacts between intersections that may affect blocking and sight distance for turning

vehicles.

o The effectiveness of the median on the east leg of William Street was questioned, and it

was suggested that the median could be eliminated and the increased width could be used

to provide bicycle accommodation between Main Street and Central Street.

Signage – It was noted that signs at the intersection stating “Turning Traffic Must Yield to

Pedestrians” are fluorescent yellow-green in color, but should be white because they are regulatory

signs. Only warning signs, which are typically diamond-shaped, should be fluorescent yellow-green

in color. It was also noted that placement of these non-standard signs is less than optimal, and that

drivers may miss or forget the sign message. Additionally, there is a “State Law STOP For

Pedestrians” sign on the William Street westbound approach which should be removed.

Massachusetts state law requires vehicles to yield to pedestrians where traffic control signals are not

present.

Delta island on northwest corner

of Main Street/William Street

Page 10


Potential Safety Enhancements After the site visit, audit participants returned to the meeting location to discuss the safety issues and

consider improvements. Audit participants were encouraged to consider both short and long term

improvements for each issue. Each improvement considered has been categorized as short-term, mid-

term, or long-term based on the definitions shown in Table 2. Additionally, a cost category has been

assigned to each improvement based on the parameters set forth in Table 2. In addition to the specific

improvements listed below, it should be noted that the intersections of Central Street/Elm Street and

Central Street/William Street should be included in any future study of the Main Street/Elm Street and

Main Street/William Street intersections, due to their close proximity.

Table 2. Estimated Time Frame and Costs Breakdown Time Frame Costs

Short-term <1 year Low <$10,000

Mid-term 1–3 years Medium $10,000–$50,000

Long-term >3 years High >$50,000


The following improvements were suggested by audit participants to improve safety issues associated

with the intersection of Main Street and Elm Street.

Update pedestrian signals, pushbuttons and signs. Pedestrian buttons and signs should be updated so

that they are uniform for all crossings at the intersection, and operation and proper illumination of all

pedestrian signal heads should be verified. Pedestrian pushbutton placement should be studied to

determine if locations meet current ADA requirements. The existing pushbutton in the median on the

eastern leg of Elm Street should be removed, since pedestrian phase time is sufficient for a pedestrian

to cross the entire width of this approach, and there is no refuge area adjacent to the existing

pushbutton. This is a short term, medium cost improvement.

Install detectable warning panels for all wheelchair ramp locations. Detectable warning panels will

provide tactile cues for visually impaired pedestrians that they are about to depart the sidewalk. This

can be done at existing wheelchair ramp locations, or in conjunction with construction of paired

ramps in place of apex ramps. This is a short term, low cost improvement.

Verify sidewalk cross slopes and reconstruct sidewalk to meet MassDOT and ADA standards. It was

noted that the sidewalk cross slope may exceed MassDOT and ADA standards. The cross slope of all

sidewalk adjacent to the intersection should be verified, and areas that exceed the accepted standards

should be reconstructed to current standards. Study and verification of cross slopes is a short term,

low cost improvement, while reconstruction of the sidewalk is a high cost, long term improvement.

Study feasibility of replacing apex handicap ramps with paired ramps. It was noted during the audit

that paired ramps are safer than apex ramps for physically and visually disabled pedestrians, because

Page 11


the paired ramp better points the pedestrian in the direction of the crossing, while the apex ramp

directs the pedestrian towards the center of the intersection. Feasibility should be studied first to

ensure that expansion of sidewalks will fit within the available right-of-way. If constructed, this is a

long-term, medium cost improvement.

Place bollards at the back of sidewalk on the northwest corner of the intersection. This potential

improvement was suggested to provide protection between the pedestrian waiting area at the corner of

the intersection and the paved parking area for the former video store property on the northwest

corner. This is a short-term, medium cost improvement.

Study clearance times. The existing yellow and all red clearance times should be determined from the

existing traffic signal controller and compared to minimum requirements calculated based on the

Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) methodology. If existing clearance times are insufficient,

clearance times should be increased accordingly. This is a short-term, low cost improvement.

Study feasibility of widening Main Street. Ideally, lane and shoulder widths through the intersection

would meet minimum MassDOT requirements for vehicle and bicycle accommodation, which

provide 11-foot lanes and a 4-foot shoulder. It is not known if sufficient right-of-way exists, and

impacts to abutting properties must also be considered. An engineering study should be initiated to

investigate the feasibility of widening as a long-term solution. This is a short term, low cost

improvement, while widening would be a long-term, high cost improvement.

Narrow curb radii. Although this was suggested as a potential solution by an audit participant, it

should not be considered without considering the impact on turning vehicles. Main Street and Elm

Street are arterial roadways which must provide accommodation for a WB-50 design vehicle.

Install backplates. Backplates should be installed on all signal heads. This improvement will enhance

visibility of signal heads against the existing visual background. This is a short-term, low cost

improvement.

Install mast arms and provide overhead signal heads for Elm Street approaches. Overhead signal

heads provide greater visibility for approaching vehicles and reduce the potential for a signal head to

be blocked by queued vehicles. This is a mid-term, medium cost improvement.

Replace incandescent signal lenses with LED lenses. All red, yellow, and green signal heads at the

intersection should have LED lenses meeting MassDOT standard, which provide greater illumination

and greater efficiency than the incandescent lenses. This is a short-term, low cost improvement.

Remove R10-12 “Left Turn Yield on Green (ball)” sign from the northbound signal mast arm. The

northbound left turn operates under permissive phasing only, while this sign is typically used for

protected/permissive left turns. This is a short-term, low cost improvement.

Reprogram pedestrian phase and verify phase time. The existing traffic signal controller should be

reprogrammed so that the pedestrian phase is served between the Main Street and Elm Street phases.

Existing WALK and flashing DON‟T WALK times should be studied to ensure that they are suitable

Page 12


for the intersection geometry and that they meet state and federal guidelines. This is a short-term, low

cost improvement.

Repair/replace loop detectors. Loop detectors at the intersection are old and are known to be either

malfunctioning or non-operational. Operation of existing loops should be verified and malfunctioning

or non-operational loops should be replaced. A fully functional fully-actuated traffic signal will

provide more efficient operation at the intersection. This is a mid-term, medium cost improvement.

Provide additional advanced lane control signage. It was suggested that additional lane control signage is needed for all four approaches for the exclusive left turn lanes. It is recommended that R3-7L “Left Turn MustTurn Left” signs be added for the Main Street approaches, and that R3-8a graphical signs as shown at right be provided for the Elm Street approaches. This is a short-term, low cost improvement.

Add “through and right” pavement markings for the Elm Street approaches. There are existing arrow

and ONLY markings for the exclusive left turn lanes on Elm Street. This improvement would add

“through and right” markings to the right lane on each approach. In conjunction with this

improvement, left turn arrow and ONLY markings should be reapplied on all four approaches. This is

a short-term, low cost improvement.

Replace “Turning Traffic Must Yield to Pedestrians” signs. The existing “Turning Traffic Must Yield

to Pedestrians” signs are fluorescent-yellow in color, which violates the Manual on Uniform Traffic

Control Devices (MUTCD), which states that all regulatory signs should

be black or red legend on a white background. It is recommended that the

existing signs be replaced by the graphical sign shown at right, which is

included in the 2009 MUTCD. The „Turning Vehicles” banner should be

fluorescent yellow-green in color. This is a short-term, low cost

improvement. Where possible, the signs should be placed on the far corner

of the intersection, similar to the standard placement for R10-11b “No

Turn on Red” signs.


The following improvements were suggested by audit participants to improve safety issues associated

with the intersection of Main Street and William Street.

Install detectable warning panels for all wheelchair ramp locations. Detectable warning panels will

provide tactile cues for visually impaired pedestrians that they are about to depart the sidewalk. This

is a short-term, low cost improvement.

Study intersection phasing and timing to determine feasibility of an exclusive pedestrian phase.

Providing an exclusive pedestrian phase would eliminate conflicts between turning vehicles and

pedestrians that exist today due to concurrent pedestrian operation. This is a short-term, low cost

improvement.

Page 13


Review potential for a diagonal crosswalk between the southwest and northeast corners of the

intersection. The skewed geometry of the intersection allows the opportunity to effectively provide a

diagonal crosswalk at the intersection. This will provide more direct pedestrian movements between

the proposed Tri-Community Path and the schools along Central Street. It should be noted that a

diagonal crosswalk can only be provided if the pedestrian phase is exclusive. This is a short-term, low

cost improvement; associated modification of pavement markings, sidewalks, wheelchair ramps and

pedestrian signals would be a long-term, high cost improvement.

Consider elimination of the existing median on eastern leg of intersection. There is an existing

median dividing William Street between Main Street and Central Street. Elimination of this median

may allow additional width to be allocated to bicyclists in conjunction with the Tri-Community

Bikeway project. Possible accommodation techniques discussed include a marked bicycle lane, or a

widened sidewalk which serves as a shared path serving both pedestrians and bicycles. An

engineering study should consider these potential options, either independently of or in conjunction

with the ongoing Bikeway project. This is a mid-term, low cost improvement.

Restrict the westbound left turn from William Street. This potential improvement was discussed at the

audit, with the intent of reducing the conflict between turning vehicles and pedestrians. Town

personnel present at the audit were not in favor of this improvement, and it was theorized that

restricting the turn would lead to drivers ignoring the restriction or using the Stop & Shop parking lot

as a cut-through. As a result, this improvement is not recommended.

Repair/replace loop detectors. Loop detectors at the intersection are old and are known to be either

malfunctioning or non-operational. Operation of existing loops should be verified and malfunctioning

or non-operational loops should be replaced. A fully functional fully-actuated traffic signal will

provide more efficient operation at the intersection. This is a mid-term, medium cost improvement.

Install backplates. Backplates should be installed on all signal heads. This improvement will enhance

visibility of signal heads against the existing visual background. This is a short-term, low cost

improvement.

Install a mast arm and provide overhead signal heads for the eastbound William Street approach.

Overhead signal heads provide greater visibility for approaching vehicles and reduce the potential for

a signal head to be blocked by queued vehicles. This is a mid-term, medium cost improvement.

Install an R10-10 “Left Turn Signal” sign for the Main Street southbound left turn. The Main Street

southbound exclusive left turn lane is a protected movement only and has its own signal housing. A

“Left Turn Signal” sign should be added to the mast arm adjacent to this signal housing for emphasis.

This is a short-term, low cost improvement.

Revise signal timing to incorporate a William Street westbound to Main Street northbound right turn

overlap phase. This improvement would reduce delay and improve traffic flow for right-turning

traffic from William Street westbound to Main Street northbound. The right turn overlap phase would

run concurrently with the Main Street southbound to William Street eastbound protected left turn

phase. This improvement would require replacement of the existing right side overhead signal

Page 14


indication facing William Street westbound with either a right arrow signal housing or a 5-section

„doghouse‟ signal housing. This is a mid-term, low cost improvement.

to Pedestrians” signs are fluorescent-yellow in color, which violates the Manual on Uniform Traffic

Control Devices (MUTCD), which states that all regulatory signs should be black or red legend on a

white background. It is recommended that the existing signs be replaced

by the graphical sign shown at right, which is included in the 2009

MUTCD. The „Turning Vehicles” banner should be fluorescent yellow-

green in color. This is a short-term, low cost improvement. Where

possible, the signs should be placed on the far corner of the intersection,

similar to the standard placement for R10-11b “No Turn on Red” signs.

The existing “State Law STOP For Pedestrians” sign on the westbound

William Street approach should be removed in conjunction with this

improvement.

Install a YIELD sign for the Main Street southbound to William Street westbound movement. This

right turn is not controlled by the traffic signal, implying yield control although there is no existing

YIELD sign. This is a short-term, low cost improvement.

Replace existing R3-7R “Right Turn Must Turn Right” signs on the

William Street westbound approach with R3-8b graphical signs. It was

suggested that a graphical sign as shown at right would be more effective

in conveying the lane configuration for the William Street westbound

approach. This is a short-term, low cost improvement.

Replace “Turning Traffic Must Yield to Pedestrians” signs. The existing “Turning Traffic Must Yield

Place bollards at the back of sidewalk on the southwest corner of the intersection. This potential

improvement was suggested to provide protection between the pedestrian waiting area at the corner of

the intersection and the fueling aisle for the Stop & Shop gas station on the southwest corner. This is

a short-term, medium cost improvement.

Consider removal of delta islands on the northwest and southeast corners. It was noted during the

audit that removal of the delta islands would eliminate the unprotected crosswalk across the

channelized right turn lane created by the delta island, and suggested that the reduced overall radius

of the turn would still be sufficient to accommodate turning vehicles. This potential improvement

should be studied first to determine if turning movements can still be accommodated for large trucks.

Study of the feasibility of this improvement is a short-term, low cost improvement, while construction

would be a mid-term, medium cost improvement.

Summary of Road Safety Audit

Table 3 summarizes potential recommendations discussed by the audit team. The recommendations are

categorized based on the potential safety payoff, as well as by time frame and cost. The safety payoff is a

qualitative judgment of the effectiveness of the potential safety improvements.

Page 15


Table 3. Potential Safety Enhancement Summary Safety Issue Safety Enhancement Safety Payoff Time Frame Cost


Signal Equipment Study existing clearance times and make changes, if appropriate.

High Short-term $2,000

Pedestrian Accommodation, Signal Equipment

Update pedestrian signals, pushbuttons and signs.

Medium Short-term $8,000

Pedestrian Accommodation Install detectable warning panels for all wheelchair ramp locations.


Pedestrian Accommodation Verify sidewalk cross slopes and reconstruct sidewalk to meet MassDOT and ADA standards.

N/A (Study) Medium (Const.)

Short-term (Study) Long-term (Const.)

$2,000 (Study) $100,000 (Const.)

Pedestrian Accommodation Study feasibility of replacing apex handicap ramps with paired ramps.



$5,000 (Study) $50,000 (Const.)

Pedestrian Accommodation Place bollards at the back of sidewalk on the northwest corner of the intersection.


Pedestrian Accommodation Study feasibility of widening Main Street to provide 11-foot lanes and 4-foot shoulders.

N/A (Study) High (Const.)


$5,000 (Study) TBD (Const.)

Signal Equipment Install backplates on all signal heads. Medium Short-term $5,000

Signal Equipment Install mast arms and provide overhead signal heads for Elm Street approaches.

Medium Mid-term $40,000

Signal Equipment Replace incandescent signal lenses with LED lenses.


Signal Equipment Remove R10-12 ―Left Turn Yield on Green (ball)‖ sign from the northbound signal mast arm.



Reprogram pedestrian phase and verify that phase time is adequate for pedestrians to cross the widest leg of the intersection.


Page 16



Left Turn Lanes

Install R3-8a graphical lane control signage for the Elm Street approaches, and R3-7L ―Left Lane Must Turn Left‖ signs for the Main Street approaches.


Left Turn Lanes

Add ―through and right‖ pavement markings for the Elm Street approaches, and reapply arrow and ONLY markings on all four approaches.


Pedestrian Accommodation, Signage

Replace ―Turning Traffic Must Yield to Pedestrians‖ signs with MUTCD-compliant signs. Place new signs on the far corner, where feasible.


Signal Equipment Repair and/or replace loop detectors. Low Mid-term $25,000


Reconstruct traffic signal at the intersection, replacing all existing equipment and incorporating all signal improvements listed above.

High Long-term $200,000


Pedestrian Accommodation

Study intersection phasing and timing to determine feasibility of an exclusive pedestrian phase. (Safety Payoff assumes implementation)

High Short-term $5,000

Pedestrian Accommodation Install detectable warning panels for all wheelchair ramp locations.


Pedestrian Accommodation Review potential for a diagonal crosswalk between the southwest and northeast corners of the intersection.

Medium Short-term (Study) Long-term (Const.)

$5,000 (Study) $150,000 (Const.)

Bicycle Accommodation/Geometry/Lane Assignments

Consider elimination of existing median on eastern leg of William Street and study potential re-use of available roadway width.

Medium Mid-term $5,000 (Study)

$100,000 (Const.)

Signal Equipment Install backplates on all signal heads. Medium Short-term $5,000

Page 17



Signal Equipment Install mast arms and provide overhead signal heads for the eastbound William Street approach.

Medium Mid-term $20,000

Signal Equipment, Signage Install an R10-10 ―Left Turn Signal‖ for the Main Street southbound left turn.

Medium Short-term $500

Pedestrian Accommodation, Signage

Replace ―Turning Traffic Must Yield to Pedestrians‖ signs with MUTCD-compliant signs. Place new signs on the far corner, where feasible.


Signal Equipment, Signage Install a YIELD sign for the Main Street southbound to William Street westbound movement.


Geometry/Lane Assignments

Replace existing ―Right Lane Must Turn Right‖ signs on the William Street westbound approach with R3-8b graphical lane control signage for the William Street


Pedestrian Accommodation Place bollards at the back of sidewalk on the southwest corner of the intersection.


Pedestrian Accommodation/Geometry/Lane Assignments

Study feasibility of removing delta islands on the northwest and southeast corner of the intersection.



$3,000 (Study) $50,000 (Const.)

Signal Equipment

Revise signal timing to incorporate a William Street westbound to Main Street northbound right turn overlap phase. (This improvement would require replacement of the existing right side overhead signal indication with a right arrow or ―doghouse‖ signal housing.)

Low Mid-term $10,000

Signal Equipment Repair and/or replace loop detectors. Low Mid-term $25,000


Reconstruct traffic signal at the intersection, replacing all existing equipment and incorporating all signal improvements listed above.

High Long-term $200,000

Page 18


Appendix A. RSA Meeting Agenda

Road Safety AuditStoneham – Main Street at Elm/William Streets

Meeting Location: Central Elementary School, 36 Pomeworth Street

Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:30 AM – 12:30 PM

Type of meeting: High Crash Location – Road Safety Audit Attendees: Invited Participants to Comprise a Multidisciplinary Team Please bring: Thoughts and Enthusiasm!!

10:30 AM Welcome and Introductions

10:45 AM Review of Site Specific Material • Crash Summary and Speed Regulations

• Existing Geometries and Conditions

11:15 AM Visit the Site • Walk the Main Street corridor, view both intersections

• As a group, identify areas for improvement

12:00 PM Completion of RSA • Finalize discussion on all areas for improvement

• Discuss potential safety improvements with pros and cons and record possible countermeasures

12:30 PM Adjourn for the Day – but the RSA has not ended

Instructions for Participants: • Before attending the RSA on November 30th, participants are encouraged to drive

through the corridor and complete/consider elements on the RSA Prompt List with a focus on safety.

• All participants will be actively involved in the process throughout. Participants are encouraged to come with thoughts and ideas, but are reminded that the synergy that develops and respect for others’ opinions are key elements to the success of the overall RSA process.

• After the RSA meeting, participants will be asked to comment and respond to the document materials to assure it is reflective of the RSA completed by the multidisciplinary team.


Appendix B. RSA Audit Team Contact List


Appendix C. Detailed Crash Data

Crash Data Summary Table Intersection of Main St (Route 28) @ Elm St; Stoneham, MA

# Crash Date Crash Day Time of Day Manner of Collision Light Condition Weather Condition Road

Surface Driver Contributing Code Ages Comments Injury Code

d/m/y Type Type Type Type Type D1 D2 D3

1 12/12/09 Saturday 5:15 PM Angle Dark - lighted roadway Clear Dry Disregarded traffic signs, signals, road markings 49 44 Vehicle went through red light

2 2/11/09 Wednesday 6:16 PM Angle Dark - lighted roadway Clear Dry Failed to yield to right of way 28 23 Left turning vehicle did not yield the right of way

3 10/11/08 Saturday 12:34 PM Angle Daylight Clear Dry Failed to yield to right of way 47 64 Vehicle went through red light 4

4 7/10/08 Thursday 5:08 PM Angle Daylight Clear Dry Unknown 36 26 Both vehicle making a left turn

5 4/11/08 Friday 5:19 PM Rear-end Daylight Cloudy Wet Unknown 47 61 66

6 1/6/08 Sunday 3:12 PM Angle Daylight Clear Dry Disregarded traffic signs, signals, road markings 44 61 64 Vehicle went through red light 3

7 10/10/08 Friday 3:52 PM Angle Daylight Clear Dry Failed to yield to right of way 41 41 Left turning vehicle did not yield the right of way

8 5/6/08 Tuesday 8:18 AM Rear-end Daylight Clear Wet Cellular telephone 47 4

9 11/10/08 Monday 6:03 AM Head on Dawn Clear Dry Failed to yield to right of way 73 Left turning vehicle hit a pedestrian crossing Elm St (Fatal Injury) 1

10 2/11/09 Wednesday 6:16 PM Angle Dark - lighted roadway Clear Dry Failed to yield to right of way 28 23 Left turning vehicle did not yield the right of way

11 11/12/09 Thursday 3:45 PM Sideswipe, same direction Daylight Clear Dry Unknown 16 22

12 6/7/10 Monday 8:03 AM Sideswipe, opposite direction Daylight Clear Dry Unknown 29 55

Vehicle was traveling south on Main st and turning left on Elm st, another vehicle was traveling west on Elm st and turning right on

Main St. Both vehicle's side mirror struck. Summary based on Crash Reports obtained from the Stoneham Police Department and Operator Reports

Crash Data Summary Tables and Charts Intersection of Main St (Route 28) @ Elm St; Stoneham, MA

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

M T W Th F Sa Su

6-10AM 10-2PM 2-6PM 6-10PM 10-2AM 2-6PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 99

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 97 99

0%

50%

100%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 99

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

100%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 97 99

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 97 99

<=20 20s 30s 40s 50s 60s 70s >=80

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

100%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 97 99

0%

20%

40%

60%

15-20 21-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+

8% 17% 0% 8% 8% 8% 8% 0% 0%

17% 17% 8%

17% 8%

17% 17% 17% 17% 8%

25% 8%

50% 17% 0% 0%

0% 17% 58% 8% 8% 8% 0% 0%

92% 8% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

83% 17% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

D1 D2 15-20 9% 0% 21-29 27% 36% 30-39 9% 0% 40-49 45% 27% 50-59 0% 9% 60-69 0% 27% 70-79 9% 0% 80+ 0% 0%

Ages

Weather Condition

Road Surface

Day of the week

Time of Day

Manner of Collision

Month

DryWet Snow Ice Sand, mud, dirt, oil, gr Water (standing, mov

J F M A M J J A S O N D

Monday Tuesday WednesdayThursday Friday Saturday Sunday

6 AM to 10 AM 10 AM to 2 PM 2 PM to 6 PM 6 PM to 10 PM 10 PM to 2 AM 2 AM to 6 PM

Single Vehicle CrashRear-end AngleSideswipe, same direc Sideswipe, opposite d

Sleet, Hail, Freezing R

Head on Rear to Rear Unknown

Clear Cloudy Rain Snow

Two D3 (In 60s)

Other

Fog, Smog, SmokeSevere Crosswinds Blowing sand, snow

Slush Other Unknown

Unknown

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%


0% 10%

20%

M T W Th F Sa Su

0%

100%

6-10AM 10-2PM 2-6PM 6-10PM 10-2AM 2-6PM

Crash Data Summary Table Intersection of Main St (Route 28) @ William St; Stoneham, MA

# Crash Date Crash Day Time of Day Manner of Collision Light Condition Weather Condition Road


d/m/y Type Type Type Type Type D1 D2 D3

1 5/23/10 Sunday 1:57 PM Angle Daylight Cloudy Dry Failed to yield to right of way 62 17 Exiting Stop&Shop parking lot

2 1/11/10 Monday 7:57 AM Rear-end Daylight Clear Dry Followed too closely 16 49

3 3/20/08 Thursday 8:27 AM Angle Daylight Cloudy Wet Failed to yield to right of way 59 47 Left turning vehicle did not yield the right of way 4

4 2/8/08 Friday 4:14 PM Angle Daylight Snow Wet Disregarded traffic signs, signals, road markings 53 33 67 Vehicle went through red light

5 4/5/08 Saturday 10:24 PM Angle Dark - lighted roadway Clear Dry Disregarded traffic signs, signals, road markings 17 84 Vehicle went through red light 4

6 11/6/08 Thursday 9:42 PM Angle Dark - lighted roadway Rain Wet Made an improper turn 50 38 Left turning vehicle struck a vehicle waiting for the light to go SB

7 10/20/08 Monday 2:40 PM Angle Daylight Clear Dry Made an improper turn 40 52

8 7/10/08 Thursday 7:25 PM Angle Daylight Clear Dry Unknown 30 64 Witness state one of the vehicle was travel at a high rate of speed

(Around 40-45mph)

9 12/19/08 Friday 10:42 AM Sideswipe, same direction Daylight Cloudy Wet No Improper Driving 31 Exiting Stop&Shop parking lot (vehicle fled the scene after the

accident)

10 2/5/09 Thursday 6:57 PM Sideswipe, same direction Dark - lighted roadway Clear Wet Other improper action 40 55 Vehicle was stopped for a red light, another vehicle behind him want

to move to the left lane and strike his rear left bumper

11 2/19/09 Thursday 6:52 PM Angle Dark - lighted roadway Rain Wet Inattention 18 42 The operator was looking at his GPS while making a right turn on to

William St

12 4/3/09 Friday 11:43 AM Angle Daylight Rain Wet Failed to yield to right of way 78 21 Left turning vehicle did not yield the right of way

13 2/21/10 Sunday 3:40 PM Sideswipe, opposite direction Daylight Clear Dry No Improper Driving 52 Left turning vehicle did not yield the right of way (vehicle fled the

scene after the accident)

14 3/31/10 Wednesday 8:03 AM Angle Daylight Rain Wet Failed to yield to right of way 47 34 Exiting Stop&Shop parking lot 4

15 8/25/10 Wednesday 4:17 PM Angle Daylight Rain Wet Disregarded traffic signs, signals, road markings 47 39

Left turning vehicle did not yield the right of way (The vehicle went through red light according to one of the witness) 4

16 9/21/10 Tuesday 8:16 AM Angle Daylight Clear Dry Failed to yield to right of way 30 44 Left turning vehicle did not yield the right of way

17 10/4/10 Monday 8:20 AM Rear-end Daylight Rain Wet Distracted 33 61 Summary based on Crash Reports obtained from the Stoneham Police Department and Operator Reports

Crash Data Summary Tables and Charts Intersection of Main St (Route 28) @ William St; Stoneham, MA


M T W Th F Sa Su

6-10AM 10-2PM 2-6PM 6-10PM 10-2AM 2-6PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 99

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 97 99

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 97 99

<=20 20s 30s 40s 50s 60s 70s >=80

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 97 99

0%

10%

20%

30%

15-20 21-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+

6% 24% 12% 12% 6% 0% 6% 6% 6%

12% 6% 6%

18% 6%

12% 29% 18% 6%

12%

29% 18% 24% 24% 6% 0%

0% 12% 71% 12% 6% 0% 0% 0%

41% 18% 35% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

41% 59% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

D1 D2 15-20 18% 7% 21-29 0% 7% 30-39 24% 27% 40-49 24% 27% 50-59 24% 13% 60-69 6% 13% 70-79 6% 0% 80+ 0% 7%

Ages

Weather Condition

Road Surface

Day of the week

Time of Day

Manner of Collision

Month

DryWet Snow Ice Sand, mud, dirt, oil, gr Water (standing, mov


Monday Tuesday WednesdayThursday Friday Saturday Sunday

6 AM to 10 AM 10 AM to 2 PM 2 PM to 6 PM 6 PM to 10 PM 10 PM to 2 AM 2 AM to 6 PM

Single Vehicle CrashRear-end AngleSideswipe, same direc Sideswipe, opposite d

Sleet, Hail, Freezing R



One D3 (67yr old)

Other

Fog, Smog, SmokeSevere Crosswinds Blowing sand, snow

Slush Other Unknown

Unknown

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%


0% 20%

40%

M T W Th F Sa Su

0%

50%

6-10AM 10-2PM 2-6PM 6-10PM 10-2AM 2-6PM

0%

50%

100%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 99

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 97 99

Crash Data Summary Table Main St (Route 28) Between Elm and William St; Stoneham, MA

# Crash Date Crash Day Time of Day Manner of Collision Light Condition Weather ConditionRoad


d/m/y Type Type Type Type Type D1 D2

1 6/19/10 Saturday 11:52 AM Rear-end Daylight Clear Dry reckless, careless, negligent, or aggressive manner 31 55 Vehicle backing out of the driveway of 225 Main St (Walgreens)

2 6/17/08 Tuesday 7:13 PM Angle Daylight Clear Dry Other improper action 19 51 Vehicle try to cross Main St from Farm Hill parking lot into the rear

entrance of 225 Main Street

3 4/9/10 Friday 7:21 AM Angle Daylight Rain Wet Failed to yield to right of way 44 44 Exiting a parking lot near 232 Main Street

4 11/11/08 Tuesday 6:48 PM Single Vehicle Crash Dark - lighted roadway Clear Dry Physical Impairment 54 OUI, vehicle struck pedestrian trying to cross Main Street but not in

crosswalk 3

5 2/25/08 Monday 8:55 PM Rear-end Daylight Clear Dry reckless, careless, negligent, or aggressive manner 20 22

6 11/7/08 Friday 10:43 AM Angle Daylight Rain Wet Failed to yield to right of way 45 88 Exiting a parking lot near 237 Main Street 4

Summary based on Crash Reports obtained from the Stoneham Police Department and Operator Reports

Crash Data Summary Tables and Charts Main St (Route 28) Between Elm and William St; Stoneham, MA


0% 5%

10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%


M T W Th F Sa Su

6-10AM 10-2PM 2-6PM 6-10PM 10-2AM 2-6PM

0% 20%

40%

M T W Th F Sa Su

0%

100%

6-10AM 10-2PM 2-6PM 6-10PM 10-2AM 2-6PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 99

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 97 99

0% 20% 40% 60%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 99

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 97 99

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 97 99

<=20 20s 30s 40s 50s 60s 70s >=80

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 97 99

0%

20%

40%

60%

15-20 21-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+

0% 17% 0%

17% 0%

33% 0% 0% 0% 0%

33% 0%

17% 33% 0% 0%

33% 17% 0%

17% 33% 0%

50% 0% 0%

17% 33% 50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

67% 0%

33% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

67% 33% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

D1 D2 15-20 17% 0% 21-29 17% 20% 30-39 17% 0% 40-49 33% 20% 50-59 17% 40% 60-69 0% 0% 70-79 0% 0% 80+ 0% 20%

Other

Sleet, Hail, Freezing R Fog, Smog, SmokeSevere Crosswinds Blowing sand, snow

Slush Other Unknown

Unknown

Snow Ice Sand, mud, dirt, oil, gr Water (standing, mov


Sideswipe, same direc


Sideswipe, opposite d

2 AM to 6 PM

Single Vehicle CrashRear-end Angle

10 AM to 2 PM 2 PM to 6 PM 6 PM to 10 PM 10 PM to 2 AM

Friday Saturday Sunday

6 AM to 10 AM

Monday Tuesday WednesdayThursday

S O N D

M J J A

J F M A

Ages

Weather Condition

Road Surface

Day of the week

Time of Day

Manner of Collision

Month

DryWet


Appendix D. Speed Regulations

Date post:	31-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	phungnguyet
View:	214 times
Download:	2 times

ROAD SAFETY AUDIT - Massachusetts Department of … · Road Safety Audit—Main Street at...

Documents