adam ahmad bill gramer

Adam Ahmad Bill Gramer

About the Speakers

• Transportation Design Manager assisting the Seminole Tribe of Florida

• 10 years of broad industry knowledge experience.

Adam AhmadPE, AICP, GC

• Transportation Manager of South West Florida Operations

• 29 years of broad industry knowledge experience – Planning Design Construction.

Bill GramerPE, AICP

Seminole Tribe of Florida

Identify Risk Factors

Screen Locations

Select Countermeasures

Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Presentation TopicsSeminole Tribe of Florida Transportation Program• Transportation Program Project Highlights• Systemic Safety Program Overview



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Seminole Tribe of FloridaSix Reservation in Florida

• Big Cypress Reservation• Brighton Reservation• Hollywood Reservation• Immokalee Reservation• Tampa Reservation• Fort Pierce Reservation

The 2010 Census reflects a Tribal population of 4,788 for Tribal members living on and off the reservations



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

STOF Transportation Goal

Working together, we set a goal to transition from a reactive approach

to a proactive approach for the STOF Transportation Program



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Asset Management

Asset Management/ Asset Condition Assessment FY15-Current• Collected Field Data on the Immokalee Reservation for the Transportation Infrastructure• Trained STOF Field Staff on how use the Trimble GeoExplorer with ArcPad extension.



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Asset Management to determine Maintenance Needs/ Cost, Life Cycle and Future Replacement Cost

Presenter

Presentation Notes

In 2013 we Collected Data in Google Earth and Trimble Units Tribal Wide. As you can see we located all the signs, lighting, drainage facilities, fences, striping curb and gutter.

Long Range Transportation Plan



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Identify Future Needs and Prioritize Capital Projects

Big Cypress Reservation Safety Plan

Safety Partners The following entities and stake holders are included in the development of the Roadway Safety Plan: • Big Cypress Public Works Department • The Seminole Police Department • The Seminole Fire Department • The Seminole Emergency Medical Services • The Seminole School District • The Seminole Legal Council • The Seminole Department of Transportation • The Seminole Department of Land Use Planning and Zoning • The Seminole Department of Information Technology • Florida Department of Transportation D1 • Florida Department of Public Safety • Florida Department of Public Health • Bureau of Indian Affairs Transportation



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Performed Reservation Safety Plan which validated “Safety Projects.”

Road Safety Audit

We participated in a joint Roadway Safety Audit with representatives from the Seminole and Miccosukee Tribes on Roadway that transitions between both their reservations Crash Data

Report

RSA Team Picture



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Performed Roadway Safety Audits to identify safety issues.

Program Evaluation

Community/Public Participation Plan

Request for Community Transportation Comments/Feedback in Seminole Newsletters



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Community/Stakeholder Involvement with LRTP, RSA, Safety Plan. Helped identify issue and garner a positive program image.

Safety Improvement on Arterial Roads

Josie Billie Highway Shoulder Improvements



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Safety Plan and RSA identified High Priority Projects both large and small.

Transportation DatabaseImmokalee Roadway BIA Centerline Mapping• Validate Roadway Centerline and ROW with BIA Roadway Inventory• Identify Maintenance Needs• Populate Database For Roadway Inventory Asset Management• Standardize Data collection workflows



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Road to The Systemic Approach

• Many miles to address• Not enough $$$• Need a Focused Plan

Solution: Systemic Process• Ability to identify at-risk locations based on the presence

of characteristics affiliated with severe crashes.• Allows for proactive approach to addressing crashes in

addition to traditional High Crash Location reactivetraditional approach.

As a team we have started the transition from a reactive approach to a proactive approach for

the STOF transportation program



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

However….

Definition of Systemic

Seminole Systemic Safety Goals: • Identifies Crash Locations• Prioritizes and Programs Safety Improvements• Validates Request for Safety Funding



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Project Selection Tool



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Systemic Safety Program

• Element 1: Selecting locations and countermeasures• Element 2: Achieving the correct balance between

systemic and traditional safety investments • Element 3: Evaluating the effectiveness of the systemic

approach.



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Element 1- Systemic Safety Planning Process

Step 4 - Prioritize ProjectsTask 1: Create Decision Process for

Countermeasure Selection Task 2: Develop Safety Projects Task 3: Prioritize Safety Project Implementation

Step 3 - Select Countermeasures

Task 1: Assemble Comprehensive List of Countermeasures

Task 2: Evaluate and Screen Countermeasures

Task 3: Select Countermeasures for Deployment

Step 2 - Screen and Prioritize Candidate Locations

Task 1: Identify Network Elements to Analyze Task 2: Conduct Risk Assessment Task 3: Prioritize Focus Facility

Elements

Step 1- Identify Focus Crash Types and Risk Factors

Task 1: Select Focus Crash Types Task 2: Select Focus Facilities Task 3: Identify and Evaluate Risk FactorsSeminole Tribe of Florida


Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 1- Identify Focus Crash Types and Risk Factors

Step 1 - Identify Focus Crash Types and Risk FactorsTask 1: Select Focus Crash

TypesTask 2: Select Focus

FacilitiesTask 3: Identify and

Evaluate Risk Factors

The objective of the first step in the systemic safety planning process is to identify risk factors commonly associated with each focus crash type experienced across a system.

• This step involves reviewing systemwide (i.e., macro-level) crash data and identifying potential risk factors for further analysis.



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 1 - Identify Focus Crash Types and Risk Factors

Step 1- Identify Focus Crash Types and Risk FactorsTask 1: Select Focus Crash




Recommended Minimum Data• System type (e.g., state, local)• Facility type (e.g., freeway, expressway, arterial, or

collector)• Crash type (e.g., road departure, right angle, head-on,

rear end, turning)• Crash location type (e.g., urban vs. rural, intersection

vs. segment, tangent vs. curve)• Location characteristics (e.g., topography, intersection

elements, segment elements)



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 1 - Task 1: Select Focus Crash Types





Young drivers (under 21)

Older drivers (over 64)

Aggressive driving and

speeding-related

Drug and alcohol-related

Inattentive, distracted,

asleep drivers

Pedestrian crashes Bicycle crashes Motorcycle

crashes

Heavy vehicle crashes

Train-vehicle crashes

Head-on and sideswipe

crashes

Workzonecrashes

Road departure crashes

Intersection crashes

What are the general characteristics of the crashes?

41% NY Study

26% NY Study



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 1 - Task 2: Select Focus Facilities





Segment versus intersection

Segment type, including freeway, multilane, two-

lane, and one-way (typical segment

divisions)

Intersection control type, including

signalized, unsignalized, and uncontrolled (typical

intersection divisions)

On tangent versus on curve

High-speed versus low-speed

Presence of street lighting

District or region

Where are crashes occurring?



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 1 - Task 2: Select Focus Facilities – cont.





Develop Crash Tree to Summarize Highest Risks Elements

• Rural• Undivided

• 2 Lanes• 55+ mph



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 1 - Task 3: Identify and Evaluate Risk Factors





Volume of Traffic Post Speed Limit Shoulder surface width and type Median width and type

Horizontal curvature, superelevation,

delineation, or advance warning devices

Horizontal curve and tangent speed

differential

Presence of a visual trap at a curve or

combinations of vertical grade and horizontal

curvature

Pavement condition and friction

Roadside or edge hazard rating (potentially

including sideslopedesign)

Driveway presence, design, and density

Presence of shoulder or centerline rumble

stripsPresence of lighting Presence of on-street

parking Intersection skew angle Intersection traffic control device

Number of signal heads vs. number of lanes

Presence of advanced warning signs

Intersection located in or near horizontal curve

Presence of left-turn or right-turn lanes

Allowance of right-turn-on-red

Why are the crashes occurring?



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 1- STOF Data Collection Template





• Developed data collection template• 100+ columns in each worksheet

• ~2/3 formulas for derived & crash data• ~1/3 manual collection via Google Earth, video/photo logs electronic

databases of roadway features and traffic characteristics, archives of as-built plans, aerial photography and street views, video logs, traffic control device inventories, and traffic flow maps

• Collected FDOT crash records from the six counties (Broward, Collier, Glades, Hendry, Hillsboro and St. Lucie) as part of FDOT Districts 1, 4 and 7 to assemble 5 years of crash data. FDOT crash data will be supplemented with any additional crash records provided by the STOF.

• Assigned allowable field inputs• Trained analysts on data collection• Performed QA/QC process



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 1- STOF Data Collection Results







Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

How do Risk Factors Influence Severe Crashes?

Step 2- Screen and Prioritize Candidate Location

Step 2 - Screen and Prioritize Candidate LocationsTask 1: Identify Network

Elements to AnalyzeTask 2: Conduct Risk

AssessmentTask 3: Prioritize Focus

Facility Elements

The objective of the second step in the systemic safety planning process is to develop a prioritized list of potential locations on the roadway system (e.g., segments, curves, intersections) that could benefit from systemic safety improvement projects.



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 2- Task 1: Identify Network Elements to Analyze




Facility Elements

Split corridors into elements with consistent design (i.e., cross-section) to establish homogeneous segments. Assign unique identification system to all roadway features.

1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 2- Task 2: Conduct Risk Assessment




Facility Elements

• Correlate crashes to roadway features• Segments: jurisdiction definition query + specified buffer distance• Curves: jurisdiction and alignment definition query + specified buffer

distance• Intersections:

• Where GIS intersection scan limits exist, specified buffer distance (varies by type)• Without GIS scan limits, specify larger buffer distance (varies by type)



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 2 - Task 3: Prioritize Focus Facility Elements

Step 2- Screen and Prioritize Candidate LocationsTask 1: Identify Network



Facility Elements

Assign risk ranking to roadway features



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 3- Select Countermeasures

Step 3- Select CountermeasuresTask 1: Assemble Comprehensive

List of CountermeasuresTask 2: Evaluate and Screen

CountermeasuresTask 3: Select Countermeasures

for Deployment

ObjectiveThe objective of the third step in the systemic safety planning process is to assemble a small number of low-cost, highly effective countermeasures to be considered for project development at candidate.



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 3 -Task 1: Assemble Comprehensive List of Countermeasures

Step 3 - Select CountermeasuresTask 1: Assemble Comprehensive



for Deployment

List of the safety countermeasures associated with each focus crash type.

FHWA’s Crash Modification Factor Clearinghouse

NCHRP Report 500 Nation Highway Traffic Safety Administration

•Graduated drivers licensing•Safety belt enforcement campaigns•DWI checkpoints•Street lights at rural intersections•Access management•Roadside safety initiatives•Pave/widen shoulders•Roundabouts

•Exclusive left turn signal phasing•Shoulder rumble strips•Improved roadway alignment•Cable median barrier•Removing unwarranted traffic signals•Removing trees in hazardous locations•Pedestrian crosswalks, sidewalk, and refuge islands•Left turn lanes on urban arterials

•Rumble strips (on the approach to intersections)•Neighborhood traffic control (traffic calming)•Overhead red/yellow flashers•Increased levels of intersection traffic control•Indirect left turn treatments•Restricting turning maneuvers•Pedestrian signals•Improve traffic control devices on minor intersection approaches

There are resources available to select countermeasures



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 3 - Task 2: Evaluate and Screen Countermeasures

Step 3 - Select CountermeasuresTask 1: Assemble Comprehensive



for Deployment

Evaluate and screen the initial list of countermeasures based on documented safety effectiveness at reducing the focus crashes, implementation and maintenance costs, and consistency with the agency's policies, practices, and experiences. Proven•Graduated drivers licensing•Safety belt enforcement campaigns•DWI checkpoints•Street lights at rural intersections•Access management•Roadside safety initiatives•Pave/widen shoulders•Roundabouts•Exclusive left turn signal phasing•Shoulder rumble strips•Improved roadway alignment•Cable median barrier•Removing unwarranted traffic signals•Removing trees in hazardous locations•Pedestrian crosswalks, sidewalk, and refuge islands•Left turn lanes on urban arterials

Tried•Rumble strips (on the approach to intersections)•Neighborhood traffic control (traffic calming)•Overhead red/yellow flashers•Increased levels of intersection traffic control•Indirect left turn treatments•Restricting turning maneuvers•Pedestrian signals•Improve traffic control devices on minor intersection approaches

Experimental•Turn and bypass lanes at rural intersections•Dynamic warning devices at horizontal curves•Static/dynamic gap assistance devices•Delineating trees in hazardous locations•Marked pedestrian crosswalks at unsignalizedintersections

Source: NCHRP 500 Reports

There are proven, tried and experimental countermeasures



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 3 - Task 3: Select Countermeasures for Deployment

Activity C - Select CountermeasuresTask 1: Assemble Comprehensive



for Deployment

The result of the countermeasure screening process is the selection of one or more countermeasures for each focus crash type.

Road Lane Departure

4’ Paved Shoulder

Safety Edge

Rumble Strip

6” Edgelines

Ground in Wet-Reflective Markings

Focus Crash Type

Countermeasure



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Assign multiple countermeasure for each focus crash type

Step 4 - Prioritize Projects

Step 4 - Prioritize ProjectsTask 1: Create Decision Process for Countermeasure Selection Task 2: Develop Safety Projects Task 3: Prioritize Safety Project

Implementation

ObjectiveUsing the data from steps 1,2,3; develop a priority list.



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 4 – Task 1: Create Decision Process for Countermeasure Selection


Implementation

• Develop project decision trees• Train analysts on project assignment• Distribute draft projects to respective traffic engineers for comment• Iterate process as needed based on client feedback



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 4 - Task 2: Develop Safety Projects


Implementation

Task 2: Develop Safety Projects• Providing a detailed

site plan• Identify specific

countermeasures• Estimate the

implementation cost• Summarize how the

site scored with the risk factors.

• Bundle projects into a design package for contract letting.



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Step 4 - Task 3: Prioritize Safety Project Implementation

Step 4 - D - Prioritize ProjectsTask 1: Create Decision Process for Countermeasure Selection Task 2: Develop Safety Projects Task 3: Prioritize Safety Project

Implementation

Prioritized for implementationFactors to Consider• Funding• Other programmed projects• Time to develop project plans • Expected crash reduction• Amount of public outreach needed• Environmental and right-of-way constraints



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

What else effects priority?

Element 2: Identifying Funding For Systemic Program and Implement

HSIP application form production• Develop

template of project form to adhere to HSIP submission requirements

• VBA Macro development for automated form printing

• Streamlined process for printing to PDF of all project forms for each District



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Element 3: Evaluating the effectiveness of the systemic approach

Proof: Increasing accumulation of risk factors (i.e., stars) equated to higher severe crash densities.

0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

0.035

0.040

0.045

0.050

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Seve

re C

rash

Den

sity

Perc

ent o

f Int

erse

ctio

ns

# of Stars

Severe Crash Density Severe Right Angle Crash Density % of Intersections



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

Element 3: Evaluating the effectiveness of the systemic approach

2003 2004* 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010* 2011* 2012 2013 2014County 1.80 1.55 1.30 1.33 1.31 1.10 1.20 1.19 1.19 1.17 1.09 0.89Trunk Highway 1.30 1.20 1.10 0.95 1.00 0.87 0.79 0.76 0.76 0.72 0.82 0.77State Total 1.20 1.10 1.00 0.87 0.89 0.79 0.74 0.72 0.72 0.69 0.68 0.63Interstate 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.34 0.45 0.46 0.23 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.20 0.24

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

2.00

Fata

lity

Rate

[Cra

shes

Per

100

Mill

ion

Vehi

cle

Mile

s] Minnesota Fatality Rates By System

Begin Preparation of

County Roadway

Begin Widespread

Deployment of Safety Strategies

Along County System

*Projection via linear



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

The goal is down and to the right!

How to get Started?

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/systemic/

“The systemic approach has offered the State of Minnesota another opportunity to further improve safety on our roadways by proactively addressing at-risk elements not typically identified through traditional

approaches. This has given us a way to fund and build safety projects in rural Minnesota, which in the past did not qualify for safety investments

due to the lack of identified “high-crash” locations.”– Sue Groth, State Traffic Engineer, MnDOT

Howard Preston E: [email protected]: (651) 365-8514

Adam Ahmad E: [email protected]: (239) 596-1715

Bill Gramer E: [email protected]: (239) 431-9222

Chad Polk E: [email protected]: (813) 281-7912



Screen Locations


Prioritize Projects

Identify Funding

Program Evaluation

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/systemic/

mailto:[email protected]




adam ahmad bill gramer

Documents