Agenda 12/14/2021 Item #16K 6 (County Attorney to advertise Ordinance establising pedestrian safety regulations)16. K.6
12/14/2021
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to direct the County Attorney to advertise, and bring back for a public hearing,
an Ordinance establishing pedestrian safety regulations in unincorporated Collier County, and to
repeal portions of Ordinance 87-60, as amended.
OBJECTIVE: To consider an Ordinance to be known as the Collier County Pedestrian Safety
Ordinance to enhance pedestrian safety in unincorporated Collier County.
CONSIDERATION: This past September the Collier County Sheriff's Office contacted the County
Attorney and began discussions with us on drafting an ordinance to deal with the safety issues involving
the growing number of panhandlers using County roads. The discussions expanded to include other
pedestrian uses of the right of way, which resulted in the proposed pedestrian safety ordinance for
consideration by the Board. The ordinance represents the joint work product of both Offices.
As background, Florida ranked second in the nation in 2019 for pedestrian fatalities. Locally, in 2019,
there were 130 pedestrians involved in traffic crashes in Collier County, among those 6 were killed and
105 suffered injuries. The Florida Department of Transportation's guidance on medians explains that
medians that are 6 feet in width or less are designed as traffic separators and are not designed for
pedestrian refuge; therefore, pedestrians under the proposed ordinance are prohibited from being within
those traffic separators for any purpose. The County Attorney would note that as a policy decision in the
early 2000's, the County began constructing 6 lane arterials (with turning lanes) as its primary grid
system, which roads often see vehicles traveling at relatively high speeds. To enhance pedestrian safety,
the proposed Ordinance prohibits movements by pedestrians in between lanes of travel and places
parameters as to how pedestrians can approach vehicles in the roadway as outlined in the diagrams
included as back-up to this item.
The proposed ordinance was drafted to balance pedestrian safety without unduly restricting certain
activities that are done in the right of way, including panhandling, charitable solicitation and political
campaigning. These activities are considered First Amendment speech, and Federal challenges to
limitations on these types of free speech activities are not uncommon. The proposed ordinance is based
on an ordinance from Utah that was upheld in Evans v. Sandy City, 944 F.3d 847 (10t1i Cir. 2019), wherein
the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit found that restrictions on pedestrian movements
on medians based upon the size of the medians were constitutional.
Consistent with this change, and based upon recent constitutional findings in the case of Vigue v. Shoar,
494 F. Supp. 3d 1204 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 12, 2020), subsections F and G of Ordinance 87-60, as amended,
which deal with charitable solicitations in the right of way, needs to be repealed.
FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated cost of advertising is $600.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed by the County Attorney and is approved as
to form and legality and requires majority vote for approval. - JAK
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners direct the County Attorney to
advertise, and bring back for a public hearing, the proposed Ordinance.
PREPARED BY: Colleen A. Kerins, Assistant County Attorney and
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Packet Pg. 2526
16. K.6
12/14/2021
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Pedestrian Safety Ordinance - 11.15.21(3)(1) (PDF)
2. Pedestrian diagrams (PDF)
3. Collier MPO Local Road Safety Plan 2021(2) (PDF)
4. fdot-median-handbook-sept-2014-edits-10-25-2017(2) (PDF)
Packet Pg. 2527
16. K.6
12/14/2021
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 16.K.6
Doe ID: 20682
Item Summary: Recommendation to direct the County Attorney to advertise, and bring back for a
public hearing, an Ordinance establishing pedestrian safety regulations in unincorporated Collier County,
and to repeal portions of Ordinance 87-60, as amended.
Meeting Date: 12/14/2021
Prepared by:
Title: Legal Assistant — County Attorney's Office
Name: Wanda Rodriguez
11/19/2021 2:40 PM
Submitted by:
Title: County Attorney — County Attorney's Office
Name: Jeffrey A. Klatzkow
11/19/2021 2:40 PM
Approved By:
Review:
County Attorney's Office
Office of Management and Budget
County Attorney's Office
Office of Management and Budget
County Manager's Office
Board of County Commissioners
Colleen Kerins
Level 2 Attorney Review
Debra Windsor
Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review
Susan Usher
Additional Reviewer
Amy Patterson
Level 4 County Manager Review
Geoffrey Willig
Meeting Pending
Completed
11/23/2021 1:48 PM
Completed
11/23/2021 2:03 PM
Completed
11/23/2021 2:18 PM
Completed
11/29/2021 8:45 AM
Completed
12/03/2021 2:19 PM
12/14/2021 9:00
AM
Packet Pg. 2528
16. K.6.a
ORDINANCE NO.2021 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, REPEALING PORTIONS OF
ORDINANCE 87-60, AS AMENDED, AS IT RELATES TO THE
ISSUANCE OF PERMITS FOR CHARITABLE SOLICITATIONS AT
INTERSECTIONS, AND CREATING A NEW SECTION OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
ENTITLED "COLLIER COUNTY PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
ORDINANCE"; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF
LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration published data
c
reflecting that, in 2019, Florida ranks second nationally in the number of pedestrian fatalities; and
WHEREAS, Collier County has a significant government interest in pedestrian safety and
this ordinance regulates conduct for the purpose of promoting pedestrian safety; and
E
0
WHEREAS, according to the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles
publication titled "Traffic Crash Facts — Annual Report 2019" available at
N
https://www.flhsmv.goy/pdf/crashreports/crash facts_2019.pdf, in 2019, there were 130
0
pedestrians involved in traffic crashes in Collier County, among those 6 were killed and 105
suffered injuries; and
v
M
WHEREAS, according to the report entitled Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization
N
Local Road Safety Plan, prepared by Tindale Oliver, non -motorized road users, angle, left turn,
and lane departure crashes accounted for 30% of all crashes in Collier County between 2014 and
2018, but resulted in 72% of the severe injuries and 89% of the fatalities; and
c
WHEREAS, according to the Local Road Safety Plan, approximately two-thirds of all
c
crashes in Collier County occur along County -maintained roadways, allowing Collier County the
0
ability to substantially self -manage safety outcomes on its roadways; and
WHEREAS, as stated on page 68 of the Florida Department of Transportation publication
as
vn
entitled "2014 Median Handbook, as updated October 2017," "for a median to be considered a
o
pedestrian refuge, the minimum median width must be 6 feet, but preferably at least 8.5 feet."
L
Based upon this report, the Board of County Commissioners finds that medians that are less than
6 feet in width are intended to serve as traffic separators and not designed to provide safe refuge
a
for pedestrians; and
E
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners wishes to repeal Subsections F and G
0
of Section Three of Ordinance 87-60, as amended; and
Q
[ 21-COA-02062/1681183/21
Packet Pg. 2529
16. K.6.a
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners finds that this Ordinance is narrowly
tailored to impose specific place and manner restrictions to protect the public health, safety, and
welfare by reducing the likelihood of serious bodily injury or death that results from conflicts
between vehicular traffic and the presence of pedestrians; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners seeks to prevent further pedestrian
fatalities or injuries within the County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION ONE: LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT.
The foregoing WHEREAS clauses are hereby adopted as legislative findings of the Board
of County Commissioners and are ratified and confirmed as being true and correct and are hereby
made a specific part of this Ordinance upon adoption thereof.
SECTION TWO: TITLE AND CITATION.
This Ordinance shall be known as the Collier County Pedestrian Safety Ordinance.
SECTION THREE: DEFINITIONS.
For the purpose of this division, the following definitions shall apply unless the context
clearly indicates or requires a different meaning:
Median means the portion of the roadway separating the opposing traffic flows. Medians can be
depressed, raised, or flush.
Motor vehicles means any vehicle which is self-propelled and every vehicle which is propelled
by electric power obtained from overhead trolley wires, but not operated upon rails, but not
including any bicycle or moped as defined in this section.
N
In
Pedestrian means any person afoot.
Person means any natural person, firm, co -partnership, association, or corporation.
Sidewalk is the portion of the street right-of-way intended for the use of pedestrians that is
between the curb and the adjacent property line. If there is no curb or right-of-way parking area,
it is the portion of the street right-of-way intended for the use of pedestrians that is between the
roadway and the adjacent property line. If there is no curb but there is a right-of-way parking
area, it is the portion of the street right-of-way intended for the use of pedestrians that is between
the right-of-way parking area and the adjacent property line.
Traffic separator means a barrier, such as a concrete wall, raised median, guardrail, fence, or
landscaped or gravel area, whether or not raised, that is less than 6 feet in width placed between
lanes of a roadway to divide traffic moving in opposite directions.
Travel lane means the portion of the roadway dedicated to the movement of motor vehicles
traveling from one destination to another where a motor vehicle may not remain stationary
[ 21-COA-02062/1681183/21
Packet Pg. 2530
16. K.6.a
indefinitely without eventually obstructing the free flow of motor vehicle traffic, and not including,
shoulders, bicycle lanes, or on the street parking. Travel lanes do not include sidewalks, bike paths,
private property, or streets closed to vehicular traffic. The term shall include bike lanes which are
delineated but a contiguous part of the street or highway pavement.
SECTION FOUR: JURISDICTION
The provisions of this section shall be in effect upon all streets and highways owned and
maintained by the county within the unincorporated area of the county over which Collier County
has traffic control jurisdiction.
SECTION FIVE: INTERACTIONS WITH OR IMPEDING TRAFFIC ON ROADWAYS
AND SIDEWALKS
1. A person shall not obstruct or prevent the free use of sidewalks or crosswalks by other
persons.
2. A person shall not willfully obstruct the free, convenient, and normal use of a public
roadway by:
a. Impeding, hindering, stifling, retarding, of restraining traffic or passage thereon;
b. Standing, sitting, walking, running, or otherwise remaining in the roadway; or
c. Endangering the safe movement of vehicles or pedestrians traveling thereon.
3. A person may not stand, sit, lie, walk upon, or stay for any purpose in between two
parallel motor vehicle travel lanes. This prohibition does not prohibit a person from
lawfully crossing a street.
4. This Section does not prohibit persons from doing the following:
a. Delivering or offering to deliver a tangible thing to an occupant of a motor vehicle
or receiving a tangible thing from an occupant of a motor vehicle at a legal stop in
a travel lane when the person is on the side of the vehicle that is closest to the edge
of the roadway and the vehicle is located in one of the following locations:
i. On a one-way street with only one travel lane, and the vehicle is located in
the travel lane;
ii. On a one-way street with two or more lanes of travel, and the vehicle is
located in the travel lane that is rightmost or leftmost from the driver's
viewpoint; or
iii. On a two-way street with two or more lanes of travel, and the vehicle is
located in the travel lane that is the rightmost from the driver's viewpoint.
iv. In all interactions with motor vehicles in the rightmost travel lane, the
person must stay on the rightmost side of the vehicle during the interaction
b. This prohibition shall not apply to the following persons:
i. Government law enforcement officers, fire rescue, or other government
employees acting within the scope of their governmental employment
and/or authority;
ii. A person conducting legally authorized collection of solid waste or
recyclable or recovered materials, construction work, or maintenance work,
or other legally authorized work;
[ 21-COA-02062/1681183/21
Packet Pg. 2531
16. K.6.a
iii. A person responding to an emergency, such as medical personnel, roadside
assistance, or towing and recovery personnel; or
iv. A person instructed to stand in the traffic separator by law enforcement
personnel or fire rescue personnel.
SECTION SIX: USE OF MEDIANS BY PEDESTRIANS
No person shall stand, lie, sit, walk upon, or stay for any purpose within any public median
that is six feet in width or less (a "traffic separator"), except within areas that are specifically
designated and marked for pedestrian access as evidenced by a crosswalk within the median. The
prohibition regarding pedestrians in the medians of less than six feet in width does not apply to the
following persons:
1. Government law enforcement officers, fire rescue, or other government employees
acting within the scope of their governmental employment and/or authority;
2. A person conducting legally authorized collection of solid waste or recyclable or
recovered materials, construction work, or maintenance work, or other legally
authorized work;
3. A person responding to an emergency, such as medical personnel, roadside assistance,
or towing and recovery personnel; or
4. A person instructed to stand in the traffic separator by law enforcement personnel or
fire rescue personnel.
SECTION SEVEN: REPEAL OF SUBSECTIONS F AND G OF SECTION THREE,
"EXCEPTIONS," OF ORDINANCE 87-60, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO
CHARITABLE SOLICITATIONS AT TRAVELED ROAD INTERSECTIONS.
Subsections F and G of Section Three, "Exceptions," of Ordinance No. 87-60, as amended,
as codified in Section 26-1(c)(6)-(7) of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, are N
hereby repealed as follows:
.
. ........
[ 21-COA-02062/1681183/21
Packet Pg. 2532
16. K.6.a
r�e!r: rrsr.�.rs�r�rss�xzs�r�srx_
■Mill
■
■IN
iA
III
will be ., ��oa eludes, bu4 ; of limited� ,•
o ;
N
Co
w
O
N
M
N
Q
[21-COA-02062/1681183/21
Packet Pg. 2533
16. K.6.a
eer:rs�:rset�i
Hill
IN
Will WMI
N
Co
CO
O
N
M
N
In
Q
[ 21-COA-02062/1681183/2]
Packet Pg. 2534
16. K.6.a
i
Iim
i�_ i-a
N
co
co
O
N
N
Q
[ 21-COA-02062/1681183/21
Packet Pg. 2535
16. K.6.a
rrav�!e��r_�:n�s!*e�srrss�see� _ _ .restr.�eee�i�sees:*es�:�!�sflow IN
■
SECTION EIGHT: PENALTY AND ENFORCEMENT
Any person who violates this Ordinance shall be prosecuted in the same manner as C4
misdemeanors are prosecuted. Upon conviction, a violator shall be punished by a fine not to exceed o
$500 or by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed 60 days, or by both such fine and
imprisonment. This Ordinance may be enforced by the Collier County Sheriff Office. This
M
enforcement procedure and penalty for violations of this ordinance is adopted under the express N
authority of §125.69(1), Florida Statutes.
SECTION NINE: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY
In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Collier County or other
applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of the Ordinance is held
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portion.
SECTION TEN: INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws and
Ordinances of Collier County, Florida, as a new Division 5 under Chapter 94, Article 1I1, Offenses
Involving Public Safety. The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to
accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or any other
appropriate word.
[ 21-COA-02062/1681183/2]
Packet Pg. 2536
16. K.6.a
SECTION ELEVEN: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, this day of
ATTEST:
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK
, Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form and legality:
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
2021.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Penny Taylor, Chair
[ 21-COA-02062/1681183/21
Packet Pg. 2537
ueia;s0pOd A4unoo a0illoo 041 0s14a0npe o; u014epUOWWo00N : Z990Z) swe.16eip ueia4s0p0d :;ugwLjoe;;y
N
I
k
V
a
z
7
4\0 .
ueia;s0pOd A4unoo a0illoo 041 0s14a0npe o; u014epu0uauao00N : Z990Z) suae.16eip ueia;sapod :}uGwLjoe;;y
-4—
N
v
C
N.
ue'JISOPOd A4unoo joilloo 041 0S14J0Ape 04 U014epUOWWO00N : Z990Z) swe.16elP ueIJ4s0P8d :4uqwLjoe4jv
IF
41
CJ
RC P.4
P4
ga
Q
Iq
Ln
AAA
COLLIER
Rb
Metropolitan Planning organization
Collier MPO
Local Road Safety Plan
Approved by MPO Board on May 14, 2021
Prepared by
rindale
Oliver
Packet Pg. 2541
lm�j - Wl6.K,6,c
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Organixaeon
Table of Contents
Section 1: Executive Summary.........................................................................................................1-1
Introductionand Intent..........................................................................................................................1-1
Key Conclusions and Recommendations...............................................................................................1-2
PlanOrganization...................................................................................................................................1-5
Section2: Statistical Analysis...........................................................................................................2-1
Introduction and Methodology..............................................................................................................2-1
CrashData Analysis................................................................................................................................2-1
TrafficCitation Analysis........................................................................................................................2-10
Emphasis Area 1: Non -Motorized Crashes...........................................................................................2-14
Emphasis Area 2: Intersection Crashes (Angle and Left-Turn).............................................................2-16
Emphasis Area 3: Lane Departure........................................................................................................2-18
Emphasis Area 4: Same Direction (Rear -End and Sideswipe) Crashes.................................................2-20
KeyConclusions....................................................................................................................................2-22
Section3: Recommendations..........................................................................................................3-1
Introduction and Problem Statement....................................................................................................3-1
Infrastructure Strategies........................................................................................................................3-3
Non -infrastructure Strategies...............................................................................................................3-29
Summary............................................................................................................................................3-36
Section 4: Implementation Plan.......................................................................................................4-1
LocalBest Practices............................................................................................................................................4-1
Conclusions............................................. ...............................................................................................
4-3
Relationship to MPO Processes..............................................................................................................4-5
Monitoring and Performance Measures.................................................................................................4-7
Appendices
Appendix 1: Glossary of Technical Terms
Appendix 2: Crash Data Quality Control Technical Memorandum
Appendix 3: Community Survey Summary
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan i
Packet Pg. 2542
W
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Organixaeon
SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction and Intent
Collier MPO's Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) is a collaborative and comprehensive plan that identifies
transportation safety issues and provides a framework for reducing fatalities and serious injuries on
highways and local public roads. This framework is developed through data analysis and public outreach,
along with the development and adoption of recommendations. The data analysis step allows for the
identification of emphasis areas which represent the most critical safety concerns within Collier County.
Emphasis areas are then matched with strategies and action steps for reducing roadway fatalities and
serious injuries.
These strategies will be grouped under the 4 Es of safety: Engineering, Enforcement, Education, and
Emergency Response.
In addition to a thorough analysis of safety issues in Collier County and development of recommended
strategies, other high-level objectives of this project include the following:
• Quality Control (QC) of Collier Crash Data Management System to ensure the best quality data
for development of the Plan and identification of potential areas of improvement for crash data
reporting.
• Develop implementable short-term recommendations to address critical safety issues.
• Provide input to Collier MPO's 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) to address long-
term strategies and funding needs.
• Identify ways the MPO can support FDOT's Vision Zero targets
The Collier MPO LRSP incorporates strategies currently being promoted by the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and will be implemented in
close coordination with these agencies, Collier MPO Member Governments, and local law enforcement.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 1-1
Packet Pg. 2543
W
16.K.6.c
Metmloditan Planning Orgarkadon
Key Conclusions and Recommendations
Based on the data analysis conducted as part of the Collier MPO LRSP, four key emphasis areas were
identified for further analysis and identification of high -crash corridors. The following crash types were
identified as having a high severity ratio (constituting a greater percentage of severe crashes than all
crashes) and accounting for a high overall number of severe crashes (more than 5% of total severe
crashes):
• Bicycle
• Pedestrian
• Left -turn
• Angle
• Hit fixed object
Additionally, rear -end, single vehicle, head-on, and run -off -road crash types either account for a high
frequency of severe crashes or have a high severity ratio. Based on similar characteristics and
countermeasure profiles, these crash types can be combined to form the following Emphasis Areas:
• Non -Motorized (Bicycle and Pedestrian Crashes)
• Intersection (Left -Turn and Angle Crashes)
• Lane Departure (Hit Fixed Object, Single Vehicle, Head -On, and Run -Off -Road Crashes)
• Same Direction (Rear -End and Sideswipe Crashes)
Table 1-1 is a summary of Emphasis Area crash statistics (2014-2018) excluding private roads and
interstate highways. Each emphasis area is discussed further in Section 2: including maps and tables
illustrating crash concentrations and high -crash corridors for each area. [A single crash may be
counted in more than one category.]
Table 1-1: Emphasis Area Summary
Total Crashes
Crashes
38,887
Non-
Motorized
862
Intersection
6,819
Lane
DepartureAll
3,829
Same
23,419
Injury Crashes
3,469
448
1,030
567
1,111
Total Injuries
4,719
470
1,621
747
1,492
Total Serious Injuries
928
136
326
201
187
Fatal Crashes
148
38
39
53
10
Total Fatalities
160
38
40
64
10
Severity Ratio
2.4%
15.8%
4.8%
5.2%
0.8%
Percent of All Crashes
NA
2%
18%
10%
60%
Percent of Severe Injuries
NA
is%
35%
22%
20%
Percent of Fatalities
NA
24%
25%
40%
6%
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 1-2
Packet Pg. 2544
f _ —
16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Organixaeon
In addition to the definition of Collier MPO-specific emphasis areas, the following key conclusions help
to formulate data -driven recommendations for reducing crashes, injuries, and fatalities in Collier
County:
1. Roadway Safety Relative to Florida: Collier County has fewer crashes, traffic injuries, and traffic
fatalities than Florida as a whole as a function of population and daily vehicle miles of travel
(VMT).
2. Major Roadway Focus: As is common in many urbanized Florida communities, a significant
majority of public road traffic crashes, including severe injury crashes, occur along elements of
the County's arterial and collector road network.
3. Local Autonomy: Because Collier County has a relatively sparse network of State highways and
many County -maintained roadways that carry significant traffic volume, approximately 2/3 of
crashes occur along County -maintained roadways. This means Collier County has substantial
agency to self -manage safety outcomes on its roadway network.
4. Driver Demographics: Driver age data show that older road users do not disproportionately
contribute to crashes in Collier County; however, inferential time -of -day data suggest that older
drivers (age 55+) also have less exposure to nighttime and rush-hour driving.
5. Moderate Enforcement: Fewer traffic citations per capita and per vehicle mile of travel are
issued in Collier County than in Florida as a whole and within a group of similarly sized coastal
counties.
6. High Severity Emphasis Areas: Certain crash types contribute disproportionately to
incapacitating injury and fatal crashes. Collectively, non -motorized road user, angle, left -turn,
and lane departure crashes account for 30% of all crashes but result in 72% of severe injuries
and 89% of fatalities.
7. High Frequency Emphasis Area: Though significantly less likely to result in severe injury than the
crash types noted above, rear -end and sideswipe crashes result in a significant number of
incapacitating injuries due to their frequency.
Based on the LRSP Emphasis Areas and the summary conclusions described above, infrastructure and
non -infrastructure strategies have been identified. These are summarized in Table 1-2 and 1-3 and
described in detail in Section 4:.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 1-3
Packet Pg. 2545
S�
Table 1-2: Infrastructure Strategies Matrix
16. K.6.c
caLLI R
Metmloditan Planning Orgarkadon
Strategies
Speed Management
I Non- T Intersection
Motorized
• •
• •
•
•
?
Lane
DepartureInfrastructure
•
Same
•
Alternative Intersections (ICE Process)
•
Intersection Design Best Practices for Pedestrians
Median Restrictions/Access Management
•
Right Turn Lanes
•
Signal Coordination
?
•
Rural Road Strategies including:
• Paved shoulder
•
•
• Safety edge
•
• Curve geometry, delineation, and warning
•
• Bridge/culvert widening/attenuation
•
• Guardrail/ditch regrading/tree clearing
• Isolated intersection cons p icu ity/geo metry
•
•
Shared Use Pathways, Sidewalk Improvements
•
Mid -Block Crossings & Median Refuge
•
Intersection Lighting Enhancements
•
•
•
Autonomous Vehicles (Longer -Term)
A.. Possible
TBD
•
•
•
Table 1-3: Non -Infrastructure Strategies Matrix
Non -infrastructure Strategies
Traffic Enforcement
Intersection
DepartureLane
Non-
RearEnd/
• Targeted Speed Enforcement
X
X
X
X
• Red Light Running Enforcement
X
X
• Automated Enforcement
X
?
• Pedestrian Safety Enforcement
X
Bike Light and Retroreflective Material
Give -Away
X
Young Driver Education
X
X
X
X
WalkWise/BikeSmart or Similar Campaign
X
Continuing Education
X
X
X
X
Safety Issue Reporting
X
X
X
X
Vision Zero Policy
X
X
X
X
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 1-4
Packet Pg. 2546
W
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Organixaeon
Plan Organization
The Collier LRSP is divided into three main sections as follows:
• Data and Analysis: This section includes an analysis of the County's traffic crash history, a
comparison of Collier County traffic citation data with the State of Florida and with "peer"
counties, and a discussion of the four emphasis areas described above. The Data and Analysis
Section of the LRSP also includes "Key Conclusions" derived from the analysis of the County's
traffic crash and citation data.
• Recommendations: This section begins with a problem statement that builds from the "Key
Conclusions" part of the Data and Analysis Section. Next Recommendations related to both
infrastructure and non -infrastructure strategies are presented where "infrastructure" refers to
public roadway design and operations and "non -infrastructure" refers to education/marketing,
law enforcement, and other strategies.
Implementation Plan: The LRSP Implementation Plan shows potential processes for addressing
each of the infrastructure and non -infrastructure strategies identified in the Recommendations
Section of the Report. Implementation measures are categorized by timeframe (short-term,
longer -term) and by order of magnitude cost. The Implementation Plan also includes
recommendations for evaluating and updating the Plan.
In addition to the three main report section, the LRSP also includes the following appendices:
• Glossary of Technical Terms (Appendix 1): This is a glossary of technical terms used in the LRSP
and is provided to make the document more legible for audiences that are not familiar with
traffic engineering terms.
• Traffic Crash Data Quality Control Technical Memorandum (Appendix 2): As part of the LRSP, a
five year history of Collier County's crash data was manually reviewed to ensure fatal and
incapacitating injury crashes and non -motorized crashes were located correctly and that key
data attributes were consistent with the crash report collision diagram and narrative. This
appendix summarizes the methodology and findings of that process.
• Community Survey Summary (Appendix 3): As part of the public outreach process for the LRSP,
a web -based community survey was distributed to better understand the perception and
attitudes of Collier County residents and workers with respect to traffic safety. The survey
questions and findings are provided in this appendix.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 1-5
Packet Pg. 2547
W
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Organixaeon
SECTION 2: STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Introduction and Methodology
Introduction
A critical input into the Collier MPO LRSP is analysis of traffic crash data and other relevant
quantitative data inputs. This section provides a description of the data analysis methodology and
findings used to inform the Collier MPO LRSP. Key elements of this memorandum include the
following:
• Analysis of countywide crash data distributions and comparison with statewide norms
• Analysis of traffic citation data for Collier County and comparisons with statewide citation
data and citation data from peer counties
• Establishment of Collier MPO-specific safety emphasis areas and identification of high -
crash locations based on Safety Emphasis Areas
• Key Conclusions
Methodology
The Collier MPO LRSP uses traffic crash data from the Collier County Crash Data Management
System (CDMS) for the years 2014 to 2018. As described in the LRSP Crash Data Quality Control
Memorandum (Appendix 2), fatal, incapacitating injury, and bicycle/pedestrian crash reports were
manually reviewed and key data fields were updated to ensure accuracy.
Next, crashes that occurred in parking lots and along private roads were removed from the data
sample, and those that occurred along the County's major roadway network were assigned ID
numbers from the major roadway database. This was done using a spatial query in which crashes
within 100 ft of a major roadway segment were assigned to that segment. Data from Collier County's
Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) were then used to understand crash data distributions in
the context of roadway system vehicle miles of travel (VMT), roadway characteristics, and other
factors.
To evaluate traffic citations, data were collected from Florida Department of Highway Safety and
Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) crash and citation reports and statistics web page. Data from Collier
County, the State of Florida, and similar -size coastal counties were downloaded as Excel
spreadsheets and compared.
A Glossary of Terms used in this section is provided as Appendix 1. Appendix 3 provides an overview
of a public outreach survey that was disseminated by the Collier MPO to help understand public
perceptions of traffic safety in Collier County.
Crash Data Analysis
This section of the LRSP Statistical Analysis summarizes the following traffic crash data distributions:
• Comparison of State and County Crash Rates
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-1
Packet Pg. 2548
W
16.K.6.c
Metmpokitan Planning Organixaeon
• Roadway Functional Class
• Major Roadway Maintenance Authority
• Major Roadway Number of Lanes
• Area Type (Urban/Rural)
• Lighting Condition
• Crash Type
• (At Fault) Driver Age
• Temporal Trends (Annual and Monthly)
State of Florida Crash Rate Comparison
Using data from FLHSMV (for consistency) the average number of reported crashes, fatalities, and
injuries from the State of Florida and Collier County are shown in Table 2-1. These crash totals are
represented as crash rates as a function of millions of daily vehicle miles of travel (DVMT) and as a
function of 100,000 persons. The data shows that Collier County has fewer crashes and traffic
fatalities and injuries than the State of Florida in terms of both population and vehicle miles of travel.
Table 2-1: Comparison of Collier County to State Average
Crashes
383,862
4,962
NA
Fatalities
2,972
38
NA
Injuries
242,709
2,829
NA
Daily VMT
582,491,060
9,939,709
2%
Crashes/m DVMT
659
499
24% lower
Fatalities/mDVMT
5.1
3.8
25% lower
Injuries/mDVMT
417
285
32% lower
Population
20,159,183
351,121
NA
Crashes/100k Pop.
1,904
1,413
26% lower
Fatalities/100k Pop.
15
11
27% lower
Injuries/100k Pop.
1,204
806
33% lower
Crash Distribution by Roadway Functional Class
Using the location data for each traffic crash report and a GIS layer representing Collier County's
major road network (arterial and collector roads), all Collier County crashes for 2014-2018 were
either assigned to a major roadway segment or classified as a local roadway crash. Figure 2-1 shows
the distribution of all crashes and severe crashes in Collier County. Approximately 3/4 of crashes
occurred along the County's major signalized arterial and collector road network, with fewer than
10% occurring along I-75 and fewer than 20% occurring along local streets.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-2
Packet Pg. 2549
MCGLUERW
Meaopotilan Planning organlxadon
. v. o M
All Crashes
Severe Crashes
■ Interstate ■ Arterials and Collectors All Other Public Roads
Figure 2-1: Crashes by Roadway Functional Classification
To put this data into context, Table 2-2 show how automobile traffic is distributed across Collier
County's roadway network as compared with roadways statewide. The table shows that
proportionally fewer vehicle miles of travel (VMT) in Collier County is handled by limited access
highways (interstate, turnpike, etc.) while a greater share of VMT is handled by arterial roads and
major collector roadways. These types of roadways tend have a higher number of reported crashes
per VMT than limited access highways or lower -speed minor collectors and local roads.
Table 2-2: VMT Distribution of Collier County and Florida by Functional Classification
Roadway Functional Classification
Interstate, Turnpike & Freeways
Florida
26%
Collier Crash Characteristics
21% Limited Access, Low Crashes/VMT
Other Principle Arterials
25%
50%
16%
59% Higher Speed, More Conflict Points
Minor Arterials
15%
29%
Major Collectors
11%
14%
Minor Collectors
2%
23%
2%
20% Lower Speed, Less Severe Crashes
(Locals
I 21%
180�
Crash Distribution of Major Roadway Crashes by Maintenance Authority
To understand how Collier County, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and the cities
of Naples and Marco Island each contribute to managing safety along the County's road network, it is
useful to look at how crashes are distributed based on roadway ownership/maintenance
responsibility. Figure 2-2 shows the distribution of all crashes, severe crashes, and vehicle miles of
travel along the county's major roadway network excluding 1-75.
The percentage of all crashes and severe crashes is more or less proportional to each maintenance
jurisdictions' overall VMT, with a slightly higher proportion of severe crashes occurring along State
roads compared with County -maintained roads. In more metropolitan areas of Florida, there is a
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-3
Packet Pg. 2550
f — /
16. K.6.c
!CLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Organixaeon
denser grid of State -maintained arterial roads than in Collier County. Accordingly, up to half of VMT
and half of all crashes in those jurisdictions occur on the State Highway System (SHS). In Collier
County, County -maintained major roadways that look and function like State highways carry a
greater share of the load and therefore account for a more significant proportion of crashes.
All Crashes
Severe Crashes
„mil Miles Travelled
■ State County City
Figure 2-2: Crash Distribution by Major Roadway Maintenance Authority
Crash Distribution of Major Roadway Number of Lanes
Another way to understand Collier County's crash history, especially when comparing concentrations
of severe crashes, is to look at the distribution of crashes by the number of roadway lanes along the
major roadway network (excluding 1-75). Referring to the inner ring of Figure 2-3, roadways with six
or more lanes account for half of arterial and collector roadway VMT and overall crashes but only
38% of severe crashes. Conversely, two-lane roadways account for 31% of VMT but 41% of severe
crashes.
All Crashes
Severe Crashes
." Miles Travelled
■ 6 or More ■ 4 Lanes 2 Lanes
Figure 2-3: Crash Distribution by Major Roadway Number of Lanes
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-4
Packet Pg. 2551
16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Metmpolitan Planning +7 oixaeon
Crash Distribution by Area Type
The proportion of all crashes, severe crashes, and VMT was also compared for the western, more
urban part of the county and the eastern, more rural part of the county using CR-951/Collier
Boulevard as an approximate meridian. Including travel on 1-75, approximately 60% of all VMT occurs
on major roadways to the west of and including CR-951, and these roadways account for nearly 3/4
of all crashes and about 57% of severe crashes.
Roadways in the eastern, more rural part of the county account for proportionally fewer crashes
overall but a somewhat higher proportion of severe crashes compared with VMT. These data,
combined with the prior analysis of crash severity by number of lanes, indicate a potential issue with
rural highway safety, including a potential for single -vehicle (lane departure) crashes.
All Crashes
Severe Crashes
.� KA3—Travelled
■ East of CR 951 CR 951 and to the West
Figure 2-4: Major Roadway Crashes by Sub -Area
Crash Distribution by Lighting Condition
In addition to the roadway characteristics of the County's crash history, it is also helpful to
understand key environmental conditions. One of the most useful of these is the lighting conditions
in which crashes occurred. Because crash report coding of lighting condition does not always reflect
whether nighttime lighting is functionally adequate (i.e., meets applicable AASHTO or FDOT
standards), it is better to focus on whether crashes occurred during daylight or non -daylight
conditions as a primary indicator while considering the specific non -daylight conditions as a
secondary measure.
The chart on the left of Figure 2-5 compares the observed lighting condition of all crashes and severe
crashes, and the chart on the right shows a comparison of all non -motorized crashes, severe non -
motorized crashes and all crashes. The overall percentage of non -daylight crashes (22%) is about
typical for Florida (25%). These data also show that severe crashes are more likely to occur outside of
daylight hours for both motorized and non -motorized crashes.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-5
Packet Pg. 2552
6.c
MCP"
Metmpokitan Planning +7rganixaeon
The preponderance of severe non -motorized crashes during non -daylight hours is also a common
finding statewide and nationally and reflects the fact that driver ability to observe, react, and
respond to non -motorized users in the roadway is drastically diminished at night due to the frequent
lack of adequate running lights on bicycles or use of retroreflective clothing by cyclists and
pedestrians.
All Crashes
Severe Crashes
■ Daylight ■ Dark -Lighted Dark -Not Lighted • Dusk - Dawn
Figure 2-5: Lighting Conditions
Crash Type Distribution
Severe
Non -Motorized
All
Non -Motorized
tko
A critical way of looking at Collier County's crash history is to understand what types of crashes occur
most frequently and what types result in the most incapacitating injuries and fatalities. Figure 2-6
shows all crashes ranked by crash type and the percentage of severe crashes for each. These data
show that rear -end crashes are the most common overall crash type (nearly 50%) and result in the
highest overall number of severe crashes, but the relative severity of rear -end crashes is lower than
many other crash types.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-6
Packet Pg. 2553
COLLIER 16.K.6.c
Metmpokitan Planning Organixaeon
Rear End
Sideswipe
Angle
Hit Fixed Object
Unknown
Left Turn
Right Turn
Bike
Head On
Hit Non -Fixed Object
Single Vehicle
U-Turn
Run Off Road
Pedestrian
47_30%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
All Crashes ■ Severe Crashes
Figure 2-6: Crash Type Distribution
Table 2-3 shows crash type and severity data shown in Figure 2-7 presented as a two -by -two matrix.
The top left quadrant represents crash types that have a high severity ratio (account for a greater
percentage of severe crashes than overall crashes) and also a high absolute number of severe
crashes (account for more than 5% of all severe crashes). This quadrant is the most important
strategically since eliminating a relatively small percentage of overall crashes can have a relatively
large effect in reducing life -altering injuries and fatalities.
Table 2-3: Crash Type and Severity Matrix
Bike
High Severity Frequency
Pedestrian
Rear -End
(> 5% of All Severe Crashes)
Left -Turn
Unknown/Other
Angle
Hit Fixed Object
Head -On
Sideswipe
Low Severity Frequency
Single Vehicle
Right -Turn
(<5%of All Severe Crashes)
U-Turn
Run Off Road
Hit Non -Fixed Object
Driver Age
In addition to understanding where and how crashes occur in Collier County, it is also useful to
consider demographic information about the people involved in crashes. Figure 2-7 shows the
relative contribution of different age drivers to crashes countywide and also shows the extent to
which each age bracket contributes to the County's overall population. These data indicate that
young drivers are more likely to be cited as "at fault" in crashes both in absolute terms and in
proportion to their representation in the County's population.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-7
Packet Pg. 2554
MW
COLLIER
Meaapokilan Planning Organlxadon
Although it is common to find that younger drivers are at a greater risk of being involved in a crash, it
is unusual to find that middle -age adult drivers are over -represented compared to older drivers. To
understand these data better, crash time -of -day data were compared to at -fault driver age for
drivers ages 54 and younger and 55 and up. Figure 2-7 confirms that some of the difference between
older and younger driver risk is related to time of day.
Across all time periods, drivers age 54 and younger account for 70% of all crashes, and drivers age 55
and older account for the remaining 30% of all crashes. Accordingly, the younger age group is over-
represented in late -night crashes and also during morning and afternoon rush hours and in the
evening. Conversely, older drivers very rarely are at fault in late -night crashes but are over-
represented during the midday period.
Although not definitive proof, these data imply that part of the lower risks attributed to older drivers
is that they are less likely to drive at night and may also avoid driving during the most congested
times of day.
Under 14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75-79
80-84
85+
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0%
■ Percent of Population ■ Percent of Crashes
Figure 2-7: At Fault Driver Age
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan
2-8
Packet Pg. 2555
100% 960�
80% h 78% 73% 77�0
60%
40%
20%
0%
38%
27%
4%
16. K.6.c
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Organixaeon
70%
30%
11PM- 6AM- 9AM- 4PM- 7PM-
5:59 AM 8:59 AM 3:59 PM 6:59 PM 10.59 PM
■ 54& Younger ■ 55+
Figure 2-8: Crash Distribution for Age 54 and Younger vs. Age 55 and Older
Temporal Trends
Figure 2-9 shows annual crash frequencies for crashes in Collier County for 2014-2018. Reported
crashes ranged from a low of approximately 7,600 crashes in 2014 to a high of nearly 9,000 crashes
in 2016. Nominally, the trend in crash frequency is increasing by about 130 crashes per year;
however, the year -over -year data are somewhat erratic, resulting in a low R2 value of about 0.20.
9500
9000
8500 Trend
8000
7500
7000
6500
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Figure 2-9: Crash Trend, 2014-2018
Figure 2-10 shows average monthly crash frequencies Collier County for 2014-2018. Over this period,
there was an average of approximately 700 reported crashes per month, with a monthly distribution
that generally reflects the overall seasonal traffic patterns exhibited in Collier County.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-9
Packet Pg. 2556
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Figure 2-10: Average Crashes per Month
Traffic Citation Analysis
rage
16.K.6.c
MCP"
Metropolitan Planning Organlxation
Traffic citation data are another lens through which to analyze traffic safety in Collier County. For the
LRSP, citation data for 2014-2018 were obtained from the Florida Department of Highway Safety and
Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) for Collier County, the State of Florida, and several "peer" counties.
Figure 2-6 shows the most common moving violations recorded in Collier County. "Exceeding the
Posted Speed" (speeding) accounts for more than half of all moving violations, followed by
"Disregard Traffic Control Device" (e.g., ran stop sign or yield sign) and "Disregard Traffic Signal" (ran
red light).
■ Exceeding Posted Speed
■ Disregard Traffic Control Device
Disregard Traffic Signal
■ Driving with Revoked or Suspsended License (without knowledge)
Failure to Yield ROW
. All Other (<5%)
Figure 2-6: Most Common Collier County Moving Violations
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-10
Packet Pg. 2557
16.K.6.c
caLUElt -
MetrapWitan Planning Orgarkadon
Figure 2-7 shows the distribution of traffic citations by issuing agency for Collier County. These data
indicate that the Collier County Sheriff's Office accounts for about 45% of all traffic citations,
followed by the Florida Highway Patrol at 39%. Naples and Marco Island collectively issue about 15%
of the citations countywide.
Table 2-3 compares traffic citation activity in Collier County with similarly sized coastal Florida
counties and Florida overall. These data suggest that Collier County law enforcement agencies issue
fewer citations on average than the State of Florida and most peer counties in terms of both citations
per capita and citations per vehicle miles of travel.
45
■ Florida Highway Patrol
■ City Police Department
■ Sheriff's Office
Other
Figure 2-7: Traffic Citation by Law Enforcement Agency (LEA)
Table 2-3: Traffic Citations per Capita and per VMTComparison
State and
County
Florida
Violations
i14-18)
1,978,741
Total VMT
(2014-18)
582,491,060
Citations per
100K VIVIT
340
Population
20,159,183
Citations per
100KP..
9,816
Collier
22,136
9,939,709
223
351,121
6,304
Brevard
29,592
17,784,554
166
568,367
5,206
Escambia
24,176
9,657,445
250
310,556
7,785
Lee
83,614
20,667,894
405
682,448
12,252
Manatee
23,208
10,038,803
231
358,616
6,472
Sarasota
33,880
12,052,890
281
400,694
8,455
Table 2-5 shows the types of criminal, non -criminal (moving), and non-moving traffic violations in
Collier County compared with Florida. Generally, high -frequency citation types in Collier County align
with those issued statewide; however, the following exceptions are noteworthy:
• Collier County issues a lower percentage of citations for driving with a suspended or revoked
driver's license. This may be due, in part, to the relative affluence of Collier County compared
with Florida.
• Collier County does not have red-light running cameras. These account for approximately
15% of moving violations statewide.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-11
Packet Pg. 2558
\% . t _ PPPF
-
\
COLLIER
Table 2-4: Traffic Citations (State Totals vs. Collier County) Collier LRSP Emphasis Areas
COLLIER•TOTALS
Infraction
DR/DL/Sus/RV
Average Percent of
Annual Annual Infraction
Citations Citations
CRIMINAL
1,287 25% DR/DL/SUS/RV
Average Percent of
Annual Annual
Citatiol Citations
149,717 37%
No/Imp/Expired Driver's
License
1,243
24%
No/Imp/Expired Driver's
License
87,385
22%
DUI
1,173
23%
DUI
45,791
11%
Other Crime
349
7%
Other Crime
36,220
9%
No/Imp/Exp. Tag
240
5%
No/Imp/Exp. Tag
20,857
5%
All Other (< 5%)
400
NON
9%
-CRIMINAL•
All Other (<5%)
30,648
8%
Exceeding Posted Speed
12,428
56%
Exceeding Posted Speed
746,886
38%
Disregard Traffic Control
Device
2,182
10%
Disregard Traffic Control
Device
302,601
15%
Disregard Traffic Signal
1,480
7%
Disregard Traffic Signal
203,096
10%
Driving with Revoked or
Suspended License (w/o
knowledge)
1,154
5%
Driving with Revoked or
Suspended License (w/o
knowledge)
116,733
6%
Failure to Yield ROW
1,053
5%
Failure to Yield ROW
93,217
5%
All Other (< 5%)
Exp/Fail Display Tag
3,850
NON-MOVING
2,637
17%
INFRACTIONS
25%
All Other (<5%)
Exp/Fail/ Display Tag
516,207
253,969
26%
28%
No Proof of Insurance
2,518
24%
No Proof of Insurance
215,538
24%
Seat Belt Viol
2,215
21%
Seat Belt Viol
159,253
18%
Other
1,185
11%
Other
81,346
9%
Exp/Fail Display DL
1,097
10%
Exp/Fail Disp DL
67,964
8%
Def/Unsafe Equip
536
5%
Def/Unsafe Equip
63,465
7%
All Other (<5%)
199
2%
All Other (<5%)
30,158
3%
Based on the data analysis described, four key Collier MPO LRSP emphasis areas were identified for
further analysis and identification of high -crash corridors. The following crash types were identified
as having a high severity ratio (constituting a greater percentage of severe crashes than all crashes)
and accounting for a high overall number of severe crashes (more than 5% of total severecrashes):
• Bicycle
• Pedestrian
• Left -turn
• Angle
• Hit fixed object
Additionally, rear -end, single vehicle, head-on, and run -off -road crash types either account for a high
frequency of severe crashes or have a high severity ratio. Based on similar characteristics and
countermeasure profiles, these crash types can be combined to form the following Emphasis Areas:
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-12
Packet Pg. 2559
16. K.6.c
COLLIER -
Metmloditan Planning Orgarkadon
1. Non -Motorized (Bicycle and Pedestrian Crashes)
2. Intersection (Left -Turn and Angle Crashes)
3. Lane Departure (Hit Fixed Object, Single Vehicle, Head -On, and Run -Off -Road Crashes)
4. Same Direction (Rear -End and Sideswipe Crashes)
Table 2-5 is a summary of Emphasis Area crash statistics excluding private roads and interstate
highways. Each emphasis area is discussed further in this section, including a summary of high -crash
corridors and a "heat map" showing crash concentrations for each emphasis areas. Because much of
Collier County is undeveloped, the maps focus on the western, urban part of the county and the area
around Immokalee and Marco Island.
Table 2-5: Emphasis Area Summary
T
Total Crashes
Injury Crashes
Crashes
38,887
3,469
Non-
Motorized
862
448
Intersection
6,819
1,030
Lane
DepartureAll
3,829
567
Same
23,419
1,111
Total Injuries
4,719
470
1,621
747
1,492
Total Serious Injuries
928
136
326
201
187
Fatal Crashes
148
38
39
53
10
Total Fatalities
160
38
40
64
10
Severity Ratio
2.4%
15.8%
4.8%
5.2%
0.8%
Percent of All Crashes
NA
2%
18%
10%
60%
Percent of Severe Injuries
NA
15%
35%
22%
20%
Percent of Fatalities
NA
24%
25%
40%
6%
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-13
Packet Pg. 2560
16. K.6.c
It. -
cOLul:R
�. .. Metmpokitan Planning Orgarkadon
Emphasis Area 1: Non -Motorized Crashes
Non -motorized crashes (crashes in which a pedestrian or bicyclist are involved) are a statewide
Emphasis Area and an important component of traffic safety challenges in Collier County. These
crashes account for only 2% of all reported crashes in Collier County but constitute 15% of the
county's severe injury crashes and 24% of the county's crash fatalities.
Table 2-6 shows a list of major roadway corridors with the most non -motorized crashes, and Figure
2-8 is a "heat map" of non -motorized user crashes. Consistent with prior Collier MPO
bicycle/pedestrian safety analyses, key focus areas include the area defined by US-41 (Tamiami Trail),
Airport Road, and Davis Boulevard and SR-29 through Immokalee. Other critical corridors are listed in
Table 2-7 and highlighted in Figure 2-9.
Table 2-6: Non -Motorized High Crash Corridors 2014-2018
On
Airport Rd
Tamiami Trail E
Tamiami Trail N
_40NEF'ro
US-41 (Tamiami Trail)
Davis Blvd
Vanderbilt Beach Rd
Street
Davis Blvd
Airport Rd
Immokalee Rd
31
24
22
2
2
1
3
2
0
SR 29
1st St
9th St
21
1
4
Bayshore Dr
Thomasson Dr
US-41(Tamiami Trail)
20
0
3
Radio Rd
Livingston Rd
Santa Barbara Blvd
20
0
2
SR 29
9th St
Immokalee Dr
19
0
5
Tamiami Trail E
Airport Rd
Rattlesnake Hammock Rd
19
0
2
Collier Blvd
Vanderbilt Beach Rd
Immokalee Rd
16
0
1
Lake Trafford Rd
Carson Rd
SR-29
16
1
3
Immokalee Rd
Stockade Rd
SR-29
15
0
2
Davis Blvd
Lakewood Blvd
County Barn Rd
14
0
2
SR-29
Immokalee Dr
CR-29A North
14
1
2
Airport Rd
Davis Blvd
North Rd
13
0
2
Airport Rd
Radio Rd
Golden Gate Pkwy
13
0
1
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-14
Packet Pg. 2561
R;a;eS ueu3Sapad R;unoo aallloo e43 OSluanpe o; uoi;epUOMMODab : Z990Z) (MUZ ueld AaabeS peoa leao'l pdW JOHIOO :;uawyOLRV F,--�
c1Y ^ g
z Y
I � V
N
u�
MLIM
IM
fe
d
- w. if 0
d.
m A
b I
Ask-
w
.16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Orgamxaeon
Emphasis Area 2: Intersection Crashes (Angle and Left -Turn)
Angle and left -turn crashes involve either two motor vehicles traveling at roughly perpendicular
directions or a motor vehicle making a left turn across the path of an oncoming vehicle. Because
these crashes are often extremely violent, high-energy events, they are more likely to result in
incapacitating or fatal injuries than crashes in which vehicles are traveling in the same direction.
These crashes account for only 18% of all crashes but 35% of severe injuries and 25% of fatalities.
Table 2-7 shows a list of major roadway corridors with the most angle and left turn crashes based
on the data mapped in Figure 2-9. Many of the high -crash corridors include one or more high -
volume arterial intersections; however, some corridors, including Golden Gate Parkway (Santa
Barbara Blvd. to Collier Blvd.) include crash concentrations associated with lower -volume
intersections.
Table 2-7: Intersection (Angle and Left -Turn) High -Crash Corridors 2014-2018
Golden Gate Pkwy
Santa Barbara Blvd
Collier Blvd
190
0
4
Tamiami Trail N
SR-84 (Davis Blvd)
CR-851
136
0
1
(Goodlette Rd S)
Collier Blvd
Golden Gate Pkwy
Green Blvd
111
1
4
Park Shore Dr/
Tamiami Trail N
12th Ave
106
0
4
Cypress Woods Dr
Goodlette-Frank Rd
US-41 (Tamiami Trail)
Golden Gate Pkwy
87
0
3
Park Shore Dr/
Pine Ridge Rd/
Tamiami Trail N
Cypress Woods Dr
Seagate Dr
84
1
2
Santa Barbara Blvd
Golden Gate Pkwy
Green Blvd
82
0
1
Airport Rd
Radio Rd
Golden Gate Pkwy
81
1
1
Airport Rd
Pine Ridge Rd
Orange Blossom Dr
74
2
1
Goodlette-Frank Rd
Golden Gate Pkwy
Pine Ridge Rd
74
0
4
Pine Ridge Rd
Airport Rd
Livingston Rd
73
0
2
Collier Blvd
Vanderbilt Beach Rd
Immokalee Rd
67
0
4
SR-29
9th St
Immokalee Dr
67
0
2
Pine Ridge Rd/Seagate
Tamiami Trail N
Gulf Park Dr
65
1
4
Dr
Tamiami Trail E
Airport Rd
Rattlesnake
63
1
2
Hammock Rd
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-16
Packet Pg. 2563
R;9;eg ueu3s9p9d R;unoo a9llloo 943 9slu9npe o; uoi;epUOMMOD9b : Z990Z) (MUZ Mid A191eg peo21 leoo'l OdW JOHIOO 4u9wyOLRV
Y €
LW
e
�e
3
01
Vn
WCOLLIERWO
_ Metmpcgitan Planning OrWnixauon
Emphasis Area 3: Lane Departure
Lane departure crashes, referred to as "run -off -road" crashes, include crash types in which a single
vehicle leaves the roadway and either strikes a fixed object or otherwise crashes. Head-on crashes,
though rare events, are included in this Emphasis Area as they are precipitated by similar
circumstances. Because these types of crashes often involve vehicles traveling at high speeds, they
are more likely to have severe outcomes. In Collier County, roadway departure crashes account for
only 10% of overall crashes but are responsible for 22% of severe injuries and 40% of fatalities.
Table 2-8 shows a list of major roadway corridors with the most lane departure crashes and Figure
2-10 shows a "heat map" of non -motorized user crashes. While more lane departure crashes occur in
the along busier roadways west of and including Collier Boulevard, approximately 40% of these
crashes occur along rural highways and local roadways in the eastern part of CollierCounty.
Immokalee Rd
Immokalee Rd
Golden Gate Blvd
Airport Rd
Airport Rd
Goodlette-Frank Rd
Collier Blvd
Tamiami Trail N
Tamiami Trail N
Collier Blvd
Collier Blvd
Table 2-8: Lane Departure High Crash Corridors 2014-2018
Collier Blvd
Wilson Blvd
Oil Well Rd
Stockade Rd
Collier Blvd
Wilson Blvd
Radio Rd
Golden Gate Pkwy
Pine Ridge Rd
Orange Blossom Drive
US-41 (Tamiami Trail)
Golden Gate Pkwy
Vanderbilt Beach Rd
Immokalee Rd
51
1 3
45
0 4
43
0 2
39
0 1
35
0 1
35
0 1
33 0 2
Park Shore Dr/
12th Ave 33 0 0
Cypress Woods Dr
SR-84 (Davis Blvd) CR-851 33 0 0
(Goodlette Rd S)
US-41 (Tamiami Trail) Rattlesnake 32 0 2
Hammock Rd
Rattlesnake Davis Blvd 31 0 2
Hammock Rd
Collier Blvd Mainsail Drive Manatee Rd 29 0 0
Tamiami Trail E Rattlesnake Treetops Dr 29 0 2
Hammock Rd
Vanderbilt Beach Rd
Logan Blvd
Collier Blvd
28 0 1
Pine Ridge Rd
Airport Rd
Livingston Rd
28 0 1
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-18
Packet Pg. 2565
R;9;eg ueu3s9p9d R;unoo a9llloo 943 9slu9npe o; uoi;epUOMMOD9b : Z990Z) (MUZ Mid A191eg peo21 leoo'l OdW JOHIOO 4u9wyOLRV
Y €
LW
e
�e
7
N
a
IL
v
U
a
N
16. K.6.c
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Emphasis Area 4: Same Direction (Rear -End and Sideswipe) Crashes
Rear -end and sideswipe crashes are much less likely to result in incapacitating or fatal injuries than crash
types included in the other three emphasis areas; however, these crashes are the most common type of
crash to occur and contribute to injuries and deaths as a function of their frequency.
Table 2-9 shows a list of major roadway corridors with the most non -motorized crashes and Figure 2-11
shows a "heat map" of non -motorized user crashes. Consistent with prior Collier MPO
Bicycle/Pedestrian safety analyses, key focus areas include the area defined by US 41 (Tamiami Trail),
Airport Road, and Davis Boulevard and SR 29 through the town of Immokalee.
Table 2-9: Same Direction High Crash Corridors 2014-2018
On
Crash
Fatal
Incap. Injury
Golden Gate
Parkway
Santa Barbara Boulevard
Collier Boulevard
190
0
4
Tamiami Trail
SR 84 (Davis Blvd)
CR 851 (Goodlette Rd
136
0
1
North
South)
Collier Boulevard
Golden Gate Pkwy
Green Boulevard
111
1
4
Tamiami Trail
Park Shore Dr / Cypress
12th Ave
106
0
4
North
Woods Dr
Goodlette-Frank
US 41 (Tamiami Trail)
Golden Gate Parkway
87
0
3
Road
Tamiami Trail
Park Shore Dr / Cypress
Pine Ridge Rd / Seagate
North
Woods Dr
Dr
84
1
2
Santa Barbara
Golden Gate Parkway
Green Boulevard
82
0
1
Boulevard
Airport Road
Radio Road
Golden Gate Parkway
81
1
1
Airport Road
Pine Ridge Road
Orange Blossom Drive
74
2
1
Goodlette-Frank
Golden Gate Parkway
Pine Ridge Road
74
0
4
Road
Pine Ridge Road
Airport Road
Livingston Road
73
0
2
Collier Boulevard
Vanderbilt Beach Road
Immokalee Road
67
0
4
SR 29
9th Street
Immokalee Dr
67
0
2
Tamiami Trail
Pine Ridge Rd / Seagate
North
Dr
Gulf Park Drive
65
1
4
Tamiami Trail
Rattlesnake Hammock
Airport Road
63
1
2
East
Road
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-20
Packet Pg. 2567
AIDJUS ueu;sapad Alunoo jallloo ayl eslljanpe o; uol;epuawwooaa : Z890Z) (ZhZOZ veld AlOILS PLOM leool OdW Jall103 :;uawyoe;;y
Y a
�Lw
e
pe➢
�1
b �
}
F
q4
W
3
� N
N
N
O
P
b b
N
z
lm�
16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Orgarhaeon
Key Conclusions
Based on the data analysis summarized above, the following key conclusions are evident:
• Collier County has fewer crashes, traffic injuries, and traffic fatalities than Florida as a whole
as a function of population and daily VMT.
• As is common in many urbanized Florida communities, a significant majority of public road
traffic crashes, including severe injury crashes, occurs along elements of the County's
arterial and collector road network.
• Because Collier County has a relatively sparse network of State highways and many County -
maintained roadways that carry significant traffic volume, approximately 2/3 of crashes
occur along County -maintained roadways. This means Collier County has substantial agency
to self -manage safety outcomes on its roadway network.
• Driver age data show that older road users do not disproportionately contribute to crashes in
Collier County; however, inferential time -of -day data suggest that older drivers (age 55+) also
have less exposure to nighttime and rush-hour driving.
• Tindale Oliver noted that fewer traffic citations per capita and per vehicle mile of travel are issued in
Collier County than in Florida and within a group of similarly -sized coastal counties. The County
Sheriff's Office responded that "This may be misleading in substance. Viewing Table 2-3 on P. 2-11,
the number of citations are not critically lower on a statistical level than Manatee, Brevard,
Escambia, and Sarasota Counties. Further, these numbers only count citations. They do not count
the overall number of traffic stops and warnings issued. As noted in a footnote below Table 2-3,
Collier County does not have red light cameras that cause number variations in other Florida
jurisdictions; red light cameras issuing a 100% citation rate for identified violators. Beyond that,
Conclusion #5 listed 2 paragraphs below this sentence articulates the significant impact
municipalities have on citation statistics and the small municipalities in Collier County.
Of note as well is that Manatee, Brevard, Escambia, Lee, and Sarasota Counties all have Florida
Highway Patrol (FHP) Troop stations located within their county boundaries. FHP can be relied upon
for issuing a notable number of citations from their Troopers. Collier County no longer has a Troop
Station located in its boundaries; it was removed years ago. Collier County relies upon the Lee
County Troop Station to supply Troopers to Collier County which can cause staffing anomalies in the
county as the local Troopers must travel to north of RSW for administrative functions."
• Certain crash types contribute disproportionately to incapacitating injury and fatal crashes.
Collectively, non -motorized road user, angle, left -turn, and lane departure crashes account
for 30% of all crashes but result in 72% of severe injuries and 89% of fatalities.
• Though significantly less likely to result in severe injury than the crash types discussed above,
rear -end and sideswipe crashes result in a significant number of incapacitating injuries due to
their frequency.
• High crash corridors identified in the LRSP can be flagged for consideration of safety mitigation
measures in association with other roadway improvements.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-22
Packet Pg. 2569
i \\
... MW16.K.6.c
.C....ER
Metropolitan Planning "nixation
3: RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction and Problem Statement
Based on the data analysis documented in the preceding section on Data Analysis , the following key
conclusions help to formulate data -driven recommendations for reducing crashes, injuries, and
fatalities in Collier County:
Roadway Safety Relative to Florida: Collier County has fewer crashes, traffic injuries, and
traffic fatalities than Florida as a whole as a function of population and daily vehicle miles of
travel (VMT).
2. Major Roadway Focus: As is common in many urbanized Florida communities, a significant
majority of public road traffic crashes, including severe injury crashes, occur along elements
of the county's arterial and collector road network.
3. Local Autonomy: Because Collier County has a relatively sparse network of State highways
and many County -maintained roadways that carry significant traffic volume, approximately
2/3 of crashes occur along County -maintained roadways. This means Collier County has
substantial agency to self -manage safety outcomes on its roadway network.
4. Driver Demographics: Driver age data show that older road users do not disproportionately
contribute to crashes in Collier County; however, inferential time -of -day data suggest that
older drivers (age 55+) also have less exposure to nighttime and rush-hour driving.
5. Moderate Enforcement: Fewer traffic citations per capita and per vehicle mile of travel are
issued in Collier County than in Florida as a whole and within a group of similarly -sized
coastal counties.
6. High Severity Emphasis Areas: Certain crash types contribute disproportionately to
incapacitating injury and fatal crashes. Collectively, non -motorized road user, angle, left -turn,
and lane departure crashes account for 30% of all crashes but result in 72% of severe injuries
and 89% of fatalities.
7. High Frequency Emphasis Area: Though significantly less likely to result in severe injury than
the crash types noted above, rear -end and sideswipe crashes result in a significant number
of incapacitating injuries due to their frequency.
8. High Crash Corridors and Intersections identified in the LRSP can be flagged for integration of
safety mitigation measures in association with other roadway improvements.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-1
Packet Pg. 2570
NO 16.K.6.c
PCOLLIMER—W*
f Metmpolitan Manning "nixation
Each of these conclusions is considered below to begin formulating recommended strategies.
Conclusions #1 and 4: Roadway Safety Relative to Florida and Driver Demographics
Data from 2014-2018 indicate that Collier County experiences approximately 25% fewer traffic
crashes and fatalities than Florida as a whole when normalized for both population and VMT.
Understanding factors that contribute to this can help to build on Collier County's existing strengths
Some potential explanations for Collier County's relatively low rate of traffic crashes and fatalities
compared with Florida as a whole include the following:
Demographics: Collier County has a lower proportion of younger drivers than Florida as a whole. Statewide,
approximately 18.4% of the population is ages 15-29, whereas in Collier
County only 14.4% of the population falls within this age range. Less experienced drivers are
more likely to be involved in crashes than older drivers, so a community with proportionately
fewer younger drivers should exhibit fewer crashes per capita than average. When statewide
crash rates for each age bracket are applied to Collier County's population, the expected
number of crashes in Collier County is approximately 90% of statewide figures. Accordingly,
driver demographics may explain part of the reason why Collier County has fewer crashes
per capita and per VMT than Florida overall.
• Roadway Characteristics: Compared with Florida as a whole, Collier County has a similar
proportion of VMT on relatively safe roadway types such as limited access highway, minor
collector streets, and local roads but carries substantially less VMT on signalized principal
arterials and, instead, handles more traffic with its minor arterial network. Although both
principal arterials and minor arterials are focused on longer -distance mobility, minor
arterials tend to be more compact and generally operate at somewhat lower ambient
speeds. Although difficult to quantify, this may, in part, contribute to Collier County's
superior safety performance compared with Florida as a whole.
• Land Use and Network Characteristics: With some exceptions, commercial land uses in
Collier County tend to be organized around major intersection nodes rather than along
thoroughfare roadways. This means that between major intersections, access points are
limited, resulting in fewer potential conflicts.
As Collier County continues to grow, it is reasonable to expect its demographic profile will "regress to
the mean," resulting in a more normal proportion of young drivers and associated increase in
crashes. Strategies to improve driver training and education for younger drivers and services to
provide mobility for older road users are discussed in Section 3. Strategies to further enhance safety
on the county's major roadway network and maintain good access controls are discussed in Section
2.
Conclusions #2 and #3: Major Roadway Focus and Local Autonomy
Because a majority of crashes in Collier County occur along County -maintained minor arterial and
collector roadways, Collier County, in conjunction with the Collier MPO, has the ability to be
proactive in making roadway safety infrastructure investments while continuing to coordinate with
the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to enhance safety on 1-75 and major state highways
such as US-41 and SR-29, Davis Boulevard, and State -maintained sections of Collier Boulevard.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-2
Packet Pg. 2571
16.K.6.c
CULtIER
Metropolitan Planning "nixaeon
Specific strategies applicable to the county's roadway network are discussed in Section 2.
Conclusion #5: Moderate Enforcement Efforts
Statewide, more than half of Floridians live in municipalities, and just over half of all traffic citations
are issued by City police departments, with the remainder split roughly 60/40 between County
Sheriffs and the Florida Highway Patrol. Because the municipalities in Collier County account for only
about 10% of the county's population, the role of City police departments in traffic enforcement is
less prevalent in Collier County, with approximately 15% of citations being issued by municipal police
Section 3 addresses strategies to target and enhance traffic enforcement where appropriate.
The Collier County Sheriff's Office notes that "Statewide, more than half of Floridians live in
municipalities, and just over half of all traffic citations are issued by City police departments, with the
remainder split roughly 60/40 between County Sheriffs and the Florida Highway Patrol. Because the
municipalities in Collier County account for only about 10% of the county's population, the role of
City police departments in traffic enforcement is less prevalent in Collier County, with approximately
15% of citations being issued by municipal police. Section 3 addresses strategies to target and
enhance traffic enforcement where appropriate."
Conclusions #6 and 7: High Severity Ratio and High Frequency Crash Emphasis Areas
Because specific crash types are more likely to result in incapacitating injury or death, it is logical that
these should be the focus of both infrastructure and non -infrastructure strategies to enhance traffic
safety in Collier County. All types of crashes and crash severities may be reduced by speed
management strategies and strategies to combat distracted driving, whereas other crash types
respond to specific infrastructure and non -infrastructure interventions.
The remainder of this section offers infrastructure and non -infrastructure strategies that relate to
the conclusions from the LRSP's data and analysis described above.
Conclusion #8: High Crash Corridors and Intersections
The LRSP identifies High Crash Corridors / Intersections and strategies to address the prevalent crash types
These corridors can be flagged for integration of safety mitigation measures in association with other
roadway improvements.
Infrastructure Strategies
The term "substantive safety" refers to the measurable safety performance of a roadway or
roadway system, usually expressed in terms of crashes, injuries, and fatalities normalized for user
exposure, typically expressed in terms of VMT. The design and operating characteristics of a roadway
system affect the substantive safety performance of the system based on the interplay of two other
expressions of safety —nominal safety and perceived safety.
"Nominal safety" refers to the application of evidence -based design standards and best practices
intended to reduce the frequency and severity of crashes. Examples include elements such as
minimum lane widths, speed limits, effective drainage, clear and level roadside shoulders, curve
super -elevation, guardrails, roadway lighting, and hundreds of other roadway design and operating
standards. Each of these elements is intended to reduce the likelihood of automobile crashes and/or
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-3
Packet Pg. 2572
X _
- impt -
f —
Metropcgitan
ZAI
Planning.
to reduce the severity of crashes if they occur.
"Perceived safety" refers to how roadway users gauge the relative safety of the roadway system,
including the crashworthiness of their automobiles. This is important because for most roadway
users, perceived safety impacts their level of focus and operating behavior. Roadway users who
perceive a particular roadway environment to be relatively safe are more likely to relax their
concentration and may engage in higher -risk driving behaviors such as speeding, multi -tasking, and
"jaywalking," whereas roadway users who perceive a roadway environment to be less safe are more
likely to remain vigilant.
There are two primary challenges implicit in the interaction of these fundamental aspects of roadway
safety. The first is that many of the measures intended to make roadways nominally safer also result
in increased perception of safety by roadway users and corresponding increases in riskier user
behavior. This riskier behavior, in turn, diminishes the safety benefits of the roadway system design.
The second challenge is that typical roadway users are not well-equipped to accurately assess their
risk operating in a modern roadway system. The former challenge is intuitive but nonetheless
problematic to the extent that the very design decisions that are meant to make a roadway system
safer often contribute to the abuse of that system by its users. The latter challenge is a function of
both biological and cognitive limitations which, when combined, can contribute to unsafe user
behavior.
From a biological perspective, the speeds, distances, and complexities of modern roadway
environments are outside the normal parameters of what the "human animal" has encountered for
the vast majority of our recorded history. Multiple times per minute, a human roadway user will pass
within arm's length of objects that are comparable in mass to some of the largest animals on earth,
traveling at speeds that are naturally achievable only by falling from a high place. Rationally,
human/automobile interactions should be terrifying, but most modern humans have been
conditioned since childhood to accept them as a normal, low -risk activity.
From a cognitive perspective, most people's ability to accurately assess and process risk is more
limited when probabilities are very low and outcomes are extreme. For example, most people can
easily understand both the probabilities and the outcomes of a $1.00 bet against a coin toss but have
almost no capacity to logically process the risk/reward proposition of buying a lottery ticket. By the
same mechanism, most people cannot intuitively process the extent to which individual higher -risk,
but otherwise routine, behaviors alter their probability of being involved in an automobile crash.
Historically, the traffic safety industry has focused considerable attention on nominal safety, both in
terms of roadway system design and operations and motor vehicle design (bumpers, crush zones, air
bags, etc.). Generally, the assumption has been made that roadway users will behave as "rational
actors" using available information to make benefit/cost analyses that govern choices expected to
deliver preferred outcomes. Based on quantitative and qualitative assessment of crash histories,
there is ample evidence that road users do not consistently perform according to the rational actor
model. This includes incidences of wantonly irrational behavior (road racing, driving while
intoxicated, etc.) but more commonly occurs from a failure to accurately process risk.
The Collier LRSP considers infrastructure strategies from the perspective of nominal safety and from
the standpoint of how each strategy provides better information to roadway users to help them
make safer decisions about how they interact with each other and the roadway system.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-4
Packet Pg. 2573
Table 3-1 provides a summary of infrastructure strategies and shows how each strategy is applicable
to the four emphasis areas defined through the analysis of Collier County's crash history.
The remainder of this section provides more information about each strategy and discusses how the
strategies relate to one another. Non -infrastructure strategies are addressed in Section 3 of this
chapter.
Table 3-1: Infrastructure Strategies Matrix
Speed Management • • •
Alternative Intersections (ICE Process) • • •
Intersection Design Best Practices for
Pedestrians
Median Restrictions/Access Management • •
Right Turn Lanes ? •
Signal Coordination ? •
Rural Road Strategies including:
• Paved shoulder • •
• Safety edge •
• Curve geometry, delineation, and warning •
• Bridge/culvert widening/attenuation •
• Guardrail/ditch regrading/tree clearing •
• Isolated intersectionconspicuity/geometry •
Shared Use Pathways, Sidewalk Improvements •
_Mid -Block Crossings & Median Refuge • _
Intersection Lighting Enhancements • • _
Autonomous Vehicles (Longer -Term) TBD • • •
Speed Management
Speed is a critical factor in both a driver's ability to perceive, react, and effectively respond to
roadway conflicts and in determining crash outcomes/severity. "Speed management" refers to a
combination of infrastructure and non -infrastructure strategies to both curtail incidences of
speeding —traveling too fast for conditions or exceeding the posted speed limit —and designing
roadways to deliver operating speeds that match the land use and access contexts of the roadway
From an infrastructure standpoint, key elements of speed management include:
• Context classification and establishment of target speeds
• Design interventions
• Proactive signal management
Each of these elements is discussed in greater detail below.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-5
Packet Pg. 2574
Planning —PE I AL metmpolitan
Context Classification and Target Speeds
As part of FDOT's implementation of "Complete Streets," the Department has established a process for
classifying major roadways based on land use and roadway network connectivity to create a continuum of
context classifications ranging from rural preserve to urban core (Figure 3-1). The context classification
assignment of each segment of the State Highway System (SHS) is then used to define design specifications
including appropriate design speed ranges.
C1
C2
RURAL
C2T C3R
M
MORE URBAN
C3C C4 C5P C6
Preserve Rura! Rural Suburban Suburban Urban Urban Urban
To van Residential Commercial General Center Core
Figure 3-1: FDOT Context Classification System
In addition to design elements such as lane width and multimodal facilities requirements, a
roadway's context classification establishes allowable design speed ranges and identifies speed
management strategies for each context class and design speed range. Context classifications also
provide guidance for establishing appropriate target speeds, the desired operating speed for any
given segment of roadway based on strategic safety and mobility objectives. When a roadway's
target speed is not supported by the roadway's design characteristics (e.g., design speed), the
roadway owner (City, County, FDOT) can establish short-, medium-, and longer -term strategies to
modify the subject roadway so that the target speed is achieved.
Design Interventions
There are many design techniques to modify roadway characteristics to achieve a desired target
speed, but generally they correspond with the concepts of Enclosure, Engagement, and Deflection.
Chapter 202 of FDOT's 2020 Florida Design Manual (FDM) defines these concepts as follows:
• Enclosure is the sense that the roadway is contained in an "outside room" rather than in a
limitless expanse of space. A driver's sense of speed is enhanced by providing a frame of
reference in this space. The same sense of enclosure that provides a comfortable pedestrian
experience also helps drivers remain aware of their travel speed. Street trees, buildings close
to the street, parked cars, and terminated vistas help to keep drivers aware of how fast they
are traveling. This feedback system is an important element of speed management.
• Engagement is the visual and audial input connecting a driver with the surrounding
environment. Low -speed facilities use engagement to help bring awareness to the driver,
resulting in lower operating speeds. As the cognitive load on a driver's decision -making
increases, he/she needs more time for processing and will manage speed accordingly.
Uncertainty is one element of engagement; the potential of an opening car door, for
instance, alerts drivers to drive more cautiously. On -street parking and proximity of other
moving vehicles in a narrow -lane are important elements of engagement, as are architectural Q
detail, shop windows, and even the presence of pedestrians.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-6
Packet Pg. 2575
16.K.6.c
M
Metmpokitan Planning Orgamzaeon
Deflection is the horizontal or vertical movement of a driver from the intended path of travel. It is
used to command a driver's attention and manage speeds. Being aphysical
sensation, deflection is the most visceral and powerful of the speed management strategies.
Whereas enclosure and engagement rely, in part, on psychology, deflection relies primarily
on physics. Examples includes roundabouts, splitter medians (horizontal deflection), and
raised intersections (vertical deflection). Deflection may not be appropriate if it hinders truck
or emergency service vehicle access.
Chapter 202 of the FDM describes specific design strategies and provides a matrix of applicable
strategies to achieve various speed ranges for each roadway context classification.
Signalization
Traffic Signalization is another method of providing actionable information to drivers to help achieve
desired operating speeds. When traffic signals are spaced at intervals of not more than 0.25 miles
and are timed in a coordinated pattern consistent with a desired operating speed, most road users
will learn to drive at the signal "progression speed" rather than race ahead to stop at a standing
queue. Alternative performance measures for signal timing are discussed further later in this section
Current Practice
Collier County's roadway network falls primarily within the C-1 to C-3 range in FDOT's context
classification system. The wide spacing between intersections (2 to 6 miles) and low -density
development make it difficult to implement speed management strategies. There are exceptions,
however— locations that are more urban in character with a greater mix of uses, higher densities
and shorter blocks — where speed management could be a useful tool to apply, as noted in the
Implementation Section which follows.
Recommendation
MPO staff does not recommend further action at this time.
Alternative Intersections (ICE Process)
According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the term "alternative intersections" refers
to at -grade intersections that remove one or more conventional left -turn movements. By removing
one or more of the critical conflicting traffic maneuvers from the major intersection, fewer signal
phases are required for signal operation. This can result in shorter signal cycle lengths, shorter
delays, and higher capacities compared to conventional intersections.
Alternative intersections also offer substantial safety benefits, with expected crash reductions of at
least 15%, depending on the specific treatment. When deployed along an integrated corridor,
alternative intersections can also aid in speed management and other systemic safety improvements
The key concepts, constraints, and safety benefits of common alternative intersections are described
below.
ICE Process - Current Practice
Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) is a data -driven process to objectively identify optimal
geometric and control solutions for roadway intersections. Factors considered in the ICE process
include capacity/operational analysis, safety, and feasibility/cost. ICE is required for new
intersections and for substantial changes to existing intersections on FDOT roadways. The MPO's
member agencies apply the ICE process used by FDOT to County and City -maintained roadways as
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-7
Packet Pg. 2576
COLLIER
f Meaapokitan Planning Orgamxaeon
well.
Recommendation
MPO staff does not recommend that additional action be taken at this time.
Roundabouts
FHWA's informational guide on roundabouts (FHWA-DR-00-067) explains that "roundabouts are
circular intersections with specific design and traffic control features. These features include yield
control of all entering traffic, channelized approaches, and appropriate geometric curvature to
ensure that travel speeds on the circulatory roadway are typically less than 30 mph." Modern
roundabouts may connect three or more roadway approaches and may have one or more circulating
lanes.
The key safety benefit of roundabouts is that they eliminate high-energy "crossing" conflicts and
have fewer overall conflicts than conventional intersections. Figure 3-25, from FHWA-DR-00-067,
shows and explains the difference in conflict points between roundabouts and conventional
intersections. Attention is directed to the fact that whereas traffic signals assign right-of-way to
crossing conflicts, these conflicts are not eliminated by signals in cases of red -light -running and
permissive left -turn movements. Merge conflicts also exist in the context of right -turn -on -red
movements.
Properly designed roundabouts also are generally easier/safer to navigate for pedestrians and
bicyclists, and pedestrian crossings at multi -lane roundabouts can be supplemented with various
mid -block crossing devices (see discussion on pedestrian mid -block crossing elsewhere in this
section). Because of these motorized and non -motorized user safety benefits, roundabouts have
been found to reduce crashes overall by about 37% and reduce injury crashes by 51%.
The principal constraint of roundabouts is that they often require a greater right-of-way footprint
than conventional intersections of equivalent capacity. This is especially challenging in retrofit
scenarios along commercial corridors where right-of-way costs may make roundabout retrofits cost
prohibitive. Because the safety benefits of roundabouts diminish as more circulating lanes are added,
most roundabouts are limited to two circulating lanes. Accordingly, they are most commonly used at
the intersections of either two 2-lane roadways or a 4-lane roadway and 2-lane roadway.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-8
Packet Pg. 2577
16. K.6.c
l
ca�uER -
Metmpolitan Manning "nixation
I
I
,l
llor• Diverging
O Merging
O Crossing
Conflicts can be divided into three basic categories, In which the degree of severity
varies, as follows:
• Oiieaingconflicts. These conflicts are caused by a vehicle running into the hack
of a vehicle queue on an approach. These types of conflicts can occur at the
lack of a through -movement queue or where left -turning vehicles are queued
waiting for gaps. These conflicts are typically the least severe of all conflicts
because the collisions involve the most protected parts of the vehicle and the
relative speed difference between vehicles Is less than in other conflicts.
• Merge and diverge conflicts. These conflicts are caused by the joining or separat-
ing of two traffic streams. The most common types of crashes due to merge
conflicts are sideswipes and rear -end crashes. Merge conflicts can be more se-
vere than diverge conflicts due to the more likely posslbillty of collisions to the
side of the veh€cle, whleh Is typlcally less protected than the front and rear of the
vehicle.
• Crossing confllcts. These conflicts are caused by the intersection of two traffic
streams. These are the most severe of all conflicts and the most likely to involve
Injuries or fatal lties.Typical crash types are right-angle crashes and head-on crashes.
Figure 3-2: Roundabout Safety Benefits
Restricted Crossing U-Turn and Median U-Turn Intersections
Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) and Median U-Turn (MUT) intersections are illustrated in Figure
3-3 and Figure 3-4 from FHWA Informational Guides #FHWA-SA-14-070 and #FHWA-SA-14-069,
respectively. Generally, RCUT intersections are more effective when the minor street thru volumes
are lower than the major street left -turn volumes, with the reverse true for MUT intersections. RCUT
intersections, when sequenced together in a corridor, also allow each direction of the major street to
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-9
Packet Pg. 2578
thru movements to be coordinated separately which can have exceptional benefits for mainline
capacity.
I I
Signals on one side of I
arterial are Independent
of signals on other side I Cross street through traffic turns right
1 F Cross street left turn traffic moves through
#Pr
— — — — — — — — — — —
a
Arterial traffic no different than a
conventional intersection
Cross street traffic Cross street left turn and
must tum right through traffic makes a
U-turn in the wide median
Figure 3-3: Diagram of Signalized RCUT Intersection
I I
I I
I
Indirect left turns are made by first turning right
and then making a U-tum in the wide median
CO.
-------- a
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Na direct left turns at f r ►
main intersection
I
I I
I �
Figure 3-4: Diagram of Median U-Turn Intersection
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-10
Packet Pg. 2579
16.K.6.c
COLLIER-wo
Metmpokitan Planning Orgarhaeon
Common features of both these alternative intersection types include the following:
• Both RCUT and MUT intersections use adjacent "secondary" intersections to help process the
movements that are restricted at the main intersection. These are usually about 1/8-mile
from the main intersection and may be signalized, as shown in Figure 2-3, or stop/yield
controlled, similar to commonplace directional median openings. When signalized, these
secondary intersections provide an opportunity for mid -block pedestrian crossing locations.
• When either intersection type displaces truck movements, either an extra -wide median or
U-turn aprons, sometimes referred to as "loons," are necessary to accommodate truck
movements. The U-turn diameter (referred to as the swept -path) for a typical tractor -trailer
is just under 90 ft, but the U-turn diameter of a typical 6-lane arterial with a standard 22 ft
median is a little over 60 ft.
• Except in cases where the displaced movements represent an unusually high proportion of
all intersection movements, RCUT and MUT intersections generally offer substantial
reductions to major roadway delay and more moderate reductions in overall intersection
delay. The distance traveled by displaced movements is naturally increased, but delay for
displaced movements may be slightly reduced or only moderately increased depending on a
range of operational factors.
• Both RCUT and MUT intersections allow for reduced signal cycle length, especially when
pedestrian crossings of the major roadway are handled as two -stage movements. This,
combined with greater signal density from the use of secondary intersections, can help with
speed management and platooning of vehicles along alternative intersection corridors.
Similar to roundabouts, RCUTs and MUTs convert some high-energy crossing conflicts to lower
energy merge -diverge conflicts, helping to reduce crash frequency and severity. According to FHWA-
HRT-17-073, RCUT intersections can have an overall crash reduction of 15% and reduce injury
crashes by 22% compared with conventional intersections. MUT intersections have similar benefits,
with a 16% overall crash reduction and 30% injury crash reduction compared to conventional
intersections.
As noted, the principal constraint on converting existing 4-phase conventional intersections to 2-
phase RCUT or MUT intersections is available right-of-way to accommodate truck U-turn movements,
about 140 ft for a 6-lane road and about 130 ft for a 4-lane road. Other constraints include the
suitability of the RCUT or MUT operations with respect to individual intersection turning volumes and
driver education about navigating the intersections.
Other Alternative Intersections
Besides RCUTs and MUTs, other alternatives at -grade intersections include displaced left turn
intersections (DLT), as shown in Figure 3-5 (FHWA-SA-14-068) and quadrant intersections, as shown
in Figure 3-6 (FHWA-SA-19-029). The safety outcomes of these intersection alternatives are less well
understood than for RCUT and MUT intersections and, for reasons discussed below, their limited
applicability makes them less integral to the LRSP than roundabout, RCUT, and MUT intersections.
Nonetheless, they are included in the County's toolkit should specific circumstances warrant their z
use.
r
Q
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-11
Packet Pg. 2580
16. K.6.c
tl
COLLIER
Metmpofitan Manning "nixaeon
Figure 3-5: Displaced Left Turn Intersection
DLT intersections are very -high -capacity at -grade intersections that "displace" left -turn movements
at "cross -over" intersections in advance of the main intersection. This allows left -turn and thru
movements from the same roadway to occur concurrently. Given the high capacity, complexity, and
cost of DLT intersections, they are perhaps better thought of as alternatives to grade separation
(trading right-of-way costs for structure costs) rather than alternatives to conventional intersections.
Because of their substantial right-of-way footprints and potential for substantial business access
impacts to adjacent land uses, DLT intersections are challenging to implement as retrofit projects.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-12
Packet Pg. 2581
r\�`\ . .
arhadon
+1. 500
Main CrossirEg
IFlFrr�r?^tif?f
T
Secondary
T-intersection
u3
Quadranl
Becondary
T-int�r'tign
C; NCDOT
Figure 3-6: Quadrant Intersection Diagram
Quadrant intersections distribute turning movements at the main intersection across multiple
smaller intersections, allowing left -turn movements at the main intersection to be eliminated or
limited to either roadway. Although all turning movements can be accommodated with a single -
quadrant roadway, quadrant intersections offer more benefits when diagonal opposing quadrants, or
all four quadrants can be fitted with perimeter roads. Unlike DLT intersections, quadrant
intersections allow the main intersection to be quite compact; however, existing land uses often
preclude the construction of the quadrant roadways except in greenfield or redevelopment
scenarios.
Recommendation
MPO staff does not recommend taking further action at this time. Collier MPO member
governments already apply FDOT's ICE process to provide data -driven analysis of intersection
alternatives as part of new intersection construction and substantial modification of existing
intersections. Collier MPO established a funding mechanism for safety projects in the 2045 LRTP,
In response to a Call for Projects, member governments c may select candidate intersections and
corridors identified in the LRSP and the BPMP) to conduct feasibility studies (Stage 1 ICE/SPICE
analysis) for prioritizing and programming retrofit projects.
Intersection Design for Pedestrians
Many existing major roadway intersections in Collier County (as well as throughout Florida) were
designed with the primary intention of maximizing motor -vehicle throughput. In addition to arterial
intersections often having multiple thru traffic lanes and auxiliary left- and right -turn lanes, the radii
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-13
Packet Pg. 2582
ManningMetmpcgitan OrWnizadon
of an intersection's curbs are also often very large. All of these features increase the exposure of
pedestrians to motor vehicle traffic and can contribute suboptimal placement of crosswalks and curb
ramps, which may make crosswalks longer than necessary and/or place pedestrians in positions
where they may be difficult for turning drivers to see.
When pedestrians are exposed to overly -large intersections with right -turning traffic and permissive
left turns, they may not see a value proposition in using signalized intersection pedestrian features.
This may result in pedestrians crossing away from intersections, relying on their own judgment rather
than trusting motorists to yield and reducing pedestrian compliance with traffic signals.
Curb Radii
Large curb radii are sometimes necessary to allow trucks to navigate turns without running over the
curb, damaging infrastructure, and posing a hazard to pedestrians waiting to cross. However, in many
cases, urban and suburban intersections are using highway design principles where large curb radii
are provided to reduce friction between right -turning vehicles and high-speed thru traffic. This makes
sense in a rural setting where pedestrians are rare, but when right -turning drivers can navigate a turn
at high speeds, their ability to perceive and react to pedestrians in a crosswalk is severely limited.
Whenever possible, urban intersection should be designed with the smallest possible radii that still
can accommodate the appropriate design vehicle. When there are multiple lanes, intersection should
be designed so that trucks turn into the interior lane(s) rather than the curb lane. When large radii
cannot be avoided due to heavy truck movements, channelization (discussed below) or use of truck
aprons is preferable to very large radii.
Figure 3-7: Truck Turning Into Interior Lane
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-14
Packet Pg. 2583
l
cal.ul:lt -
` � MCaap0litan Manning "nixaeon
Figure 3-8: Truck Apron Helps Slow Turning Cars
Channelization
Using channelizing islands to break pedestrian crossings into multiple smaller stages can make large,
high -capacity intersections safer and more accommodating for pedestrians. Figure 3-9 shows the
preferred design for right -turn islands in which approach traffic has a clear view of the crosswalk
between the curb and the island and also good views of approaching traffic. The graphic also shows
the crosswalk "engaged" with the median nose, which helps ensure that left -turning drivers cannot
cut the corner, thereby helping to moderate their speed.
Cut through medians and islands
for pedestrians
2:1
length/width
ratio
Bicycle lane
550 to 700 between
vehicular flows.
725'to40' radius
ding on
n vehicle
Crosswalk one car
length back
Long radius
followed by
short
150 t/275radius
Figure 3-9: Preferred Right -Turn Island Design Parameters and "Engaged" Median
Crosswalk Design & Operation
As shown in Figure 3-10, crosswalks should be marked using both lateral and transverse markings, be
placed with individual/directional curb ramps, where possible, and generally be aligned parallel to
the roadway they are along. Although crosswalks must be a minimum of 10 ft wide, they may be
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-15
Packet Pg. 2584
\_\N
f —
\ti
OrgaNzadon
wider where pedestrian volumes are high or intersection geometry is irregular. Textured or colored
pavement is acceptable to supplement the retroreflective pavement markings but should not be a
substitute for those markings.
At signalized intersections, crosswalks should be supplemented with countdown pedestrian signals
and the "Walk" phase should be provided automatically for crossing along the major roadway and
whenever the concurrent minor roadway thru-green signal interval is greater than or equal to the
minimum pedestrian crossing interval. Except in special circumstances where high pedestrian
volumes may effectively prohibit right -turning traffic to pass through an intersection, the "Walk"
interval should be timed so that the countdown reaches zero when the concurrent thru-green signal
changes from green to amber, thereby maximizing the available time for pedestrians to cross.
When heavy right -turn movements conflict with pedestrian crossings, a leading pedestrian interval
(LPI) should be considered. An LPI provides pedestrians with a "Walk" indication a few seconds
before parallel traffic gets a green signal, giving the pedestrian an opportunity to "take possession"
of the crosswalk before turning traffic commences.
Figure 3-10: Proper Crosswalk Placement and Markings
Figure 3-11: Countdown Pedestrian Signal
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-16
Packet Pg. 2585
Je
16.K.6.c
I -WO
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Orgamxaeon
Current Practice
The summary presented above provides confirmation that the MPO's BPMP's design guidelines are
consistent with current Best Practices. The BPMP will be updated at least once every five years to
keep current and up-to-date. The BPMP's evaluation criteria gives priority to projects to mitigate
high crash corridors and intersections.
Recommendation
MPO staff does not recommend taking further action at this time.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-17
Packet Pg. 2586
all
Median Restrictions/Access Management
.16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Orgarhaeon
FDOT and Collier County both have sophisticated approaches to managing access along arterial
roadway corridors. Strategies include restricting median access to prohibit direct left turns from
unsignalized approaches, consolidation of driveways, provisions for interconnected parking lots,
reverse -frontage access, and avoiding driveways within major intersection influence areas.
Although the default approach to access management is to convert full -access medians to directional
medians, as shown in Figure 3-12 along Radio Road, maintaining cross -access and providing a new
traffic signal may help to address speed management and signal coordination issues as discussed
elsewhere in this section.
Figure 3-12: Conversion of Full Access Median to Dual Directional Median
Current Practice
Collier MPO member governments currently employ access management strategies to minimize
curb cuts and encourage right -turn -then -U-turn movements instead of direct left turns across
high -volume arterial streets. In more urban contexts, member governments give consideration to
signalizing problem intersections as an alternative to installing directional medians with the intent
of providing more controlled crossings for motorists and non -motorized road users and facilitating
greater signal density to help with corridor signal coordination.
Recommendation
MPO staff does not recommend taking further action at this time.
Right Turn Lanes
Right -turn lanes can help reduce rear -end and sideswipe crashes by allowing turning traffic to move
out of the way of thru traffic; however, in urban contexts, right -lanes can present the following
safety challenges:
• Right -turn lanes can make intersections larger than they need to be, posing challenges to a
pedestrians.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-18
Packet Pg. 2587
M
16.K.6.c
Metmpokitan Planning Orgamxaeon
• Right -turns lane between signalized intersections (i.e., at commercial driveways) create
higher -speed conflict points for cyclists travelling in bike lanes.
• When right -turn lanes extend a substantial distance from an intersection, right -turning traffic
may be able to speed past standing queues waiting at the signal. If another vehicle or a
pedestrian is "nosing" thru the queues of stopped traffic to access a driveway, the resulting
crash can be very severe.
• Right -turn lanes facilitate right -turn -on -red movements because the lane will never be
blocked by a vehicle waiting to pass thru an intersection. Right -turn -on -red movements can
make crossing more challenging for pedestrians, especially if the failure of right -turning
traffic to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk results in inadequate time to safely cross the
intersection.
Current Practice
Right -turn lanes are used primarily along higher -speed, high -volume suburban roadways where the
mitigation of high-speed rear -end and sideswipe crashes outweighs the challenges presented by
the scenarios above.
Recommendation
MPO staff does not recommend taking further action at this time.
Signal Coordination
Signal coordination refers to the timing of traffic signals relative to one another to manage the flow
of traffic along a roadway corridor. Generally, the goal of signal coordination is to minimize delay
along major roadways while allowing for side -street approaches to process traffic with a reasonable
amount of delay. Although this approach is effective to maintain roadway level of service (LOS) along
major thoroughfares, it is not always the best approach for promoting safety.
When traffic signals along a corridor are optimized to process thru traffic, the cycle -length of signals
often becomes very long, taking 3, 3.5, or even 4 minutes to completely cycle through all the various
signal phases. Long cycle lengths combined with signals spaced a half -mile or more apart can result in
vehicles being randomly -spaced along a roadway with greater variation in speeds. Conversely, when
signal cycle lengths are short and traffic signals are more closely spaced, vehicles tend to group
together in "platoons"; this grouping, combined with visual cues from the next traffic signal, result in
drivers maintaining a more consistent speed.
The top section of Figure 3-13 shows traffic moving along a roadway with widely -spaced signals and
long cycle lengths. Because there is little driver feedback and a very wide "green band" in which
approaching traffic can clear the next signal, cars are spread out along the roadway with few
adequate gaps for drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists to cross the road or turn across oncoming traffic.
The lower section shows the same number of cars in a platoon, with large gaps between the
beginning of one platoon and the end of the preceding one. These gaps allow cross -traffic maneuvers
can be made more safely.
Gaps between platoons also mean fewer vehicles will be caught in the "dilemma zone" when
approaching a changing traffic signal in which the driver must quickly decide whether to brake or try
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-19
Packet Pg. 2588
X
\tiCOLLIER
metmpcgitan Planning.
and accelerate to clear the signal. Keeping traffic out of the dilemma zone can reduce both rear -end
crashes and left turn/angle crashes.
Figure 3-13: Graphic Depicting Random vs. Platooned Traffic
Current Practice
As discussed, converting roadway corridors to two-phase signal operation using alternative
intersection designs is an excellent method of reducing cycle length and increasing signal density to
allow for more effective platooning of traffic and achieving resulting safety outcomes. Independent
of alternative intersection implementation, In response to the MPO's Call for Projects (Safety and/or
Congestion Management), Collier MPO member governments have the option to select high crash
corridors identified in the LRSP and BPMP where alternative signal coordination approaches may be
feasible. This may include reducing cycle lengths off-peak, operating minor intersections between
arterial intersections at half the cycle length of the adjacent major intersections and identifying
locations where a new traffic signal might help the coordinated signal system perform more
efficiently and more safely.
Recommendation
MPO staff does not recommend taking further action at this time.
Rural Road Strategies
Rural roadways tend to have lower traffic volumes and fewer crashes per mile than busy urban
roads; however, because of generally higher travel speeds and the potential for fixed objects and/or
deep ditches along the roadside, crash severity tends to be higher. The strategies discussed below
can be used to treat known problem locations but should also deployed in a systemic approach to
reduce severe crashes along rural highways and local streets.
Paved Shoulder, Safety Edge, and Audible -Vibratory Markings
Where possible, rural roadways should have 5-ft paved shoulders and adequate, level clear zones to
facilitate recovery of vehicles that leave the roadway. Audible -vibratory pavement markings or
ground -in rumble strips should be provided between the travel lanes and the shoulder to help alert
drivers before they leave the roadway, and retroreflective pavement markings should be used to
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-20
Packet Pg. 2589
Je
16.K.6.c
I -wo
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Orgamxaeon
delineate both the roadway centerline and the outside edge of the travel lanes.
When drivers do leave the roadway, steering the tires back onto the pavement against a vertical
edge can make it difficult to safely re-enter the travel lane; drivers may oversteer and lose control of
the vehicle, leading to severe crashes. As shown in Figure 3-14, providing a 30-degree contoured
pavement "safety edge" can mitigate this issue, especially on roadways that lack adequate paved
shoulders and warning strips.
Figure 3-14: Photo Depicting "Safety Edge" Pavement Design
Curve Geometry, Warning, and Delineation
Because rural highways often have long, straight segments with few discerning features, drivers may
become complacent and not exercise due care when entering curves. Accordingly, curves should be
well -marked with pavement markings and chevrons, and attempts should be made to provide
adequate shoulders and recovery areas. Where necessary, the roadway should be super -elevated to
help drivers navigate high-speed curves, and guardrail should be used when roadside hazards within
the clear zone cannot be completely eliminated. Devices such as solar static or actuated flashing
beacons and speed feedback signs may also be used to alert drivers to curve advisory speeds.
Clear Zone Hazards
Common hazards adjacent to the roadway include trees and ditches as well as lateral and cross -drain
structures and concrete bridge barrier walls. Efforts should be made to inventory infrastructure
elements within roadway clear zones and implement measures to mitigate the hazards they pose.
This can include removing trees, re -grading ditches, providing attenuation in advance of bridge walls,
and converting projecting or square edge drains to mitered -end -section designs.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-21
Packet Pg. 2590
COLLIER
f Meaapokitan Planning Orgamxaeon
Figure 3-15: Mitered -End -Section Drain Pipe
Intersection Conspicuity/Geometry
Much like curves along rural highways that may catch drivers by surprise, rural intersections can be
unexpected features, and drivers traveling along a rural highway may not be prepared to respond to
crossing traffic. Rural intersections may also exhibit irregular or skewed geometry and may have
foliage interrupting sight triangles or may exhibit other features that make it more challenging for
side -street traffic to maneuver safely. Mitigation strategies include correcting poor geometry,
consistently maintaining sight triangles, and posting advance warning signs with/or without flashing
beacons to raise awareness of approaching drivers.
Current Practice and Recommendation
Specific, known issues along rural highways should be mitigated, but a proactive, systemic approach
would improve the overall safety performance of rural road systems. Collier MPO member
governments have the option of selecting high crash corridors identified in the LRSP in response to
an MPO Call for Safety Projects to analyze potential systemic improvements to the county's rural
and exurban roadways, including curve and isolated intersection treatments, improved shoulders
and edge treatment, and mitigation of roadside hazards.
Low -Stress, Separated Cycling Facilities
Since the 1970s, "vehicular cycling" has been the predominant approach to accommodating bicyclists
within the roadway network. This approach means that cyclists operate using the same rules as
motor vehicle traffic and share the roadway with motor vehicles either operating in marked bicycle
lanes or riding with traffic. Vehicular cycling can be an effective approach for faster, confident cyclists
to safely interact with traffic; however, a substantial majority of cyclists do not fall within this group
and are uncomfortable or unwilling to ride with traffic on higher -volume, higher -speed roadways.
Although vehicular cycling has been shown to help cyclists avoid certain crash risks, sideswipe and
rear -end crash types that would generally result in less severe outcomes between two motor
vehicles can have severe outcomes when one of the vehicles is a bicycle. This is especially true when
the speed differential between the cyclist and overtaking traffic is large. For example, a typical road
cyclist operates at speeds of 15-20 mph, so along 30-35 mph roadways, the closing speed of the
cyclist and overtaking traffic is not more than 20 mph. Whereas this can result in a serious crash, the
overtaking motorist has more time to observe and react to the cyclist, and if a crash does occur, it is
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-22
Packet Pg. 2591
16. K.6.c
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Orgarhaeon
likely to be survivable. Conversely, along roadways with operating speeds of 45 mph or greater, a
faster closing speed means a motorist is less likely to react and respond to a cyclist, and if a crash
does occur, it is much more likely to be fatal.
For these reasons, many agencies, including FDOT, Collier MPO and its member governments, are
working to provide separated bicycle facilities, especially along roadways that operate at speeds
greater than 35 mph. Separated facilities include protected bike lanes, sometimes referred to as
cycle tracks, and shared -use pathways along the edge of roadways. Other low -stress bicycling
facilities form alternative networks to thoroughfare streets and include "bike boulevards" and off -
road trails.
Cycle tracks may be two-way or directional and feature some type of physical barrier between motor
vehicle lanes and the cycling facility. Figure 3-16 shows an example of a two-way cycle track in
downtown Tampa that uses a raised curb and on -street parking to separate bicycle and motor -
vehicle traffic. The cycle track features special signals and other design features at intersections to
help mitigate bicycle/turning motor vehicle conflicts.
Figure 3-16: Rendering of 2-way Cycle Track in Downtown Tampa along Jackson Street/SR-60
When separated facilities cannot be provided along thoroughfare streets, parallel "bike boulevards"
are an option to provide for bicycle mobility. Bike boulevards are streets that have been designed,
designated, and prioritized for bicycle travel and can provide a safe, inviting, low -stress option for
bicyclists of varying degrees of experience. Although there is no set design template for bike
boulevards, a few common principles apply:
• Logical, direct, and continuous bike route
• Safe and comfortable intersection crossings
• Reduced bicyclists delay
• Enhanced access to desired destinations
• Low motor vehicle speeds
• Low motor vehicle volumes
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-23
Packet Pg. 2592
COLLIER
„ r
Current Practice
Consistent with emerging guidance from FDOT and FHWA and the Collier MPO's BPMP, the MPO and
its member governments have prioritized major roadway corridors to provide separated bicycle
facilities and an interconnected network that meets current standards.
The BPMP design guidelines identify a range of potential solutions to apply to situations where ROW
is limited. The MPO is coordinating with the Community Traffic Safety Team (CTST) to promote
traffic safety education that targets drivers, cyclists and pedestrians.
Recommendation
There is growing support from a safety perspective to provide bike/pedestrian separation from the
roadways where possible. The MPO's BPMP design guidelines (reference Table 17, page 61) support
this approach. The BPMP design guidelines do not appear to require updating at this time. The next
BPMP update will begin in 2023, at which time state and national facility design guidance may have
changed and can be incorporated.
Pedestrian Crossings and Median Refuge
Given the distances between traffic signals along most of Collier County's suburban roadway
network, it is reasonable to expect that pedestrians will cross major roadways between signalized
intersections. Elements such as adequate lighting, traffic platooning, and speed management make it
safer to cross the street generally; however, specific infrastructure to facilitate pedestrian crossings is
also necessary. These include median refuge areas and mid -block crossings.
Median Refuge Areas
When pedestrian crossing patterns are not concentrated between obvious origins and destinations,
continuous raised medians or intermittent median islands allow pedestrians to break roadway
crossings into two discreet movements. Ensuring that medians are dry, level walking surfaces can
help encourage pedestrians to wait for an adequate gap before attempting the second leg of their
crossing.
C f_ • 8 '
• •• 0 ♦ ro o i% 40 r• * r oo U o 40
*1 r 9
Figure 3-17: Median Refuge Breaks Complex Crossing into Two Simple Crossings
When pedestrian crossing patterns are more tightly clustered, mid -block marked crosswalks should
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-24
Packet Pg. 2593
PF
-
metmpcgitan Planning. .
be considered to provide a safer crossing option; however, along multilane roadways, a marked
crosswalk alone is insufficient to provide a safe crossing, and the crosswalk markings should be
supplemented with warning beacons or traffic control devices. Beacons such as a rectangular rapid -
flashing beacon (RRFB), shown in Figure 3-18, should be pedestrian -actuated and are best suited to
roadways with no more than four lanes and speeds of 35 mph or less.
If a midblock crosswalk is provided across a roadway with more than four lanes or speeds greater
than 35 mph, a pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB) is the preferred supplemental device. A PHB is like a
traffic signal but creates less motor vehicle delay by switching to a flashing red (stop sign) operation
after the first few seconds of the walk interval, as shown in Figure 3-19.
Figure 3-18: RRFB
qrBlank for Is
drivers
2
Flashing Is
yellow
3
Steady
yellow
qPSt4 dy
red
5
Wig -Wag
LIE
Return
to 1 (a
Figure 3-19: Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon Sequence
Current Practice
Median refuge islands and pedestrian mid -block crossings complement speed management and
signal coordination strategies to allow pedestrians to more safely cross major roadways. Medians
are typically used when there are not clear concentrations of pedestrian traffic, and crosswalks are
considered to connect origins and destinations such as transit stops and neighborhood serving
commercial lane uses. Marked crosswalks across major roadways generally require supplemental
devices and are selected based on the speed and characteristics of motor vehicle travel.
As with considerations related to restricting median access, traffic engineers also investigate
whether a midblock crossing need might be better served by signalizing a local street intersection to
provide for controlled crossings at that point while also helping to provide downstream gaps for
other crossing movements. Retrofit projects are eligible for funding when the MPO issues a Call for
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-25
Packet Pg. 2594
16.K.6.c
COLLIER —WO
Metmpokitan Planning Orgarhaeon
Projects for Congestion Management, Bike-Ped or Safety.
;- •uu'�*M•i
MPO staff does not recommend taking further action at this time.
Lighting
Roadway lighting helps drivers see roadway features at night and, if properly designed, can help
drivers detect pedestrians and cyclists. Adequate lighting and well -maintained pavement markings
reduce lane departure crashes but also can reduce all types of nighttime crashes by reducing the
workload necessary for drivers to stay in their lane, thereby freeing up mental resources for other
defensive driving tasks.
Intersection lighting provides the same function for drivers, but if designed correctly, can also help
drivers see pedestrians at night. Figure 3-20 shows how intersection lighting should be in advance of
crosswalk approaches to that light reflects from pedestrians back towards approaching traffic.
Section 231.3.2-4 of the Florida Design Manual defines lighting criteria for intersections,
roundabouts, and mid -block crosswalks to help ensure pedestrians are visible to approaching drivers
Figure 3-21 shows a roadway corridor with light -emitting diode (LED) street lights. Contemporary LED
lights offer energy cost savings compared to conventional street lights and the spectrum of light is
more effective to promote safety.
Figure 3-20: Simplified Intersection Lighting
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-26
Packet Pg. 2595
r �
16.K.6.c
�� COLLIER
� Meaapokitan Planning Organixauon
Figure 3-21: LED Lighting
Current Practice
Collier MPO member governments are familiar with FDOT's current intersection lighting standards
and balance that consideration with residents desire to maintain the integrity of views of the night
sky. The current practice is to keep nighttime skies dark, reduce glare, and put the right amount of
light in the right place and at the right time to ensure the safety of all.
Recommendation
Intersection lighting is a tool that will be evaluated on a case -by -case basis.
Autonomous and Connected Vehicles
Because the majority of traffic crashes involve some element of human error, the promise of
automated vehicles offers tremendous crash reduction potential, especially when those vehicles are
not only able to sense the roadway environment but also capable of communicating with one
another.
Although this technology is generally thought of as futuristic, the reality is that vehicle automation
has been with us for some time. Figure 3-22 shows how elements such as cruise control, anti -lock
brakes, and various warning sensors have been part of our vehicle fleet for some time, and Figure 2-
23 shows the various levels of vehicle autonomy with level one and two being common today.
Some challenges with automated vehicles include delay between the time fully -automated
technologies are available and there is sufficient saturation in the motor vehicle fleet to result in
effective use of vehicle -to -vehicle communications and measurable safety benefits. Another
challenge is the limitations of automated/connected vehicles in detecting non -motorized road users
Specifically, pedestrians and cyclists are relatively small, varied in appearance, hard to predict, most
exposed/fragile, and not "connected" to vehicle -to -vehicle communication systems.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-27
Packet Pg. 2596
16.K.6.c
IM[I
CULtIER
Metropolitan Planning "nixation
Figure 3-22: History and Future of Autonomous Vehicles
Figure 3-23: Vehicle Autonomy Levels and Features
Current Practice and Recommendation
Collier MPO staff does not recommend taking further action at this time. Within the 2045 LRTP
timeframe, MOT District 1 projects that Connected and Automated Vehicles will comprise
approximately 35% of Collier County's motor vehicle fleet; however, in the interim, proactive spot
and systemic safety measures are still necessary. Good design of roadways with a balance
between mobility and connectivity and good infrastructure for non -motorized road users will
provide benefits even once the majority of motorized vehicles drive themselves.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-28
Packet Pg. 2597
III16.K.6.c
caLul:lt -
Metmpolitan Manning organixauon
Non -Infrastructure Strategies
Referring to the same four emphasis areas, Table 3-2 shows a list of non -infrastructure strategies and
the emphasis areas to which they correspond.
Traffic Enforcement
• Targeted Speed Enforcement
X
X
X
X
X
X
• Red Light Running Enforcement
X
• Automated Enforcement
?
• Pedestrian Safety Enforcement
X
Bike Light and Retroreflective Material
Give -Away
Young Driver Education X X
WalkWise/BikeSmart or Similar Campaign
Continuing Education X X
Safety Issue Reporting X X
Vision Zero Policy X X
Table 3-2: Non -Infrastructure Strategies Matrix
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Traffic Enforcement
The Statistical Analysis Technical Memorandum indicates that Collier County records fewer traffic
citations per capita and per vehicle mile of travel. This appears to be in part due to relatively small
municipal law enforcement agencies and therefore a greater reliance on the Collier County Sheriff's
Office and the Florida Highway Patrol to handle traffic enforcement needs. Based on the Statistical
Analysis Technical Memorandum, the following enforcement areas could help to reduce severe
crashes in Collier County.
• Speed Enforcement
• Red Light Running Enforcement
• Non -Motorized User Safety Enforcement (focusing on driver yield behaviors)
Although automated enforcement (red light running cameras) was suspended in Collier County in
2013, a transparent use of red-light cameras with revenues directed to fund other traffic safety
programs should be considered as part of the County's toolkit.
Current Practice
Traffic enforcement is one aspect of an effective speed management program and should be used to
target drivers who are significantly exceeding the Speed Limit. Collier County law enforcement
agencies regularly apply for FDOT High Visibility Enforcement Grants for bicycle and pedestrian
enforcement.
Recommendation
Collier MPO staff does not recommend taking further action at this time.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-29
Packet Pg. 2598
all
Material Give-Aways
.16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Orgarhaeon
The LRSP Statistical Analysis (Section 2) notes that while Collier County does not have a
disproportionate ratio of nighttime crashes overall, non -motorized road user crashes are more likely
to occur at night. A common tactic to reduce nighttime non -motorized user crashes it to provide
retro-reflective materials to vulnerable populations including:
• School -age children
• Transit customers
• Homeless shelter clients
• Shift workers who may commute at night
Examples of retroreflective materials include low-cost backpacks with reflective strips, Velcro ankle
strips to keep pant cuffs from catching in bicycle gears, and simple safety vests. Low-cost bicycle light
kits can also be distributed and may be provided as part of a warning stop when police officers notice
cyclists riding at night without proper lights.
Current Practice and Recommendation
The Collier County Sheriff's Office provided the following information:
"The Collier County Sheriff's Office has a variety of community outreach events per year involving contact
with adults and juveniles for bicycle and pedestrian safety. These include our in -school Youth Relations
Bureau, Community Policing Units, and Crime Prevention Unit that provide bicycle, bicycle helmet, literature,
lights, and reflective material giveaways in addition to verbal education. These have occurred during general
school hours, targeted community events on the weekends, or random 'pop-up' events in the community at
targeted locations.
The Crime Prevention Unit and District Community Policing Units hold targeted 'pop-up' events in areas that
patrol units, citizen complaints, or statistical data show dangerous pedestrian and bicycle activity. One of
these areas, for example, is on East Tamiami Trail between Airport -Pulling Road South and Bayshore Drive;
see Figure 2-8 on P. 2-17. Bicycle helmet, bicycle light, reflective materials, and literature giveaways in
conjunction with dialogue take place several times per year with these events.
We believe that these events proactively have kept the number of bicycle and pedestrian crashes to not be
statistically significant. We are largely able to do this with safety product giveaways. Thus, we would
encourage the contribution of these products and literature to our agency for continued proactive safety
educational measures. Increasing local contributions would be beneficial in maintaining our efforts.
The Collier County Sheriff's Office Safety and Traffic Enforcement Bureau receives funding through the
Florida Department of Transportation High Visibility Enforcement (H.V.E.) grant. Various methodologies are
used with this grant to reduce bicycle and pedestrian crashes and increase safety. The Safety and Traffic
Enforcement Bureau works in conjunction with District Community Policing Units, Patrol Units, Crime
Prevention Unit, Youth Relations Bureau, Media Relations Bureau, and other entities to promote the goals of
this program."
Recommendation
MPO staff will look for free materials to give-away at MPO events.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-30
Packet Pg. 2599
16. K.6.c
l
cal.ul:lt -
Metmpolitan Manning Organixauon
Figure 3-24: Example Retroreflective Promotional Materials
Young Driver Education
A key conclusion from the LRSP Statistical Analysis is that Collier County's demographics likely play a
role in its better than average safety performance. Because Collier County does not have a high
proportion of younger drivers, the overall expected crash rates as a function of population age
demographics are better than Florida as a whole. In the future, as Collier County continues to grow,
it is likely that its demographic profile will become more "normal" and the introduction of more,
young drivers will begin to adversely impact Collier County crash statistics.
Although older drivers certainly have limitations in terms of vision, reflexes, and other age -related
deficits, these drivers are more likely to recognize their limitations than younger drivers and act
accordingly. This is born -out by data showing that older drivers are less likely to be involved in
nighttime crashes or crashes during rush hour because these drivers choose to avoid higher -risk
times of day.
To help reduce crashes among younger drivers, supplemental drivers' education programs should be
considered. One such program, funded by FDOT District 7, provides high school seminars focused on
teen driver safety issues including bicycle and pedestrian safety, motorcycle safety, and impacts of
DUI. Statewide FDOT provides grants under the umbrella of the State Safety Office Teen Driver Safety
program to fund programs that help to educate teen drivers.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-31
Packet Pg. 2600
.16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Mettapokitan Planning OrgaNzation
TEfH" Z ~
SAFE ORIM6
t CO,QLIT/OH
SAFE DRIVING
BEGINS WITH YOU
Teen traffic safety educarion can save lives.
A COALITION DEDICATED TO A SAFER FLORIDA
Figure 3-25: Florida Teen Safe Driving Coalition Homepage
Current Practice
MOT and the state MVD conduct training sessions for young drivers. The Collier County Sheriff's Office
provided the following information:
"The Collier County Sheriff's Office Youth Relations Bureau and Crime Prevention Unit provide direct and
indirect education programs to Young Drivers. The Youth Relations Bureau provides the "Teen Driver
Challenge" to young, high school aged drivers in order to provide them with a comprehensive view of safe
driving habits and legalities surrounding the challenge of driving as a youth. They also integrate with drivers'
education courses and other school functions in providing educational literature and dialogue with young
drivers (and future drivers) in order to prepare them for real life encounters on the roadway. One of the
significant focuses they have made is with respect to Texting and Driving; with state laws that make texting
and driving illegal under certain conditions and the significant focus that youth have on their cell phones.
They also speak with the students in Drivers Ed about the dangers of driving under the influence of alcohol
and drugs.
Youth Relations Bureau members and Crime Prevention Unit members also make hundreds of contacts with
young drivers every year in settings not specifically structured towards driving but that still allow specific
educational opportunities for young drivers to be educated on legalities and safe methods of driving."
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-32
Packet Pg. 2601
COLLIER
f Meaapokitan Planning Orgamxaeon
Recommendation
MPO staff does not recommend taking further action at this time. Adult Traffic Safety Education
From the public outreach survey responses, it is clear that many Collier County residents do not feel
safe biking or walking along major roadways and that driver behavior with respect to yielding/making
space for non -motorized users is inadequate. The Bike/Walk Tampa Bay program, administered by
the University of South Florida and funded by FDOT District 7, offers virtual and in -person pedestrian,
driver and bicyclist safety presentations to adult audiences. The presentation uses an Audience
Response System to quiz the audience and poll their opinions.
Nonmotorized Safety Education
Since 2015 over 30,000 individuals have participated in seminars with each participant taking a
"pledge" to WalkWise, BikeSmart, and Drive Safely and work to educate others about the importance
of safe behaviors.
Figure 3-26: Walk Wise Class Photo
Current Practice
The Collier MPO is following -up on the more detailed safety analysis contained in the BPMP and is
an active participant in the Community Traffic Safety Team (CTST), which includes FDOT District 1
and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, in promoting traffic safety education for drivers, pedestrians
and cyclists.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-33
Packet Pg. 2602
16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Meaapokitan Planning Orgarhaeon
The Collier County Sheriff's Office added the following information:
"The Collier County Sheriff's Office participates in sporadic speaking engagements with community
organizations specific to drivers, pedestrians, and cyclist safety laws, regulations, and safety tips. Further,
The Collier County Sheriff's Office participates in hundreds of community events every year that involve
proactive community outreach. Literature, giveaways, and dialog about motorized and non -motorized
vehicle safety are often included in these events.
The Collier County Sheriff's Office Media Relations Bureau provides safety tips and messages for drivers,
pedestrians, and cyclists through news releases and a variety of online publications. These messages
generate hundreds of thousands of views on CCSO's various social media platforms. The MRB also works
closely with local news organizations to promote the agency's safety message.
To address the growing problem of motorcycle crashes, fatalities, and injuries, Collier County Sheriff's Office
seeks to start the implementation of the Safe Motorcycle and Rider Techniques (SMART) training program, a
countermeasure addressed in chapter 5, section 3.2 "Motorcycle Rider Training" of the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA's) Countermeasures That Work guide. It will be a six -hour course
supported by the University of South Florida's Center for Urban Transportation Research.
The program will be design around skill sets taken from the Basic Police Motorcycle Operators Course. The
instructor ratio will be no less than 1:6 with one lead instructor. Each class will hold a maximum of 36
students in an effort to maximize saddle time and course repetition without creating undue fatigue. There
will be six stations that emphasize fundamental principles and that have real world applications. Each station
will be 45 minutes long with a 15-minute break in between stations. During each break, there will be an
additional five minutes of instruction on a relevant motorcycle operation topic. The breaks will be designed
as a working break in which questions and additional comments would be addressed."
Recommendation:
MPO staff recommend, and will report on, taking a more proactive approach to bike-ped safety
education by working closely with the MPO's Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, FDOT,
the CTST and the informal Naples Bike-Ped Safety Coalition to promote bike/ped safety
informational videos, brochures and special events.
Continuing Education
Continuing education programs for safety professionals can help ensure that as standards and
practices evolve, the professional community remains abreast with the state of the art. This is
especially important in Collier County where so much of the public roadway system is constructed by
private developers. The Collier MPO should encourage participation in FDOT's Local Agency Traffic
Safety Academy (LATSA).
LATSA is a free webinar series focused on:
• Sharing knowledge about traffic safety
• Discussing new and ongoing safety programs
• Explaining available funding sources
• Presenting local best practices,
• Learning about new safety treatments and technologies
• Discussing project delivery processes
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-34
Packet Pg. 2603
�, NPPP
ZJ Nil
Current Practice and Recommendation
The Collier MPO will continue to promote and distribute safety education materials geared
towards professional engineers and planners, including LATSA webinars.
Safety Issue Reporting System
Non -emergency reporting systems can help identify potential safety issues before crash histories are
established. Applications such as Wikimaps allow agencies to collect "crowdsourced" tips which can
be categorized. These applications also allow users to click on and concur with previously reported
issues and/or upload photos so that monitoring agencies can gather more actionable intelligence
about potential issues. In the northeast Florida Area, FDOT District 2 maintains a Community Traffic
Safety Team engineering issues system which allows safety partners to submit engineering concerns
with pictures and follow-up contact information.
Map Satellite
e a
pp = RivercIsil,
rs I
Iix—i
S'
ale Flats at
e Heights
j0 g a
wKemu
w oml
® Woodlawn
re��s�ia.
w rnnl�v:
I_VERSIDE
HEIGHTS
w glN�e s:LL Southeastern Fi
s Tackle Liquk
•yr 5Ww6:[ i % a ��N�YesA.l
ceders Park
Efi� s Ar�iPFicar�
Folk ArECL
y
c
G'1E,ahorough r•:•o.o-vse
-
gh schools
z
scar=—s
`
SGUTHE
SEWN
�l>
HEIGH
southern Brewing-
& Winemaking
-
•
B..xs
ccnoi.:w5s
EN�hM1
Bn 57
Figure 3-27: Example Wikimaps Issue Page
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-35
Packet Pg. 2604
Recommendation
Collier County's 311 Reporting System addresses the strategy. MPO staff does not recommend
taking further action at this time.
Vision Zero Performance Measures and Targets
The Collier MPO has adopted FDOT's Vision Zero safety performance measures and targets. The
development of the LRSP expands the MPO's awareness and understanding of traffic safety data
The data analysis component of the LRSP has been factored into the project prioritization
methodology in the Traffic System Performance Report (TSPR) and the 2045 LRTP. The LRSP
recommendations for nonmotorized users safety are consistent with the design guidelines and
prioritization criteria in the MPO's BPMP, adopted in 2019.
Recommendation
The Collier MPO has adopted FDOT's Vision Zero performance measures and targets. As part of
the implementation process for the Collier LRSP, MPO member governments are encouraged to
explore the merits of adopting a Vision Zero approach to safety in Collier County.
SUMMARY
MPO staff interviewed technical staff of member agencies to identify current practices related to each of
the strategies identified by the consultant team, and in the process, refined the preliminary draft
recommendations to focus on enhanced practices addressing three key strategies:
1) Flag high crash locations identified in the LRSP to incorporate safety analysis in the project scoping
and design for road improvement projects and stand-alone bike/ped facility projects.
2) Flag high crash locations for Road Safety Audits using MPO SU safety set -aside and/or state, federal
funds. The BPMP already does this for stand-alone bike-ped projects.
3) Promote bike-ped safety videos, handouts and special events more proactively as part of the CTST /
Blue Zones Naples Bike-Ped Safety Coalition.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-36
Packet Pg. 2605
W16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Metmpofitan Planning "nindon
SECTION 4: IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
LOCAL BEST PRACTICES
Collier MPO staff interviewed member agency staff to determine the extent to which the Recommendations
described in the previous section have already been put into practice. The following is a brief summary of
current, local Best Practices.
City of Naples —Traffic Department, Police Department Activities
Engineering Analysis and Response to Serious Injury and Fatal Crashes - The City of Naples Traffic
Department reviews all serious injury and fatal crashes to determine if there is a need for engineering
modifications. If City staff identify any recommended actions Streets and Drainage Division and Planning
Division staff review police reports on fatal crashes to determine if there may be a need for an engineering
[design] solution. If staff has actions to recommend actions on State roads, they reach out to FDOT and
request consideration of any modifications.
Engineering Analysis of High Crash Corridors & Intersections - If there are a significant number of crashes at a
particular intersection, the Naples Police Department typically notifies the Traffic Department for an
assessment.
Enforcement - If Traffic Department staff notice areas of concern, they work with the Naples Police
Department to increase enforcement by placing speed trailers out or integrating police presence.
Education - The Traffic Department is researching ways to incorporate more safety education into their
programs, particularly for pedestrian/bike safety and understanding of the rules of the road by all users —
motorized and non -motorized.
Special Studies and Activities - Traffic Department staff often perform speed studies, review intersections
for line -of -sight issues, evaluate local needs for intersection improvements including stop signs or other
modifications to determine if they meet warrants, and incorporate bike/pedestrian markings and signage
where a need is identified.
Collier County— Growth Management Department -Traffic Operations Division and Transportation
Planning Division
Engineering Analysis and Response to Serious Injury and Fatal Crashes — The Traffic Operations Division has
a FTE for a PE to monitor and report on crash data. The staff member maintains the County's Crash Data
Management System (CDMS), and regularly pulls crash reports to determine whether there is an indication
that roadway design could be an issue. The Division develops potential solutions and seeks funding to
implement them.
Engineering Analysis of High Crash Corridors & Intersections —The Traffic Operations Division
prepares an annual report on high crash intersections.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 4-1
Packet Pg. 2606
COLLIERW
i Orgarhadon
Enforcement —The Traffic Operations Division has fixed and portable speed monitoring signs. The Division
places the portable signs in locations in response to public requests and keeps them in place for a two -week
period. The County Sheriff's Office also deploys speed monitoring signs in problem areas. The Traffic
Operations Division and the Sheriff's office have a cooperative working relationship and share information
regarding enforcement needs and capabilities.
The County's five (5) fixed messaging signs are located on high crash locations along:
• Immokalee Road
• Collier Blvd
• Golden Gate Blvd
• Randall Blvd
• Oil Well Road
Special Studies and Activities
Traffic Operations produces an annual report identifying high crash intersections. Staff reviews all
crash data for three subsets of intersections:
• Energized (signalized)
• 4-way unsignalized
• 3-way unsignalized
Staff ranks intersections by comparing crash rates over 1, a crash rate over the "mean" of all
intersections, a statistical computation of any intersection with a crash rate over the critical crash
rate, a comparison of the expected value, and injury severity. Next, staff reviews each noted
intersection in depth and implements corrective actions where needed.
Collier County Sheriff's Office (CCSO)
Education and Enforcement
The CCSO takes a proactive approach that combines traffic safety education and enforcement. The
Community Engagement Division focuses on public outreach and education and works closely with
the Traffic Enforcement group. The CCSO notes that in a community with a large number of tourists
and part-time residents, there are instances when educating a member of the public on local laws is
more effective than issuing a citation. The County Sheriff's Office maintains multiple data bases on
crashes and deploys enforcement strategically to high crash locations. If engineering design
modifications appear to be needed, the CCSO contacts the local road agency.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 4-2
Packet Pg. 2607
16.K.6.c
COLLIER_Wo
Metmpokitan Planning Orgamxaeon
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the foregoing set of recommendations proposed by the MPO's consultant, Tindale Oliver,
and MPO staffs compilation of current practices, staff concludes that the following
recommendations have already been sufficiently implemented:
1. The high crash corridor and intersection locations identified in the LRSP have been incorporated
into project prioritization criteria in plans recently approved by the MPO Board:
• 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) approved December 11, 2020
• Transportation System Performance Report and Action Plan, approved September 11, 2020
2. The high crash corridor and intersection locations identified in the LRSP may be considered eligible
for expenditure of MPO TMA SU funds in addition to those locations identified by:
• Collier County Traffic Operations Section on an annual basis
• FDOT's annual reporting system
• The MPO's Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (2019)
3. The 2045 LRTP establishes funding for safety projects using TMA SU funds; the MPO will
periodically issue a Call for Safety Projects
4. The LRSP provides confirmation of the following strategies already in use by member
governments:
Infrastructure
• Speed Management — limited to deploying speed monitoring signs in specific locations
• Alternative Intersections (FDOT's ICE Process)
• Median Restrictions/Access Management
• Right Turn Lanes
• Signal Coordination
• Rural Road Strategies
• Design Best Practices for pedestrians and cyclists including:
o Intersection design
o Shared Use Pathways and Sidewalk Improvements
o Mid -Block Crossings & Median Refuge
o Intersection Lighting Enhancements
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 4-3
Packet Pg. 2608
c
ZA
5. The LRSP pointed out the desirability of creating a Traffic Safety Coalition to raise awareness and
promote traffic safety education. While the LRSP was in development, the Blue Zones of
Southwest Florida began organizing and promoting an informal partnership referred to as the
Naples Bike-Ped Safety Coalition as an outgrowth of the Community Traffic Safety Team (CTST).
The CTST concept was initiated by FDOT, Membership is fluid and informal. Blue Zones currently
hosts the CTST, which welcomes participation by state agencies, health and emergency service
providers, local law enforcement, other Nongovernment Organizations (such as Naples Pathways
Coalition, and Naples Velo), local governments and the MPO. MPO staff has long been active in
the CTST and has joined forces with the Naples Bike-Ped Safety Coalition. As a further
implementation step, MPO staff is proactively promoting bike-ped safety videos, handouts and
special events sponsored by other entities.
Staff Recommended Enhanced Practice:
Monitor and report on progress made:
• Speed management — project specific in high crash locations identified by the LRSP.
• Bike-ped safety education — more proactive engagement by the MPO and member
governments; include safety material give-aways that can be acquired free of charge from
FDOT and NHTSA.
• Road Safety Audits — coordinate with FDOT on programming the MPO's priority safety
projects in the Work Program.
• Safety Analysis - include in project scoping and design for road improvement projects and
stand-alone bike/ped facility projects in high crash locations identified in the LRSP and BPMP
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 4-4
Packet Pg. 2609
16.K.6.c
19 [1
COLLIER
Metrapokitan Planning OrWnixauon
Relationship to Collier MPO 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan and Transportation
Improvement Program
The MPO's 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) documents multimodal transportation
needs and cost -feasible project priorities over the 20-year period from 2026 — 2045. Committed
projects slated for construction prior to 2026 are incorporated in the MPO's 5-year Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). The Draft 2045 LRTP incorporates the LRSP by reference and also
incorporates the MPO's Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
Infrastructure Strategy Implementation Opportunities
Table 4-16 on the following page shows the relationship of the projects prioritized in the 2045 LRTP —
Cost Feasible Plan to corridors identified as having an overrepresentation of emphasis area crashes
in Section 2 of the LRSP. Each LRTP project shown in the table represents an opportunity to advance
the infrastructure strategies described in Section 3 of the LRSP. While there is significant overlap
between 2045 LRTP projects and LRSP high crash corridors, some corridors do not have planned
capital projects and are eligible for $3m in SU funding set -aside for Safety projects under the LRTP, in
addition to any State funds that may be available for stand-alone studies and enhancements
consistent with the LRSP.
In addition to the potential for substantive safety improvements to be incorporated in the LRTP Cost -
Feasible Plan projects, the LRTP sets aside over $41m of funding for implementation of the Collier
Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan. While not all bicycle and pedestrian mobility projects have an
inherent safety nexus, the prominence of non -motorized user safety as a planning factor in
developing the mobility project priorities for cyclists and pedestrians means that implementation of
this plan, as a component part of the LRTP, will generally advance non -motorized user safety. The
Transportation System Performance Report and Action Plan, also incorporated into the 2045 LRTP by
reference, includes traffic safety as a prioritization criterion. The 2045 LRTP allocates $41m in SU
funding for congestion management projects.
LRSP Update Cycle
Because the LRTP sets funding priorities for the Federal and State dollars within the MPO's purview,
the most effective timeframe to update the Collier MPO LRSP is concurrent with or in advance of the
LRTP. The Final Draft of the 2045 LRTP identifies the LRSP as a core document to be updated and
incorporated by reference into future updates of the LRTP as a component part. The 5-year cycle of
the LRTP update process allows for adequate time to assess the recommended LRSP monitoring
measures (discussed below) and for the data -driven analysis of safety performance in Collier County
to influence capital project priorities.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 4-5
Packet Pg. 2610
mLAMES uu;sapad Alunoo jallloo ayl eslljanpe o; uol;epuawwooaa : Z890Z) (Z4ZOZ uOld AlOILS PLOM leool OdW JGII103 :;u8wLI3BRV
m
m
a ti
v w
o
n
N
TF,
�
v v
r m
n in
m n
.o n
m ti
v
n m
a+ m
m r
o+ .
. in
m
TFF
r
m
TTFF�
n m
v ro
. v v
o
ry ry
o .-+
o o
.-+
. o
. m
m ry
o o
ry
.-+ o .-+
T o
00 .o
m
N a
.o n
m vmi
ry
.o
m
�o m
.o
N
o .o
n v'
O1 ti
n o
0 o
m
.o n
.o 0
I�
m
m m
m
N
N v
m
m v
v
m e
a e
.n v
�n
m
oo
N
m e
N ry
m N
m e
m m
e .n
e v m
0
a
0
>
o
u
aaz
m
9
a
o
E
\o
ma6Iyo
o
O
>
>
O'amz'cm'o
_sa'
a-
o
£
o
Swa
w
°
.m
�aCo
y
o.O
>
E
E
om>
u
v
¢ad
zvzaau
u
a
z
a
a
z
0
a
°
0
3 0
A
~
m E
r
>, m°O
y
°1
o 1
3
3
E
a
a m
m
z°
a
a>
E
3 s
a
v
a
E
a
>
o
°
wO
o
>°
m
zI.E
mv°C
°
mNc
v
mv
z
a v
<vi
ram
o
ov"
-,o
mr$
Y
o
7
,c cva
mc
o
0Oa-'o
av
a
Mm
v1p
c
a0v°
c
o
°
c
o
Iz
Yo
°
E>
.a
0
m° av
ro
zc°
(c7
u
o>
>>
o
o
>
Oi>
(7
>
w
>
Y
> a
O
3 m
a
O
m
>
N
L L
L L
L L
o
O O
m m
a
>>
a a
>>>
a a
>
9 m
a
a
A a
a a
a a
a
a m
mo mo
m
___
w w
o o
z z
o o
z z
o
z z
,�,
a a
m° m°
a a
m m°
ov
o
v v
'o 'o
v>�.
v-
'o 'o
v
�j
t7
LL z¢
v
« v
z
v v
v v
s z
v v
v v
s a
v o
v ,�
m m
v
m m°
'm m
'm
a a a
�,
L m
`w_
m m
`w_ `w_
m m
`w_ `w_
m° c
v
c v
v--
a m
o
m m
0 0
m m
0 0
m m
0
a a
m m
m m
m
m �Ea
E �Ea
°o_ Q
Q Q
`
'� a
a o
o E£
E£
E
E °1
v �v
o .o
c
N ^�
^� E
E EE
E
E E
E£
c c c
u°u°uu°u°om
m
U°m�
E
£ E
£ E
E�aasv10i
vmi vmi
vmiHHH������>>>
m
o
LL
m
e
N
LL
m v
m e
yN M
LL LL
m
yy
LL
m
m
LL
e
e
LL
41
O
C
W
E
O
h0
O
b0
=
C
"
W
O
o
«
C
m
v J
°
E
J
@I
@l
> @l
@I
>
�?l
C
O N
O
O C
O
C
O
£
o
h
h
E h
0
N
n ry
.o
ry m
�n
m
v c
v c
o m
o"
m
v v.
m
all
Monitoring and Performance Measures
.16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Metmpokitan Planning Orgarhaeon
Safety Performance Measures
The Collier MPO has adopted FDOT's Vision Zero safety performance measures and targets on an
annual basis. The MPO Director provides an annual report to the MPO Board in December which
tracks how well the MPO is performing in meeting its performance targets. In addition, the 2045
LRTP includes a Transportation System Performance Report using a template developed by FDOT and
the MPO Advisory Council (MPOAC). A similar report is incorporated in the MPO's Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP).
Monitoring of Plan Implementation
The MPO Director will include information on progress made towards implementing the LRSP to the
Annual Report; most likely in combination with reporting on progress towards meeting safety
targets generally due to the linkages established between the LRSP, the TSPR, the BPMP and the
2045 LRTP.
Updating the Local Roads Safety Plan
The baseline data analysis captured in this first iteration of the LRSP will be updated every 5 years in
preparation for developing the next iteration of the LRTP. The traffic safety updates may not
necessitate a stand- alone document like the LRSP; rather, they could be incorporated in other
planning efforts, such as the Transportation System Performance Report. New strategies and
recommendations will be incorporated as needed, and the plan may shift focus overtime.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 4-7
Packet Pg. 2612
16.K.6.c
mirp
Metmpolitan Manning "nixation
APPENDIX 1: GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan Appendix 1 - 1
Packet Pg. 2613
16.K.6.c
GLOSSARY
AADT —Average Annualized Daily Traffic: Daily traffic volumes collected over multiple (usually
three) days and adjusted for seasonal variations in traffic volumes.
• Emphasis Area — Emphasis areas are usually divided into 22 categories based on extensive
research by the AASHTO and National Cooperative Highway Research Program in their Strategic
Highway Safety Plan (NCHRP). These include infrastructure (e.g., utility pole collisions), crash
types (e.g., head-on collisions, lane departures), behavior (e.g., alcohol, speeding, occupant
protection), vehicle types (e.g., bicycles, motorcycles, heavy trucks), and at risk populations
(e.g., young drivers, older drivers). Implementation guides have been developed for these
emphasis areas and are available as 22 volumes of the NCHRP Report 500. Emphasis Areas for
the Collier LRSP represent a combination of similar crash types related to non -motorized road
users, intersection crashes, lane departure crashes, and same direction (rear-end/side-swipe)
crashes.
• Functional Classification — System used to classify roadways based on a transect of mobility vs.
access.
o Freeway & Expressway - Roads in this classification have directional travel lanes usually
separated by some type of physical barrier, and their access and egress points are
limited to on- and off -ramp locations or a very limited number of at -grade intersections.
These roadways are designed and constructed to maximize their mobility function, and
abutting land uses are not directly served by them.
o Arterial Roadway (Major) -These roadways serve major centers of metropolitan areas,
provide a high degree of mobility and can also provide mobility through rural areas.
Forms of access include driveways to specific parcels and at -grade intersections with
other roadways.
o Arterial Roadway (Minor) - Minor Arterials provide service for trips of moderate length,
serve geographic areas that are smaller than their higher Arterial counterparts and offer
connectivity to the higher Arterial system. In an urban context, they interconnect and
augment the higher Arterial system, provide intra-community continuity and may carry
local bus routes. In rural settings, Minor Arterials should be identified and spaced at
intervals consistent with population density, so that all developed areas are within a
reasonable distance of a higher level Arterial. The spacing of Minor Arterial streets may
typically vary from 1/8- to 1/2-mile in the central business district (CBD) and 2 to 3 miles
in the suburban fringes. Normally, the spacing should not exceed 1 mile in fully
developed areas
o Collector Roadway - Collectors serve a critical role in the roadway network by gathering
traffic from Local Roads and funneling them to the Arterial network. Collectors are
broken down into two categories: Major Collectors and Minor Collectors. Major
Collector routes are longer in length; have lower connecting driveway densities; have
higher speed limits; are spaced at greater intervals; have higher annual average traffic
volumes; and may have more travel lanes than their Minor Collector counterparts. In
rural areas, AADT and spacing may be the most significant designation factors. Major
Collectors offer more mobility and Minor Collectors offer more access. Overall, thetotal
Packet Pg. 2614
16.K.6.c
mileage of Major Collectors is typically lower than the total mileage of Minor Collectors,
while the total Collector mileage is typically one-third of the Local roadway network
o Local Street — Locally classified roads account for the largest percentage of all roadways
in terms of mileage. They are not intended for use in long distance travel, except at the
origin or destination end of the trip, due to their provision of direct access to abutting
land.
• ICE — Intersection Control Evaluation: A FHWA and FDOT process for evaluating appropriate
traffic control measures at major intersections.
• Signal Timing— Refers to a set of parameters for controlling traffic signals what include:
o Cycle Length — the time for a traffic signal to complete all phases
o Phase — a set of allowed concurrent movements
o Split — the amount of time allocated to each phase
o Offset — the time between common phases at adjacent traffic signals. This is used to
progress traffic along a roadway from upstream to downstream signals
o Platoon — a group of vehicles travelling between coordinated traffic signals
• VMT — Vehicle Miles Traveled: A measure of driver exposure based on miles of roadwaytravel
Packet Pg. 2615
16.K.6.c
l_
CULLIER
Metmpolitan Manning "nixation
APPENDIX 2: CRASH DATA QUALITY CONTROL TECHNICAL
MEMORANDUM
Collier County MPO I Local Road Safety Plan Appendix 2 - 1
Packet Pg. 2616
1
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Collier County MPO
Local Road Safety Plan
Crash Data QC
Technical Memorandum
March 24, 2020
FINAL
Prepared for:
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Prepared by:
Tindiale
40,40fiver
0
V
0
0
c
0
c
m
f' E
E
0;
0 .
d
N
O
O
;4- s'
.N.
VW N
` O
N
c
R
d
m
M
l
NO w�
i'
0
0
0
U
Packet Pg. 2617
-s-
7
MCGLUERW
Meaapotilan Planning orgarkadon
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: Introduction.......................................................................................................1-1
Section 2: Methodology and Data Review........................................................................... 2-3
Event Relation to Intersection..............................................................................................2-4
CrashType............................................................................................................................ 2-2
ImpactType.......................................................................................................................... 2-2
Section 3: Conclusions and Recommendations.................................................................... 3-2
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Summary of Crashes (2014-2018)..............................................................................1-1
Table 2-1: Revised Data Input by Reporting Agency................................................................... 2-3
Table 2-2: Frequently Revised Data Fields...................................................................................2-3
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Revised Motorized Vehicle Crashes
Appendix B: Revised Non -Motorized Crashes
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan i
Packet Pg. 2618
,-D.—
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
W
caLLI R
Metmloditan Planning Orgarkadon
A five-year crash history from 2014 to 2018 was queried using data from the Collier County Crash Data
Management (CDMS) for both motorized vehicles and crashes involving non -motorized road users.
Table 1-1 shows a five-year total of motorized vehicle and non -motorized road user crashes based on
the highest injury severity for each report.
Table 1-1: Summary of Crashes (2014-2018)
Fatal
130
74%
45
26%
175
Incapacitating Injury
669
80%
170
20%
839
Non -Incapacitating Injury
2,758
85%
501
15%
3,259
Possible Injury
5,290
92%
454
8%
5,744
Property Damage Only
45,175
99%
315
1%
45,490
TOTAL
54,022
97%
1485
3%
55,507
As part of the Collier County Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP), key attributes of the more severe crashes in
the data set were reviewed to verify that the coded crash data accurately corresponds to the narrative
information and collision diagrams included in each crash report. This was done to ensure that
reasonably accurate data is used for the purpose of developing the LRSP recommendations and to
identify potential data coding trends and issues to address with each of the reporting Law Enforcement
Agencies.
The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the methodology used to review and re -code crash
reports, as well as summarize the findings from the review process. Consistent with the LRSP Scope of
Services, the following crash reports were reviewed:
• Motor Vehicle Crashes: Fatal, Incapacitating Injury, and Non -Incapacitating Injury (3,557
Crashes).
• Non -Motorized User Crashes: Fatal, Incapacitating Injury, Non -Incapacitating Injury, and
Possible Injury (1,170 Crashes).
For each of these crash reports, the following data items were checked:
• Crash Location: Verification and correction of crash node assignment and approximate XY
coordinates.
• Crash Type: Verification and correcting collision diagram crash type. (Note: this is a data
attribute that is calculated by the Collier CDMS from other crash data attributes including
vehicle direction, vehicle movement, manner of collision, and first harmful event.)
• Checking for completeness and compare key data fields with narrative and diagram asfollows
- Manner of collision
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 1-1
Packet Pg. 2619
- First Harmful Event
Event Impact
First Harmful Event Relation to Junction
- Driver Action (First)
- Driver Restraint System (Vehicle 1 and 2)
- Non -Motorized User Data:
o Description
o Action Prior to Crash
o Location at Time of Crash
o Actions/Circumstances (First)
o Safety Equipment (First)
. !Iirjr
= 16.K.6.c
DMUER
Metmpditan Planning Orgadzadon
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan
1-2
Packet Pg. 2620
f --
SECTION 2: METHODOLOGY AND DATA REVIEW
16.K.6.c
cal
Metmloditan Planning Orgarkadon
Attribute fields for motorized and non -motorized crash data were exported from the Collier WebCDMS
database and manually reviewed and checked for accuracy by an engineering technician. When
individual data elements were deemed inaccurate, a revised value was coded in a separate data field. An
input was deemed inaccurate if the crash report data input was inconsistent with the crash report's
written narrative or illustrated collision diagram.
As shown in Table 2-1, Collier County Sheriff's Office collects the highest number of crash reports,
followed by Florida Highway Patrol, Naples Police Department (PD), and Marco Island PD. Collier County
Sherriff's Office has the highest number (60 percent) of reports that were revised during the clean-up
process, followed by Marco Island PD and Naples PD.
Tnhln 1-1 • Quvi—A Ih4m InnnT hu D—r+ina Aann—
Reporting Agency
Florida Highway Patrol (FHP)
Reports Reviewed
1,895
Reports Revised
608
Percent Reports Revised
32%
Collier County Sheriff's Office (CCSO)
2,690
1,613
60%
Naples Police Department (PD)
Marco Island PD
Other
TOTAL
327
155
47%
124
91
73%
50%
49%
6
3
5,042
2,470
During the review process, the fields with the most inconsistent coding needing editing were Event
Relation to Intersection, Crash Type, and Impact Type. There were twelve (12) motorized and eight (8)
non -motorized crash entries that did not have XY coordinates. These crash entries were manually
reviewed, and a location was added.
Table 2-2 shows a summary of the total revisions to these attributes for Motor Vehicle (MV) crashes and
Non -Motorized User (NM) crashes for each reporting agency.
Reporting
Agency
Event Relatl
Intersect
MV
Crashes Ci
Marco Island •D
Table 2-2: Frequently Revised Data Fields
34
415
45
25
3
522
310 12 90 1 168 0 0
33
3
2.
C
7C
9
381
108
682
2
0
i
17
6
39
9
0
i
28
4
37
1
7
1
0
0
0
1
9
439
208
926
12
8
MV: Motor Vehicle NM: Non -Motorized
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-3
Packet Pg. 2621
6.c
MCP"
Metmpokitan Planning Orgarkadon
Example cases of each commonly miscoded crash type are described on the following pages of this
memorandum. Appendices A and B show cross tabulations for each of these crash data attributes for
motor vehicle and non -motorized user crashes respectively.
EVENT RELATION TO INTERSECTION
This field indicates where the crash event occurred on the roadway. There are 12 categories under this
field:
- Non -Junction - Crossover -Related
- Intersection - Shared Use Path or Trail
- Intersection -Related - Acceleration/Deceleration Lane
- Driveway/Ally Access Related - Through Roadway
- Railway Grade Crossing - Unknown
- Entrance/Exit Ramp - Other
N
�I
I C CPI Eggleston ##3158
14-9320
,� . 1.91'.��IZcTB�3L'FItYIF.
ter.
l
1. I
1I
ICI
The image above was initially coded as "Non -Junction" then revised to "Intersection"
The QC process showed that the top 3 revised categories under Event Relation to Intersection were:
Motorized Vehicles: Non -Motorized:
- Non -junction - Non -Junction
- Intersection - Intersection
- Intersection -related - Driveway/Alley Access Related
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-4
Packet Pg. 2622
f - c
COLLIERPlanningMetmloditan . .
CRASH TYPE
This field defines the overall type of the crash and is used to generate collision diagrams. There are 14
crash types:
- Angle
- Run Off Road
- Head On
- Sideswipe
- Hit Fixed Object
- Single Vehicle
- Hit Non -Fixed Object
- U-Turn
- Left Turn
- Unknown
- Rear End
- Bike
- Right Turn
- Pedestrian
The crash in the image above was correctly recoded to the intersection rather than a non -junction, and
recategorized as a Left -Turn crash instead of the incorrect "Angle" crash.
The top 3 revised categories under Crash Type were:
Motorized Vehicles:
- Angle
- Sideswipe
- Rear End
- Hit Fixed Object
Non -Motorized:
- Hit Non -Fixed Object
- Rear End
- Bike
- Pedestrian
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan
2-2
Packet Pg. 2623
H
16.K.6.c
Meaapokilan Planning Orgarkadon
I M PACT TYP E
This field defines the manner and direction of the collision. There are 9 impact type categories:
- Front to Rear
- Rear to Side
- Front to Front
- Rear to Rear
- Angle
- Unknown
- Sideswipe (Same Direction)
- Other
- Sideswipe (Opposite Direction)
I , I N
,
r� V.
6101 Fine <fVot To ,Sol
Ridge Rd n
N
8101 Pine
Fridge Rd
Napa BIW
The image above shows an example of a crash report initially coded as "Front to Front" then revised to
"Angle"
The top 3 most revised categories under Impact Type:
Motorized Vehicles: Non -Motorized:
- Front to Rear - Angle
- Angle - Sideswipe (Same Direction)
- Sideswipe (same direction) - Rear to Rear
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan
2-2
Packet Pg. 2624
f
H
16.K.6.c
Meaapokilan Planning Orgarkadon
SECTION 3: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Coding errors and inconsistencies within crash reports impact the usefulness of crash data for both
strategic planning and traffic study purposes. Specifically, inaccurate location coding can contribute to
misidentified corridor and spot location priorities. Improper Relation to Intersection information can
create confusion as to whether there is a problem with an intersection or if there are issues with the
intersection approaches (e.g. adjacent commercial driveways or median openings). Incorrect or
internally inconsistent coding of crash attributes such as First Harmful Event, Vehicle Movement, and
Vehicle Direction can result in either incorrect Crash Type assignment or result in an inability to
determine the Crash Type. This data field is critical for understanding overall crash patterns and is also a
fundamental element in analyzing corridors or spot locations.
Differences in crash report edits between law enforcement agencies in Collier County suggest that data
entry methods and training may play a part in determining the accuracy of crash reporting. As the Local
Road Safety Plan progresses, the intent to discover what are the leading causes for crash report
inconsistency and inaccuracy. Follow up interview will be conducted with LEA officers from different
departments to gain additional insight on crash reporting and learn ways to improve accuracy and
consistency.
Based on the data analysis conducted thus far, key question areas include methods to capture crash
location and consistency of coding those data points that contribute to Crash Type assignment.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-2
Packet Pg. 2625
0S1}a0npe 01 u011epUBWWo00M : Z990Z) (Z)4ZOZ Ueld AIGIeS peOM le3Ol OdW a011103 :;uGwt43elIV
i
1
N
G1
i
a
0)
00
N
rl
N
O
M
C
V
L
Gl
a
Gl
H
Gl
�
r-
lD
M
00
i
O
a
v
>
OC
Ol
"D
M
�D
O
rn
i
O
a
v
0
a
C
0
�
a
�
LA
V
u
a
m
m
Lj-
Ztv
O
C >.
u
i C
Nba
Q
WW
V w
C
a �
w
Q N
N
M
of
O
N
of
Vf
O >
F W
1!1
n
O
N
�D
N
N
t
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
3
t T
o a
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
t mo
H �
C 0
0 0
- � v
v v
v
v
o
v
v a
t
� d
0
O
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
> a
0
0
O
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o �
V
>
w
p
v a
E
0
0
0
0
0
0
W
3
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
o
0
0
o
> v
T
v
> v
$ a
4 o
N
v m
N
v�
N
1�
O
O
O
O
N
m
O
of
Ol
0
N
N
a -
c
in
m
m
o
0
1
0
0
1
1
1z
O
F
ry
W
N
of
O
N
N
n
O
�D
m
v
o
E
s
_
`o
c
o
�
a•
�
CF
o
c
c
¢
•w
w
o
0
c
N
N
m
3
�•
m
°\'
c
i
o
•'°
r
3
o
•-
o
G
r
aW
z 3
7
E >
0
OSI:POApe 01 u011epUBWWO30M : Z990Z) (Z)4ZOZ Ueld AIGIeS peOM Ie3OI OdW a811103 :;uGwt43elIV
i
1
N
i
O
o
Q
0)
O
N
01
c-I
1 -
c-
N
�
O
V
Gl
a
H
OC
G)
M
-1
M
N
O
a+
M
M
O
Q
OC
Ql
�
M
"D
O
M
i
O
Q
0)
0
a
M
0
�
a
�
LA
0J
o
V
L.L
Ztxo
O
i C
O GJ
Q bb
Q
1=
W
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
e
o
0
K W
a --I
�
.-I
N
N
�
tv7
O
�
.--i
l0
00
a �
0
0 j
N
m
vmi
v
m
m
N
a
m
N
o
0
v
v
d
v
m
N
O
O
O
O
O
.-1
O
O
O
O
N
O
3
0
�
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Y
C
3
O
O
O
O
rl
O
O
v �
U
�n v
_a
v
N
O 6
W
Q
0
�
CD.-1
O
O
O
O
rl
vt
O
ti
O
O
a
>
W
3
W�
cc
W
K
C
N
H
�
n
ti
O
.-I
O
O
O
O
c-I
O
O
O
a,
o
Z O
2 N
x
u
y
O
0
v
x
v
J
R
M
M
00
M
�
O
al
R
P
C
O
O
O
O
1O
00
N
r1
V
1
w
00
1
N
u
v
O
a
x
y
G
w
u
s
r
�
w
x_
c
O
3
c
W
3
O
°
_
3
m
>
y
3
o
0)O
OD
'0"
Z
ry
t
C
7J
E0
Y
v
a~
y
m
3
a
c
c
Y
¢
x
x
x
cc
c[
i
in
7
7
CO
y
I a
¢ W
Z J
O
ay; OSIIJOApe 0; u011epUOWW000N : Z99OZ) (Z4ZOZ Ueld A101eS peON Ie00-1 OdW aalll0O :;uaWy0eUv
N
N
N
4S
L
O
O
O
w
O
m
O
r"
O
o
U
N
a
a
N
a�
4
o
w
�
o
0
tZ
a
a
rn
m
o
m
N
c-I
c-I
N
O
iZ
a
c
0
�
a
�
_
N
tV
a
O
L
s
c�
Z
O
c �.
i C
O N
aCLi Q
z W
c-I
lD
lD
h
V
c-I
O
r 4
O
yj N
c-I
c-I
M
c-I
a �
J O
N
0 W
.^-I
N
Lp
01
LnO
Ln
Ln
K
N
t
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
3
0
c
Y
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
C
ai
ai
w
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
v
W
N N
_Q Y p
NO
3
c
Q N
O
M
.
O
O
O
O
.-I
0
N
-0i
W
N
Ln
W
N
O' N O
3 E u
N
N
M
O
N
O
N N v
-O
V
v
bA
Lr)
0
M
Ln
c-I
O
C 4
a
0
LL
O
Ln
c-I
O
O
O
C
O
LL
C N
O
cn
Ln
O
.-I
O
c-I
Ol
0 �
LL
J
H
N
N
l00
G
N
M
�
c-I
Ln
Ln
Cn
Ln
0
rl
rl
N
P
H
0
c
u
O
N
v
o
�
v
o
Q
++
m
Q.
Q
w
O
N
f6
0
0
0
0
O.
O.
(AOC
C
cc
O
O
v
y
LL
LL
Q
N
IN
W
I
I 7
1 0
Q w
z
J
0
00
N
to
N
a
d
d
Y
t)
Ln
m a
0S1}a0npe 01 u011epUBWWo00M : Z990Z) (Z)4ZOZ Ueld AIGIeS peOM le3Ol OdW a011103 :;uGwt43elIV
i
H
d
i
0
d
C
L
O
O
O
O
O
Gl
-i
N
l0
a)
O
a
-1
m
m
H
d
D:
L
O
v
r-I
m
u1
Ln
D:
-tt
M
-tt
N
M
G1
d
H
L
0
Q-
O
N
111
O
a)
r1i
N
-1
w
m
0
a
C
0
�
a
�
N
UCU
L
U
LL
Z
G
O
Mo
a �.
i C
c Q
W y�
a
O
r
O
ul
O
of
� W
a �
C
W
O W
N
t
0
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
3
c
t >
m 3
O a
mo
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
t
H �
0
o
v
vc
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
ii
o
0
0
v _
v v
v
v
v o
t
� d
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
v a
v
>
W
o °1
V
Q
uWi
v E
O
o
O
o
O
o
0
0
0
W
z
�
c
> v m
_ o
V
o
o
O
o
o
o
0
o
0
0
O
3> u
u
m
N
o
0
o
N
o
a
> Q z
0
C
a
v
m
O
o
0
o
N
o
N
v
v �
c
o
0
N
N
m
o
o
a
m
o
�o
00
C
C O
O +'
Z C
O
m
O
O
e-I
O
e-I
O
o0
0
Q
m
mN
m
oo
w
a
N
w
ya
_
v
�
=
o
v
o
E
m
v
m
o
_
O
C
=
Q
m
lu
C
W
G
m �
v
m
m
O
w
a
o
z°
_
o`
w
uL
a
D
o
Q W
0
rn
N
tC
N
a
IL
Y
V
m a
Y s
m
ay; 0S1}a0npe 01 u011epUBWWo00M : Z990Z) (Z)4ZOZ Ueld AIGIeS peOM le3Ol OdW a011103 :;uGwt43elIV
H
i
O
Q
d
0)
00
.1
-zt
-zt
M
H
Gl
N
i
O
Q
O
0)
00
N
I,
00
NN�
N
i
O
Q
O
-1
Ln
O
OC
c-I
N
-I
'D
M
0
a
0
�
a
�
0
v
0
=
m
Z
O
Q
Z_ U
~ Z
� w
00
Q
W
zo
U
p' >
l0
00
N
01
O
M
1T
V
cn Q1
M
m Ol
O
N
lD
m
W
O
Ol
Q1
N
c-I
N
W W
d �
J W
FH
O
.--I
C
a -I
Ql
1,
O
M
Vf
O
V^1
O1
O >
n9
N
N
ti
M
r
Ol
H �
N
v
a
v
m
CD
3
0
�
Y
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
o
0
C
C
m
H
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Z)
N N
7 u
C L
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
'
0
O
010
_Q
a)
O
O
O
o
a
N
W
O
O
CDO
O
O
O
CD
O
O
O
O
0
J
a
>
E
�
W
~
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
>
L
W
bA
z
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
in
a
m
v
J
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
m
u
c v
O o
z Q
N
N
Ql
O
O
O
O
_ x
LL
N V
LL O
Q
M
O
O
N
r-I
O
O
O
O
V
O
0
o
o
0
0
o
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
v
2
v
a
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
O
O
o
0
N
N
M
1,
N
l0
00
e-I
'~
N
lD
'-1
co
W
W
O
ci
V
v
0
0
N
x
�
O
u
O
LL
o
„3
v
a
z
'Li
no
vv
m
Y
v
a w
Z �
l7 Q
z >
0
OSl}aanpe 01 u011epUBWW000M : Z990Z) (Z)4ZOZ Ueld AIGIeS peOM le3Ol OdW a011103 :;uGwt40elIV
i
tV
tNNV
i
O
Q
tV
C
i
o
0
0
0
0)
00
00
-1
00
0
a
1.0
Ln
rn
ui
O
0)
H
01
i
O
Q
m
00
0/
r,
w
m
r,
OC
w
-i
rn
rn
O
0)
N
i
O
Q
O
r-i
Ln
0/
OC
c-I
m
N
N
c-I
-tt
w
M
0
a
c
0
�
a
�
O
L
_
CL
s
u
LL
Z
CC�
G
O
i C
O 01
Q
2
W
0
O
00
0
0
0
Z W
W
a �
J �
W
0>
H W
1'
N
�
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
cy
3
°
c
O
O
o
o
`-I
`-I
c
o
v
m
o
o
O
o
o
n
N
0
O
C
c-I
O
M
rl
O
O
N
W
N
Q
a
a �
� O
O
O
O
O
O
N
o
N_
�
-6
ac
E
F
�o
3 v
v �
v
in
v
O
Q
N
M
O
YO
O
O
M
O
O
O
O
ON
0.
O
O
K
�
c
O
O
O
ti
O
O
O
N
ti
J
~O
m
m
a
O1
v
u~i
a
2
a
v
o
v
v
o
.o
O-
O
N
a
o
N
0
cc
o
�i
O
v
°
N
a
s
z
0
c
3
O
c
`v
a
O
N
O
o
Q W
Z J
a>
0
16.K.6.c
19 [1 l
PER -
Metmpolitan Manning "nixation
APPENDIX 3: COMMUNITY SURVEY SUMMARY
Collier County MPO I Local Road Safety Plan Appendix 3 - 1
Packet Pg. 2632
1
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Collier MPO
Local Road Safety Plan
Community Survey
Summary
10/09/2020
Final
Prepared for
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Prepared by
undale
)(Oliver
Of
Packet Pg. 2633
16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Table of Contents
Section1: Introduction....................................................................................................................1-1
Section2: Key Takeaways................................................................................................................2-2
Demographics and Travel Behavior...................................................................................................2-2
Safety Concerns and Improvements..................................................................................................2-2
Driving Habit Comparison between Aging and Younger Drivers.......................................................2-3
Bikeand Pedestrian Safety................................................................................................................2-4
Section 3: Traffic Safety Survey........................................................................................................3-1
Survey Respondent Demographics........................................................................................................3-1
GeneralTraffic Safety.............................................................................................................................3-3
Bicyclistsand Pedestrians......................................................................................................................3-6
Section 4: Additional Observations..................................................................................................4-1
Summary of Concerns for Local Road Safety.........................................................................................4-1
List of Figures
Figure 1-1: Website Survey Post................................................................................................................1-1
Figure 3-1: Collier County Residence/Employment...................................................................................3-1
Figure3-2: Age...........................................................................................................................................3-1
Figure3-3: Home ZIP Code........................................................................................................................3-2
Figure3-4: Work ZIP Code.........................................................................................................................3-2
Figure3-5: Travel Mode.............................................................................................................................3-3
Figure 3-6: Travel Destination....................................................................................................................3-3
Figure 3-7: Driving Frequency....................................................................................................................3-4
Figure3-8: Travel Time..............................................................................................................................3-4
Figure 3-9: Travel Safety Concerns............................................................................................................3-5
Figure 3-10: Safety Improvement Support................................................................................................3-5
Figure 3-11: Walk and Bike Frequency.......................................................................................................3-6
Figure3-12: Walking Frequency................................................................................................................3-6
Figure3-13: Bike Safety.............................................................................................................................3-7
Figure3-14: Pedestrian Safety...................................................................................................................3-7
Figure 3-15: Traffic Rules Adherence.........................................................................................................3-8
Figure3-16: Driver Behavior......................................................................................................................3-8
Figure 3-17: Bike Safety Improvement......................................................................................................3-9
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan i
Packet Pg. 2634
16. K.6.c
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Tables
Table1-1: Travel Time................................................................................................................................2-3
Table1-2: Travel Frequency.......................................................................................................................2-3
Table 4-1: Intersections/Roadway Corridors in Need of Improvement.....................................................4-2
Table 4-2: Intersections/Roadway Corridors in Need of Bike and Ped Improvement...............................4-4
Appendix
Appendix A: Traffic Safety Survey............................................................................................................. A-1
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan ii
Packet Pg. 2635
MW
JJ[J
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
The Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is developing a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) with
the goal of prioritizing opportunities to improve roadway safety, budget programs, and projects,
develop highway safety strategies, and reduce the loss of life, injuries, and property damage while
improving the performance and capacity of the county -wide street and highway network.
The purpose of the LRSP is to:
• Identify and define areas to improve the safety of Collier County's streets and highways.
• Define strategies and projects, including improvements to infrastructure (Engineering); driver,
bicycle, and pedestrian behavior (Education); law enforcement programs (Enforcement); and
response of emergency medical services (Emergency Services).
• Identify federal, State, and local funding programs.
• Provide structure for evaluating the progress in reducing crashes and fatalities.
The plan development process includes data analysis, public outreach, and plan drafting. The data
analysis step looked at the county's motorized and non -motorized crash data from 2014 to 2018, and
high -crash frequency locations, crash types, and roadway and weather conditions were reviewed. On
August 20, 2020, a survey was sent out to capture the public's input on how to minimize roadway
fatalities and make Collier County road systems safer for residents and stakeholders. The survey was
posted on the Collier MPO website and Facebook page, sent out to the MPO's advisory committees and
adviser network, and shared by WinkNews.
Figure 1-1: Website Survey Post
COLLIER METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION 0 @ A+ A A- select Language
COLLIER COUNTY, FLdRiDA
nc�vwlw� cran-:�a ryovi�non 01"i . RM
� ears%
__August2a, @u20
TRAFFIC WEfY SLIRVLY: The Collier MPO is developing a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP). As part of this effort the MPO has analyzed motorized and non,
motorized crash data From 2014to 2018. This data together with input from the public. will farm the basis forthe plan. The following survey is irnendedto get your
input on how to minimize road fatalities and make our roadway system safer far Dallier County residents and stakeholders. It vnll take 10-15 minuiesto complete
this survey.
LPIt WOWS
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 1-1
Packet Pg. 2636
law
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
SECTION 2: KEY TAKEAWAYS
The survey was published in English and Spanish. Of 1,092 survey responses received, 1,060 were in
English and 32 were in Spanish. Following are key takeaways from the survey.
Demographics and Travel Behavior
• A large number of survey respondents indicated that they either worked or lived in Collier
County year-round, and a majority lived and worked in Naples and Immokalee. The top three
home and work ZIP codes were as follows:
Home ZIP codes:
■ 34120 (Naples) —186 participants
■ 34142 (Immokalee) —146 participants
■ 34119 (Immokalee) — 84 participants
Work ZIP codes:
■ 34116 (Naples) —129 participants
■ 34109 (Naples) — 93 participants
■ 34142 (Immokalee) — 77 participants
• More than two thirds of survey respondents were between ages 35 and 64.
• Survey respondents ranked driving, walking, and riding a bike as the top three most used modes
of travel.
• Respondents ranked their top two destinations as "Retail Goods and Services" and "Work." It is
important to note that this survey was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic during which
most people were working from home.
— In total, 75% of respondents drove a motor vehicle every day, with daily travel taking 30
minutes or more.
Safety Concerns and Improvements
• Of the 13 safety concerns indicated on the survey (see Appendix A, Question 5), respondents
chose the following as their top three:
— Drivers using cell phones or conducting other activities while driving
— Speeding and aggressive driving
— Aging drivers
• A large majority indicated support for "increased traffic enforcement" as a desired safety
improvement, corresponding with one of the top safety concerns of aggressive driving. Other
desired improvements were ranked as follows:
1— Increased traffic enforcement
2 — Improved rural roads (e.g., wider shoulders, better signs, pavement markings)
3 — Increased safety on major roads for pedestrians (e.g., better intersection design, marked
crosswalks, better lighting)
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 2-2
Packet Pg. 2637
PPPP
yll�
tooCOLLIER _W
4 — Better bicycle facilities, including wider bicycle lanes and separated bike paths
5 — Better roadway lighting
6 — Reduced speeds on major roads through design and traffic signalization strategies
Driving Habit Comparison between Aging and Younger Drivers
Further analysis of survey responses compared the driving habits of aging drivers (those age 55 and
above) and younger drivers' habits (those age 54 and below). Survey respondents included 40% aging
drivers and 60% younger drivers. Following are some key takeaways:
• A large number of respondents in both age groups indicated that they drove a motor vehicle
every day, and aging drivers (21%) indicated that they drove more than 4 times per week but
not daily.
• A majority of drivers in both age groups spent at least 30 minutes traveling each day. A
significant number of aging drivers, however, indicated that they spent less time traveling (20-
30 minutes).
• Both age groups had opposite rankings for travel destinations. Aging drivers rated "Retail Goods
and Services" as their top travel destination and "Work" as their second choice. Younger drivers
ranked those two destinations the opposite, with "Work" as their top destination.
• Both groups indicated concern about different safety -related items. Younger drivers were
concerned about "people who do not know the rules of the road" and "aging drivers," and aging
drivers were concerned about "speeding and aggressive driving" and "people using cell phones
or doing other activities while driving."
The following survey results support the above findings. Travel Time and Frequency
Table 2-1: Travel Time
Question: How much time do you typically spend traveling each day?
Aging Drivers
Count
(Age 55+)
Percentage
Younger Drivers
Count
(< Age 54)
Percentage
0-10 minutes
33
8%
17
3%
10-20 minutes
20-30 minutes
30 minutes or more
96
23%
30%
39%
78
12%
18%
67%
124
113
163
426
Table 2-2: Travel Frequency
Question: How often do you drive a motor vehicle?
Response
Count
Percentage
Count
54
Percentage
Daily
246
59%
541
85%
2-4 times per week
69
17%
24
4%
More than 4 times per week
87
21%
64
10%
Once per week
14
3%
3
0%
Less than once per month
1
0%
1
0%
Mode of Travel
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-2
Packet Pg. 2638
MW
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Question: How do you usually travel from place to place? (Rank from 1 to 6, with 1 being the most
frequently used mode of transportation and 6 being the least used.)
Both age groups ranked their preferred modes of travel as the following:
• 1— Drive
• 2 — Walk
• 3 — Bicycle
• 4 — Rely on others for rides
• 5 — Rideshare (e.g., Uber/Lyft)
• 6 — Bus
Travel Destination
Question: What is your usual destination when using your #1 ranked mode of transportation? (Rank
from 1 to 5, with 1 being where you travel most often and 5 being where you travel least often.)
Younger drivers:
• 1— Work
• 2 — Retail Goods and Services (e.g.,
shopping, dining out)
• 3 — Visiting friends/family
• 4 — School
• 5 — Medical Appointments
Top Three Safety Concerns
Aging drivers:
• 1— Retail Goods and Services (e.g.,
shopping, dining out)
• 2 — Work
• 3 — Medical Appointments
• 4 — Visiting friends/family
• 5 — School
Question: Of the items below, which are your top three safety concerns about traveling in Collier
County? (Choose three. See Appendix A, Question 5 for a full list.)
Younger drivers:
• 1— People who do not know the "rules
of the road"
• 2 — Aging drivers
• 3 — Speeding and aggressive driving
Bike and Pedestrian Safety
Aging drivers:
• 1— Speeding and aggressive driving
• 2 — People using cell phones or doing
other activities while driving
• 3 — People who do not know the "rules
of the road"
• Almost half of respondents indicated that they walked and/or rode a bicycle less than once per
month.
• Nearly one third of respondents (32%) indicated walking less than once per month, and another
third (26%) walked daily.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 4-2
Packet Pg. 2639
\�
lawCOLLIER
..
anizabon
• When respondents were asked if they felt safe and comfortable while riding a bicycle in Collier
County, half either strongly or somewhat disagreed.
• More than half either strongly or somewhat agreed to feeling safe and comfortable while
walking in Collier County.
• Almost half of survey respondents agreed that Collier County pedestrians and bicyclists do a
good job of following the rules of the road.
• More than half of those surveyed expressed that Collier County drivers are not courteous about
sharing the road with pedestrians and bicyclists.
• Respondents indicated the following as the top three improvements they believed could be
done to make bicycling safer in Collier County:
— More bicycle lanes that are physically separated from vehicle traffic
— Reducing distracted driving
— Making it easier to cross highways and high-speed streets
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan -
Packet Pg. 2640
SECTION 3: TRAFFIC SAFETY SURVEY
Survey Respondent Demographics
Figure 3-1: Collier County Residence/Employment
Question: Please describe yourself by checking all that apply.
I am a visitor to Collier County I 1%
I own a business in Collier County 10%
I live in the region and visit Collier County for
shopping and recreation ■ 8%
1 work in Collier County
I live in Collier County for part of the year ■ 7%
I live in Collier County year-round
65+
55-64
45-54
35-44
25-34
18-24 - 3%
0% 5%
43%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Figure 3-2: Age
Question: What is your age?
18%
21%
20%
24%
13%
10% 15% 20% 25%
11W
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
88%
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan
Packet Pg. 2641
Naples
34120
I
MRlapal¢¢
3s142
tab
Naples
34119
34104
67
81
34117
34110
Ti
8.3
34112
34118
59
55
34700
3410a
53
43
34714
3477J
39
32
34705
34103
34f 02
30
25
13
Marta 1.1d
ui1
5
EveiNlades Cety
34134
2
000alana
34140
1
ocwpee
1 34141
1 1
16. K.6.c
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Figure 3-3: Home ZIP Code
Question: What is your home ZIP code?
F, o
� O
O I
� OI BFowAX/_
n
G
O
HemeZipmdr menLvns
0 . 0- 0- 0
rnr..
i%s[ 61fl�-lalnirs
Nenlb'nel{',
�raa�rr-.,•�mca��
Olin=MMM
M®_
IIIIII�
®_
�IIIIII��
ill
Collier Count
y
Home 'l.ipcodes
T
Figure 3-4: Work ZIP Code
Question: What is your work ZIP code?
SFr
_. Hi•PlLWY
�J I
S
� a>9
AROWARp
C
O
nsa
Wwk2ip�ode memions
0.- Collier ConntyO- O°'0-O"Work 7ipcodes TTT
T
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan -2
Packet Pg. 2642
16. K.6.c
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
General Traffic Safety
Figure 3-5: Travel Mode
Question: How do you usually travel from place to place? (Rank from 1 to 6, with 1 being the most
frequently used mode of transportation and 6 the least used.)
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
Walk Bicycle Drive Bus Rideshare Rely on
(e.g. others for
Uber/Lyft) rides
Figure 3-6: Travel Destination
Question: What is your usual destination when using your #1 ranked mode of transportation?
(Rank from 1 to 5 with 1 where you travel most often and 5 where you travel least often.)
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
Work School Retail Goods Medical Visiting
and Services (e.g Appointments friends/family
Shopping, Dining
Out)
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan -
Packet Pg. 2643
Figure 3-7: Driving Frequency
Question: How often do you drive a motor vehicle? (Select one.)
80% 75%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20
14%
9%
10% , ■
0
2 0 0.2%
0%
Daily More than 4 2-4 times a week Once a week Less than once a
times a week month
Figure 3-8: Travel Time
Question: How much time do you typically spend traveling each day? (Select one.)
Uu,o 5:74
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
5%
0% -
0-10 minutes
22%
17%
10-20 minutes 20-30 minutes 30 minutes or more
16. K.6.c
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organizati°n
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan
3-4
Packet Pg. 2644
PPPP
lowkL COLLIER
Figure 3-9: Travel Safety Concerns
Question: Of the items below, which are your top three safety concerns about traveling in
Collier County? (Choose three.)
People who do not know the "rules of the road"
Construction or utility work zones
7%
Inadequate roadway lighting or traffic signals
� 15%
People using cell phones or doing other activities while...
Teen drivers
5%
Speeding and aggressive driving
Commercial vehicles operating on local roads
�14%
Motorcyclists
M 5%
Aging drivers
People not wearing seatbelts
1 1%
Pedestrians and bicyclists sharing the roadway
27%
People driving under the influence of alcohol, drugs,...
23%
Roadway design
18%
0% 10% 20% 30%
41%
64%
59%
43%
40% 50% 60% 70%
Figure 3-10: Safety Improvement Support
Question: What is your level of support for the following safety improvements? (Rank each from 1 to 5,
with 1 being the most support and 5 being the least support.)
Increased traffic enforcement
Improving roadway lighting M 977
Improving rural roads (e.g. wider shoulders, better signs
and pavement markings) 988
Making major roads safer for pedestrians (e.g. improving 982
intersection design, providing marked crosswalks, better...
Providing better bicycle facilities including wider bicycle 980
lanes and separated bike paths
Reducing speeds on major roads through design and
traffic signalization strategies 976
1,031
940 960 980 1,000 1,020 1,040
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan -
Packet Pg. 2645
Bicyclists and Pedestrians
50 %
45 %
40 %
35%
30%
25 %
20 %
15%
10%
5%
0%
MW
Jim
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Figure 3-11: Walk and Bike Frequency
Question: How often do you walk and/or ride a bicycle? (Choose one.)
47%
17%
17%
12%
7%
Daily More than 4 times 2-4 times a week Once a week Less than once a
a week month
Figure 3-12: Walking Frequency
Question: How often do you walk? (Choose one.)
35%
32%
30%
26%
2_ ,.,
20%
19%
15%
1
1°
Daily More than 4 times 2-4 times a week Once a week Less than once a
a week month
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-6
Packet Pg. 26476
16. K.6.c
COLLIER
-- Metropolitan Planning Organization
Figure 3-13: Bike Safety
JT
Question: In general, I feel safe and comfortable while riding a bicycle in Collier County. M
U)
40%
35
300 0 28%
25%
20% 18%
17%
15%
10%
5% 4%
0% ■
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat Strongly disagree No opinion
disagree
Figure 3-14: Pedestrian Safety
Question: In general, I feel safe and comfortable while walking in Collier County.
45%
40% 39%
35%
30%
25%
20% 18%
15% 14% 14% 15%
10%
5%
0%
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat Strongly disagree No opinion
disagree
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan -
Packet Pg. 2647
16. K.6.c
COLLIER
-- Metropolitan Planning Organization
Figure 3-15: Traffic Rules Adherence
JT
Question: In general, Collier County pedestrians and bicyclists do a good job following the M
U)
rules of the road. r-
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
36%
24% 24%
9%
7%
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat Strongly disagree No opinion
disagree
Figure 3-16: Driver Behavior
Question: In general, Collier County drivers are courteous about sharing the road
with pedestrians and bicyclists.
32%
31%
25%
10%
6% 7%
5%
0%
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree No Opinion
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-
Pg. 2648
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Figure 3-17: Bike Safety Improvement
Question: What could be done to make bicycling safer in Collier County? (Choose three.)
Reducing distracted driving A 45%
Better enforcement of speed limits 24%
More education for motorists and bicyclists about
sharing the roadway 25%
Start a bicycle sharing program M 4%
More convenient and available bicycle parking = 5%
Make it easier to cross highways and high-speed streets 32%
More low -speed neighborhood routes - 12%
More multi -use paths 30%
More bicycle lanes that are physically separated from
vehicle traffic
More bicycle lanes - 20%
70%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 3-9
Packet Pg. 26479
16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
SECTION 4: ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
Summary of Concerns for Local Road Safety
Aggressive/ Careless Driving/ Speeding — Concerns raised by Collier County residents and stakeholders
regarding aggressive driving include speeding and tailgating, high-speed lane changing, running red
lights and stop signs, drivers not using indicator lights before lane change, and drivers traveling
dangerously below the posted speed limit. Survey respondents noted that aggressive drivers make it
unsafe for drivers obeying traffic laws and gave US-41 as an example of a roadway segment with of
excessive speeding.
Distracted Drivers — Distracted driving behavior includes using a cell phone either for a call or texting,
loud music, and impaired driving under the influence of substances. Survey respondents suggested
increased law enforcement for drivers that use cell phones while driving.
Law Enforcement — Survey participants indicated that increased enforcement is needed to crack down
on high-speed drivers and cell phone users while driving.
Aging Drivers — Survey participants expressed that aging drivers have slower reaction times and drive
below the speed limit, even in fast lanes. Participants suggested more frequent licensing retesting and
better public transportation as options for aging drivers.
Traffic — Respondents indicated that there is traffic during AM and PM peak hours and during tourist
seasons, noting that tourist season leads to overcrowding of roads, which slows down traffic and leads
to accidents. Respondents provided examples of roadway systems that need immediate attention— Oil
Well Road and the intersection of 1-75 and Everglades Boulevard.
Bicyclist and Pedestrians — Respondents felt that bicyclists and pedestrians do not follow the rules of
the road and that bike lanes are not fit for safe travel, indicating that bicyclists are ignored on the
roadway. Suggestions included providing additional sidewalks for safer pedestrian travel and adding bike
lanes to Vanderbilt Drive between 111th and Vanderbilt Beach Road.
Roadways/ Maintenance / Infrastructure — In general, survey participants were concerned about back
roads being too small and that some landscapes are dangerous in that they act as an obstruction. They
also pointed out that lack of traffic lights results in unsafe exiting and suggested adding more speed limit
signs and improved infrastructure to combat high traffic volume. Examples noted were Immokalee Road
being poorly lit and making it dangerous to drive at night and Oil Well Road needing maintenance and
additional shouldering and lighting.
Miscellaneous — Some respondents commented that there were too many one-way roads and that
additional education on driver safety is needed.
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan 4-
Pg. 2650
ay; aSl;aanpe O; uOIIBPUOWWOOON : Z890Z) (Z)MZ uald ApleS paoN laaol OdW a811103 : OWL1a844V
wJ
c
a
a
O
u
pp
N
O
C
L
L
>
a
>tto
E
N
Y
L
t O
O
(C6
E
a
O E
`n
cl
U
E
C L
O
>, O
C
a
O
C
Y
ro V,
E
-0
N -a
0 u
+� u
tab
C
N
o o a
a
a s
+,
a N w
>
�
•>
o ao--
i
�
Q- +
O
>
1
LO
O � i
>
a
O
m
O- D O Op
Y
Ln>
"L
—
C
a UA
u
J
Lnaj
0)
a
r0 N
ra Q- c N
to
a X tea
to a
u a
0 O M a
3z
Q
•
a
Q
Q
Q
dLU N
oCz
QZQ
�,=
Q
z
z
z
z
z
z
otao
°)
—
bD
o
a s
a_
a
Q
c to
o
a
��
L>
o Q
a
�
3
a
v
_0
O
of
m
N
O
a
O
J
O
U
Q ro
O
O
a
i Y
m
CL
a41
L
_
—
Y Q m
a
>
m
C �[
>
Q
O
a
+
76
!O
Lu^>
oC
ma_
_
�E
>
m 7
O
m
raa a
Qca
Y L -O
m
to m
> C
c
a a
> ago
o
C O
u c
N J
E
a 0 .L c
C m
J O
ro
m
E
+-+
O a0
ro
O r0
L o
0
N
a
—
D
-0
Y O
O (9
E
E
00
-6C
m
_0u
O s -a
E
r
ac
�
NL
(JL
O
4N
O rp
(.0
O
a
tmNUJ
ra
O
O
Z
-6
LU
Cl>-
L
>N
O
w
>, U N
m
="aCCLL
m
m
YmN
ra
_
Q
a
m COcoO0)41C
a
a
a
E
Om^
E
v— a
N
r,4
m
ri
a`�i t
N>
N a
0o
is
Y a
m Q
+�
E
O
u p
E
rl Cl.
O -p
V) a
N
Y
"O C
O
ra C
Q ca
O 41
E fO
-a
Y
O
CO a
_
a
a) -6
ro C
6 Q m
or m
-a
O Ln
C7
L
-6 O
(7
E c
C
ro 'O c
N
OC O
—
LO ro
a
m
N Y
0
v>
m
a>
a
f6 c
v>
z
a
v>
0 3 m
a
C
o
o0 m
-O
Lr�
O>
a
Cl.
-a m
aa)
m 3
a
c
v ra
-a 3
Ln d C—
Y E
N a
m
L cLa
M
jj�N=
a
U'
a
Q
m O
++
Y
O
ra
i N
an d
W O 0
Q
ha
a
.--I N
-p O
t]D
N
O
W
>
C
>
> r0 rp 'O
J C.7 0c
co
u m
> O
-:i (D
O ro
u m
l6
a Z
In L
Q
O C _�
(D J Q
j a
W Q—
E
(7
pc
(�
Q m
> r6
W C7
r"n
r'n
Ln
Ln
m
Lo
-i
Ln
o
00
00
rl
N
rn
rl
Ln
Ln
Ln
m
r i
r-i
-i
-i
>-
Ln
Of
�
m
u
a
a
m
a;
>
>Of
°C
0an
(7
a
co
m
—
0
>
Oa
E
a
L
Q
L
I
m
0
C
lzt
m
Ln
E
Ln
C
>
Ln
O
a
C7
Q
u
�
U)
Q
LO
to
N
Ch
d
d
Y
V
a
GLIJ aSl4JaAPBmuo|e■PUOWWO eN:Z 9 Z (Z MZU81d AeeSp oN|83 0-1 OdWJ811103 emL138 n¥
k
k
/
mo
7
5 k
}
0 §
\ \
§
_
7@
2
7
g
2
ƒ
0 u
§ E )
\f
/
)05
e
=
_ g .
2
E%\\§
E�
_0=
u
) 3
\ /
o
Q
$
§ k
)
m"=
/
o®
o
/ c
a
2 &_
o
/ 9 \
®
$ E
/�
+
z m
0
/
/
5 W
\ /
E »
§
n
\
@ g 2_
e
o i»_&$/
k
o
2 =
,
4
y
e d
_»
—
\
$
)
$
o /
§
®7
_�
\
§
k /
k
o 3
°
d
\ \ \
/ (�
» \
\ \ ®
) /
\
\ 2
2
< m m
< _ C
u u=
m
o o
= = e
#
u
2
m m
z =
<
m
< z
7
7
p
±
/
e
'
7
y
Cl.
\_
\
` \
/
E
}
/
\
\
7
$
\
to
\
\
<
\
E
/
/
\
f
/
q
L
#
m
7
�
\
/
>
_
_
<
\
2
k
%
_
o
%
a
»
a
n
\
\
\
\
\
<
to
C14
a.
,\
a
§
3
�
/
_Z3
R
cc
/
0
k
§
0
ay; aSl;aanpe O; UOIIBPUOWWOOON : Z890Z) (Z)MZ Uald ApleS paoN laaol OdW a811103 : OWL13844V
0
Q
7
v
M
v_
C
N•
on
c
+J
aj
C Q
E0
0
> 4J
O `A
Qc U
G U_
L
to 0
a
c c
ca a�
Y_ v
m >
0
O Q
E
LV >-
Z al
N
i �
O a1
'a ai
O c
u
M 4�
0
O (moo
t
4J
C L
o 0
U -
a) L
H 0
� v
C �
N �
� O
L .0 0
M ul
H c
0
U
v
L
v
4�
c
O
0
ti0
N
f6 -0
N
u 0 Y
CO 0-
(D N >
u
O ++ (6
(D
m
aJ
a1
O
ae
N
++
7 u
N a1
c
N
N .2
O 3
a°'i
t
° 1i f6
N
U
U -°
E - m
N -6 � (>6
Y U u
°
ca L CO
>T
O —
u
(a O
a) C O
S
co
o _O
i N—
> N
O
'}.
L
N E
N
v
d' ++
n3 t w
0
w
> +�
0
bA
-Z3
L
D
bA 0 n3 �••C
C ++ LO
L N 0
C N
w±2
N t
a1 0
L L
(O 1
Z
u
2
o—
O N
0
0 O Y
(O N
O _6
a1 �--� C _O
L
C '^ O
0 �
c _
N m
0
d 0 _ 3
N= O O 0
c
N C
N
C Y
C
CO ++ +�
Y >,
i O >. .�
0
C
L
a1 U 0
v }' v N
C
.0 Q v Ln M
Q 0 3
j
OL 7
L
,75
000
N3
C
>
o O a1 D
�c
E-0 a E
oE
0 o
o
E L
CL Eo c
EE° E
• •
•
• •
o>Q
•
U
•
E LL O H a
• • • •
Y
v
s
+
w
O 0)O
O
C7
c 0
m n3 c v
c o Q
a
oc �
OL c
Q a u
m y
'� �
f6 °
> C7
+,
a �'
m nz
v
V
> v
—
O
E Ol
C -6 C
-0 T
a1
'Z3
0
ocn
o
O Ql
— c t
+�1
v )
a1
a a,
E
E N
_O
>_ hO .� i--I
CO
J
r N
CL > O (0
c
d >,
v
C a)
E
J •C E
Q
i W = a
Ui n3
-O
'O O I--°
Y
>
m
(o a' Y �_
Q Z
E
O
m
> a
C
m i
Z
L
a1
c C
N f6 W
Q N -6 Li
L
N
d
N Y
v 0
N
aJ
L 0 LL
a
J
41
Q
Ln
°
O N
bA
°
CLO
L
U QJ
Ln
ci CO
a c a o
v u
>
L O
^
V)
L (� C O
i
L_0
L (�ro
Y
w
'0
(a O
u ri � C7
(Lo
LL E (,
N
>, -0_ t - 0
p
> C7
COro
CO
O }
0 E
>
m
Ln a) >
O
m N
m
0-
0
ro
j CO
C
a1 m 1^
N
c
3
0
v
o^
w_
Cl. v
m (a (a U
>
p
a c
(u>
O m
0
u -0_
_
>
0
1 i
m
_
>
CT
O
L O
3
J L
0
o O" Z N
ci
� +'
�
L
N
o 3 a=
o v
3 s a a, -a
-a
Ln
—ago
U 01 [1' o
Q
O 0>
v
a) av M
(fin
L
> v
tin
J° (o "
c
E>
(n
_
—
U
-6
Q
H
uJ
(a >—
Ln
0 -a
a1 c N
> v v CO
a1 >
v
v^
(o
ao
a) Co O =
a
m (a -a ai a)
(
ti0
nz
n3
a N
o
v o Q
0 0—
LU
E cLa on n3
(o - O O
Q (a
v L
= E s nz
O E 6 +�
E -0 —
E n3 L
� 0
(o N M
E a1
(a >
U Ln J U
Q m LL
U Cr Ln
�'
m D
U Q
M
N
O
O
(3)
M
Ql
On
Oil
I"
to
l0
Ln
O
Ofon
Of
U
41
tio
m
—_
0
O
a-i
L
°
L
v
a)
Cl.
O
Q
u
O
M
LO
to
tV
Ch
d
d
Y
V
a
ay; aSl;aanpe O; uOl;epuaWWOOON : Z890Z) (Z)MZ uald ApleS paoN laaol OdW a811103 : OWL1a844V
c O _r_
3
° 0 7
° 7 Y O a)
3 � 0 c
° m -00 mm°to A 3
(U a) c o =
u 4= ao ao o n
a° -0v v t o
>
3 O W O v" c o m
v _0to on
o ,
ii -0 Oc� E 4, v 0
CL O v >� �- �a)t "t
L
vui o-0c «`, N m 3 m V, � .c7
c +� .�' O +� �n .� n Y' ° n a
— c c
ua) -,an -0 to
v Y Ln
O L v
a) O O N O N O u
C C O EF O- 7 a Q
a>C7Z> E Q Q > E Q Q a=a o>z
• • • • Z Z • Z Z • •
O
cTa 41
O Y
c to 3 (U
O O a 0 a)
Y Y co pC U
c ai O ° > 41
+. m L
J z LLr N =� Y H
a)
a)
O 4-Z E c >
c o a) -E to Z
co 41
ur of Ln m
O O a) O U w O
a) O O N N Z to t
o�c C "O Vl •� co N m
°o a c" m n a z Y m
Y m a) U a) '6 i v oo ±
> 0 O 6
v(D � O m CL C Oc 3
00 U Q >
E aa)) as 4 ; °
cLa
N E
v cc
_ �00 O m N c E a)
O = c a Ln a> '> (v a)
41
of o o 0
to u> m t- ri (7 E c
C7 Q of s m= m a)_0-6 E 0
d Q p cxa m Co
m Ln c a) C7
Q E �Y ,c v- v ��� a)-o
Q co � � w m m a 3: m o m m
N
N
N
N
t
u
m
(U4-1
p
m
m
m
O
>
a)
v
T
O
m
'O
O
0
a) $
OA
f0
ba
V)a
Y
C
_0
i
c>o
O cLo
>
tOp
>
>
o
C7 a
iD
C=
w
C7
�
c
41
c N c
to
a, �
O 1
41 U O 0
O
ra �
v Fa v
oc do
> ns
N o a
— 4tf T
L
toc
>
Ln v
� ns
L N
N 41
0
> 3
to O 0 cn
Q
Q
Q
2 0_ U>
Q
Q
Z
Z
Z•
Z
Z
a)
m
>
�
C
'a
E
m
°
E
_
o
ns
co
c
0
O
!O
(6
m
t
c
ai
v
r
N
�a
J
r�-I
Y
of
O
-0
s
0
O
tTo
O
Z
as
_
N
Y
>
of
O
�O
m
i
f0
Q
a)
a)
>
J
J
by
++
41
Y
>
Y
(D
>
E
o
a
c
m
E
a)
V)
>
v
L
°
v
_0
O
—
i
M
m
U
Ucr
cTa
C
O
>
ri
t
>
Y
U
a
cuo j.
=
fO
a
>
>
+v
ai
CO N
Ln
a)
co
LU
•i
0
0
6
>
u
>
Y
v m
m
c
v
ra
m
m
a
c ono
'> >
°
O
> oC
0 0
Col
Vn
0
C7
N
N
N
r-I
O
O
c-I
ri
ri
ri
c-I
ri
Y
a)
6
>
>
i
m
LL
0
>,
v
>
v
Co
+'
m
"O
'°
Co
O
O
,'
O
co
U
O
O
H
-D
"a
r
O
m
.
a
C7
cc
16.K.6.c
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Appendix 3: Traffic Safety Survey
General Traffic Safety Survey
1. How much time do you typically spend traveling each day (Choose one)
• 0-10 minutes
• 10-20 minutes
• 20-30 minutes
• 30 minutes or more
2. How do you usually travel from place to place? (Rank from 1-5 with 1 being the most frequently
used mode of transportation and 5 is the least used)
• Walk
• Bicycle
• Drive
• Bus
• Rideshare (e.g. Uber/Lyft)
• Rely on others for rides
3. What is your usual destination when using your #1 ranked mode of transportation (Rank from 1-5
with 1 being where you travel most often and 5 being where you travel leastoften)
• Work
• School
• Retail Goods and Services (e.g shopping, dining out)
• Medical Appointments
• Visiting Friends/Family
4. How often do you drive a motor vehicle (Choose one)
• Daily
• More than 4 times a week
• 2-4 times a week
• Once a week
• Less than once a month
5. Of the items below, which are your top three safety concerns about traveling in Collier County
(Choose three)
• Roadway design
• People driving under the influence of alcohol, drugs, medications or other substances
• Pedestrians and bicyclists sharing the roadway
• People not wearing seatbelts
• Aging drivers
• Motorcyclists
• Commercial vehicles operating on local roads
• Speeding and aggressive driving
• Teen drivers
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan
Packet Pg. 2655
PPPP
Organizabon
• People using cell phones or doing other activities while driving
• Inadequate roadway lighting or traffic signals
• Construction or utility work zones
• People who do not know the "rules of the road"
In your own words, what is your biggest concern for local road safety in Collier County?
6. What is your level of support for the following safety improvements? (Rank each from 1 to 5, with 1
being the most support and 5 being the least support)
• Reducing speeds on major roads through design and traffic signalization strategies
• Providing better bicycle facilities including wider bicycle lanes and separated bike paths
• Making major roads safer for pedestrians (e.g. improving intersection design, providing marked
crosswalks, better lighting
• Improving rural roads (e.g. wider shoulders, better signs and pavement markings)
• Improving roadway lighting
• Increased traffic enforcement
7. Please tell us if there is a specific roadway or intersection that you would most like to see improved
Bicyclists and Pedestrians
8. How often do you walk and/or ride a bicycle? (Choose one)
• Daily
• More than 4 times a week
• 2-4 times a week
• Once a week
• Less than once a month
9. How often do you walk? (Choose one)
• Daily
• More than 4 times a week
• 2-4 times a week
• Once a week
• Less than once a month
10. In general, I feel safe and comfortable while riding a bicycle in Collier County. (Choose one)
• Strongly agree
• Somewhat agree
• Somewhat disagree
• Strongly disagree
• No opinion
11. In general, I feel safe and comfortable while walking in Collier County. (Choose one)
• Strongly agree
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan
Packet Pg. 2656
Z:-ql Ill
COLLIER
-
COLLIER Metropolitan Planning Organization
• Somewhat agree
• Somewhat disagree
• Strongly disagree
• No opinion
12. In general, Collier County pedestrians and bicyclists do a good job following the rules of the road
(Choose one)
• Strongly agree
• Somewhat agree
• Somewhat disagree
• Strongly disagree
• No opinion
13. In general, Collier County drivers are courteous about sharing the road with pedestrians and
bicyclists (Choose one)
• Strongly agree
• Somewhat agree
• Somewhat disagree
• Strongly disagree
• No opinion
14. Are there specific intersections or roadway corridors that you think need safety improvements for
bicyclists or pedestrians? (select up to three)
15. What could be done to make bicycling safer in Collier County. (Choose three)
• More bicycle lanes
• More bicycle lanes that are physically separated from vehicle traffic
• More multi -use paths
• More low -speed neighborhood routes
• Make it easier to cross highways and high-speed streets
• More convenient and available bicycle parking
• Start a bicycle sharing program
• More education for motorists and bicyclists about sharing the roadway
• Better enforcement of speed limits
• Reducing distracted driving
Demographic and Contact information
16. Please describe yourself by checking all that apply
• I live in Collier County year-round
• I live in Collier County for part of the year
• I work in Collier County
• I live in the region and visit Collier County for shopping and recreation
• I own a business in Collier County
• I am a visitor to Collier County
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan
Packet Pg. 2657
Z:-ql Ill
16.K.6.c
COLLIER
I- Metropolitan Planning Organization
17. What is your age range
• 18-24
• 25-34
• 45-54
• 55-64
• 65+
18. What is your home ZIP code?
19. What is your work ZIP code?
20. If you would like to be contacted to provide input on future Collier County roadway safety survey
programs and initiatives, please provide your preferred contact information below.
Name:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan
Packet Pg. 2658
16. K.6.c
COLLIER
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Collier MPO I Local Road Safety Plan
Packet Pg. 2659
16. K.6.d
14
JIAN
!I;I1111illl
See update made
October 25, 2017
on page 20
T
. & 0
The purpose of this document
is to guide the professional
through the existing rules,
standards and procedures, as
well as to provide current
national guidance on the best
ways to plan for medians and
median openings. Unless
specifically referenced, this is
not a set of standards nor a
Departmental procedure. It is
a comprehensive guide to
allow the professional to
make the best decisions on
median planning. The primary
thrust of this handbook is the
unsignalized median opening.
Even though much of this
material can be used with
signalized intersection
planning, issues of signalized
queues and signal timing are
not covered in detail.
V&
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATOtsN
850-414-4900 dot.state.fl.us/planning/system
Packet Pg. 2660
16. K.6.d
CH1 Introduction MEDIAN HANDBOOI
Contents
® Introduction.....................................................................................................................
5
1.0 Medians and their Importance for Safety........................................................................
5
1.0.1
What are the Benefits of Medians?..........................................................................
5
1.1 How Medians Fit in with Access Management................................................................
6
1.1.1
What is the Function of a Median Opening?............................................................
6
1.1.2
The Location of Median Openings............................................................................
7
1.1.3
Medians Increase Safety— Case Studies...................................................................
8
1.1.4
Driver Information Load............................................................................................
9
1.2 The
Highway Safety Manual...........................................................................................
11
1.2.1
Example Using Safety Performance Functions (SPFs)............................................
11
1.2.1
Benefit/Cost Ratio Analysis.....................................................................................
12
1.3 FDOT Policy on Medians and Median Openings............................................................
14
1.3.1
Rule 14-97...............................................................................................................
14
1.3.2
Multi -lane Facility Median Policy............................................................................
16
1.3.3
Median Opening and Access Management Procedure: 625-010-021...................
17
1.3.4
Recommended Queue Storage Requirements.......................................................
17
1.3.5
Conditions for More Flexibility...............................................................................
18
1.3.6
Conditions for Less Flexibility.................................................................................
18
1.3.7
Retrofit Multi -lane Multilane Roadways with Center Turn Lanes ..........................
19
1.3.8
Florida Statute 335.199 — Public Involvement........................................................
19
1.3.9
Other FDOT Criteria and Standards........................................................................
21
® Important Concepts of Medians and Median Openings Placement ..........................
22
2.0 Importance of Roadway Functional Classification.........................................................
22
2.0.1
Hierarchal Priority of Median Openings.................................................................
23
2.1 Median Opening Placement Principles..........................................................................
25
2.1.1
Placement Principles...............................................................................................
25
2.1.2
Avoid Median Opening Failure...............................................................................
27
2.2 Parts of the Functional Area of an Intersection.............................................................
28
2.2.1
Decision Distance....................................................................................................
28
2.2.2
Right Turn Weave Distance (Right Turn Weave Offset) .........................................
28
2.2.3
Full Width Median..................................................................................................
30
2.2.4
Maneuver -Deceleration Distance...........................................................................
30
2.2.5
Queue Storage........................................................................................................
33
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 201 ` 1 2
Packet Pg. 2661
16. K.6.d
CH1 Introductio- MEDIAN HANDBOOI
2.2.6 Median Opening Spacing........................................................................................
35
2.3 Median Openings near Freeway Interchanges..............................................................
37
2.3.1 At unsignalized interchange ramps........................................................................
38
2.4 Median End Treatments.................................................................................................
39
2.5 Median Opening Left Turn Radius.................................................................................
41
2.6 Median Opening Length.................................................................................................
42
2.7 Pavement Markings and Signing....................................................................................
43
2.8 Retrofit Considerations..................................................................................................
44
2.8.1 Assessing the Need to Close/Alter/Maintain a Median Opening ...........................
44
2.8.2 Deciding to Close a Median Opening......................................................................
45
2.8.3 Deciding to Alter a Median Opening......................................................................
46
2.8.4 Deciding to Keep a Median Opening......................................................................
46
2.8.5 Construct a New Median on an Existing Roadway .................................................
46
2.8.6 Considerations for Resurfacing, Restoration, and Rehabilitation (313) Projects.....
47
2.9 Rural Median Opening Considerations..........................................................................
48
2.9.1 Realigning Minor Roadway Intersections...............................................................
48
2.9.2 Restricted Crossing U-Turn Intersection.................................................................
49
2.10 Special Rural Highway Treatments.............................................................................
50
2.10.1 Advance Warning of Oncoming Vehicles on Rural Highways .................................
50
2.10.2 Vehicle Actuated Flashing Beacons for 2-Stage Crossing .......................................
50
2.10.3 Rural Intersection Conflict Warning System...........................................................
53
® Sight Distance................................................................................................................
54
3.0 Introduction to Sight Distance Concepts.......................................................................
54
3.0.1 Stopping Sight Distance..........................................................................................
55
3.0.2 Intersection Sight Distance.....................................................................................
56
3.0.3 Sight Distance for U-turns.......................................................................................
57
3.0.4 Sight Distance for Left -Turn into Side Street..........................................................
57
3.0.5 Left Turn Lane Offset..............................................................................................
58
3.1 Landscaping and Sight Distance Issues..........................................................................
60
3.1.1 Major Criteria for Decisions on Sight Distance and Planting Area .........................
60
ZMMedian Width................................................................................................................
64
4.0 Function Determines Median Width..............................................................................
64
4.1 Anatomy of Median Width.............................................................................................
64
4.1.1 Minimum and Recommended Widths....................................................................
65
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 201 ` 1 3
Packet Pg. 2662
16. K.6.d
CH1 Introduction MEDIAN HANDBOC'
4.1.2 Directional Median Opening Channelization..........................................................
66
4.1.3 Minimum Traffic Separator Width at Intersections ...............................................
67
4.1.4 Traffic Separator Visibility at Intersections.............................................................
68
4.1.5 Minimum Median Width for Pedestrian Refuge ....................................................
68
4.1.6 Minimum Median Width for U-turns......................................................................
69
® U-turn considerations...................................................................................................
70
5.0 AASHTO Guidance on Width and U-turns......................................................................
70
5.1 Design Options for U-turns............................................................................................
71
5.1.1 U-turn Flare Design Examples.................................................................................
72
5.2 Truck U-turns..................................................................................................................
73
5.2.1 U-turn Alternatives for Large Vehicles - Jug Handles .............................................
74
5.3 U-turn Locations.............................................................................................................
75
5.3.1 U-turn at Signalized Intersections...........................................................................
75
5.3.2 U-turns in Advance of a Signal................................................................................
75
5.3.3 U-turns after a Signal..............................................................................................
77
5.3.4 U-turns location in relation to driveways...............................................................
78
ZMRoundabouts..................................................................................................................79
6.0 Roundabouts and Access Management.........................................................................
79
6.1 Roundabout Considerations...........................................................................................
81
6.1.1 How Roundabouts can be used for U-turns...........................................................
81
6.1.2 Adjacent Median Opening Locations near Roundabouts .......................................
82
® Pedestrian considerations............................................................................................
84
7.0 Medians Help Pedestrians..............................................................................................
84
7.1 Proven Safety Countermeasures....................................................................................
85
7.1.1 Pedestrian Refuges Islands in Urban and Suburban Areas .....................................
85
7.1.2 Pedestrian Crash Crashes can be Reduced.............................................................
86
7.1.3 Midblock Crossing Locations...................................................................................
87
7.1.4 Installation Criteria.................................................................................................
87
7.1.5 Treatments..............................................................................................................88
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 201 " 1 4
Packet Pg. 2663
CH1 Introduction
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HAND_��,
1.0 Medians and their Importance for Safety
A restrictive median with well -designed median openings is one of the
most important tools to create a safe and efficient highway system. The
design and placement of median openings is an integral component of a
corridor that manages access and minimizes conflicts.
The AASHTO Green Medians are paved or landscaped areas in the middle of roadways that
Book states, "A median
highly desirable on separate traffic traveling in opposite directions. Medians should be
arterials carrying four provided whenever possible on multi -lane arterial roadways. The
or more lanes." documented benefits of raised medians are so significant that the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) requires medians for most new
multilane facilities with over 40 mph in design.
Source: Plans Preparation Manual Volume 1 Chapter 2.2.2
This guide should help the professional with considerations for medians,
median openings, and median design at intersections.
1.0.1 What are the Benefits of Medians?
Properly designed medians provide many benefits including:
Vehicular Safety — medians reduce crashes caused by traffic turning left,
1 head-on and crossover traffic, and headlight glare, resulting
in fewer and less severe crashes
•
Pedestrian Safety — restrictive medians provide a refuge for pedestrians
crossing the highway. Fewer pedestrian injuries occur on
roads with restrictive medians.
Operational Efficiency — medians help traffic flow better by removing
turning traffic from through lanes. A roadway with properly
designed medians can carry more traffic, which can reduce
the need for additional through lanes.
Aesthetics — In addition to safety and operations, medians can improve
the appearance of a corridor. If landscaped, the median can
lessen water runoff and enhance air quality.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
61AWIi7U
Packet Pg. 2664
CH1 Introduction
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
1.1
Restrictive medians help in both low and high
traffic situations, but where traffic is high,
the benefits are greater.
Properly implemented medians and median openings will result in
improvements to traffic operations, minimize adverse environmental
impacts, and increase highway safety. As traffic flow is improved, delay is
reduced as are vehicle emissions. In addition, corridor
efficiency/throughput and fuel economy are increased, and most
importantly, crashes are less numerous and/or less severe.
How Medians Fit in with Access Management
The location and design of medians and their openings will depend on
the function of the roadway, to provide appropriate access to the
driveways, intersections, traffic signals and freeway interchanges that
connect.
1.1.1 What is the Function of a Median Opening?
In order to properly place and design median openings, you should
consider the needed function of the opening
• Median openings can provide for cross traffic movement.
• Median openings can allow left turns and U-turns from the highway
Exhibit 1
Reduce conflict points using median openings
------------------- T-.----------------------- •-
----------------- ------------------------
MORE CONFLICTS LESS CONFLICTS
A typical median opening that allows all turns has numerous conflict
points. One way to limit the number of conflicts is through the design of
median openings. The example on the right is a "directional" median
opening serving a side street that allows for left -turns from the major
street but prohibits left -turns from the minor street. This is a design
which greatly reduces the conflict points by limiting the number of
allowed turning movements. Through use of restrictive medians, most
driveways along the corridor become right-in/right-out driveways.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 16
Packet Pg. 2665
CH1 Introduction
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Exhibit 2
Separating conflict points benefits all modes of transportation
Transit Pedestrian
�v
- AnL i
Auto Bike
Of course, pedestrians, cyclists, and transit riders are all users of the
roadway. When conflict points are well managed, all the users of the
roadway benefit from a better environment.
1.1.2 The Location of Median Openings
The location of median openings has a direct relationship to operational
efficiency and traffic progression.
To assure efficient traffic operations, full median openings should only be
at locations which are thoughtfully placed along the corridor. If median
locations are properly spaced when signalized, traffic will flow at efficient
and uniform operating speeds.
Full median openings should be limited to the following situations:
• Signalized intersections or those expected to be signalized.
• Intersections that conform to the adopted median opening spacing
interval, or are separated from neighboring median openings so they
will not interfere with the deceleration, queuing or sight distance of
the full opening.
• Divided roadways where the traffic volume provides numerous
opportunities for left -turns and crossing maneuvers from the
intersecting access connection to be made with little or no delay
• Decision sight distance to vehicles on the roadway is sufficient for
(1) drivers to observe activity at the median opening and to proceed
without decelerating if the median opening is unoccupied, and
(2) for a driver making a left -turn into the roadway to do so without
interference with traffic on the roadway.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 17
Packet Pg. 2666
CH1 Introduction MEDIAN HAND
16. K.6.d
1.1.3 Medians Increase Safety— Case Studies
Research has shown that restrictive medians have a significant safety
benefit. In 1993, an evaluation of urban multilane facilities in Florida
revealed that the crash rate for corridors with restrictive medians is 25%
lower than those with center turn lanes. 1
Exhibit 3
Safety Impacts of Medians
4
Now 3
2
25%
1
crash rate reduction
Long, Gan, Morrison, University of Florida 1993
Before and After Study
3.27
2.46
V1
Center Turn Lane Raised Median
Research performed in 2012 shows an improvement in safety when
corridors were retrofitted with restrictive medians to replace center turn
lanes (i.e. going from a 5-lane undivided section to a 4-lane divided
facility, or a 7-lane undivided section going to a 6-lane divided roadway. )2
Raised medians improve safety
for all modes of transportation
One of the case studies for this analysis was Apalachee Parkway in
Tallahassee. Exhibit 4 shows that in 2002 a restrictive median was placed
along a one and a half mile section of Apalachee Parkway. The research
states, "Overall, a reduction of 48.1% in total crashes was observed in the
three-year after period."
1
Safety Impacts of Selected Median and Access Design Features
Gary Long, Ph.D., P.E.,Cheng-Tin Gan, Bradley S. Morrison
2
Before and After Safety Study of Roadways Where New Medians Have Been Added
Priyanka Alluri, Albert Gan, Kirolos Haleem, Stephanie Miranda, Erik Echezabal, Andres Diaz, and Shanghong Ding
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 18
Packet Pg. 2667
16. K.6.d
CH1 Introduction MEDIAN HANDBOOI
Exhibit 4
Before and After Safety Study of Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee Florida
AADT — Crashes per MVM (Crash Rate)
1.1.4 Driver Information Load
Medians make the road safer by minimizing the number of potential
conflict points the corridor user must monitor at a single time. In the
terminology of human factors research, "Driver Information Load" is
decreased by having medians. An example is shown in Exhibit 5.
Exhibit 5
Comparison of driver information load for center turn lane and median
Center Turn Lane Driver Perspective
--
Median - Driver Perspective
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 20" 1 9
Packet Pg. 2668
16. K.6.d
CH1 Introduction MEDIAN HANDBOOK
In the roadway with a center turn lane, the driver must scan the facility
from numerous directions to monitor potential conflict points.
Exhibit 6
Pedestrian are more vulnerable in center turn lanes
The task of a pedestrian crossing the street is more challenging without a
restrictive median. Pedestrians need to be aware of drivers in both
directions and are not as visible to a driver traveling at a higher speed.
Other research has shown that the presence of restrictive medians
makes the environment safer for pedestrians. Pedestrians were nearly
half as likely to be involved in a mid -block crash on facilities with
restrictive medians as shown in Exhibit 7. 3
Exhibit 7
Medians & Pedestrian Safety —Atlanta, Phoenix, Los Angeles
Intersection Crashes
Per 100 million
entering vehicles
Mid -Block Crashes
Per 100 million
vehicle miles
■ Restrictive
TWLTL
Undivided
0 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8
Pedestrian Crash Rates for Suburban Arterials
Brian Lee Bowman, Robert L. Vecellio 1994 3
3 Investigation of the Impact of Medians on Road Users - Brian Lee Bowman, Robert L. Vecellio 1994
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 2014 1 10
Packet Pg. 2669
CH1 Introduction
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
1.2 The Highway Safety Manual
The Highway Safety Manual (HSM) is a scientifically based guide that
predicts the impacts of safety improvements on the highway system.
The HSM is a document of the American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). This document conclusively
demonstrates the safety benefits of access management, especially the
provision of restrictive medians. It also provides a method to use the
safety impact projections to help promote restrictive medians, even
when the construction or right-of-way costs are significantly greater.
The HSM Part C (Chapters 10-12) contains the information and procedure
for this computation work.
1.2.1 Example Using Safety Performance Functions (SPFs)
Using the information in Chapter 12 of the HSM, the following example
that demonstrates how it could be used to predict the safety benefits.
You have been given the job of evaluated the benefits of a raised
median. This example evaluates the safety benefits for converting a 5-
lane section (two lanes in each direction with a center turn lane) into a 4-
lane facility with a restrictive median. The corridor is one (1) mile in
length and has annual average daily traffic (AADT) volume of 30,000
vehicles per day. Exhibit 8 graphs the relationship between the predicted
crash frequency per mile and the AADT of different facility types. Exhibit
8 is based on the equations in the HSM called Safety Performance
Functions (SPFs). These estimate the expected average crash frequency
as a function of traffic volume and roadway characteristics (such as
AADT, number of lanes, median width, intersection control, etc.).
Exhibit 8
SPF for urban highway 5-lane with center turn lane roadway segments
5 lane section
d
i Zo sT 41ane divided
section
Base Prediction:
11 Crashes/Year a
ii sr
j 6 Crashes/Year —
�Fj s
10,000 20.000 30,000 40DW 50.000 60,000 7o.Wo
MDT(velVdsy)
Figure 12-3. CWhical Form of ft SPF for Multipk Nd1ic)e Norktiscway colhsioru (from Equation 12-IO and T&Nc 12.3)
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 11
Packet Pg. 2670
16. K.6.d
CH1 Introduction MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Using the above method, adding a restrictive median is expected to
reduce crashes by 5 per year (11-6 = 5).
Most corridor reconstruction safety project analyses are performed on a
multi -year basis. Therefore, an examination of the cumulative safety
benefits is more appropriate. We look at a longer view because the
roadway improvement might serve the public for 15 to 20 years. A
benefit -cost analysis provides more insight into the long-term benefits of
restrictive medians.
1.2.1 Benefit/Cost Ratio Analysis
FDOT District 7 Office (greater Tampa area) completed an analysis on a
resurfacing proposal. To improve the existing conditions, the District
found that they would need to spend $2,200,000 for right-of-way to
improve to a 4-lane roadway with restrictive medians compared to a
projected cost of $600,000 to improve to a 5-lane roadway with TWLTL.
Exhibit 9 provides the estimated crash costs associated with the two
alternatives using the methods in Chapter 12 of the HSM.
Exhibit 9
Estimated crash costs for different facility types
Multi -Vehicle $1,492,000 $2,856,000
Single Vehicle $155,000 $235,000
Driveways $561,000 $3,337,000
Total $2,208,000 $6,428,000
The Benefit/Cost Ratio is found by calculating the difference between the
benefits and costs of each alternative. In this example, taking the
difference in crash costs divided by the extra right-of-way costs, you find
the benefit cost ratio to be 2.64. This shows that the expenditure of the
extra funds for right-of-way is well justified by the savings in crash costs
over the 20 year period.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 12
Packet Pg. 2671
CH1 Introduction
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Exhibit 10
Calculate Benefit/Cost Ratio
benetit/LoSt•: 4-iane iwiclecll to
4-lane crash costs $2,208,397
$4,219,132
5-lane crash costs $6,427,529
4-lane right of way costs $2,200,000
$1, 600,000
5-lane right of way costs $600,000
6/C = 2.64
Societal Benefit $4, 219,132
B/C Additional Cost to Build $1, 600, 000 2.64
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 13
Packet Pg. 2672
CH1 Introduction
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
1.3 FDOT Policy on Medians and Median Openings
Median opening decisions are guided by the following principles:
• Traffic Safety
• Traffic Efficiency
• Functional integrity
1.3.1 Rule 14-97
Administrative Rule Chapter 14-97 establishes the seven classifications
for state highways that contain separation standards for access features
Essentially, FDOT determines which roads are the most critical to
providing highly efficient, higher volume traffic. These facilities are
classified with the highest standards.
Medians and median openings are regulated through the requirement
for a restrictive median in certain classes. For those classes, spacings
between median openings are regulated. The Access Management
Standards and how these are measured are found in Exhibit 11. Class 1
applies specifically to freeways, so it is not included in this exhibit.
Exhibit 11
Access Management Standards From Rule 14-97
Class
Medians
Median Openings
Signal
Connection
Full
Directional
More than 45 mph
45 mph and less
Posted Speed
Posted Speed
2
Restrictive
2,640
1,320
�
2,640 1,320
660
w/service Roads
3
Restrictive
2,640
1,320
2,640 660
440
4
Non -Restrictive
2,640
660
440
5
Restrictive
2,640
660
2,640
440
245
at greater than 45 mph
at greater than 45 mph
Posted Speed
Posted Speed
1,320
1,320
At 45 mph or less
At 45 mph or less
Posted Speed
Posted Speed
6
Non -Restrictive
1,320
440
245
7
Both Median Types
660
330
1,320
125
125
It is critical to know what access classification and posted speed limit has
been assigned to the highway/road segment under consideration and to
determine what roadway features and access connection modifications
are appropriate to adhere to the access management process. The
Florida Transportation Information DVD is an easy to use resource to
determine the access management classification and posted speed limits
for all FDOT roads, as shown in Exhibit 12.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 14
Packet Pg. 2673
CH1 Introduction
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
The FTI DVD is
available free from
FDOT. Select Access
Management from the
View menu to display
this screen.
Exhibit 12
Florida Transportation Information DVD Access Management Classifications
2t Florida Transportation Information N O
File View Reports My Views Find Tools Help
`-1 Default Map ]]
xx o a T l.A l
Z�
, „s..
# I I g
1 Highway Network
Traffic Stations
^tom
AADT Map
Eil E
Truck AADT Map
1 selected, I Roadway IN
J Access Management
Access Man
Fum,tional Classification
Access Chss 04
HPMS Samples
Roadway g7090000
515 Rail
emp to.t43
Speed Limits
EMP
Lanes
Type of Road
faRl%+r... \
- WA
- Axess Clus 01
Class 02
Access Chas 03
- axes Class .
\
___
-A.. Class 05
Acuzs Clasz 06
I\
- Axasz Clazz 0]
Ma aB smanl Plen
No Zoom
\
mi 1.53 mi
Class 4 - Highest
standards w/o median
Exhibit 13 shows how to measure the distance shown in FDOTs standards. Full median openings
are measured from the center of the median opening to the center of the next full median
opening (or intersection.) Driveways are measured from one edge of a driveway to the nearest
edge of the next driveway. Where a pair of directional median openings is used, the distance is
typically measured from the center of a full median opening to the center of the pair of
openings.
Exhibit 13
How to apply spacing requirements from Rule 14-97
Measure intersection and full median opening spacing Center to Center
�i
49.: ��_,_ ' s :a'� "t ergo o a a-aa.*a.
IT 1W
Measure connection (driveway) spacing Edge To Edge F i
1—
a
Measure directional median opening spacing Center to Center F I
Where a pair of directional median openings is used, the distance is
measured from the center of a full median opening to the center of the
pair of openings.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 15
Packet Pg. 2674
CH1 Introduction
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
1.3.2 Multi -lane Facility Median Policy
Multi -lane facility
median policy is an
integral part to
roadway access
management
What is the impact of
redirecting left turns?
All multilane Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) facilities shall be designed
with a raised or restrictive median. All other multilane facilities shall be
designed with a raised or restrictive median except four -lane sections with
design speeds of 40 mph or less.
Facilities having design speeds of 40 mph or less are to include sections of
raised or restrictive median for enhancing vehicular and pedestrian safety,
improving traffic efficiency, and attainment of the standards of the Access
Management Classification of that highway system.
Multilane Facility Median Policy
Topic #625-000-007January 1, 2013
Plans Preparation Manual, Volume 1
Design Geometrics and Criteria 2.2.2.
Since 1993, the Multi -lane Facility Policy essentially directs all FDOT
multilane projects over 40 mph in design speed to have some restrictive
median treatments.
It also directs our designers to find ways to use restrictive medians in all
multi -lane projects, even those below the 40 mph design speed. An
example of a small pedestrian refuge that could be used on a 5-lane
section is shown in Exhibit 14.
Exhibit 14
Pedestrian refuge on a 5-lane section
One of the impacts of these standards is the concentration of more left
turn and U-turns at fewer locations. This requires careful planning of well
designed, well placed median openings. In response to this, FDOT
created the Median Opening and Access Management Procedure
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 16
Packet Pg. 2675
16. K.6.d
CH1 Introduction MEDIAN HANDBOOK
1.3.3 Median Opening and Access Management Procedure:
625-010-021
Adhering to the median opening spacing standards of Rule 14-97 can, at
times, pose a practical problem. Therefore, FDOT developed a process to
analyze deviation from the standards found in the Rule. The process
allows project managers/permits staff a 10% deviation from the
standards for full median openings and gives complete flexibility to
project managers/permits staff on decisions involving directional median
openings as long as they meet minimum traffic engineering standards for
storage, deceleration, sight distance, and maneuverability. All deviations
greater than 10% for full median openings must go to the District Access
Management Review Committee (AMRC) for further study and
recommendation. For minor deviations:
• Decisions can be made by a responsible engineer
• 10% deviation for "full" openings allowed
• Directional openings are decided on a "case -by -case" basis
It is important to note that even deviations of less than 10% might be
problematic and create operational issues. Districts can follow a more
strict decision making policy and process.
Each District has an AMRC to consider deviations from Rule 14-97
standards. The decisions of the AMRC are guided by the following
principles of the process:
Decision making • Traffic Safety
principles • Traffic Efficiency
• Functional Integrity
1.3.4 Recommended Queue Storage Requirements
A critical measure for adequate median opening design is left -turn lane
queue storage.
Site or project specific projections of queue storage should be used at all
critical intersections. Due to the variable nature of left -turn demand,
actual volumes should be collected and reviewed in many cases. Designs
should also include a factor of safety to account for any uncertainty in
demand. 4
Queue Storage Where left turn volume is unknown and expected to be minor 5
• Urban/suburban minimum = 4 cars or 100 ft.
• Rural/small town minimum = 2 cars or 50 ft.
4 Median Opening and Access Management Procedure (FDOT) Topic No.: 625-010-020
5 Plans Preparaton Manual Vol. 1- 2.13.2 Queue Length for Unsignalized Intersections
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 2014 1 17
Packet Pg. 2676
16. K.6.d
CH1 Introduction MEDIAN HANDBOOK
1.3.5 Conditions for More Flexibility
The process also gives guidance for where flexibility should be
considered. These would be favorable conditions for approving an
deviation of a median opening: 6
• Opportunities to alleviate significant traffic congestion at existing
or planned signalized intersections.
• Opportunities to accommodate a joint access serving two or more
traffic generators.
• Existence of control points that cannot be relocated such as
bridges, waterways, parks, historic or archaeological areas,
cemeteries, and unique natural features.
• Where strict application of the median opening standards in 14-
97.003(1) Figure 2, would result in a safety, maneuvering, or
traffic operational problem.
• Where directional opening would replace existing full service
median opening.
1.3.6 Conditions for Less Flexibility
The following conditions may provide less flexibility for deviation from
the standards:
Limited Flexibility • Full median openings and signals
• Median openings in a high crash segment or intersection, unless a
safety benefit can be clearly shown
• Situations where circulation can be provided through other
alternatives
These unfavorable conditions provide less flexibility for deviation from
the standards:
Unfavorable Conditions • Openings in functional area of intersection
• High crash locations
• Where alternatives exist
• Where any unsignalized intersection would be unsafe (such as
close to the Interchange at SR 436 and 1-4 in Altamonte Springs
shown in Exhibit 15)
Other considerations that would influence the decision where median
openings would be located include:
Other Considerations • Where strict adherence would cause safety problem
and priorities . Where a directional would replace a "full" opening
• Emergency vehicle openings
6 Median Opening and Access Management Procedure (FDOT) Topic No.: 625-010-020
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 18
Packet Pg. 2677
CH1 Introduction
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
16. K.6.d
Intercha
Exhibit 15
of SR 436 and 1-4 in Altamonte Springs
I
4'
1.3.7 Retrofit Multi -lane Multilane Roadways with Center Turn Lanes
Retrofit center turn All 7 lane (6-lane roadways with a two-way center turn lane) roadway
lanes with medians sections should be given the highest priority for retrofit.
Existing 5 lane sections and those facilities over 28,000 in daily traffic
should be given high priority for retrofit.
1.3.8 Florida Statute 335.199 — Public Involvement
Effective November 17, 2010, a new Florida Statute had impacts on the
way the FDOT works with the public in regards to median changes.
Generally, whenever the FDOT plans to add a median, or close a median
opening, new requirements not present in our previous standards must
be followed.
Overarching Principle "Whenever the Department of Transportation proposes any project on
FS 335.199 the State Highway System which will divide a state highway, erect median
barriers modifying currently available vehicle turning movements, or have
the effect of closing or modifying an existing access to an abutting property
owner, the Department shall notify all affected property owners,
municipalities, and counties at least 180 days before the design of the
project is finalized."
FS 335.199 Requirements
• Notify, in writing, the Chief Elected Official of the City and/or
County as well as property owners
• Conduct at least one public hearing
• Local governments should notice impacted property owners at
least 180 days before the design of the project is finalized.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 19
Packet Pg. 2678
16. K.6.d
CH1 Introduction MEDIAN HANDBOOI
Cu Fther g 1i.J-,.n has been p i.ded Rdis expected to Gh-,.,ge with to
a R d e x p e r eRee The fe11eW Rg 1idd-Ar -ey ri++en R. neeePAher 2Q1 n.
Senate Bill 1842 requires the Depaictw,eRt to Re+if., all affected r eoy
guidance en SB 1812 ems;;eFs a;a local gevemments when it prerpe3e, rpl.,eieletls en to^te
rrte QeeeFlibeF Highway System that will divide a state highway, e eet median barriers
7, 2n� eddif" ntl„ available vehicle +� Fning rn r+� r haVe the
z�Lv e
The guidance on how ^ffeG+ of GleSiRg e eddif"iRg EIR iStiRg a r +e A_-,h11++iRg p er+"
to address the Florida ew„= pr The ^^+ifid -drier, FR St eGG11FAt Ie-,c+ 'I 4Q days hefere the p eC4
Statute design is fie-aliZed- D late d to these p s the hill r S PDOT
335.199 in the
permitting process is (a) +e � �I+ With - pliGable leGal rt Rt- a its final ddesigR aR d
currently being all^,^,r the local g n++e present al+erpAti"er +e relieve i +s
clarified as an update +eeemmeiceial bYSiRess p er+ies.
to Rule 14-96. Until
the rule is published, (b) +e held- at least e public heaFiRg +e dde+er. .ipe he" the ^ ee+ will
FDOT staff should ask -,ffed-+ +e h„-si e«es andd the r,e+er,+i-,l e aCt of +hd,
for assistance from the pi:eier+ en the led•-,l h„SiResS nity, -,R
Central Office General
Counsel's Office (e) +^ take all n+_s ie+e si,aer.,+ien OR final deli R of the p ed+
October 25, 2017 Qroan Blanchard c131444
. IWO
■_
N2
,
This provision requires at least one public hearing (advertised and
recorded). Many times the decision whether to construct a median is
made during the Planning and/or Efficient Transportation Decision
Making (ETDM)/Project Development & Environment (PD&E) Phases of a
project. During these phases of a project, the FDOT works with a
community with an emphasis on their participation in the decision -
making process concerning the project's need and basic concepts. These
phases involve local government representatives, public input, business
interest input as well as other interested parties along the corridor and
others outside the corridor. The ETDM/PD&E phases document these
activities for major projects throughout. As this phase progresses,
stakeholder input is sought and may involve multiple mailings, meetings
and workshops depending on the scope of the project. This process will
not change and in most cases will satisfy the 180 day hearing
requirement. Since only major studies like an EIS, EA, and major Type 2
Categorical Exclusions are required to have a formal hearing, a hearing
during the final design phase shall be conducted when one hasn't been
conducted during the ETDM/PD&E phase.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AUG 2014 120
Packet Pg. 2679
CH1 Introduction
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
For on -going design projects, additional outreach to the community is
provided through implementation of our Community Awareness Plans,
which include notification of property owners and occupants.
If a final design plan has been inactive (on -the -shelf) for a time long
enough for major changes in roadside business ownership and
occupancy, FDOT staff will work with the new owners and residents to
inform them of the upcoming changes and allow for a dialogue before
construction begins.
The Department will continue to provide property owners Access
Management Notices with project plans and Chapter 120, Florida
Statutes rights. The Access Management Review Committees will also
continue to meet to provide property owners the ability to voice their
concerns before the Department.
1.3.9 Other FDOT Criteria and Standards
Other FDOT documents containing important standards and criteria for
medians and median opening design are:
➢ Plans Preparation Manual
➢ Standard Index Design Standards
➢ Florida Highway Landscape Guide
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 21
Packet Pg. 2680
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
W
Importance of Roadway Functional Classification
Highway functional classification means classifying highways with respect
to the amount of access or movement they are to provide and then
designing and managing each facility to perform that function.
"A prominent cause of highway obsolescence is the failure of a design to
recognize and accommodate each of the different trip levels of the
movement hierarchy." AASHTO Green Book (Chapter 1)
Exhibit 16
Balancing through movement and land access
�novE
q\ss
There is no clear distinction between each of the functional classes or
direct correlation to define a corridor as a local, collector, or arterial
facility. The four basic functional classes represent a continuum of
facilities that range from unrestricted access (no through traffic) to
complete access control (no local traffic). Applying the principles of
access management through well -designed medians and median
openings will improve the function of corridors by maximizing the
facility's ability of the roadway to safely move people and goods through
the heart of the system.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 22
Packet Pg. 2681
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2
An important access management principle is that facilities should ideally
not connect directly to another facility with a significantly higher
functional classification. For instance, a local road may be connected to a
major collector, and a major collector may be connected to a minor
arterial, but a local road should generally not connect directly a major
arterial.
"The extent and degree of access control is thus a
significant factor in defining the functional category
of a street or highway."AASHTO Green Book 2oii
2.0.1 Hierarchal Priority of Median Openings
In keeping with the principles of functional design adopted by the
AASHTO Green Book, the choice of which opening is to be closed in order
to resolve inadequate median opening spacing requires that the
hierarchy or prioritization of the median openings be established.
Exhibit 17
Conceptual view of hierarchy of median openings
Commercial Strip Major Arterial
Major Collector
F I —
i L
�1 �� ` I —Major Office & Commercial Development
Qi
Q,7
L
LL
• Major arterial -to -major arterial (signal spacing can have large impact
on interchange area)
• Arterial to large development (consider impacts if signalization
needed later) Directional openings are desired unless impractical.
• Directional openings at two public and/or private connections.
Other U-turn/left-turn ingress should normally be given priority over left -
turn movements out (egress) because ingress capacity is typically higher
and produces less hazardous conflict than the left -turn out (egress)
movement.
Source: Adapted from the course material notes of Virgil Stover.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 23
Packet Pg. 2682
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
For more information on roadway hierarchy:
➢ AASHTO Green Book, Chapter 1.
➢ Transportation and Land Development, Stover/Koepke
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 24
Packet Pg. 2683
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2.1 Median Opening Placement Principles
The basic concept used in median opening location
and design is avoidance of unnecessary conflicts
which result in crashes.
The unsignalized median opening is essentially an intersection. Properly
designed, it will have an auxiliary lane allowing the left -turning vehicles to
decelerate without interfering with the through movements of the
leftmost through lane.
Important: The outside through lane is where most high speed traffic
operates. Therefore, the potential of high speed crashes is the greatest in
the through lanes. Before median opening placement is determined, it is
important to know what speed, maneuvering distances, and storage
requirements the project requires.
2.1.1 Placement Principles
• Follow the spacing criteria in Rule 14-97 as close as possible.
• Median openings should not encroach on the functional area of
another median opening or intersection as shown in the following
exhibit.
Exhibit 18
Functional area of an at -grade intersection
"Driveways should not be situated within the
functional area of at -grade intersections."
AASHTO Green Book, Chapter 9, 2011
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 25
Packet Pg. 2684
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Exhibit 19
Median openings that allow traffic across left -turn lanes should not be allowed
J
O
A median opening within the physical length of a left -turn lane or lanes as
illustrated in Exhibit 19 can create a safety issue. Such an opening
violates driver expectancy.
Avoid these Median openings that allow the following movements should be avoided:
movements
• across exclusive right turn lanes
• across regularly forming queues from neighboring intersections
Exhibit 20
Median openings that allow traffic across right -turn lanes should not be allowed
Avoid openings across right turn lanes
1
Avoid openings across right turn lanes due to the danger of queues
accumulating across the opening area. When vehicle performs a left -turn
across regularly forming queues, some queued drivers known as "Good
Samaritans" often provide a gap to allow for the right -turning vehicle to
cross oncoming traffic while drivers in other lanes do not provide a gap,
causing an angle crash.
Exclusive right -turn lanes are most appropriate under the following
conditions:
1. No median openings interfere,
2. The right -turn lane does not continue across intersections, and
3. No closely spaced high volume driveways
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 26
Packet Pg. 2685
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2.1.2 Avoid Median Opening Failure
Median opening failure can occur when critical components of the
opening are not designed appropriately. This is usually due to the
inadequate space for left -turn storage. This can result in excessive
deceleration in the through lane, because vehicles are queued in the area
of the left -turn lane needed for deceleration. Additionally, an inadequate
left -turn lane can lead to vehicle queues extending into the through lane
creating amore hazardous situation. Exhibit 21 illustrates this issue.
Tc
C
I
Exhibit 21
Examples of median opening failure
Exhibit 22
Through lane queue blocks entry into the left -turn lane
_t?4_ V
Er'"" � a o
Watch out for this L _ L = = L = 4
problem — - — - — — — -- - — —
When the queue in the through traffic lane spills past the left -turn lane,
turning vehicles are trapped in the queue, as illustrated in Exhibit 22. The
left -turning vehicles are not able to move into the turn bay until the
queue advances and often miss the left -turn signal phase which
negatively impacts intersection efficiency. Dual left turn lanes may be
more prone to this problem.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 27
Packet Pg. 2686
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2.2 Parts of the Functional Area of an Intersection
The intersection functional area consists of three basic elements:
1) Distance traveled during decision time,
2) Maneuver -deceleration distance, and
3) Queue -storage distance.
Exhibit 23
2.2.1 Decision Distance
The perception -reaction time required by the driver to make a decision
varies. For motorists who frequently use the corridor this may be as little
as one second or less. However, unfamiliar drivers may not be in the
proper lane to execute the desired maneuver and may require three or
more seconds.
Suggested decision distances are shown in Exhibit 24.
Exhibit 24
Suggested Decision Distance
Rural 2.5 130 ft 165 ft 200 ft
Suburban 2.0 100 ft 130 ft 160 ft
Urban 1.0 50 ft 75 ft 100 ft
For more information on decision time: AASHTO Green Book or the
Florida Intersection Design Guide 2013
2.2.2 Right Turn Weave Distance (Right Turn Weave Offset)
Vehicles turning right from a downstream driveway will need distance to
weave if they are turning left at the next opening. Exhibit 25 shows the
potential weaving patterns from having driveways close to median
openings.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 28
Packet Pg. 2687
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Exhibit 25
Weaving Patterns
A Short separation:
Drivers select a suitable simultaneous gap in all traffic lanes and then
make a direct entry into the left-turn/U-turn lane.
B Long separation, low volume approaching from the left:
Drivers select a simultaneous gap in all traffic lanes, turn right, and
make a direct entry maneuver into the left through lane
C Long separation, high volume or low volume and high-speed traffic
from the left:
Drivers wait for suitable gap, turn right, accelerate and make a lane
change maneuver, then decelerate as they enter the left -turn lane.'
A study by the University of South Florida gives some guidance for the
needed weaving distance needed. Exhibit 26 shows the "weaving
distance." (University of South Florida, 2005). 8
Exhibit 26
Weaving distance between driveway and U-turn
J
M
a
f Weaving Distance-�
II
II
Although the study focused on the weaving made by vehicles positioning
for a U-turn, the recommended distances are the same as weaving
distance for left -turn and U-turns. The research highlights that the more
through lanes a facility has, the longer the weaving distances are from
NCHRP 420 Impacts of Access Management Techniques - 1999
s Determination of the Offset Distance between Driveway Exits and Downstream U-turn Locations for Vehicles
making Right Turns Followed by U-turns —University of South Florida, November 2005 - Jian John Lu, Pan Liu, and
Fatih Pirinccioglu
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 2014 1 29
Packet Pg. 2688
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
the driveway to the median opening. Exhibit 27 shows some
recommended distances.
Exhibit 27
Recommended Weaving Distances
Median 4 400
Opening 6 or more 500
Signalized
Intersection
2.2.3 Full Width Median
rd
550
6 or more 750
Source: (University of South Florida, 2005) s
Where at all possible, the length of the full width median should be as
long as possible. The median will be more visible to the driver. This also
gives more space for traffic signs and landscaping.
Rule of thumb: the full width median should be
greater than or equal to the decision distance
Exhibit 28
Length of full width median
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Full Width Median — — — Greater than or equal to decision distance
Not a Full Width Median
Lacks visibility, provides less positive guidance
2.2.4 Maneuver -Deceleration Distance
The Maneuver -Deceleration Distance consists of two components:
1) the taper, and
2) the deceleration
Taper Taper — The taper is the portion of the median opening that begins the
transition to the turn lane. FDOT Standard Index 301 contains the
standards for this feature.
Design standards for left -turn lanes are available from several sources,
most of which determine the base their rate of taper length from the
approach speed; the faster the speed, the longer the taper. The FDOT
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 2014 1 30
Packet Pg. 2689
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HAND
Typically 50 ft
(or 100 ft for dual -left -
turn lane taper)
Deceleration
does offer standards for the design of left turn lanes. The FDOT Design
Standards Index 301 dictates the use of a 4:1 ratio, or 50 ft, for bay tapers
on all multilane divided facilities regardless of speed. This may appear to
be an abrupt transition area for free -flow conditions, however, most
urban areas will benefit from a longer storage area for queued vehicles. It
also provides a better visual cue to the driver for the turn lane.
Exhibit 29
Recommended Taper
Typical taper
50 ft
Typical multi -lane taper
100 ft
More storage
Less chance of a vehicle
blocking through lane
Additional Taper Designs can be found in the AASHTO Green Book.
Total Deceleration
Minimum standards for the distance needed to properly slow a vehicle
down and bring the vehicle to the storage portion of the median opening,
or deceleration distance, is found in FDOT Standard Index 301. This
distance is measured from the beginning of the taper to the end of the
queue storage portion.
The standards found in the Standard Index however should be considered
a minimum because research has shown reactions vary considerably with
drivers. And in many cases, more space may be needed.
Exhibit 30
Median openings should not be in functional area
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 31
Packet Pg. 2690
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Design Speed The design speed is the speed used to make critical decisions on the
roadway design features. The AASHTO Green Book defines the design
speed as:
"Design speed is a selected speed used to determine the various geometric
design features of the roadway... In selection of design speed, every effort
should be made to attain a desired combination of safety, mobility, and
efficiency within the constraints of environmental quality, economics,
aesthetics, and social or political impacts."
"Once selected, all of the pertinent features of the highway should be
related to the design speed to obtain a balanced design. Above -minimum
design values should be used where practical, particularly on high speed
facilities."
AASHTO GREEN BOOK
Entry Speed When considering medians and median openings, the greatest use of
design speed is for determining the length of right- and left -turn lanes.
FDOT Standard Index 301 identifies that design speed and the related
entry speed are the basis for determining the minimum length of the turn
lane for deceleration and stopping behind the turn lane queue.
Exhibit 31
Deceleration Distances from the FDOT Design Standard Index 301
35 25 145
45 35 185
50 urban 40 240
50 Rural 44 290
55 Rural 48 350
Design Standards Index 301
Total Deceleration The turn bay should be designed so that a turning vehicle will develop a
Distance speed differential (through vehicle speed minus the entry speed of
turning vehicle) of 10 mph or less at the point it clears the through traffic
lane and enters the turn lane. The length of the turn lane should allow
the vehicle to come to a comfortable stop prior to reaching the end of
the expected queue in the turn lane.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 32
Packet Pg. 2691
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Exhibit 32
Excessive Deceleration
10 mph speed differential
E� —
45 mph �pX\
3�
30 mph speed differential
45 mphE00D
1
If the turn lane is too short, or queued vehicles take up too much of the
deceleration portion of the turn lane, excessive deceleration will occur in
the through lane. This creates a high crash potential.
Non -Peak Hour Non -Peak Hour speeds are also important considerations since around
Speeds 80% of the daily traffic takes place outside of the peak hours at that time,
usually at higher speeds. Turning volumes are lower at those times which
will make queuing requirements smaller.
For more information on speed definitions:
➢ Design Speed, Operating Speed, and Posted Speed Practices, NCHRP
Report 504, 2003
➢ AASHTO Green Book
2.2.5 Queue Storage
Turn lanes must include adequate length for the storage of traffic waiting
to perform a turn. This is also called turn lane queue length.
Where a specific queue study does not exist, FDOT will typically require a
100 ft. queue length (four passenger cars) in an urban/suburban area and
a 50 ft. (two passenger cars) queue length in rural or small town areas
with expected low volumes of left turns. Deceleration distance needs to
be added to the queue storage to determine the full turn lane length
requirements.
Sources:
➢ Plans Preparation Manual Vol. 1 - 2.13.2 Queue Length for
Unsignalized Intersections
➢ Median Opening and Access Management Decision Process (FDOT)
Topic No.: 625-010-020
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 33
Packet Pg. 2692
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Alternatively, for calculating purposes, the AASHTO Green Book suggests
the use of a virtual 2 minute interval for unsignalized locations. Exhibit 33
illustrates that where an average queue is 3 vehicles, the actual queue
will probably be over 3 vehicles much of the time.
Exhibit 33
How can designing to the average fail?
��®
Comm
IMrIM
40% failure rate
average queue = 3 cars
The technique used to analyze this distribution of queue length is the
Poisson Distribution. The Poisson Distribution is used to predict randomly
occurring discrete events such as queues. Using this statistical technique
we see that building queue storage to fit the average demand will result
in the median opening "failing" 30% to 40% of the time.
Design queues are usually
1.5 to 2 times the average.
Exhibit 34
Estimated queue storage for unsignalized median openings
30
50*
40-50
75 *
60 — 70
100
80 — 90
125
100 —110
150
120 —140
175
150+
200
* Only use less than 100 ft in small towns, rural areas,
or where you expect low volumes in the future
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 34
Packet Pg. 2693
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Assumptions: 120 second interval, approximate
probability of turn lane length success is 90%
Exhibit 34 contains the recommended queue storage length of as variety
of left turn lane volumes. The recommendations were based on a 90%
turn lane length success rate. You must consider the historic variability of
these numbers, as well as the inherent inaccuracies of traffic projection
models when making your recommendation.
The length of 25 feet is an average distance, front bumper -to bumper of
a vehicle in queue. If the queue is comprised mostly of passenger cars,
this distance provides for an average distance between vehicles of about
one-half car length.
If 10% or more trucks or large vehicles are expected, the average queue
length, should be increased as follows:
Exhibit 35
Adjustment for Trucks
Over 10% 30 ft
Over 20% 35 ft
Source: Adapted from Transportation and Land Development, Stover
and Koepke
Use Caution Near Use caution to assure that queues will not be placed over downstream
Railroad Crossings railroad crossings. Railroad crossings should not be anywhere near the
functional area on an intersection.
For more information on queues, storage, and projecting left turns:
➢ AASHTO Green Book
➢ FDOT Project Traffic Forecasting Handbook, Statistics Office
2.2.6 Median Opening Spacing
The spacing of median openings will be the sum of the following factors
for both directions of the roadway.
How all these factors . Deceleration
impact the spacing of Queue storage
openings • Turning or control radii (usually 60 ft)
• Perception/reaction distance or full width of median
(The length of the median which is not a part of the turn lanes or
the taper. These sections provide for visibility, buffer and
landscaping opportunity.)
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 35
Packet Pg. 2694
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOI'
Design speed — 45mph
urban location
Left Turn Queue Storage
(Signalized)
= 350 ft
Deceleration
= 185 ft
Left Turn Queue Storage
(Unsignalized)
= 100 ft
Deceleration
= 185 ft
Full width median
= 130 ft
Turn Radii
= 60 ft
TOTAL 1,070 ft
60 I 200 1 185 I = 210
Exhibit 36 shows a possible example. In this case you have a signalized
intersection on one end and an unsignalized opening at the other end.
The signalized intersection has been designed for 45 mph deceleration
and a queue of 350 ft. Because we want to have some small area for
landscaping and improved night time visibility, we have included 130 ft
full width median. This example shows even if the facility were a Class 7
roadway where 660 ft would be the standard, the median opening
spacing would need to exceed the standard criterion. On the other hand
during a reconstruction project, if this facility were a Class 5 roadway
where the standard spacing is 1,320 ft, the designer may justify a shorter
spacing. In all cases, the design should provide adequate spacing
between median openings and handle the expected operations (queuing,
deceleration, decision, and visibility).
Exhibit 36
Example of a possible urban condition @ 45 mph
60' 100' 185' 130' 185, 350' 60'
{
1,070 ft
Longer median opening provides space for:
• Safety
• Operations
• Flexibility
• Traffic Progression
• Pedestrian refuges
• Aesthetics
Exhibit 37 depicts median opening spacing that allows for numerous
pedestrian crossing opportunities.
(both formal and informal)
Exhibit 37
Example of longer median opening spacing
165 100 rJ 100 I 185 130 165 I 100 rJ 100 I 185 I 21U 1 185 200 160
2,640 ft
Pedestrian crossings — informal, striped or signalized
Longer spacing between median openings provides multiple
opportunities for vehicle and pedestrian to benefit, both formal and
informal.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 36
Packet Pg. 2695
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2.3 Median Openings near Freeway Interchanges
Administrative Rule 14-97, the main rule on access management
standards, considers interchange areas differently than other portions of
a corridor. These areas may require spacing of median openings at
greater distances than required by the individual access management
class of the arterial.
Interchange Areas 14-97.003 1. (i) 3.
The standard distance to the first full median opening shall be at least
2,640 ft as measured from the end of the taper of the off ramp.
Interchange Areas 14-97.003 1. (i) 4.
Greater distances between proposed connections and median openings
will be required when the safety or operation of the interchange or the
limited access highway would be adversely affected. Based on generally
accepted professional practice, FDOT makes this determination when the
engineering and traffic study projects adverse conditions.
The standards in Rule 14-97 are difficult to achieve in many cases.
Therefore, FDOT relies upon generally accepted professional practices
and model to analyze and design the separation of median openings.
Exhibit 38
Median 0
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 37
Packet Pg. 2696
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2.3.1
At unsignalized interchange ramps
What distance is
Drivers may make erratic maneuvers in areas where there is a limited
needed from a
separation between the off -ramp and the median opening. Desirable
freeway ramp terminal
to the first median
conditions would permit a driver to accelerate, merge into the outside
opening?
traffic lane, select an acceptable gap in order to merge into the inside
lane, move laterally into the left -turn lane, and come to a stop as shown
in Exhibit 39. The desired distance needed between an unsignalized
freeway off -ramp and median opening at first signalized intersection is
2,640 ft.
Exhibit 39
Distance between an off -ramp and first signalized intersection
z
Wait and then
m
M
merge into
Doutside
through lane
2,640 ft (Rule 14-97)
Standard desirable distance from taper to first intersection
Typically800 to 1600 ft Move into left
Prepareto Merge into turn lane z
merge into inside lane
inside lane 70
D
r
(Weaving Section) (Deceleration & Storage)
Based on an average weaving section
speed between 34 and 45 MPH
Experience shows that most urban situations fall within 800 ft to 1,600 ft
of conflicting weaving movements within the arterial weaving section,
during the peak hour. If a lower average speed through that section is
acceptable (35 mph) the weave section may be as low as 400 ft.
Jack Leisch — Procedure For Analysis And Design Of Weaving Sections 1985
and Robert Layton Interchange Access Management Background Paper 2 -1996
Though not a specific FDOT requirement, we have included Exhibit 40
from the State of Oregon for access management near freeway
interchanges. A designer may choose to reference these standards as a
starting point to the decision -making process.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 38
Packet Pg. 2697
CH2 Important Concepts
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
16. K.6.d
Example access
spacing at interchange
areas — developed for
educational purposes
for the Oregon DOT.
Exhibit 40
Example Access Spacing At Freeway Interchanges
(Oregon State University Transportation Engineering)
Access Type
First Access (ft)
Fully Developed Suburban Rural
Urban (35 mph) (45 mph) (55 mph)
Two-lane Cross Roads
750 1 990 1 1,320
First Major Signalized
1,320
1,320
1,320
Intersection (ft)
Four -lane Cross Roads
First Access from Off-
750
990
1,320
Ramp (ft)
First Median Opening
1 990
1,320
1,320
990
1,320
First Access Before On-
1,320
Ramp
First Major Signalized
2,640
2,640
2,640
Intersection (ft)
Source: Adapted from Interchange Access Management Discussion Paper #4
by Robert Layton - Oregon State University 2012
http://teachamerica.com/MHB/12-5-interchange-access-management.pdf
This is not a substitute for FDOT standards. Although it is not consistent
with the requirements in FDOT Plans Preparation Manual (PPM) Chapter 2.14
"Interchanges and Median Openings/Crossovers", Exhibit 40 summarizes the
Oregon State University research developed for Oregon DOT. This can be a
good example and starting point for access management near freeway
interchanges.
Signalized On and Off Ramps: If the ramp is signalized, this weaving
distance will need to be determined by a signal spacing analysis or other
methods and standards.
2.4 Median End Treatments
The median end design for an urban arterial should be designed for a
passenger vehicle while assuring it can accommodate a larger design
vehicle. Alternative median end designs include: semicircular,
symmetrical bullet nose, asymmetrical bullet nose, half -bullet nose, but
remember: always use turn lanes.
The only new openings that should be provided
without turn lanes would be for official
or emergency use only.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 39
Packet Pg. 2698
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts MEDIAN HAND
The "bullet nose" median opening requires a vehicle to make a left turn
from a through lane interfering with the through traffic. This will result in
a situation with a high potential for rear -end crashes as shown in Exhibit
41.
Exhibit 41
Potential crash problems when left -turn is made from the through traffic lane
The problem f —
of no turn lanes
�COE] C��
cm
The most common method in which left -turning vehicles can be removed
from a through traffic lane is to install a left -turn lane (see Exhibit 42).
The lane should be of sufficient length to allow for adequate
maneuvering distance plus queue storage as discussed earlier in Chapter
2. The total deceleration length, including the taper, should be sufficient
to allow the turning vehicle to decelerate from the speed of through
traffic to a stop plus queue storage. Existing bullet nose median openings
should be replaced with an adequate left -turn lane.
Exhibit 42
Left -turn lane to remove left -turn vehicles from the through traffic lanes
Solution ��
Add a turn lane 1*:) L� m �] A*]C7 - C2 - -
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 140
Packet Pg. 2699
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2.5 Median Opening Left Turn Radius
FDOT has historically used 60 ft for most situations and 75 ft when
significant truck volumes are expected for left -turn or control radii
Exhibit 43
Typical radius for left turn movements
II
II
60 ft radius 75 ft radius
most situations trucks expected
��
The Florida Intersection Design Guide contains the following guidance:
F
I Predominant
Exhibit 44
Control Radii for Minimum Speed Turns
50 (40 min) 60 (50 min)
P SU-30
75 130
SU-40
WB-40 WB-62FL
W B-62
I Occassional SU-30 SU 40 WB-62FL WB-67
Table 3-13 Florida Intersection Design Guide 2013
For more guidance on radius design:
➢ Florida Intersection Guide
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 141
Packet Pg. 2700
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts
MEDIAN HANDBOOI
2.6 Median Opening Length
Problem
Median opening length is governed by the:
• Turning or control radii
• Side street geometrics
• Median (traffic separator) width
• Intersection skews
• Intersection legs
An excessively wide median opening will store multiple vehicles in an
unsignalized full median opening while they are waiting to complete a
maneuver. Excessively wide openings result in multiple conflicts for both
the turning vehicles and through traffic. The situation shown in Exhibit 45
is a common occurrence at wide full median openings on high volume
roads during peak periods. This often occurs in areas that experienced
significant development and growth in traffic volumes since the median
opening was originally constructed.
The presence of several vehicles in the median opening results in
impaired sight distance, especially when one or more of the vehicles is a
pickup, van or RV. Signalization should be considered only if the median
opening meets the criteria of a signal warrant analysis.
Exhibit 45
— — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — —
� a
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 2014 1 42
Packet Pg. 2701
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts
Solution
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Alternative solutions to the problem are:
1. Reconstruct the unsignalized full opening as a more restrictive
median opening.
2. Close the median opening.
3. Directionalize the median opening.
Which solution is selected, as well as the design of the restrictive
movement if used, will depend on several factors including the proximity
to other median openings, alternative routes, traffic volumes, and crash
experience.
For more information on median opening length:
➢ AASHTO Green Book Median Openings Section of "At -Grade
Intersections"
2.7 Pavement Markings and Signing
The Manual on Uniform Traffic Devices (MUTCD) contains guidance on
the type and placement of signs and traffic control devices at median
opening areas. FDOT also provides guidance for signing and pavement
markings in the FDOT Standard Index 17000 series.
Exhibit 46
M.U.T.C.D Figure 213-16
9nd
rt Direction of is a
i t *** *One Way signns are
e
* ONE WAY � Oplidnal it K99p Right
k4M 3r+0 signs are installed
}J **Kaep Right signs are
64E WAY * / optional it 9ne Way
�j signs are installed
Narrower 1 nan 30 ft
**�
AYAI iXf�
111 ; t
A Al
XE wAY
NOt95:
Sao Figure 2B-12lor examplas of placing DO NOT ENTER
and WRONG WAY 6igning.
Soo Figure 2B-15 H median is 30 feet or more in Yndlh.
For more information on pavement markings and signing:
➢ Manual on Uniform Traffic Devices (MUTCD)
➢ FDOT Standard Index 17000 series
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ONE SPAY
Typical Mounling
SEP 2014 143
Packet Pg. 2702
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2.8 Retrofit Considerations
When resurfacing, or altering a segment of a roadway within the State
Highway System (SHS), it is recommended that all medians, median
openings, and driveways be assessed to determine see if it is appropriate
to retrofit any of the median characteristics.
2.8.1
Assessing the Need to Close/Alter/Maintain a Median Opening
Adapted from
For the initial assessment of the existing median opening, the design
Guidelines for Median
requires data collection and analysis. A 4-step process (as provided in the
Opening Placement
and Treatment Type
literature indicated in the side bar) should provide adequate information
for decision making on whether to close/alter/or maintain an existing
FDOT D5 1996
median opening.
1. Determination of major cross streets and major driveway locations
2. Data Collection
o Identification of all existing signalized intersections, as well as
those locations scheduled for signalization in the near future
o Elimination of intersections from consideration for
signalization (based on proximity to other signalized
intersections)
0 24-hour bi-directional approach counts on each leg of each
intersection
o Other pertinent traffic data includes;
■ Traffic count locations for vehicle classification and
volume to develop traffic characteristics
■ Planned development in the corridor
■ Locations of schools, school crossings, and school
zones
■ Locations of facilities/design characteristics that serve
emergency vehicles
■ Locations of land uses which have special access
requirements (bus terminals, truck stops, fire stations)
■ Existing pedestrian crossings, parks, or other
pedestrian generators
■ Existing and proposed bicycle facilities
■ Recent (3 years) crash data, especially individual crash
reports
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 144
Packet Pg. 2703
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
3. Analysis
o Preliminary signal warrant analysis using existing volumes
o Determine if (proposed) signal spacing is adequate using
progression analysis
o Verify that existing signals still meet the warrants
o Intersection and arterial capacity analyses based on
anticipated roadway improvements to determine overall
corridor level of service (using projected design -year data)
4. Recommendations
o Provide a list of existing signalized intersections which are
expected to continue to meet the warrants for signalization
o Develop a list of intersections which are candidates for future
signalization that will still provide adequate spacing between
signalized intersections
o Provide roadway segments where median openings are not
recommended (site specific reasoning), as well as noting all
existing median openings being closed or modified
o Recommendations for median opening locations and
treatment type
Once the recommendation has been made to close/alter/or maintain an
existing median opening, the following sections provides guidance on
how to proceed with that decision.
2.8.2 Deciding to Close a Median Opening
The following criteria provides guidance on a recommendation to close
an existing median opening:
• Narrow median width (<14 ft or less than length of design vehicle)
where left turning vehicles cannot be protected during a two -
stage left turn (move to median and then proceed left when the
appropriate gap becomes available for the left turn vehicle.
• A combination of high volume left- turn out movements coupled
with high through and left- turn in movements, significantly
reducing making the availability of available gaps.
• High volume of left -out movements onto the major roadway
(AADT >27,000 AADT or existing crash data)
• Disproportionate share of angled crashes involving the left -out
turning movement
• Provision of an appropriate place for the displaced left -turn to
make U-turns
Driveway consolidation and median opening alterations that would
improve traffic conditions as a result of a plan that includes median
closure(s).
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 145
Packet Pg. 2704
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2.8.3 Deciding to Alter a Median Opening
Adapted from Virgil The following design/traffic criteria provides guidance on the alteration
Stover's course notes of an existing median opening:
Narrow median (12 —14 ft.)
• Replace a full median opening with a directional opening for left -
turns from one direction only
Median (>14 ft.)
• Replace a full median opening with a directional opening for left -
turns from both directions
2.8.4 Deciding to Keep a Median Opening
When all the data has been analyzed and negative impacts on the
adjacent roadway are considered minimal, the decision to keep a median
opening placement and/or type would be justified.
2.8.5 Construct a New Median on an Existing Roadway
On a 5-lane or 7-lane roadway with center turn lane;
• Replace the center turn lane with a raised median to restrict
movements to right-in/right-out only
See Vergil Stover's • Install a raised median with a directional median opening. Where
"Access Connections the center turn lane width is 14 ft. or more, the directional
on Opposite Sides of opening may be designed for left -turns from both directions on
Roadway" (2008) the roadway. Where the center turn lane is less than 14 ft. wide,
the directional opening should be designed for left -turns from one
direction only. Consideration as to the choice as to which
connection will have left -turn in movements ins and which will
not include:
a) Alternative access
(the directional median opening given to the property not
having alternative access, or the less extensive
alternative), and
b) Traffic generation
(the directional opening going to the property generating
the most traffic).
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 146
Packet Pg. 2705
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2.8.6 Considerations for Resurfacing, Restoration, and Rehabilitation
(3R) Projects
When a 3 R project is planned for a corridor, many features of the facility
are analyzed. Some of the most important considerations involve access
management. These may include:
• Radius improvements at side road driveways due to evidence of
off -tracking
• Close abandoned driveway in urban/curb & gutter section to
improve ADA accessibility/sidewalk
• Correct driveways that do not meet design standards*
(i.e. slopes too steep, documented dragging or damaged
driveway and/or asphalt on roadway)
• Construct new transit/bus amenities*
(bus bays, pads for bus shelters, bus stop pads, etc.)
• Construct new turn lanes to meet projected need*
• Lengthen/revise existing turn lanes at signalized intersections
due to documented operational issues. Any intersection could
be revised as needed based on verified crash history*
*To remain in resurfacing projects at the engineer's discretion
Source: FDOT Roadway Design Guidance 0410512012 "List of Optional
Items to Review on RRR Projects"
➢ www.dot.state.fl.us/officeofdesign/CPR/ProiectScopingfor3RWork.shtm
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 147
Packet Pg. 2706
CH2 Important Concepts
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
16. K.6.d
2.9 Rural Median Opening Considerations
Unsignalized intersections in rural areas can often lead to some of the
most dangerous points of conflict due to generally higher speeds and
reduced enforcement of proper driver behavior. Crash data in rural areas
has shown a higher proportion of right angle crashes and injury rates
compared to more urbanized areas. It is in the best interest of the
travelling public to limit the number of through movements across major
roadways from minor roadways. The following sections provide
suggestions to improve safety on rural facilities on the SHS.
2.9.1 Realigning Minor Roadway Intersections
Where an unsignalized intersection in a rural area experiences a high
crash rate, due to a minor roadway crossing a major roadway, it is
recommended (when sufficient right- of- way exists) that one of the
access points to/from the minor roadway be re -aligned so that a 4-way
intersection is modified to create two (2) 3-way intersections, ideally
spaced approximately % mile part or more. Refer to Exhibit 47 and
Exhibit 48.
Exhibit 47
Vergil Stover's paper "Access Connections"
Oakville Rd.
North
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Oakville Rd.
South
SEP 2014 148
Packet Pg. 2707
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Exhibit 48
NCHRP Report 650 — Figure 65. Conflict -point diagram for offset T-intersection
26 Total Conflict Points T
. Z+,
* Crossing Points (10)
• Merge and Diverge (8 each)
2.9.2 Restricted Crossing U-Turn Intersection (RCUT)
Where an unsignalized intersection in a rural area experiences a high
crash rate, due to a minor roadway crossing a major roadway, it is
recommended (when right of way is limited) that the full median opening
be converted to a directional median opening. This will force the through
vehicle (on the minor roadway) to make a right turn followed by a U-turn
and ultimately making a right turn (back onto) at the minor roadway.
Considerations need to be made so that the design vehicle has enough
room to make the required right turns and U-turn. Even if right of way
allows the re -alignment of the minor roadway, the directional median
opening may be the preferred treatment.
Exhibit 49
Conflict point diagram for Restricted Crossing U-Turn Intersection, or RCUT)
24Total Conflict Points
Crossing Points (4)
• Merge and Diverge (10 each)
lj.. �. 5- - - - _
.-. .. -.. --- 7._. •�Q~ {� -�._-_
i 1
For more information on RCUT:
➢ www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/09059/
➢ teachamerica.com/ai14/
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 149
Packet Pg. 2708
16. K.6.d
CH2 Important Concepts
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2.10 Special Rural Highway Treatments
2.10.1 Advance Warning of Oncoming Vehicles on Rural Highways
Innovative treatments of problematic intersections in rural settings have
proven to be beneficial in reducing the number of accidents that result in
injuries and fatalities. Even though an intersection meets all FDOT
guidelines and design standards, certain situations could result in higher
than expected conflicts. All geometrics and hazards should be considered
when attempting to improve the safety of an intersection and no one
method may offer the desired results. It is recommended that FDOT staff
should consider innovative treatments if all other design options have
been exhausted.
2.10.2 Vehicle Actuated Flashing Beacons for 2-Stage Crossing
This treatment option may be considered when an extraordinarily wide
median results in an increased observance of accidents occurring at the
far end of the intersection (before fully crossing the intersection but after
traversing the median). The root of the problem lies in a deceptively long
acceptable gap in traffic in order to safely cross the entirety of the
intersection. One option is to break the 1-stage crossing maneuver into a
2-stage crossing maneuver by placing a 2nd set of stop signs within the
median.
This treatment option includes the placement of continuously flashing
beacons on the existing stop signs of the intersecting roadway. Due to an
exceptionally wide median, distance is sufficient to store at least 1
vehicle. Please note the design vehicle, as in many situations a large
vehicle may need to use this intersection. A second set of stop signs are
placed within the median, thereby making this intersection crossing a 2-
stage maneuver. Additionally, on the 2nd set of stop signs, it is
recommended that loop sensors are placed within the median to activate
flashing red beacons on the stop signs as well as flashing yellow beacons
in advance of the intersection on the major roadway.
The following example is located along SR 20 and CR 234 in Alachua
County, Florida.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 150
Packet Pg. 2709
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOI
Exhibit 50
Wide median treatment with actuated flashing beacon
Added Stop Sims and
-vehicle a actuated flashing
beacons_
Modified shape of
median opening to
remove `-bullet-nose„
median geometry_
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
�.dded Stop Bar_ double-yeno%v
centerline uritlun median
opening, and daslxed line
extension thrrntgh median area
along the nigjar roadway
Safety Improvements at Unsignalized Intersections (2008)
FDOT Traffic Operations Research Study
Exhibit 51
Flashing beacon on minor street
Safety Improvements at Unsignalized Intersections (2008)
FDOT Traffic Operations Research Study
SEP 2014 1 51
Packet Pg. 2710
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Exhibit 52
Loop Sensors and Flashing Yellow Beacons
Google Earth image
Note: painting and loop detectors within median pavement. The loop
sensors activate flash red beacons on the stop signs within the
intersection as well as flashing yellow beacons place ahead of the
intersection on the major roadway.
Exhibit 53
Exhibit 54
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 52
Packet Pg. 2711
CH2 Important Concepts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
2.10.3 Rural Intersection Conflict Warning System
Another innovative idea designed to alleviate traffic crashes, has been
developed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Their
system warns motorists if a vehicle is approaching the intersection from
either direction. As a vehicle on the minor roadway approaches the
major roadway, a red flashing beacon will warn the motorist if vehicles
on the major roadway are approaching the intersection. Alternately, as a
vehicle on the major roadway approaches the minor roadway, a yellow
flashing beacon will warn the motorist if there are vehicles approaching
the intersection. This system requires loop sensors in advance of the
intersection from each direction.
Exhibit 55
Intersection conflict warning system concept
N
Minor 5�
. T aoA —Lti,.., �
Major
Road
T �•
Rural Intersection Conflict Warning Systems Deployment — Concept of Operations
(2012) Minnesota DOT
Additional resources:
➢ MnDOT webpage on "Rural Intersection Conflict Warning System"
www.dot.state. mn.us/guidesta r/2012/rural-intersect-confl ict-warn-system/
➢ Link to MnDOT "Concept of Operations"
www.dot.state. mn.us/guidesta r/2012/rural-intersect-conflict-warn-
system/documents/RICWSConODs.Ddf
➢ FDOT's research on "Innovative Operational Safety Improvements at
Unsignalized Intersections"
www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed Pro*/Summary TE/
FDOT C81<21 rpt.pdf
➢ Development of Guidelines for Operationally Effective Raised Medians
and the Use of Alternative Movements on Urban Roadways
D. Li G. Liu H. Liu K. Pruner K. R. Persad L. Yu X. Chen Y. Qi
Full report 2013 :
d2dtl5nnlpfrOr.cloudfront.net/tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-6644-1.pdf
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 53
Packet Pg. 2712
16. K.6.d
CH3 Sight Distance MEDIAN HAN-
3.0 Introduction to Sight Distance Concepts
This chapter addresses sight distance concepts related to unsignalized
median openings and facility connections. The majority of the chapter
contains discussion of the assumptions relating to stopping and
intersection sight distances. The AASHTO Green Book is the basis for
much of the Florida Design Standards. Right -turn and passing sight
distance is not addressed in the chapter as they are not typically an
element in median opening location and design.
Highways must be designed to provide sufficient sight distance so that
drivers can control and safely operate their vehicles. The following sight
distances are of concern on median and median opening decisions, both
urban and rural:
• Stopping Sight Distance: The distance necessary for the driver to
safely bring a vehicle to a stop.
• Intersection Sight Distance: The distance necessary for drivers to
safely approach and pass through an intersection.
Several factors that contribute to determining stopping sight distance
and intersection sight distance include:
Height of Eye - In determining sight distance, the height of the eye of
the person who must stop or pass through the intersection is
assumed to be a certain measure. This assumption has significant
bearing on such issues as the placement of landscaping which might
obstruct the view of the vehicle at the assumed height. FDOT defines
this height as 3.5 ft.
Height of Object - AASHTO and FDOT assumes a determined height of
object for intersection sight distance. This will allow the driver to view
the headlights of an oncoming passenger car. This height is defined as
0.5 ft above the road surface by FDOT.
Area Size of Vehicle — Florida DOT has developed criteria for sight
distance that allows a 50% "Shadow" control for sight distance. This
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 54
Packet Pg. 2713
CH3 Sight Distance
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
3.0.1
For application of
stopping sight
distance, use an eye
height of 3.5 ft and an
object height of 0.5 ft
above the road
surface
means that if a driver can see at least 50% of the visual area of a
vehicle it is considered "visible."
• Time of Visibility — Where visibility is blocked by over 50%, FDOT will
allow for two seconds unobstructed visibility.
Exhibit 56
Area Size of Vehicle
25% "shadow" 50% visibility
Exhibit 57
Time of Visibility
_ - Where visibility is O /
blocked for over 0
provide 2 seconds unobstructed visibility
Stopping Sight Distance
Sight distance is the length of roadway ahead visible to the driver. The
minimum sight distance available on a roadway should be sufficient to
enable a vehicle traveling at or near the design speed to stop before
reaching a stationary object in its path. The sight distance at every point
along the highway should be, at a minimum, the distance required for an
operator or vehicle to stop in this distance.
Exhibit 58
Minimum Stopping Sight Distance
35
250
45
360
55
495
60
570
65
645
Source: FDOT Plans Preparation Manual Vol. 1 Table 2.7.1
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 55
Packet Pg. 2714
16. K.6.d
CH3 Sight Distance MEDIAN HANDBOOK
3.0.2 Intersection Sight Distance
FDOT Design Standard Index 546 specifies the following sight distances in
for right- and left -turns at intersections on multi -lane facilities with W
medians. These distances should be considered minimums. Exhibit 59 N
presents an example at 45 mph with a 22 ft median width.
a.
Exhibit 59 r
Sight Distance Example
::)!ju rt (w 47 mpn kr[ meuianl
Exhibit 60
Intersection Sight Distance for Passenger Vehicle (P) — 4-lane Divided
35
460
45
590
55
720
60
785
Source: FDOT Design Standard Index 546
For a median wider than 22 ft, refer to Standard Index 546, Sheet 5
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 56
Packet Pg. 2715
CH3 Sight Distance
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
3.0.3 Sight Distance for U-turns
U-turns are more complicated than simple turning or crossing
maneuvers. Sight distances in Exhibit 62 for U-turns were calculated for
automobiles with the following assumptions:
• "P" vehicle (Passenger vehicle)
• 2.0 seconds reaction time
• Additional time required to perform the U-turn maneuver
• Begin acceleration from 0 mph only at the end of the U-turn
movement (this is conservative)
• Use of speed/distance/and acceleration figures from AASHTO
Green Book.
• 50 ft clearance factor
Exhibit 61
U-turn Sight Distance
830 Tt CcO 4S mph
Exhibit 62
Sight distance for U-turn an unsignalized median opening
35
520
40
640
45
830
50
1,040
55
1,250
60
1,540
3.0.4 Sight Distance for Left -Turn into Side Street
In most cases, the right -turn sight distance from the side
street/connection would control the sight distance of this area. If the
intersection has sufficient sight distance to allow a right -turn maneuver
from the side street, the sight distance should have sufficient sight
distance for the left -turn maneuver from the side street.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 57
Packet Pg. 2716
CH3 Sight Distance
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
3.0.5 Left Turn Lane Offset
Vehicles turning left from opposing left -turn lanes restrict sight distance
for both vehicles unless the lanes are sufficiently offset. Offset is defined
This is further defined as the lateral distance between the left edge of a left -turn lane and the
in Section 2.13.3 of right edge of the opposing left -turn. When the right edge of the opposing
the FDOT Plans left turn is to the left of the left edge of the left turn lane, the offset is
Preparation Manual. negative. If it is to the right, it is a positive offset as shown in Exhibit 63.
Exhibit 63
Negative and Positive Offset between opposing left turn lanes
ELA
Negative Offset Positive Offset
Source: Plans Preparation Manual Vol. 1, 2.13.3
Exhibit 64
Offset Left -turn Lane
Source: 2001 Highway Design for Older Drivers and Pedestrians FHWA
I■II-M
J -0Zs.A=
vi
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Exhibit 65
Offset Left -turn Lane
Left turner's view blockage area
V1: Left turning vehicle
V2: Opposite left turning vehicle
V3: Opposing -through vehicle that the left -turn driver can't see
SEP 2014 158
Packet Pg. 2717
CH3 Sight Distance
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Desirable offsets should all be positive with a recommended minimum 2-
foot offset when the opposing left turn vehicle is a passenger car and a
recommended minimum 4-foot offset when the opposing left turn
vehicle is a truck. In both cases, the left -turn vehicle is assumed to be a
passenger car.
On all urban designs, offset left -turn lanes should be used with median
widths greater than 18 ft. A 4 foot wide traffic separator should be used
when possible to channelize the left -turn movement and provide
separation from opposing traffic. On rural intersections where high
turning movements occur, offset left -turn lanes should also be
considered.
On median widths 30 ft or less, an offset left -turn lane parallel to the
through lane should be used and the area between the left -turn lane and
the through lane where vehicles are moving in the same direction should
be channelized with pavement markings. On medians greater than 30 ft,
a tapered offset should be considered.
Exhibit 66
Example of Positive Offset
Source: FHWA
Exhibit 67
Example of Positive Offset
For More Information on Offset Design:
➢ District 1 Access Management Unsignalized Median Opening
Guidelines
➢ Transportation Research Record #1356
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 159
Packet Pg. 2718
CH3 Sight Distance
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
3.1 Landscaping and Sight Distance Issues
Two important FDOT documents address landscaping as they relate to
medians:
➢ FDOT Design Standard Index #546 (Sight Distance)
➢ "Florida Highway Landscape Guide"
FDOT, Environmental Management Office
The Landscape Guide states the importance access management in
providing good visibility and landscaping opportunities:
"Access management is the management of vehicular access to the
When the number of
highway. This includes ingress to the highway, egress from the highway
median openings and
and median openings on divided highways. A well -designed highway
driveway connections
with good access management can be aesthetically pleasing. It provides
are reduced, a greater
area is generally
the landscape architect greater opportunity in the development of
available for
practical and efficient landscape plans. When the number of median
landscaping.
openings and driveway connections are reduced, a greater area is
generally available for landscaping. The reduction of median openings
and driveways also reduces the number of locations that must meet clear
sight requirements. This allows greater flexibility in the landscape plan.
Therefore, any plan for landscaping a highway should consider access
management."
FDOT LANDSCAPE GUIDE
3.1.1 Major Criteria for Decisions on Sight Distance and Planting Area
• Sight Distance - for left -turns as stated in FDOT Design Standard
Index #546
• Stopping Sight Distance for absolute clear area
• Tree Caliper — 4 — 11 in. and greater than 11 in. to 18 in.
• Tree Spacing - as stated in FDOT Design Standard Index #546
• Area Size of Vehicle Seen - 50% coverage or 2 seconds of
complete visibility
• Horizontal Clearance - as stated in Standard Index 700 and Plans
Preparations Manual
• Clear sight window criteria - see Exhibit 68.
The same standards are used for both signalized and unsignalized
intersection because the traffic signal could malfunction of operate in
flash mode during some hours of the day.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 60
Packet Pg. 2719
CH3 Sight Distance
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Exhibit 68
Clear Sight Window
U1 d
Source: Adapted from Standard Index 546 (2013) and the Florida
Highway Landscape Guide, Environmental Management Office, 1995
The spacing of trees is based on the design speed and the caliper or
diameter of the tree trunk. Once the caliper of the mature tree trunk is
over 18", the driver can completely lose sight of the other vehicle,
therefore, the spacing of the trees increases dramatically to allow a
complete 2 second view between trees.
Exhibit 69
Spacing of trees (in ft) from Index 546 (45 mph)
30
25
90
35
30
105
40
35
120
45
40
135
50
50
150
55
55
165
60
60
180
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 61
Packet Pg. 2720
CH3 Sight Distance
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOk
FDOT Design Standard Index 546 also has important direction on areas
that should never have any landscaping except low groundcover. At a
minimum, low groundcover should be used in areas to allow for clear
stopping sight distance or to the start of the turn lane taper (whichever is
the longest measure).
Exhibit 70
Special areas limited to ground cover (45 mph)
100 ft* 100 ft for < 50 mph*
~ 200 ft for ? 50 mph*
a
C=)
* See GENERAL NOTE 5.8
Adapted from Standard Index 546
No trees shall be permitted within 100 ft (<50 mph) or 200 ft (>_50 mph)
of the restrictive median traffic separator nose.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 62
Packet Pg. 2721
CH3 Sight Distance
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Exhibit 71
Trees In Median
Intersection Sight Corridor And Outside Clear Zone
(6' Horizontal Clearance), Curb And Gutter
Min. Sp mg
Max. Trunk Dia.
6' Shadow
Shadow Diagram
Setting Max. Caliper and Min. Spacing
Shadow Diagram
Setting Max.Cover Height
Restricted
(2 Sec. Min.)
Min Spacing When_
Caliper > 11" <= 18"
Perception Diagram
Setting Sabal Palm (State Tree) Spacing
Exhibit 72
Intersection Sight Distance on 4-lane divided roadway
112 45 mph = 36a ft stopping sight distance
0
f
Limit of Clear Sight
Limit of Median
dm = 485 ft Sight Obstruction
d)t 590 ft for one-step crossing
Areas free of sight obstruction
For more details see Standard Index 546 Sheet 5 M Limited to ground cover
For more information on landscaping and sight distance:
➢ Florida Highway Landscaping Guide, FDOT - Environmental
Management Office (1995)
➢ Standard Index #546 (Sight Distance at Intersections)
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 2014 1 63
Packet Pg. 2722
16. K.6.d
CH4 Median Width MEDIAN HANDBOOK
4.0 Function Determines Median Width
The appropriate median width should be determined by the specific
function the median is designed to serve. Concerns which affect median
width on roadways having at -grade intersections include the following:
• Separate opposing traffic streams
• Pedestrian refuge
• Left -turns into side streets
• Left -turns out of side streets
• Crossing vehicle movements
• U-turns
• Aesthetics and maintenance
4.1 Anatomy of Median Width
Median width in most urban situations should accommodate turning
lanes and a separator. The width of both the left -turn lane and separator
are critical to the operations of the median opening. Exhibit 73 shows the
traffic separator "nose." (FDOT Standard Index 301 & 302)
Exhibit 73
Anatomy of Median Width
Travel Lane Edge Stripe
SEPARATORTRAFFIC WIDTH
MEDIAN Stripe
WIDTH
TURN LANE WIDTH
Travel Lane Edge
FDOT Standard Index measures width from travel lane edges
Important Point: Never use the gutter space as part r
0
of your turn lane width.
a�
E
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 2014 1 64 Q
Packet Pg. 2723
CH4 Median Width
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
16. K.6.d
Exhibit 74
Median and Turn lane Width
4.1.1 Minimum and Recommended Widths
Exhibit 75
Minimum Median Width
40 mph and less (Reconstruction Projects) 15.5*
45 mph (Reconstruction Projects) 19.5*
45 mph and less 22
When greater than 45 mph 40
*On reconstruction projects where existing curb locations are fixed due
to severe right of way constraints.
Exhibit 76
Recommended Median Width
30
4 lane highways with medians expecting
for single left turn lanes
significant U-turns and directional median
42
openings with excellent positive guidance
for dual left turn lanes
6 lane highways with medians expecting
22
significant U-turn and directional median
for single left turns
openings with excellent positive guidance
34
for dual left turn lanes
Where left turns are not expected due to terrain or land use, a median as
narrow as 6 ft can help channelize traffic and provide more positive
guidance and prevent unwanted left turns.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
as
E
z
SEP 2014 1 65 Q
Packet Pg. 2724
CH4 Median Width
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Where left turns are not expected due to terrain or land use, a median as
narrow as 6 ft can help channelize traffic and provide more positive
guidance and prevent unwanted left turns.
A critical function of many medians is to protect vehicles turning left.
Exhibit 77 shows how a narrow median cannot provide this protection
Exhibit 77
Movements in a narrow median
4.1.2 Directional Median Opening Channelization
FDOT Design Standards (Standard Index 527 - "Directional Median
Openings") contains much guidance on the design, channelization, and
striping of directional openings. The standards found in the Design
Standards and the FDOT Plans Preparation Manual will be the major
authority for the details of channelizing directional median openings.
Preventing wrong -way A critical function of many medians is to protect vehicles turning left. In
movements order to discourage unwanted movements in a directional median
opening, provide a 20-foot section of traffic separator overlap as shown
in Exhibit 78.
Exhibit 78
Traffic separator overlap
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 66
Packet Pg. 2725
16. K.6.d
CH4 Median Width MEDIAN HANDBOOK
A 30-foot median width provides many desirable aspects that should be
considered:
30 ft median benefits • Greater flexibility in the choice of lane widths and separation
width at double left -turn, full median openings.
• Additional width for landscaping the overlapping "traffic
separators" at directional median openings, depending on width.
• Permits separate vertical and/or horizontal alignment of the two
roadways.
The FDOT Plans Preparation Manual - Section 2.16.4 (Medians) also
provides the following guidance on the benefits of a wider median:
The minimum median width for four -lane and six -lane high-speed urban
and suburban arterial highways may be reduced to 30 ft (inclusive of
median shoulders) as opposed to 40 ft minimum required in Table 2.2.1. A
30-foot median provides sufficient width for a 30-foot clear zone. This
median width also allows space at intersections for dual left turn lanes (11-
foot lanes with 4-foot traffic separator), and directional median openings
using 4-foot traffic separators. When this is done neither a Design
Exception nor Design Variation is required.
FDOT PLANS PREPARATION MANUAL
For more information on turn lane width:
➢ Plans Preparation Manual Table 2.1.1
4.1.3 Minimum Traffic Separator Width at Intersections
The minimum width of a median traffic separator "nose" has commonly
been 4 ft. AASHTO indicates that "...the minimum narrow median width
of 4 ft is recommended and is preferably 6 to 8 ft wide." (AASHTO Green
Book). The FDOT Design Standards identify 4, 6 and 8.5 ft wide traffic
separators as standard widths; however, where right-of-way is limited,
narrower median traffic separators have been used.
For more information on traffic separators:
➢ Standard Index 302
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 67
Packet Pg. 2726
CH4 Median Width
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
16. K.6.d
4.1.4 Traffic Separator Visibility at Intersections
Narrow median traffic separator noses can be difficult to see, especially
at night and in inclement weather. Reflectorized paint provides minimal
visual enhancement as it rapidly loses its limited reflectivity. Reflectorized
traffic buttons and/or reflectorized pylons help but are not a significant
feature to provide good "target value." Carefully selected landscaping is
often the most effective way to provide good median/median opening
visibility. A minimum traffic separator width of 6 ft (preferably 8.5 ft) is
needed for the median traffic separator nose to be of sufficient width to
make it highly visible. Landscaping of the median traffic separator nose to
provide visibility is especially important where longer left -turn lanes are
present. Obviously, the choice of vegetation and the landscaping design
must ensure that sight distance is not obstructed.
Exhibit 79
4.1.5 Minimum Median Width for Pedestrian Refuge
In order for a median to be considered a pedestrian refuge, the minimum
median width must be at least 6 ft, but preferably at least 8.5 ft. Exhibit
80 depicts a median of adequate width to be considered a pedestrian
refuge.
Exhibit 80
Pedestrian refuge in unmarked median
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 68
Packet Pg. 2727
16. K.6.d
CH4 Median Width MEDIAN HANDBOOK
4.1.6 Minimum Median Width for U-turns
See Chapter 5 for U-turns should not be permitted from the through traffic lane because of
complete analysis the potential for high speed, rear -end crashes and significant detrimental
impacts on traffic operations. All left -turns and U-turns should be
performed from a left-turn/U-turn lane.
Exhibit 81 shows that extremely wide medians are needed for a U-turn by
large vehicles. Even a standard passenger car cannot make a U-turn on a
4-lane divided roadway with curb and gutter and commonly used median
traffic separator nose widths. A very high percentage of the automobile
fleet is intermediate and smaller than the "P" design vehicle. Small or
intermediate vehicles can complete a U-turn on a 4-lane divided roadway
with curb and gutter and a 6 foot median traffic separator nose.
The design P-vehicle can make a U-turn on a 4-lane divided roadway with
a 6 ft. median traffic separator nose by "flaring" the receiving roadway.
➢ See Chapter 4.2 and Refer to AASHTO Green Book, Chapter 2, for
the minimum turning radii for common vehicle types.
➢ See Chapter 5.3 for a more complete discussion of truck U-turns
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 69
Packet Pg. 2728
16. K.6.d
CH5 U-turn Considerations MEDIAN HANDBOOK
5.0 AASHTO Guidance on Width and U-turns
U-turns should not be permitted from the through traffic lane because of
the potential for high speed, rear -end crashes and serious detrimental
impact on traffic operations. All left -turns, and U-turns should be made
from a left-turn/U-turn lane.
The AASHTO Green Book provides guidance on the relationship between
median width and U-turn movements. Unfortunately, the figure in the
Green Book shows the U-turn movements made from the inside (left)
lane. This is contrary to the basic principle of providing accommodations
for left turns to be made in auxiliary lanes rather than through lanes.
Therefore, the designer should include at least 12 additional feet to the
median width for this purpose. Exhibit 81 presents the AASHTO Green
Book figures with 12 ft added for a better guide to median width and U-
turns. In order to provide median width sufficient for a passenger car (P)
to make a U-turn from the left -turn lane to the outer through lane, it
would require 30 ft. If you cannot provide 30 ft, then the car will
encroach on to the shoulder. This is acceptable as long as this
encroachment has been built into the design by way of a bulb out or
additional pavement. When designing for 6 lane facilities, 20 ft of median
width will usually provide sufficient space for the U-turn for the P vehicle.
Please Note: The T" vehicle is approximately the
size of a luxury car or a Chevy Suburban. Therefore,
many vehicles in today's passenger car fleet can
make tighter U-turns.
Exhibit 81 shows that extremely wide medians are needed for a U-turn by
large vehicles. Even a standard passenger car cannot perform a U-turn on
a 4-lane divided roadway with a minimum recommended 18 foot median
curb and gutter and commonly used median traffic separator nose
widths. However, a very high percentage of the automobile fleet is
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 170
Packet Pg. 2729
16.K.6.d
CH5 U-turn Considerations MEDIAN HANDBOOK
intermediate and smaller than the "P" design vehicle. Small or
intermediate vehicles can complete a U-turn on a 4-lane divided roadway
having curbs and gutters and a 6 ft median traffic separator nose.
The design P-vehicle can make a U-turn on a 4-lane divided roadway with
a 6 ft. median traffic separator nose by "flaring" the receiving roadway.
See Chapter 4.2 and Refer to AASHTO Green Book, Chapter 2, for the
minimum turning radii for common vehicle types.
Exhibit 81
Minimum width of median for U-turn on 4 lane road
Source: Adapted from AASHTO Green Book
(with added 12ft for turn lane width)
5.1 Design Options for U-turns
In order to accommodate U-turns, the following options are available
Exhibit 82
U-turn Options
30 ftWide Medians
y
22 ft � Out
Traffic, land use, and terrain will play important roles in the decision on
their implementation.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 171
Packet Pg. 2730
CH5 U-turn Considerations
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
5.1.1 U-turn Flare Design Examples
Design for P-vehicle
U-turn with extended
flare (point out
extended flare)
The design P-vehicle can make a U-turn on a 4-lane divided facility with a
6 ft median by "flaring" the receiving pavement area via a bulb out or
radius return as illustrated in Exhibit 83 and 84.
Exhibit 83
U-turn Alternatives
6 ft
T
t
Exhibit 84
Median opening with both bulb out and flare to accommodate U-turn
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 1 72
Packet Pg. 2731
CH5 U-turn Considerations
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
16. K.6.d
5.2 Truck U-turns
The extremely wide median that is required for buses and trucks to make
a U-turn makes it impractical to design for these vehicles except in special
cases. The need for U-turns by large vehicles can generally be avoided in
the following ways:
• Bus and truck delivery routes can be planned to eliminate the
need for U-turns on a major roadway.
• Driveways can be adjusted and on -site circulation designed to
eliminate the need for U-turns by trucks.
Local governments can avoid the need for U-turns by large vehicles
through their subdivision and site development ordinances.
These special designs will probably only be necessary
at, or near, truck facilities, major industrial areas, or
truck staging areas.
Exhibit 85
Truck U-turn in Williston Florida
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 173
Packet Pg. 2732
16. K.6.d
CH5 U-turn Considerations MEDIAN HANDBOOK
5.2.1 U-turn Alternatives for Large Vehicles -Jug Handles
Exhibit 86
Jug handle designs for large vehicles
Option A
Option B
-----------------------------------------
Jug handles are a roadway design feature to accommodate U-turns (and
left turns) for large vehicles. In most cases Option "B" would need a
signal. Option "A" has the following desirable operational features.
• The U-turning vehicle is stored in the median parallel to the
through traffic lanes.
• A suitable gap is needed in the opposing traffic stream only.
• After completion of the U-turn the driver can accelerate prior to
merging into the through traffic lane.
These options require more right of way than most standard highway
designs, but it may be more cost feasible where public land is available
Exhibit 87
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ned for horse trailers
SEP 2014 174
Packet Pg. 2733
CH5 U-turn Considerations
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
16. K.6.d
5.3 U-turn Locations
Consider the location of U-turns in context with the transportation
network.
5.3.1 U-turn at Signalized Intersections
U - turns can be made at a signal when:
• Median is of sufficient width
• Low combined left -turn plus U-turn volume at signalized single
left -turn lane
You should note:
• Consider "right -on -red" restrictions for side streets
• Signal operation including right -turn overlaps
• U-turns take more time to clear the intersection than left turns
Where medians are of sufficient width to accommodate dual left -turn
lanes, an excellent option is to allow U-turns from the inside (left -most)
left -turn bays as illustrated in Exhibit 88.
Exhibit 88
Dual left turn may provide U-turn option
_-) 1A.-I -
. I
a� i
Enroll,
M�
O
I��l.j1•
� O
rM
5.3.2 U-turns in Advance of a Signal
A U-turn in advance of a signalized intersection will result in two
successive left -turn lanes as illustrated in Exhibit 89. However, unless
there is a substantial length of full median width, drivers may mistakenly
enter the U-turn lane when desiring to perform a left -turn at the
downstream signalized intersection. Motorists may perform abrupt re-
entry maneuvers into the through traffic lane to escape the U-turn lane.
Over 100 ft of full median width would help to alleviate this problem. If
100 ft is not possible, signage or other pavement markings can be used to
help guide the motorist.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEP 2014 175
Packet Pg. 2734
CH5 U-turn Considerations
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Indications that you should consider a U-turn opening before a signalized
intersection are:
• High volume of left turns currently at signalized intersection
• Many conflicting right turns
• Where a gap of oncoming vehicles would be beneficial at a
separate U-turn opening
• Where there is sufficient space to separate the signalized
intersection and U-turn opening
A study on U-turns by the University of South Florida has shown that
having U-turns made before a signalized intersection can greatly
decrease delay at the signalized intersection.
Exhibit 89
U-turn before a signal
ca
Source: Safety and Operational Evaluation of Right Turns Followed By U-
turns as an Alternative to Direct Left Turns, Dr. John Lu, University of
South Florida
Exhibit 90
Directional opening before a signalized intersection
Locating the U-turn after a traffic signal has the same operational issues
as the U-turn located before a signal. These are sometimes called
"Michigan U-turns" or "Michigan Left Turns."
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 176
Packet Pg. 2735
CH5 U-turn Considerations
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
16. K.6.d
5.3.3 U-turns after a Signal
Locating the U-turn after a traffic signal has the same operational issues
as the U-turn located before a signal. These are sometimes called
"Michigan U-turns" or "Michigan Left Turns", due to their origination in
Detroit, Michigan in the early 1960's. While this type of turn is still
common in the state of Michigan, there have been recent
implementations of Michigan Lefts throughout the country.
Exhibit 91
Depiction of a Michigan Left Turn
� Primary Highway
j Primary Highway
0JVUCh,WVP _j.&,swe. �„v.nii hp,�,r�,��Y::,v,,.,,.1 S COr1C�Qry i�it� wa]�
Key: Red Line - divided highway cross rrafi4cturning left onto crossroad. -possiblefocarionsfortrafficsignais,
Green Line - crossroad traffic ruroing left onto divided highway. based on traffic vciurnes.
r
M
Exhibit 92
Michigan Left Turn in Holland
U
'i RA'.x �, ire twit: a
Source: michigan highways. org
KAI
;V;_
There are potential benefits associated with the implementation of a
Michigan Left. The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) has
found that Michigan Lefts allow for a 20 to 50 percent greater capacity
than direct left -turns. This has led to reduced average delays for left -
turning vehicles and through -traffic. Michigan Lefts have also been found
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 177
Packet Pg. 2736
CH5 U-turn Considerations
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
16. K.6.d
to be safer for pedestrians looking to cross the roadway. Vehicular safety
is also increased, MDOT found significant crash reductions.
Typically, there is % mile spacing between the intersection and the left
turn. According to MDOT, while there are no absolute traffic volume
requirements for the use of a Michigan Left, they have traditionally been
implemented on state roads with average traffic volumes of at least
10,000 vehicles per day.
5.3.4 U-turns location in relation to driveways
Access connections should be located directly opposite or downstream
from a median opening as illustrated. The nearest driveway access should
be located more than 100 ft upstream from the median opening to
prevent wrong way maneuvers as seen in Exhibit 93.
Exhibit 93
Entry maneuvers
Ir -
100 ft
Additional Resources:
➢ Synthesis of the Median U-turn Intersection Treatment, Safety, and
Operations Benefits
➢ Median U-turn Intersection
➢ Restricted Crossine U-turn Intersection
➢ Displaced Left -Turn Intersection
➢ Quadrant Roadway Intersection
➢ Alternative Intersections and Interchanges Symposium
http://www.teachamerica.com/AI14
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 178
Packet Pg. 2737
CH6 Roundabouts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
6.0 Roundabouts and Access Management
Roundabouts can provide many benefits when included as part of an
overall access management strategy. Roundabouts achieve one primary
principal of access management by reducing the number of conflict
points. The result is that serious injuries/fatalities are significantly
reduced.
Exhibit 94
Roundabouts reduce conflict points
I
C
Serious
injuries
fatalities
reduced by
0 Crossing Q
❑ Diverging
❑ Merging ) (( 79%
8 TOTAL Conflict Paints
Source: safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/fhwa sa 12 005.htm
Roundabouts are ideal for providing U-turn opportunities, and when
designed in series, they help create an integrated system of moving
traffic safely and efficiently, with potentially better traffic flow and access
to adjacent businesses.
This chapter will provide guidance to help you determine whether a
roundabout is an appropriate access management tool for a specific
application.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 179
Q
Packet Pg. 2738
16. K.6.d
CH6 Roundabouts
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Traffic flow through a roundabout is especially sensitive to small
geometric changes. Some considerations that must be addressed for
successful implementation are:
• Good deflection at the entry of a roundabout
• Truck movements
• Public acceptance/awareness
Because many minor crashes can be avoided by a careful review of initial
designs by designers with significant roundabout experience, peer review
of all designs is highly recommended.
NCHRP
Roundabouts are one of the select few FHWA proven safety
REPORT672
countermeasures, and FHWA offers Peer -to -Peer (P2P) assistance to
transportation professionals interested in considering them as an option.
pa"dd'"
ammmamsi cmae
fa
The FHWA Safety P2P Coordinator will determine your specific questions
6W1
or issues and match you with the best peer for your case.
NCHRP Report 672, Roundabouts: An Informational Guide covers all
aspects of roundabout design in more detail. This chapter provides some
general guidance to help you consider whether a roundabout is a good
NCHRP Report 672
choice, and how it could be implemented.
The Florida Intersection Design Guide provides more guidance and a
checklist to evaluate whether conditions are appropriate for a
roundabout.
www.dot.state.fl.us/rddesign/FIDG-Manual/FIDG.shtm
Roundabouts should
be considered as an
alternative to all the
other traffic control
modes - FDOT
Intersection Design
Guide.
Florida Intersection
Design Guide 2013
13
FIDG 2013
Due to substantial safety characteristics, and potentially significant
operational and capacity advantages, the modern Roundabout is a
preferred traffic control mode for any new road or reconstruction project.
Roundabouts should be considered as an alternative to all the other traffic
control modes.
Florida Intersection Design Guide
Roundabouts by nature encourage lower speeds on the approach to, and
within the circulatory roadway, thereby enhancing safety characteristics.
The numbers of vehicles that are required to come to a complete stop at a
roundabout are significantly less than at a conventional intersection,
thereby reducing delay. Because entering vehicles are required to yield to
vehicles within the circulatory roadway, sight distance is critical to entering
vehicles, while approaching vehicles should not be given the appearance
of a linear path. World-wide experience has shown that there are a few
conditions under which roundabouts may not perform well enough to be
considered as the most appropriate form of control. These factors must be
examined carefully as a part of the justification process.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Florida Intersection Design Guide
SEP 2014 180
Packet Pg. 2739
CH6 Roundabouts
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
16. K.6.d
6.1 Roundabout Considerations
At a minimum, roundabouts should accommodate school buses, moving
vans, garbage trucks, fire trucks, and other emergency vehicles. Truck
aprons around the circular island allow for larger trucks to safely make all
turning movements. When properly designed, the geometric design of
roundabouts reduces the speed of vehicles approaching, using, and
exiting the roundabout. Because vehicle speed is reduced, the differential
among all users speed is also lowered.
Exhibit 95
Roundabout category comparison (adapted from NCHRP 672)
Single lane Multi -lane
Total entering traffic Up to 25,000 Up to 45,000
volumes
Entry speed 20 to 25 mph 25 to 30 mph
Typical inscribed circle 90 to 180 ft 150 to 300 ft
diameter
6.1.1 How Roundabouts can be used for U-turns
Roundabouts allow U-turns within the normal flow of traffic, which often
are not possible at other forms of intersection. Isolated roundabouts can
be used to solve a variety of problems. The use of a roundabout can also
change access management patterns, changing side street and driveway
access spacing needs and requirements. Exhibit 96 shows how a
roundabout would facilitate access to the arterial from this shopping
center, where the median opening was closed.
Exhibit 96
Example of proposed roundabout near arterial
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 181
Packet Pg. 2740
16. K.6.d
CH6 Roundabouts MEDIAN HANDBOOK
6.1.2 Adjacent Median Opening Locations near Roundabouts
The operational characteristics of a roundabout are very different than
an intersection. The slower speeds and traffic queues provide more
flexible turning opportunities that would typically disrupt a signalized
intersection.
Directional median openings could be considered after exiting a
roundabout. The ease of making a U-turn suggests reduces the need for
median openings prior to roundabouts. Since speeds are lower before
and after roundabouts, the design and location of median openings will
depend on the specific location. Exhibit 97 shows a directional median
opening constructed near the exit leg of this Arizona roundabout.
Exhibit 97
Directional median opening after a roundabout
Exhibit 98 shows a series of two roundabouts in Sarasota approved in
2013. Signalized intersections and several median openings were
included in alternatives to be considered. An extensive public
involvement process resulted in a single pair of directional median
openings between two roundabouts that allow direct access to the park
and 11t" Street. All other movements are accommodated by U-turns at
the two roundabouts.
Exhibit 98
Existing conditions for Sarasota
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 182
Packet Pg. 2741
CH6 Roundabouts
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOI
I t, WI1fO
1�5
View Sarasota
Roundabout Website
Exhibit 99
Proposed roundabout design for Sarasota
Exhibit 100 shows that the splitter island has been extended to form a
continuous median for this corridor. Excellent bicycle and pedestrian
amenities include a transit shelter and multi -use recreational trail. The
median forms a pedestrian refuge along the entire corridor, and positive
guidance for all vehicular movements.
Exhibit 100
Multimodal alternatives integrated as part of corridor plan
,OA }!� '
OwuNd " /Lj.. '� F JOY
us
Below is an example of how a series of roundabouts was used to improve
traffic flow and safety on a commercial corridor.
Exhibit 101
Golden Colorado businesses helped by roundabouts and medians
Source: teachamerica.com/RAB11/RAB1111Isebrands/plaver.htmI
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 183
Packet Pg. 2742
CH7 Pedestrian Considerations
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
7.0 Medians Help Pedestrians
Although medians have significant benefit for vehicle operations, they
are also beneficial for pedestrians. Pedestrians are permitted to travel
along all non -limited access facilities. Therefore, considerations for
pedestrian safety and mobility should be included in median design
decisions.
Pedestrian Safety — restrictive medians provide a refuge for pedestrians
crossing the highway. Fewer pedestrian injuries occur on
roads with restrictive medians.
Pedestrian Mobility —when pedestrian crossing treatments are
incorporated into restrictive medians, a complete pedestrian
network is provided resulting in improved connectivity.
Pedestrians, transit riders, and cyclists are all users of all non -limited
access facilities. Note that bicyclists, for design purposes, are considered
vehicles when operating within the roadway and pedestrians when
operating within the sidewalk area. When conflict points are well
managed as part of a comprehensive approach, all users of the roadway
benefit from improved safety and operations.
Multi -lane facility
The Multi -lane Facility Policy directs our designers to find ways to use
median policy is an
restrictive medians in all multi -lane projects, even on facilities with those
integral part to
roadway access
below the 40 mph design speed.
management
An example of a small pedestrian refuge that could be used on a 5-lane
section is shown in Exhibit 102.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 184
Packet Pg. 2743
16. K.6.d
CH7 Pedestrian Considerations
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Exhibit 102
Pedestrian refuges on a 5-lane section
Source: John McWilliams, South Florida
7.1 Proven Safety Countermeasures
7.1.1 Pedestrian Refuges Islands in Urban and Suburban Areas
Midblock locations account for more than 70 percent of pedestrian
fatalities. This is where vehicle travel speeds are higher, contributing to
the larger injury and fatality rate seen at these locations. More than 80
percent of pedestrians die when hit by vehicles traveling at 40 mph or
faster while less than 10 percent die when hit at 20 mph or less. Installing
such raised channelization on approaches to multi -lane intersections has
been shown to be especially effective. Medians are a particularly
important pedestrian safety countermeasure in areas where pedestrians
access a transit stop or other clear origins/destinations across from each
other. Providing raised medians or pedestrian refuge areas at marked
crosswalks has demonstrated a 46 percent reduction in pedestrian
crashes. At unmarked crosswalk locations, medians have demonstrated a
39 percent reduction in pedestrian crashes.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 185
Packet Pg. 2744
16. K.6.d
CH7 Pedestrian Considerations MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Exhibit 103
Angled cut -through in Bainbridge, WA (from FHWA Medians Brochure)
Source: safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/fhwa sa 12 011.htm
7.1.2 Pedestrian Crashes can be Reduced
Safety Benefits of
Raised Medians and
Pedestrian Refuge
Areas
FHWA Safety Program
Pedestrian crashes account for about 12 percent of all traffic fatalities
annually. Over 75 percent of these fatalities occur at non -intersection
locations. On average, a pedestrian is killed in a motor vehicle crash every
120 minutes and one is injured every 8 minutes.' Many of these crashes
are preventable. By providing raised medians and pedestrian refuge
islands, we can bring these crash numbers down, prevent injuries, and
save lives.
Providing raised medians or pedestrian refuge areas at pedestrian
crossings at marked crosswalks has demonstrated a 46 percent reduction
in pedestrian crashes. At unmarked crosswalk locations, pedestrian
crashes have been reduced by 39 percent.10 Installing raised pedestrian
refuge islands on the approaches to unsignalized intersections has had
the most impact reducing pedestrian crashes.
s NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts 2008 Pedestrians, NHTSA, Washington, DC, 2009.
11 Lindley, J., Guidance Memorandum on Consideration and Implementation of Proven Safety Countermeasures
FHWA, Washington DC, July 2008.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 186
Packet Pg. 2745
CH7 Pedestrian Considerations
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
16. K.6.d
7.1.3 Midblock Crossing Locations
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) strongly encourages the use
of raised medians (or refuge areas) in curbed sections of multi -lane
roadways in urban and suburban areas, particularly in areas where there
are mixtures of a significant number of pedestrians, high volumes of
traffic (more than 12,000 vehicles per day) and intermediate or high
travel speeds.'
FHWA guidance further states that medians/refuge islands should be at
least 4 ft wide (preferably 8 ft wide for accommodation of pedestrian
comfort and safety) and of adequate length to allow the anticipated
number of pedestrians to stand and wait for gaps in traffic before
crossing the second half of the street.$
On refuges 6 ft or wider that serve designated pedestrian crossings,
detectable warning strips complying with the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act must be installed.11
7.1.4 Installation Criteria
Traffic Engineering
Manual
FDOT's Traffic Engineering Manual (TEM) (Section 3.8) provides
installation criteria for marked mid -block crosswalks.
Placement of mid -block crosswalks should be based upon an identified
need and not used indiscriminately. Important factors that should be
considered when evaluating the need for a mid -block crosswalk include:
(a) Proximity to significant generators
(b) Pedestrian demand
(c) Pedestrian -vehicle crash history
(d) Distance between crossing locations
FDOT Traffic Engineering Manual
Any marked crosswalk proposed at an uncontrolled location across the
SHS must be reviewed and approved by the District Traffic Operations
Engineer prior to installation. A full engineering study documenting the
need for a marked crosswalk based upon the location of significant
generators, demand, crashes, and distances to nearest crossing locations
provides the basis for the determination. Refer to the TEM for detailed
criteria for each facet of this evaluation.
11 Lindley, J., Guidance Memorandum on Consideration and Implementation of Proven Safety Countermeasures
FHWA, Washington DC, July 2008.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 187
Packet Pg. 2746
16. K.6.d
CH7 Pedestrian Considerations
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
7.1.5 Treatments
The TEM also provides standards for the appropriate treatments for
marked mid -block crossings. The determination of the appropriate
treatments is generally based upon pedestrian volumes, vehicular
volumes, distances to adjacent traffic signals, etc. The TEM outlines 3
primary treatment options for midblock crossings beyond an
appropriately signed and marked crosswalk:
1. Traffic Signal — a conventional full traffic signal installed at a mid -
block location. Consideration for traffic signal warrant and
spacing criteria must be addresses as part of this option.
2. Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon —this treatment is also referred to as a
High -Intensity Activated Crosswalk Beacon or HAWK beacon. This
treatment provides for signalized, protected pedestrian crossings
while minimizing disruption to vehicular traffic flow. Pedestrian
hybrid beacons must meeting specific warrant criteria for
installation as outlined in the TEM. This is a common option in
locations where a full traffic signal is not warranted by pedestrian
volumes demand are more intense warning treatment.
3. Supplemental Beacons — The TEM provides two (2) options for
supplemental beacons: flashing yellow warning beacons and
rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs). Conventional flashing
yellow warning beacons installed as part of regulatory or warning
signs provides additional emphasis on the crossing location. Note
that the TEM requires that these beacons be activated by a
pedestrian to increase the effectiveness of the treatment. RRFB's
are also pedestrian actuated and quickly flash alternating warning
lights in a "wig -wag" pattern.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 188
Packet Pg. 2747
CH7 Pedestrian Considerations
Exhibit 104
Rapid Rectangular Flashi
16. K.6.d
MEDIAN HANDBOOK
Beacon in Miami
syst YA1 c
ca
L
d
C
7
0
L)
U
In addition to these treatments, other enhancement tools are available to
the designer to further enhance midblock crossings. These
enhancements include, but are not limited to supplemental pavement
markings/signage and in -street lighting. Note that all marked mid -block
crossings must meet the ADA Standards. The TEM provides guidance for
the application of these supplemental enhancements.
Key Resources
➢ A Review of Pedestrian Safety Research in the United States and Abroad,
p. 85-86
http://www.walkinginfo.org/library/details.cfm?id=13
➢ Pedestrian Facility User's Guide: Providing Safety and Mobility, p. 56
httD://katana.hsrc.unc.edu/cros/downloads/PedFacility UserGuide20
02. pdf
➢ Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities,
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2004
[Available for purchase from AASHTO]
https://bookstore.transportation.org/item details.aspx?id=119
➢ Pedestrian Road Safety Audits and Prompt Lists
http://www.walkinginfo.org/library/details.cfm?id=3955
➢ FHWA Office of Safety Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped bike/
➢ Safety Effects of Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled
Locations, p. 55
http://www.walkinginfo.org/library/details.cfm?id=54
➢ Handbook of Road Safety Measures
http://www.cmfclearinghouse.org/study detail.cfm?stid=14
➢ Analyzing Raised Median Safety Impacts Using Bayesian Methods
http://www.cmfclearinghouse.org/study detail.cfm?stid=213
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SEP 2014 189
Packet Pg. 2748