IA330US65IA117 IA330F17 Jasper County Intersections Discussion of Design

IA-330/US-65/IA-117 & IA-330/F-17 Jasper County Intersections Discussion of Design Alternatives April 7, 2009 Presented by: Tom Welch State Transportation Safety Engineer Prepared with the Assistance of: Dr. Tom Maze & Joshua Hochstein – Iowa State University’s Center for Transportation Research and Education (CTRE) administers the following programs: Bridge Engineering Center • Center for Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Technology • Construction Management & Technology • Iowa Local Technical Assistance Program • Iowa Statewide Urban Design and Specifications • Iowa Traffic Safety Data Service • Midwest Transportation Consortium • Partnership for Geotechnical Advancement • Roadway Infrastructure Management Systems

DEFINING THE PROBLEM With Traditional Expressway Intersection Design • Typical Problem: Far-Side Right-Angle Collisions

DEFINING THE PROBLEM With Traditional Expressway Intersection Design Typical Far -Side Right -Angle Collision * Courtesy of University of Minnesota Intersection Surveillance System Test Bed at US-52 & CSAH-9, Goodhue County, MN 6: 42 AM CDT

Fatal Crash at US-151 & X-20, Springville, IA (Feb. 4, 2009)

U IA S-6 -3 5 30 IA-117 30 -3 IA US-65 F-17 Locations: IA-330 at County Road F-17 & IA-330/US-65/IA-117 Jasper County

IA-330/US-65/IA-117 Fatalities: Christopher Carver Walton Cain Norma Smith Betty Spangler 34 82 74 84 Newton, Iowa Chariton, Iowa Colfax, Iowa Sheridan, Wyoming 46 44 77 31 66 78 56 20 55 66 Eldora, Iowa Whitten, Iowa Chariton, Iowa Indianola, Iowa Marshalltown, Iowa Colo, Iowa Marshalltown, Iowa Broken Arrow, Oklahoma Major Injuries: Lori Ledger Leslie Hobson Betty Cain Tiffany Cooper Mary Mull John Mead Becky Deimerly Jennifer Kniss Catherine Leonard Louise Yoder

IA-330/US-65 & US-65/IA-117 Collision Diagram 2003 - 2008 Total = 43 or 7. 17/year 4 Fatal 22 Injury 17 PDO 38 Right-Angle (88%) 36 Far-Side 2 Near-Side 2 Left-Turn Leaving (5%) 3 Rear-End (7%)

CRASH TYPES: IA-330/US-65 & US-65/IA-117 Far-Side Right-Angle Crashes ARE a Problem! 95% of Right-Angle are “Far-Side” at IA-330/US-65 & US-65/IA-117

CRASH SEVERITY: IA-330/US-65 & US-65/IA-117 Maze et al. , 2004 [page 79] More Fatal & Major Injury Crashes Occur at -330/US-65 & US-65/IA-117 Than on Average IA

MINOR ROAD DRIVER AGE IN RIGHT-ANGLE CRASHES AT IA-330/US-65 & US-65/IA-117 Elderly Drivers More Involved in these Collisions

IA-330 and Co Rd F-17 Fatalities: Opal Kassel* 79 Nevada, Iowa Brian Cole 47 Indianola, Iowa Walter Donahue 78 Kamrar, Iowa Dorothy Donahue 73 Kamrar, Iowa Craig Hudson 16 Collins, Iowa Major Injuries: * Driver was former DOT Director

IA-330 & F-17 Collision Diagram 2003 - 2008 Total = 15 or 2. 50/year 2 Fatal 8 Injury 5 PDO 15 Right-Angle (100%) 11 Far-Side 4 Near-Side

CRASH TYPES: IA-330 & F-17 Far-Side Right-Angle Crashes ARE a Problem! 73% of Right-Angle are “Far-Side” at IA-330 & F-17

CRASH SEVERITY: IA-330 & F-17 Maze et al. , 2004 [page 79] More Fatal & Major Injury Crashes Occur at -330 & F-17 Than on Average IA

MINOR ROAD DRIVER AGE IN RIGHT-ANGLE CRASHES AT IA-330 & F-17 Elderly Drivers More Involved in these Collisions

Highway Crashes are Complex u Driver conditions and behavior § A contributing factor in 95 percent of crashes § Primary factor in 67 percent of crashes u Roadway design and environment § A contributing factor in 28 percent of crashes § Primary factor in 4 percent of crashes u Vehicle § A contributing factor in 8 percent of crashes § Primary factor in 4 percent of crashes

YOUNG & ELDERLY DRIVERS Vision and Cognition Challenges Peripheral Vision is important to making judgements about placement, speed, and gaps in moving traffic – Young drivers are still developing peripheral vision – Along with other vision changes, older drivers also begin to lose peripheral vision

The Teen Brain Is Still Under Construction • Recent Scientific studies reveal that the teen brain is still under construction until about age 25. • The Prefrontal Cortex is the last part to develop. It also controls: – – – risk-taking judgment impulse control speed assessment distance assessment ability to handle distractions

Medical Factors - Aging Drivers Eye Lens • The lens of the eye becomes cloudy and yellow with age, giving faulty information for driving decisions. Depth Perception • With age, people lose depth perception and peripheral vision making it harder to judge distance and speed Needed Light • A 50 -year-old needs 5 times more light to read than a 20 • year old. At 60 he’ll need 10 times more light

ALTERNATIVES:

National Academies of Science Transportation Research Board Project 15 -30 Median Intersection Design for Rural High. Speed Divided Highways 2009 Principal Investigator: Dr. Thomas Maze PHD, P. E. Joshua Hochstein, Ph. D. Student Iowa State University

SIGNALIZATION 1) Creates Expressway Traffic Delay 2) Not Expected by Expressway Drivers 3) Don’t Necessarily Improve Safety (Change Crash Types, Not Severity) 4) Signals at the bottom of a hill are not desirable

DRIVER EDUCATION:

Does Driver Education Reduce Crashes? . . . No. “The De. Kalb County project-conducted in the U. S. in the late 1970 s and early 1980 s to evaluate the effectiveness of a comprehensive driver education program-stands as the most large scale, welldesigned and ambitious effort to assess the impact of formal instruction. Despite the different methods and statistical procedures that have been applied to the data, however, the findings have been extremely consistent and disappointing to the driver education communitydriver education was not associated with reliable or significant decreases in crash involvement. ” Effectiveness And Role Of Driver Education And Training In A Graduated Licensing System: D. R. Mayhew and H. M. Simpson; • Date: 1996 -09 -09 Supported by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety The full report at www. Drivers. com

Why Doesn’t Driver Education Reduce Crashes? The studies conclude that typical driver training does not change behavior. For example it: • does not motivate drivers to use what they have learned; • does not offset inherent risk behaviors; • does not address lifestyle and related psychosocial factors; • does not carry a sustained knowledge or performance expectation that the driver will be tested or held accountable. (“Study only for the test and forget the rest. ”) Even worse, instruction • may encourage some drivers to feel over-competent enough to take more risks, off-setting the value of learning safety tactics.

Drivers Reality Check • Knowledge doesn’t always translate to correct actions • There is no substitute for experience

INCREASED ENFORCEMENT: “It is generally considered that fear of arrest and punishment causes drivers to conform better to traffic laws and regulations and thus reduces accidents. On the other hand, there is evidence to suggest that enforcement crusades have little lasting effect. For example, in several experiments vehicle speeds and driver behavior were recorded before and after an intensive enforcement effort. No significant changes were found either in speeds or in the number of law violations. Other studies have shown that many drivers ignore speed limit and speed zone signs that do not conform with their usual driving habits. ” Dr. Clarkson H. Oglesby Stanford University

Jasper Co. Sherriff Department Comments

Failure To Yield Right-of-Way Crashes 2004 -2008 5 -year average per/year Vehicle Type that got pulled in front of 8 ft 16 ft 17 ft Average annual crashes reported 149 4742 Motorcycle Passenger car 815 Sport utility vehicle 738 Van or mini-van 18 ft 66 ft 1224 Pickup, van, small bus 269 Large Trucks This depicts crashes involving a causal driver who failed to yield the right-of-way to another vehicle at an intersection

Diamond Interchange Cost Estimate: ≈ $7 -10 Million Safety Effectiveness Estimate: ≈ 60 – 80%

OFFSET T -INTERSECTION (Right-Left Configuration) Cost Estimate: ≈ $3 Million ± Safety Effectiveness Estimate: ≈ 40% Reduction Reduces Conflict Points from 42 to 26

OFFSET T-INTERSECTIONS 26 Conflict Points 10 Crossing 16 Merge/Diverge

OFFSET T-INTERSECTIONS

J-TURN ALTERNATIVES

THE J-TURN INTERSECTION The J-Turn Intersection utilizes a directional median opening which closes the median to minor road traffic, but still allows all maneuvers (including left-turns) from the expressway.

THE J-TURN INTERSECTION Closing the median eliminates direct crossing and left-turn maneuvers from the minor road, thus preventing far-side right -angle collisions. Emergency vehicles can still cross median.

THE J-TURN INTERSECTION All minor road traffic must turn right at the main intersection. Minor road drivers who wish to cross or turn left must do so indirectly via a downstream Uturn.

THE J-TURN INTERSECTION Out-of-the-way travel distance depends on spacing of Uturns, but 1500 to 5000 feet extra travel can be expected for a J-Turn Intersection. However, because the movements involved are less complex, the total delay time for indirect left-turn & crossing maneuvers may be equivalent to that of direct maneuvers at a traditional at-grade intersection.

Interchanges also involve out-of-the-way travel Typical Diamond = approximately 750 feet extra

Typical loop ramp = approx. 2200 feet extra

THE J-TURN INTERSECTION The J-Turn Intersection reduces the total number of intersection conflict points from 42 to 24, reduces the crossing conflicts from 24 to 4, and spreads out the conflict points over a larger area.

J-TURN INTERSECTION SIGNAGE EXAMPLE

J-TURN ALTERNATIVE -330/US-65/IA-117) (IA Approximate Proposed U-Turn Spacing From Main Intersection: ≈ 2250 feet ≈ 1100 feet

J-TURN ALTERNATIVE -330/F-17) (IA Approximate Proposed U-Turn Spacing From Main Intersection: ≈ 900 feet ≈ 1600 feet

J-TURN INTERSECTION MARYLAND TESTIMONY • City Council Members Initially Opposed to the J-Turn Design Option (Wanted Overpass/Interchange) § Couldn’t imagine how it could possibly work § Thought it would be too complex for elderly • After J-Turn was constructed, it became obvious safety was improved § “Can’t deny that it was a measure important for safety” § U-Turn improves sight lines (provides a better visibility angle for viewing oncoming traffic in both lanes) • J-Turn cheaper than an Overpass/Interchange § $800, 000 vs $8, 000 (Allows DOT to spend same $ on more projects across the state – Approximately 10 J-Turn Intersections can be built for the price of 1 interchange).

J-TURN INTERSECTION SAFETY EVALUATION MARYLAND (US-301 & MD-313) 4 Years Before, 6 Years After • 92% crash reduction overall (8. 25 to 0. 67 crashes/year) • 100% reduction in right-angle collisions (22 to 0) • 100% reduction in fatal/injury crashes (23 to 0) All statistically significant reductions (90% confidence).

85% “Preventable” Includes 22/23 Fatal/Injury MARYLAND EVALUATION 4 YEARS BEFORE 1/1/1997 – 10/31/2000 33 Crashes Total Right-Angle = 22 (67%) FS = 18 NS = 4 In Median = 6 (18%) Single-Vehicle = 4 (12%) Mainline Rear-End = 1 (3%) Fatal/Injury = 23 (70%)

MARYLAND EVALUATION 6 YEARS AFTER 1/1/2001 – 12/31/2006 4 Crashes Total Right-Angle = 0 FS = 0, NS = 0 In Median = 0 Single-Vehicle = 3 Mainline Rear-End = 1 Fatal/Injury = 0

J-TURN INTERSECTION SAFETY EVALUATION North Carolina (3 Site Average) Site #1 6 years before & after Sites #2 & #3 3 years before & after • 57% Crash reduction overall • 97% reduction in right-angle collisions • 100% reduction in far-side right-angle collisions • 55% reduction in fatal/injury crashes

THE J-TURN INTERSECTION J-Turn Intersection at IA-330/US-65 & US-65/IA-117 could… Prevent 93% (40/43) of the collisions which occurred there over the last 6 years (38 right-angle & 2 left-turn leaving). These collisions include the MOST SEVERE CRASHES (all fatal and minor injury as well as 4/5 major injury and 11/12 possible/unknown injury collisions).

THE J-TURN INTERSECTION J-Turn Intersection at IA-330 & F-17 could… Prevent 100% of the collisions which occurred there over the last 6 years.

OTHER IOWA PROPOSED J-TURNS US-151 & X-20, Springville, IA – Linn County

OTHER IOWA PROPOSED J-TURNS Janesville US-151 & Springville Rd. Cedar Falls US-218 & C-57 (W. Cedar Wapsi Road) Black Hawk County

IA-330/US-65/IA-117 & IA-330/F-17 Jasper County Intersections Discussion of Design Alternatives QUESTIONS? Iowa State University’s Center for Transportation Research and Education (CTRE) administers the following programs: Bridge Engineering Center • Center for Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Technology • Construction Management & Technology • Iowa Local Technical Assistance Program • Iowa Statewide Urban Design and Specifications • Iowa Traffic Safety Data Service • Midwest Transportation Consortium • Partnership for Geotechnical Advancement • Roadway Infrastructure Management Systems

IA -3 30 US-65 OTHER OPTIONS 0 -3 3 IA (Right-Left Configuration) (Alternative 1 b) IA-117 U S- 65 Offset T -Intersection at IA-330/US-65/ IA 117

OTHER OPTIONS One Quadrant Interchange with TIntersection at IA 330/US-65/IA-117 (Alternative 2 a)

OTHER OPTIONS One Quadrant Interchange with Roundabout & T -Intersection at IA -330/US-65/IA-117 (Alternative 2 b)

OTHER OPTIONS Two Quadrant Interchange at IA 330/US-65/IA-117 with Right-In, Right -Out Access (Alternative 2 c)

OTHER OPTIONS Folded Diamond Interchange at IA 330/US-65/IA-117 (Alternative 3 b)