Skip to contentUnited States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration Go to TFHRC homeGo to FHWA websiteFeedback
Skip Repetitive Links. Go to TFHRC Home. Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center.
Go to the Site Map. Perform a search of the TFHRC Website. Receive help using the TFHRC website. Menu.

Go to What's New. Go to About TFHRC. Go to Our Products. Go to Our Research. Go to Our Support Services. Go to the Library. Go to Periodicals. Go to Other Resources. Read our Privacy Policy. Send us your Feedback. Return to TFHRC Home. menu bar.

PPT version for Printing

Low Cost Safety Improvements Pooled Fund Study

Advanced Street Name Signs

Header Image - Picture shows series of three scenarios: a vehicle on a meandering road, safety personnel at work, and a car that is very badly damaged after it appears to have collided into a telephone pole.

Dr. James Jenness, Westat


Overview

  • Background
  • Status of Data Collection
  • Study Design
  • Remaining Data Needs
  • Evaluation Considerations

Background

Provide advance guide signs and street name signs

  • Ranked 14th
  • NCHRP Report 500 Series Older Driver Guidebook
  • Older drivers are more involved in intersection crashes than other drivers
  • Older drivers exhibit excessive vehicle-braking at/before intersections
View Alternative text

  • Tried, low cost, short-term implementation
  • Target crashes
    • All intersection related
    • Rear-end
    • Late lane changes
    • Night
    • Older drivers
  • Consistent signing across jurisdictions also important
View Alternative text
  • Differing methods to provide street names in advance of intersection:
    • Green and white Advance Street Name signs
    View Alternative text
    View Alternative text
    • MUTCD W3-3 advance traffic control signs with W16-8 supplemental warning plaques

Data Collection

View Alternative text

Status of Data Collection

  • Massachusetts
    • Blanketed strategy across four districts in 2004
    • 200 sites included in the study
      • Over 400 installed
      • Lack of ADT data limited sample
    • Limited crash data 2002-2005
    • 500 intersection-years of before crash data
    • 250 intersection-years of after crash data
View Alternative text
 
  • North Carolina
    • Blanketed strategy in Cary, NC in 2001
    • 100 sites included in the study
    • Crash data from 1997-2004
    • 400 intersection-years of before crash data
    • 300 intersection-years of after crash data
View Alternative text

Study Design

  • Required Sample Size
    • Minimum: 803 intersection-years per period
      • Detect a 5 percent reduction in total crashes with 95 percent confidence
    • Desirable: 2,031 intersection-years per period
      • Detect a 10 percent reduction in older driver crashes with 95 percent confidence
  • Assumptions
    • 7.0 crashes per intersection per year in the before period, of which 9 percent involve older drivers
      • Crash rate based on preliminary data from MA sites, older-driver share based on Toronto data
    • Before and after periods are of equal length
    • Equal number of intersection-years for treatment and reference sites

Remaining Data Needs

  • Minimum: Need 450 more after intersection-years
  • Desirable: Need 1,130 before intersection- years and 1680 after intersection-years for older driver
  • Need additional installations

Evaluation Considerations

  • Do not have large enough sample size
  • Comparing two methods of signing
  • Limited ADT data in Massachusetts

< Presentation 10 | Presentation 12 >

 

What's New | About TFHRC | Our Products | Our Research | Support Services
Library | Periodicals | Other Resources | Site Map | Search

FHWA
TFHRC Home | FHWA Home | Feedback

United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration