Active Transportation Road Safety Audit - National Center For Rural Road … · 2016-08-29 · Active Transportation Road Safety Audit . SE McLoughlin Boulevard (OR 99E) – MP 9.53

Active Transportation Road Safety Audit

SE McLoughlin Boulevard (OR 99E) – MP 9.53 to MP 9.99 Clackamas County, Oregon Prepared For: Clackamas County Traffic Engineering 150 Beavercreek Road Oregon City, OR 97045 Prepared by: DKS Associates 117 Commercial St NE, Suite 310 Salem, Oregon 97301

Clackamas County Project Manager: Rick Nys, Senior Traffic Engineer Consultant Project Manager: Scott Mansur, P.E., PTOE Deputy Project Manager: Tegan Enloe, P.E. August 2014

Active Transportation Road Safety Audit August 2014 SE McLoughlin Boulevard (OR 99E) – MP 9.53 to MP 9.99 ii

THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF TITLE 23 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 409 AS FOLLOWS:

Title 23 U.S.C. § 409

Discovery and admission as evidence of certain reports and surveys

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists or data compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety enhancement of potential accident sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway crossings, pursuant to sections 130, 144 and 148 of this title or for the purpose of developing any highway safety construction improvement project which may be implemented utilizing Federal-aid highway funds shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, lists or data.

Active Transportation Road Safety Audit August 2014 SE McLoughlin Boulevard (OR 99E) – MP 9.53 to MP 9.99 iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Road Safety Audit Overview .................................................................................................... 1

RSA Summary .......................................................................................................................... 2

RSA Team .................................................................................................................................................. 2

Road Safety Audit Background ................................................................................................................. 2

RSA Process ............................................................................................................................................... 3

RSA Analysis .............................................................................................................................................. 3

Road Safety Audit Findings ...................................................................................................... 5

Finding #1: Left-Turn Crossing Movements .............................................................................................. 5

Finding #2: Location of Pedestrian Crossings ........................................................................................... 8

Finding #3: Visibility of Pedestrian Crossings at Unsignalized locations ................................................. 11

Finding #4: Rolling Stops ......................................................................................................................... 13

Finding #5: Definition of Sidewalks/Pedestrian Walkway ...................................................................... 14

Finding #6: Nighttime Visibility ............................................................................................................... 16

Finding #7: Corridor Speeds .................................................................................................................... 18

Finding #8: Network Connectivity ........................................................................................................... 20

Finding #9: Sidewalk Quality ................................................................................................................... 21

Finding #10: Trolley Trail ......................................................................................................................... 23

Finding #11: Permissive Turns at SE Jennings Avenue Intersection ....................................................... 26

RSA Findings Summary .......................................................................................................... 28

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Study Corridor - SE McLoughlin Boulevard .................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Road Safety Audit Process ............................................................................................................. 3 Figure 3: Looking North at SE McLoughlin Boulevard/Boardman Avenue ................................................... 5 Figure 4: Legal Two-Stage Crossings with Median ........................................................................................ 6 Figure 5: Vehicle Illegally Completing Two-Stage Crossing at SE Hull Avenue ............................................. 6 Figure 6: "No Left Turn" Sign (MUTCD) ......................................................................................................... 7 Figure 7: Example of a Traffic Separator that Restricts Left Turn Movements from the Minor Street ........ 7 Figure 8: Pedestrian Crossing at Midblock Location ..................................................................................... 8 Figure 9: Locations Designated Pedestrian Crossings and Observed Undesignated Pedestrian Crossings .. 9 Figure 10: Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon (RRFB) .................................................................................... 10 Figure 11: Refuge Island with Cut through Design Planned for SE McLoughlin Boulevard near SE Vineyard Road North of the Study Vicinity (Clackamas County) ................................................................................ 10 Figure 12: Pedestrians Crossing at Designated Location with Pedestrian Refuge ...................................... 11

Active Transportation Road Safety Audit August 2014 SE McLoughlin Boulevard (OR 99E) – MP 9.53 to MP 9.99 iv

Figure 13: Pedestrian Waiting for Gap in Traffic ........................................................................................ 11 Figure 14: Pedestrian Crossing Signage Examples (MUTCD) ...................................................................... 12 Figure 15: Intersection Ahead and Crosswalk Ahead Sign (MUTCD) .......................................................... 12 Figure 16: Example of Signage Enhancements for Stop Controlled Intersections (FHWA) ........................ 13 Figure 17: Stop Sign with Embedded LEDs (FHWA) .................................................................................... 13 Figure 18: Vehicle Dealerships using Public Right-of-Way for Display Forcing Pedestrians to use Roadway Shoulder ...................................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 19: Sidewalk Abruptly Ends .............................................................................................................. 14 Figure 20: Bollards Can Help Differentiate Right-of-Way and Surrounding Uses (transalt.org)................. 15 Figure 21: Highly Illuminated Land Uses Make Adjustment to Roadway and Pedestrians Difficult for Drivers ......................................................................................................................................................... 16 Figure 22: Gaps Difficult for Pedestrians to Judge Due to High Speeds ..................................................... 18 Figure 23: 40 mph Posted Speed ................................................................................................................ 18 Figure 24: Speed Feedback Sign (FHWA) .................................................................................................... 19 Figure 25: Curb Extensions Can Help Reduce Speeds (FHWA) ................................................................... 19 Figure 26: .................................................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 27: Pedestrians Forced to Use Roadway Shoulder .......................................................................... 21 Figure 28: Sidewalk along SE McLoughlin Boulevard .................................................................................. 21 Figure 29: Trolley Trail Entrance from McLoughlin Boulevard ................................................................... 23 Figure 30: Examples of Community Wayfinding Guide Signs (MUTCD) ..................................................... 24 Figure 31: Exclusive Bike Signal for Diagonal Crossing (Clackamas County) ............................................... 24 Figure 32: Diagonal Bike-Only Signal (Clackamas County) .......................................................................... 25 Figure 33: Left Turn Maneuver from SE Jennings Avenue to SE McLoughlin Boulevard ............................ 26 Figure 34: Existing Lane Configuration of SE Jennings Avenue Approaches .............................................. 27

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Road Safety Audit Team .................................................................................................................. 2 Table 2: Overall Risk Classification .............................................................................................................. 28

Active Transportation Road Safety Audit August 2014 SE McLoughlin Boulevard (OR 99E) – MP 9.53 to MP 9.99 1

Road Safety Audit Overview Title: SE McLoughlin Boulevard (OR 99E) Active Transportation Road Safety Audit

Date: March 3-4, 2014

Study Intersections • SE McLoughlin Boulevard @ SE Boardman Avenue

• SE McLoughlin Boulevard @ SE Arista Drive

• SE McLoughlin Boulevard @ SE Jennings Avenue

• SE McLoughlin Boulevard @ SE Hull Avenue

Corridor Boundaries: Milepoint 9.53 to milepoint 9.99 along SE McLoughlin Boulevard

List of Findings Finding #1: Left-Turn Crossing Movements: Left turning vehicles from unsignalized minor street approaches use the major street left turn lane to complete illegal two-stage crossings.

Finding #2: Location of Pedestrian Crossings: Pedestrians were observed to cross at various undesignated crossing locations along the study corridor.

Finding #3: Poor Driver Yielding Behavior at Unsignalized Crossings: Designated pedestrian crossings at unsignalized intersections lack visibility, which may be a contributing factor to low yielding rates by drivers.

Finding #4: Rolling Stops: Vehicles turning into SE McLoughlin Boulevard from minor street approaches were observed making rolling stops.

Finding #5: Poorly Defined Pedestrian Walkway: Pedestrian walkway along SE McLoughlin Boulevard is not clearly defined or maintained throughout the study corridor.

Finding #6: Nighttime Visibility: Lighting levels along the roadway are low while surrounding land use bright lighting that makes it difficult for eyes of drivers to adjust to see pedestrians.

Finding #7: Corridor Speeds: Posted speed limit and volume of traffic can be uncomfortable for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Finding #8: Network Connectivity: Sidewalk and bicycle facilities are limited for east-west connections.

Finding #9: Sidewalk Quality: The sidewalk provided along SE McLoughlin Boulevard is in need of maintenance improvements.

Finding #10: Trolley Trail: The Trolley Trail connection is not conspicuous enough for multimodal users.


Finding #11: Permissive Turns at SE Jennings Avenue Intersection: Permissive left turn phasing on SE Jennings Avenue contributes to conflicts between turning vehicles and crossing pedestrians.

RSA Summary

RSA Team Table 1: Road Safety Audit Team

Name Agency Rick Nys, P.E. Clackamas County Scott Mansur, P.E., PTOE DKS Associates Tegan Enloe,P.E. DKS Associates Leah Robbins MAP-IT/TriMet Lewis Wardrip, P.E. City of Portland Kate Riley ODOT Jessica Horning ODOT Jeff Owen TriMet Scott France Clackamas County Public Health Christian Snuffin, P.E. Clackamas County Karen Buehrig Clackamas County

Road Safety Audit Background An interdisciplinary team formed by Clackamas County Traffic Engineering group conducted the Road Safety Audit (RSA) focused on active transportation as part of a Health Impact Assessment (HIA) along SE McLoughlin Boulevard (OR 99E) in the unincorporated community of Jennings Lodge, Oregon in Clackamas County. The Oregon Public Health Division’s HIA provides decision-makers with information about how a project may affect the health of people. The RSA team conducted the field assessment on March 3rd-4th, 2014. Shown in Figure 1, the safety performance evaluation focused on a 0.5 mile segment of OR 99E from MP 9.53 to MP 9.99. The RSA team documented key safety findings through analysis of crash records and a field assessment.

The RSA team identified several potential mitigations to address these findings and reduce the number of crashes and severity along the corridor and at intersections. These improvements are presented in this report and summarized by short and long term

Figure 1: Study Corridor - SE McLoughlin Boulevard


mitigation options.

RSA Process RSAs are conducted by a multidisciplinary team to assess the existing and likely future safety performance of the defined study corridor and suggest potential safety improvement options for all users (motor vehicle, bicyclists, and pedestrians). The goal of an RSA is to help improve roadway safety by identifying improvement strategies to reduce crashes. An RSA is a way to proactively address safety concerns and identify short and long term improvements by applying current safety evaluation techniques and engineering practices. The hope is to reduce the number and severity of all crash types.

Figure 2 shows the eight major steps for conducting an RSA consistent with Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) RSA Guidelines1

. As shown, the first two steps and last two steps are conducted by the facility owner (ODOT). The RSA team is responsible for completing the four steps in between. These steps are described in the following sections.

Figure 2: Road Safety Audit Process

RSA Analysis The RSA team identified and categorized observed safety performance findings based on a qualitative risk scale. For the purposes of this RSA, “risk” is defined as a function of exposure, probability, and consequence.

1 FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines, U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, Publication No. FHWA-SA-06-06.


• Exposure reflects the number of users that could be influenced by the feature.

• Probability reflects the likelihood of a crash influenced by the identified feature.

• The consequence reflects the severity of a crash, if one occurs.

The qualitative risk rating of identified safety findings are categorized as follows:

• Category I indicates the least risk compared to the other observed issues; they are associated with low crash severity and low crash frequency.

• Category II indicates higher risk than some issues and lower risk relative to other observed safety issues.

• Category III indicates potentially the greatest risk compared to the other observed issues; they are associated with higher frequency and higher severity than other issues.


Road Safety Audit Findings After making observations throughout the corridor, the following 11 key findings, their qualitative risk rating, and the suggested short and long term treatments were identified by the RSA team.

Finding #1: Left-Turn and Crossing Movements from Minor Street Approaches

Description of Safety Finding Drivers turning left from the minor street approaches at the two-way stop controlled intersections of SE McLoughlin Boulevard/SE Boardman Avenue and SE McLoughlin Boulevard/SE Hull Avenue illegally use the left turn refuges on SE McLoughlin Boulevard to complete two stage crossings. Figure 4 shows an example of legal two-stage crossings using a crossover median with adequate room. Left turning vehicles completing a two-stage crossing at SE McLoughlin Boulevard from SE Boardman Avenue and SE Hull Avenue have insufficient space for to dwell (particularly at locations with raised medians), creating conflicts with turning vehicles and mainline traffic. In addition, vehicles that dwell illegally in the left turn lane block the visibility of pedestrians waiting to cross in the pedestrian refuge.

Figure 3: Looking North at SE McLoughlin Boulevard/Boardman Avenue


Function Classification Reasoning

Exposure Category II Several vehicles were observed using the left turn refuges on the mainline to make illegal two-stage left turn maneuvers from the minor approaches

Probability Category II High risk of being hit while dwelling.

Consequence Category II High speed collision.

Overall Category II -

Figure 5: Vehicle Illegally Completing Two-Stage Crossing at SE Hull Avenue

Figure 4: Legal Two-Stage Crossings with Median


RSA Team Suggestions Short Term Treatments:

• Consider requesting State Traffic-Roadway Engineer approval for left turn prohibitions and installation of No Left Turn signing at the two minor streets where this behavior was observed.

• Restricting left turns from the minor streets will eliminate at risk behavior observed in the field and may result in a reduction of collisions and injuries.

Long Term Treatments:

• Consider providing increased median width to provide sufficient space for two-stage crossings.

• Consider installation of a positive offset traffic separator on SE McLoughlin Boulevard that prohibits minor street left turn movements at the intersections but allows drivers to make left turns from SE McLoughlin Boulevard. As a result of the traffic separator, the frequency and severity of collisions and injuries are reduced. Figure 7 shows the traffic separator option that would restrict left turn movements from the minor street. This design could be done to maintain the existing pedestrian refuge.

Figure 7: Example of a Traffic Separator that Restricts Left Turn Movements from the Minor Street

Figure 6: "No Left Turn" Sign (MUTCD)


Finding #2: Location of Pedestrian Crossings

Description of Safety Finding Pedestrians were observed crossing SE McLoughlin Boulevard at various undesignated (unmarked) crossing locations along the study corridor, as opposed to using designated (marked) intersection crossings, during the two-day field visit. Figure 9 shows these locations. During peak traffic volume periods there are fewer adequate gaps and vehicles rarely stop or yield for crossing pedestrians. This results in many pedestrians choosing to run across the roadway to utilize short gaps in traffic as they appear. Most crossings that took place at undesignated crossings were from pedestrian traffic generated by bus stops. Even in instances where a designated intersection crossing was within 100 feet of a bus stop location, pedestrians would cross at the stop location during breaks in traffic rather than walk to the designated crossing location.


Exposure Category III Several pedestrians were observed crossing at undesignated locations.

Probability Category II Drivers are less alert for the presence of pedestrians at undesignated locations, which may increase the risk of crashes.

Consequence Category III High speed pedestrian/vehicle collisions may result in severe injuries or fatalities.

Overall Category III -

Figure 8: Pedestrian Crossing at Midblock Location


Figure 9: Locations Designated Pedestrian Crossings and Observed Undesignated Pedestrian Crossings



• Evaluate enhancements to existing pedestrian crossings at SE Boardman Avenue, SE Jennings Avenue, and SE Hull Avenue intersections to promote driver yielding and encourage pedestrians to use these locations such, as Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB), regulatory signs, intersection street lighting and painting of existing pedestrian refuge islands.

• Conduct pedestrian crossing study to evaluate existing crossing patterns and need for improvements.

• Consider implementing educational tools such as positive reinforcement on TriMet bus doors reminding pedestrians to use crosswalk.

• Evaluate relocating TriMet bus stops closer to marked pedestrian crossing locations.

• Consider supporting current midblock crossing demand with enhanced midblock crossings in addition to existing intersection crossings. To be consistent with other County treatments along SE McLoughlin Boulevard, it is recommended that raised refuge islands with the cut through design be constructed.

Figure 11: Refuge Island with Cut through Design Planned for SE McLoughlin Boulevard near SE Vineyard Road North of the Study Vicinity (Clackamas County)

Figure 10: Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon (RRFB)


Finding #3: Visibility of Pedestrian Crossings and Unsignalized Intersections

Description of Safety Finding Designated pedestrian crossings at the two unsignalized intersections within the SE McLoughlin Boulevard study corridor have poor visibility, which may be a contributing factor to decreased driver awareness, low yielding rates by drivers, and fewer crossing opportunities. As a result, pedestrians need to wait for a gap to appear rather than waiting for drivers to stop and let them cross. The cross section is wide, making it difficult for drivers to see and stop for pedestrians. The driving task is also overwhelming with numerous driveways, private signs, etc., which can distract drivers from noticing pedestrians

waiting to cross. In addition, it is difficult for drivers to distinguish minor street approaches at the two-way stop controlled intersections from driveways. Figure 12 shows pedestrians crossing at the SE McLoughlin Boulevard/SE Hull Avenue intersection. As shown, it is difficult for drivers to perceive and identify the intent of crossing pedestrians with the lack of available visual cues.

Pedestrians crossing SE McLoughlin Boulevard are also faced with multiple threats when crossing the facility. This occurs when a vehicle in one of the SE McLoughlin Boulevard lanes stops to wait for

Figure 12: Pedestrians Crossing at Designated Location with Pedestrian Refuge

Figure 13: Pedestrian Waiting for Gap in Traffic


pedestrians to cross and another vehicle in the next lane does not.


Exposure Category III Impacts all pedestrian and bicyclists who use the designated crossings.

Probability Category II Likelihood of pedestrian/vehicle collisions may increase due to lack of visibility.




• Consider providing additional enhancements to increase visibility and driver awareness (e.g. warning signs, crosswalk markings, reflectors, advanced stop bars, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, etc.)". Figure 14 shows MUTCD signage for pedestrian crossings.

• Evaluate upgrading street name signs to meet 2009 MUTCD standards to improve minor street visibility.

• Consider installing intersection ahead and crossing location signs to support visibility and give advanced notice.

• Consider increases in enforcement related to drivers failing to stop for crossing pedestrians.

• Evaluate potential upgrades to existing luminaires along the study corridor, such as higher wattage luminaires or LED upgrades.

• Consider installing new luminaires on existing utility poles.

Short/Long Term Treatments:

• Consider installing new street lighting poles for improved lighting uniformity and to increase pedestrian visibility.

Figure 14: Pedestrian Crossing Signage Examples (MUTCD)

Figure 15: Intersection Ahead and Crosswalk Ahead Sign (MUTCD)


Figure 17: Stop Sign with Embedded LEDs (FHWA)

Finding #4: Rolling Stops

Description of Safety Finding The RSA team observed cars making rolling stops when executing westbound right-turns from SE Boardman Avenue onto SE McLoughlin Boulevard. These appeared to result from drivers wanting to take advantage of gaps in traffic on SE McLoughlin Boulevard. When a gap would appear, multiple vehicles would pull through the stop sign in one gap. To minimize loss of time from stopping, drivers would perform a rolling stop or yielding type movement. This type of behavior increases the likelihood of turning movement and pedestrian crashes at the intersection.


Exposure Category I Impacts a subset of side street users

Probability Category II Increases likelihood of vehicular or pedestrian/vehicle collisions

Consequence Category II Varying level of severity based on speed and users involved

Overall Category I -


• Consider increasing enforcement to change driver behavior and reduce the number of drivers failing to stop.

• Consider installing Stop Ahead signs on the minor streets in advance of the two-way stop controlled intersections along the study corridor for additional emphasis of the primary traffic control device (see Figure 16).

• Insure stop bars on the stop controlled minor approaches are placed properly and per standard. MUTCD guidelines suggest stop lines should have a base of 12 to 24 inches wide and should be placed a minimum of 4 feet in advance of the nearest crosswalk line at controlled intersections.

• Confirm stop signs meet the ODOT plaque size requirement of 36”x36” and replace if needed. Increase in sign size, even with single

lane existing configurations may be necessary.

Figure 16: Example of Signage Enhancements for Stop Controlled Intersections (FHWA)


Figure 18: Vehicle Dealerships using Public Right-of-Way for Display Forcing Pedestrians to use Roadway Shoulder

• Consider installing sign mounted stop beacons or a stop sign with embedded LEDs (see Figure 17).

Finding #5: Gaps and Obstructions in Sidewalk/Walkway

Description of Safety Finding The pedestrian walkway along SE McLoughlin Boulevard is not clearly defined or maintained throughout the study corridor. Wide and frequent asphalt driveways create large conflict areas between pedestrians and vehicles.

Figure 18 shows an example of the lack of definition of the pedestrian walkway along the corridor. Currently, several of the auto dealerships along this segment of highway encroach onto the right shoulder and additional public right-of-way to display vehicles that are for sale. This causes pedestrians to use the street and increases the potential for crashes. One business location within the study corridor has also striped parking stalls within the public right-of-way. In addition, gaps in the sidewalk have resulted in pedestrians walking in the bicycle lane along the east side of SE McLoughlin Boulevard or on the adjacent private properties.

Figure 19 shows where the existing sidewalk connection along the east side SE McLoughlin Boulevard ends, which forces pedestrians to walk along the roadway shoulder. This places them in conflict with bicyclists and near high speed vehicles.

Figure 19: Sidewalk Abruptly Ends


Figure 20: Bollards Can Help Differentiate Right-of-Way and Surrounding Uses (transalt.org)


Exposure Category III Impacts all pedestrians using the study corridor.

Probability Category II Pedestrians can divert to the roadway shoulder, which puts them alongside the vehicle travel lane. However, with no physical separator, there is an increased likelihood of collisions.




• Evaluate enforcement of property parking encroachments within the right-of-way.

• Consider installation of devices (e.g. bollards or other devices) to separate pedestrian and vehicular traffic and to differentiate between public right-of-way and private property (Figure 20).

• Coordinate with owners of Pete’s Lair to construct sidewalks along their business frontage to eliminate a key gap in the pedestrian network.

• Evaluate enhancing crossing at SE Boardman Avenue to encourage pedestrians to the west side of SE McLoughlin Boulevard where sidewalk is present.


• Evaluate implanting access management along SE McLoughlin Boulevard to reduce conflict points between motor vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles.

• Evaluate installing sidewalk at existing gap locations. On the east side of SE McLoughlin Boulevard, sidewalk should be constructed from just south of SE Boardman Avenue 500 feet south to where the sidewalk begins again.


Figure 21: Highly Illuminated Land Uses Make Adjustment to Roadway and Pedestrians Difficult for Drivers

Finding #6: Nighttime Visibility

Description of Safety Issue Lighting levels along SE McLoughlin Boulevard are lower than industry standard for the facility type and use. Furthermore, the surrounding land uses (car dealerships) provide additional lighting to the area, but the contrast between the bright private use area and the darker roadway actually makes it more difficult for a driver’s eyes to adjust to see pedestrians when scanning the road. When the business lights are off, it is very dark along the corridor in general. Both these conditions increase difficulty for drivers to see and respond to pedestrians, increasing the likelihood of a conflict. In addition, private LED signs with changeable messages are distracting to drivers who travel the corridor.

An article posted by Oregonlive on April 24, 2014, cites that the Clackamas County Commissioners have expressed intent to install consistent lighting along SE McLoughlin Boulevard. The article doesn’t cite specific boundaries, but indicates an interest by the community to add illumination along the study corridor.



Exposure Category III Impacts all nighttime roadway users along the corridor.

Probability Category I 25 night time crashes occurred along the study corridor from June 2008 to May 2013.

Consequence Category III High speed pedestrian/vehicle and/or bicycle/vehicle collisions may result in severe injuries or fatalities.



• Review compliance with county and state codes and improve lighting as necessary.

• Consider code changes to address issues with distracting private signs and lights.

Short/Long Term Treatments:

• Evaluate adding or improving street lighting to remove contrast with private illuminated signs and lights.


Finding #7: Corridor Speeds

Description of Safety Finding The posted speed limit along the study corridor of SE McLoughlin Boulevard is 40 mph, which is higher than is typically comfortable for use by pedestrians and bicyclists. In addition, the tendency of drivers to travel above posted speed limits increases the discomfort these users have when using the corridor. The travel speeds make it difficult for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other drivers to distinguish adequate gaps when trying to cross SE McLoughlin Boulevard. In addition, locations with gaps in the sidewalk or encroachments within the public right-of-way cause pedestrians to use the roadway shoulder, with no bugger or separation from traffic.


Exposure Category III The high corridor speeds affect all users of the roadway.

Probability Category I Does not necessarily increase the number of incidents

Consequence Category II Severity of collisions increases with speed of the roadway.


Figure 22: Gaps Difficult for Pedestrians to Judge Due to High Speeds

Figure 23: 40 mph Posted Speed



• Conduct speed zone investigation to determine if the posted speed limit of SE McLoughlin Boulevard can be reduced.

• Consider installing driver speed feedback signs along the corridor (see Figure 24).

• Evaluate adjusting signal timing progression to encourage traveling at the posted speed and discourage exceeding the posted speed.

• Reevaluate the McLoughlin Corridor Plan. Consider implementation of a special transportation area (STA).


• Evaluate reducing travel lane width.

• Consider installing design enhancements such as curb extensions, landscaping, etc. to reduce travel speeds (Figure 25).

Figure 24: Speed Feedback Sign (FHWA)

Figure 25: Curb Extensions Can Help Reduce Speeds (FHWA)


Finding #8: Network Connectivity

Description of Safety Finding Sidewalk and bicycle facilities are limited for east-west connections on SE Boardman Avenue, SE Jennings Avenue, and SE Hull Avenue. Although limited portions of sidewalk are present, there is not enough to create a consistent path or provide necessary connectivity between the surrounding schools and residential areas and SE McLoughlin Boulevard. The result is conflicts between motor vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle users who attempt to occupy the same space. Bicyclists and pedestrians must use the vehicular travel way to make these connections.

Additional east-west connections are made within the study area via the Trolley Trail. Pedestrians and bicyclists access McLoughlin Boulevard via Arista Drive and cross SE McLoughlin Boulevard to access the trail connection just south of SE Jennings Avenue.


Exposure Category I A smaller portion of users within the study area utilize these side approaches.

Probability Category II Shared use of travel lane increases risk of collision.

Consequence Category III High speed pedestrian/vehicle and bike/vehicle collisions may result in severe injuries or fatalities.


RSA Team Suggestions

Short Term Treatments:

• Consider adding shared facility signs and pavement markings

• Consider adding separate bicycle facility along SE Jennings Avenue


• Evaluate constructing sidewalks at key locations

Figure 26: View of West Leg of SE Jennings Avenue


Finding #9: Sidewalk Quality

Description of Safety Finding The sidewalk provided along SE McLoughlin Boulevard experiences some quality issues that are in need of maintenance improvements. These include sidewalks that are narrower than standard, drainage issues/pooling along the corridor, driveway ramps that are not ADA compliant, raised sidewalks, sidewalk breaks, and sidewalk elevations that are too high when compared to surrounding ground level resulting in steep drop offs. These create tripping hazards, slope issues for users with disabilities, and result in pedestrians needing to walk in the roadway shoulder. When pedestrians walk in the roadway shoulder, it increases the likelihood of pedestrian/vehicular collisions. Pedestrians are at a lower risk when they are able to use a sidewalk area because it provides a curb and elevation separation between them and traveling vehicles.

Figure 28: Sidewalk along SE McLoughlin Boulevard

Figure 27: Pedestrians Forced to Use Roadway Shoulder



Exposure Category II Impact is to pedestrians using these specific areas.

Probability Category I Low likelihood of a collision.

Consequence Category I Low severity.



• Evaluate whether current sidewalks meet requirements. Sidewalks are required by Clackamas County code within unincorporated communities and shall be designed per the ODOT Highway Design Manual and AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities. Upgrade sidewalks to applicable ODOT and County standards.

• Consider adding reflective tape along raised sidewalk/breaks in pavement and along extreme sidewalk elevations to improve visibility at nighttime.

• Consider mitigations that alert pedestrians and help them from falling off the sidewalk edge

• Consider sending violation letters to property owners who are maintaining sidewalks

• Consider contacting property owners and requiring upgrades to sidewalks to be ADA compliant


• Improve/replace existing sidewalks that are a hazard to users, are not ADA compliant, and do not meet current design standards.

• Evaluate reconstructing sidewalk at key locations

• Evaluate reconstructing street section per the adopted County Comprehensive Plan cross section


Finding #10: Trolley Trail Wayfinding

Description of Safety Finding The Trolley Trail connection is not obvious enough for multimodal users, which causes users to miss the preferred connection route and make at risk movements (jay-walking or crossing at undesignated locations) to recover their course of travel. The preferred connection is the signalized crossing at the intersection of SE Jennings Ave/SE McLoughlin Boulevard. When pedestrians and cyclists realize they have missed this connection, they make mid-block crossings along SE McLoughlin Boulevard, often accepting minimal gaps in traffic.


Exposure Category I Impacts a small portion of the corridors users.

Probability Category II Missing the crossing is likely limited to those unfamiliar with the area. Commuters and locals should know the intended connection.

Consequence Category II Crossing at the undesignated pedestrian crossing location increases risk of bike or pedestrian and vehicular crashes which tend to be severe.


Figure 29: Trolley Trail Entrance on east side of McLoughlin Boulevard



• Evaluate installing wayfinding and/or bicycle/pedestrian signage and pavement markings. Wayfinding and bicycle/pedestrian guide signs are usually a coordinated system of signs that direct road users, in this case pedestrians and bicyclists, to key civic, cultural, visitor and recreational destinations within a city or a local urbanized or downtown area. They shall not be installed in a position that obstructs the view of other traffic control devices and shall not provide direction to streets and highways. Figure 30 shows examples of community wayfinding signage. Wayfinding signage added should be consistent with other wayfinding signage used along the Trolley Trail.

• Evaluate removing existing signs that block access to trail (see Figure 29)


• Consider installation of a bicycle only signal with an exclusive bicycle phase and diagonal crossing. Figures 31 & 32 show an example of a bicycle only configuration constructed at the intersection of the Springwater Corridor and SE Johnson Creek Blvd in Clackamas County. This treatment would create a designated connection with an exclusive bicycle phase."

Figure 30: Examples of Community Wayfinding Guide Signs (MUTCD)

Figure 31: Exclusive Bike Signal for Diagonal Crossing (Clackamas County)


Figure 32: Diagonal Bike-Only Signal (Clackamas County)


Finding #11: Permissive Turns at SE Jennings Avenue Intersection

Description of Safety Finding The current traffic signal phasing on SE McLoughlin Boulevard includes permissive left turn movements from SE Jennings Ave to the mainline. This type of traffic signal operation can increase conflict between left turning vehicles and pedestrians crossing SE McLoughlin Boulevard. With high traffic volumes using the thru movement, it is difficult for drivers to find a gap to turn and they tend to focus on that task without consideration to possible crossing pedestrians. These conflicts, coupled with limited sight distance from the westbound approach of SE Jennings Avenue, results in turning movement collisions. The crash records supported this recommendation with one pedestrian collision and one bicycle collision that were likely attributed to the permissive left turn phasing.


Exposure Category II Impacts left turning movements and crossing pedestrians at this intersection

Probability Category II High potential of conflict

Consequence Category III Pedestrian collisions may be higher severity. Vehicle collisions may be moderate severity.


Figure 33: Left Turn Maneuver from SE Jennings Avenue to SE McLoughlin Boulevard



• Evaluate leading pedestrian phase for east-west crossings

• Evaluate protected/permissive phasing option. This would require striping modifications at the intersection.

• Evaluate the installation of a Flashing Yellow Arrow (FYA) with pedestrian logic. This pedestrian signal programming prevents the pedestrian walk signal and the FYA from being on at the same time. This “logic” can only be done at locations with advanced signal controllers. For older signal controllers, pedestrian safety can be enhanced at locations operating the FYA by giving pedestrians more lead time to cross the street before the left turns are permitted.


• Evaluate protected left turns to remove decision (gap detection).This would require changing the lane configuration on the south leg of the intersection from the existing left/thru shared lane and right turn only lane to a left turn only and a shared right/thru lane. Figure 34 shows the existing lane configuration of the SE Jennings Avenue approaches at SE McLoughlin Boulevard.

Figure 34: Existing Lane Configuration of SE Jennings Avenue Approaches

Active Transportation Road Safety Audit August 2014 McLoughlin Boulevard (OR 99E) – MP 9.53 to MP 9.99

28

RSA Findings Summary A range of short and long term treatments were identified in this report to address the RSA team’s findings. The observed findings were categorized based on a qualitative risk scale. For the purposes of this RSA, “risk” is defined in the RSA Analysis section as a function of exposure, probability, and consequence. Each function is given a qualitative risk rating of Category I, Category II, and Category III which contribute to an overall risk rating. Table 2 ranks the RSA team findings by order of overall qualitative risk rating.

Table 2: Overall Risk Classification

Team Finding Overall Classification

Short Term Recommendations (1-5 years) Long Term Recommendations (>5 years) Agency Response

Finding #2: Location of Pedestrian Crossings Category III

• Evaluate enhancements to existing pedestrian crossings at SE Boardman Avenue, SE Jennings Avenue, and SE Hull Avenue intersections to promote driver yielding and encourage pedestrians to use these locations such, as Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB), regulatory signs, intersection street lighting and painting of existing pedestrian refuge islands.

• Conduct pedestrian crossing study to evaluate existing crossing patterns and need for improvements.

• Consider implementing educational tools such as positive reinforcement on TriMet bus doors reminding pedestrians to use crosswalk.

• Evaluate relocating TriMet bus stops closer to marked pedestrian crossing locations.

• Consider supporting current midblock crossing demand with enhanced midblock crossings in addition to existing intersection crossings. To be consistent with other County treatments along SE McLoughlin Boulevard, it is recommended that raised refuge islands with the cut through design be constructed.

Finding #3: Visibility of Pedestrian Crossings at Unsignalized locations Category III

• Consider providing additional crossing enhancements to increase visibility and encourage pedestrian use (e.g. warning signs, crosswalk markings, reflectors, advanced stop bars, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, etc.). Figure 14 shows MUTCD signage for pedestrian crossings.

• Evaluate upgrading street name signs to meet 2009 MUTCD standards to improve minor street visibility.

• Consider installing intersection ahead and crossing location signs to support visibility and give advanced notice.

• Consider increases in enforcement related to drivers failing to stop for crossing pedestrians.

• Evaluate need to improve lighting along the study corridor by upgrading existing luminaires to higher wattage luminaires.

• Consider installing new luminaires on existing utility poles.

• Consider installing new street lighting poles for improved lighting uniformity and to increase

pedestrian visibility in dwell areas.


29

Finding #5: Definition of Pedestrian Walkway Category III

• Evaluate enforcement of property parking encroachments within the right-of-way.

• Consider installing bollards or other devices to differentiate vehicle travel way, pedestrian walkways, and private property (Figure 20).

• Evaluate enhancing crossing at SE Boardman Avenue to encourage pedestrians to the west side of SE McLoughlin Boulevard where sidewalk is present

• Evaluate implanting access management along SE McLoughlin Boulevard to reduce conflict points between motor vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles.

• Evaluate installing sidewalk at existing gap locations. On the east side of SE McLoughlin Boulevard, sidewalk should be constructed from just south of SE Boardman Avenue 500 feet south to where the sidewalk begins again.

Finding #6: Nighttime Visibility Category III

• Review compliance with county and state codes and improve lighting as necessary.

• Consider code changes to address issues with distracting private signs and lights.

•

• Evaluate adding or improving street lighting to remove contrast with private illuminated signs and lights.

Finding #1: Left-Turn Crossing Movements Category II

• Consider installing “No Left Turn” signs at the minor street approaches. Restricting left turns from the minor streets will eliminate at risk behavior observed in the field and may result in a reduction of collisions and injuries.

• Consider providing increased median width to provide sufficient space for two-stage crossings.

• Consider installing a traffic separator on SE McLoughlin Boulevard that prohibits minor street left turn movements at the intersections but allows drivers to make left turns from SE McLoughlin Boulevard. As a result of the traffic separator, the frequency and severity of collisions and injuries are reduced. Figure 7 shows the traffic separator option that would restrict left turn movements from the minor street. This design could be done to maintain the existing pedestrian refuge

Finding #7: Corridor Speeds Category II

• Conduct speed zone investigation to determine if the posted speed limit of SE McLoughlin Boulevard can be reduced.

• Consider installing driver speed feedback signs along the corridor (see Figure 24).

• Evaluate adjusting signal timing progression to encourage traveling at the posted speed and discourage exceeding the posted speed.

• Reevaluate the McLoughlin Corridor Plan. Consider implementation of a special transportation area (STA).

• Evaluate reducing travel lane width.

• Consider installing design enhancements such as curb extensions, landscaping, etc. to reduce travel speeds (Figure 25).


30

Finding #8: Network Connectivity Category II • Consider adding shared facility signs and pavement markings

• Consider adding separate bicycle facility along SE Jennings Avenue • Evaluate constructing sidewalks at key

locations

Finding #11: Permissive Turns at SE Jennings Avenue Intersection Category II

• Evaluate leading pedestrian phase for east-west crossings

• Evaluate protected/permissive phasing option

• Evaluate installing a Flashing Yellow Arrow (FYA) with pedestrian logic. This pedestrian signal programming prevents the pedestrian walk signal and the FYA from being on at the same time. This “logic” can only be done at locations with advanced signal controllers. For older signal controllers, pedestrian safety can be enhanced at locations operating the FYA by giving pedestrians more lead time to cross the street before the left turns are permitted.

• Evaluate protected left turns to remove decision (gap detection).

• Evaluate changing the lane configuration on the south leg of the intersection from the existing left/thru shared lane and right turn only lane to a left turn only and a shared right/thru lane. Figure 34 shows the existing lane configuration of the SE Jennings Avenue approaches at SE McLoughlin Boulevard.

Finding #4: Rolling Stops Category I

• Consider increasing enforcement to change driver behavior and reduce the number of drivers failing to stop.

• Consider installing Stop Ahead signs on the minor streets in advance of the two-way stop controlled intersections along the study corridor for additional emphasis of the primary traffic control device (see Figure 16).

• Consider moving stop line markings back at the minor stop controlled streets to encourage vehicles to stop in advance of pedestrian movements. MUTCD guidelines suggest stop lines should have a base of 12 to 24 inches wide and should be placed a minimum of 4 feet in advance of the nearest crosswalk line at controlled intersections. Existing crosswalks at unsignalized intersections within the corridor are not marked, however are suggested by the RSA team in Finding #3.

• Confirm stop signs meet the MUTCD plaque size requirement of 30”x30” for single lane roadways and 36”x36” for multi-lane roadways and replace if needed. Increase in sign size, even with single lane existing configurations may be necessary.

• Consider installing sign mounted stop beacons or a stop sign with embedded LEDs (see Figure 17).


31

Finding #9: Sidewalk Quality Category I

• Evaluate whether current sidewalks meet requirements. Sidewalks are required by Clackamas County code within unincorporated communities and shall be designed per the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Design Guide and AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities.

• Consider adding reflective tape along raised sidewalk/breaks in pavement and along extreme sidewalk elevations to improve visibility at nighttime.

• Evaluate creating delineation to prevent pedestrians from falling off sidewalk edge (See Figure 20).

• Consider sending violation letters to property owners who are maintaining sidewalks

• Consider contacting property owners and requiring upgrades to sidewalks to be ADA compliant

• Evaluate improving sidewalk grade and increasing sidewalk width

• Evaluate reconstructing sidewalk at key locations

• Evaluate reconstructing street section per the adopted County Comprehensive Plan cross section

Finding #10: Trolley Trail Category I

• Evaluate installing wayfinding signage and pavement markings. Wayfinding guide signs are usually a coordinated system of signs that direct road users, in this case pedestrians and bicyclists, to key civic, cultural, visitor and recreational destinations within a city or a local urbanized or downtown area. They shall not be installed in a position that obstructs the view of other traffic control devices and shall not provide direction to streets and highways. Figure 30 shows examples of community wayfinding signage. Wayfinding signage added should be consistent with other wayfinding signage used along the Trolley Trail.

• Evaluate removing existing signs that block access to trail (see Figure 29)

• Consider diagonal crossing for bikes with exclusive bike signal/phase. Figure 31 shows an example of bicycle signal that could be used with the example of the diagonal bike-only signalized crossing constructed along the Springwater Corridor in Clackamas County shown in Figure 32 . This treatment would create a visible, designated connection.

Documents

Active Transportation Road Safety Audit - National Center For Rural Road … · 2016-08-29 · Active Transportation Road Safety Audit . SE McLoughlin Boulevard (OR 99E) – MP 9.53