Autonomous Vehicle Consultant

APPLICATIONS OF GIS FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY[1]

Peer Exchange Summary Report


Cambridge, MA


September 14-15, 2011 

http://www.gis.fhwa.dot.gov/documents/GIS_Safety_Proceedings.htm#mas

• Prepared for:
• Office of Planning
• Federal Highway Administration
• U.S. Department of Transportation

• Prepared by:
• Policy, Planning, and Organizational Analysis Center of Innovation
• John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center
• Research and Innovative Technology Administration
• U.S. Department of Transportation

III. PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSION

Massachusetts DOT

Jennifer Inzana and Rick Conard

Although Massachusetts is a small state in size, it experiences a significant volume of vehicle crashes. In 2009, for example, more than 117,700 crashes were reported. The Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) is the legal custodian of crash data for the state. It receives crash reports from police and operators, and then enters or imports crash data into the state’s Crash Data System (CDS).

MassDOT, which maintains the Road Inventory GIS file in its Planning office, is a major user of the RMV’s crash data. Specifically, MassDOT’s Traffic Engineering Office focuses on crash location data and crash characteristics for all roads in the state, the preparation of high crash location reports, and the matching of crash data with the roadway inventory file using GIS tools (MassDOT has ability to edit crash location data in RMV files). Unfortunately, MassDOT has found that most police agencies do not supply crash location coordinates, and those that do, do not often use a consistent, reliable coordinate referencing system.

Screenshot of MassDOT’s interactive crash mapping tool.

Source: MassDOT

For this reason, and because MassDOT needed a way to geocode crash locations, MassDOT hired a consultant to develop a crash geocoding application that could connect to crash data and GIS databases for the state. In use since May 2006 and continually refined since, the crash geocoding application automatically attempts to locate all of the new or changed crash records from the RMV crashes each day. The layers used for the crash geocoding include:

• Road inventory/routes
• Mile markers
• Exits
• Town boundaries
• Navteq roads

The crash locations are georeferenced using information on:

• Intersection and distance from intersection
• Street address number
• Route and mile marker
• Route and exit number
• Learned intersections

Approximately, 84 percent of crashes in 2009 were automatically geocoded. MassDOT staff does have the ability to inspect and/or geocode crash data manually. The application has an interactive screen with a GIS map that allows the user to view and edit the data most relevant to the reported crash location. The user also has the ability to inspect the collision diagram(s) and crash narrative(s), assuming the crash report(s) was submitted electronically. Any location edits and new X, Y coordinates made are “pushed back” to the RMV data file each night. Any edits made to the master record do not alter the original data that the police submitted. The manual approach, however, is labor-intensive and time-consuming.

In any case, MassDOT uses the crash data to analyze the state’s top crash locations, including top pedestrian/vehicle and bicycle/vehicle crash locations. The “top crash” designation is based on crash frequencies and severities, not crash rates. Results of MassDOT’s analyses are used as inputs into a statewide “Top 200” at-grade intersections report2 (latest listing using 2007-2009 data was released in August 2011) and to report on the top five percent of all crash location clusters for the HSIP.

In the future, MassDOT anticipates releasing a web-based version of its internal crash portal that would allow the public to query and view crash data. MassDOT also hopes to continue to improve the accuracy of roadway names in both the road inventory file and in the RMV’s CDS.

Challenges

MassDOT described some of the challenges it faces in analyzing crash data. They include:

•             Excess location data (leading to conflicting locations)
•             Lack of location data
•             Location data entered into incorrect location boxes on form by police office
•             Mismatch or incorrect street names between Road Inventory and crash reports…
•             Lack of crash report submittal or underreporting by police department
•             Lack of data entry of operator reports by RMV
•             Outdated information in RMV data entry road name drop-down “pick lists” …
•             Delay by RMV to officially close a crash file for any given year
•             Difficulty quantifying number of crashes at interchanges and rotar
•             Not data owners, therefore cannot…change roadway file or crash data entry process.

Comments, Questions, and Answers

Question:

How many law enforcement agencies are providing information that goes into the top crash locations report?

Answer:

There are approximately 300 police agencies providing crash information. This includes state police, Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) police, and campus police. Not all MA towns have law enforcement agencies.

 Question:

Are all field reports captured on paper?

Answer:

About two thirds of the reports are still submitted as paper reports. Many local police agencies collect or enter data into their own computerized records management systems, but do not submit their data electronically to the RMV. Instead, their reports are printed and sent to the Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) to get keyed in again. The RMV enters the information from the paper reports into a computerized “master record.” MassDOT has been an advocate for electronic submission of crash data so that police are able to enter these data directly into the statewide crash data system file. MassDOT is also considering the feasibility of a scanning solution for all crash reports, which would enable MassDOT to more easily view and archive the images of all paper crash reports.

Question:

Does MassDOT have a way to audit or check the validity of the locations indicated in crash reports?

Answer:

MassDOT does not systematically check the validity of locations. If any potential problems are noticed when the data are being entered in the master record, then staff will examine the location more closely. Police will often use the most convenient landmark (e.g., the nearest exit) to indicate a crash’s location, when that landmark may not be the true crash location. MassDOT often receives crash data rounded off to the nearest mile, which could result in location errors off by an entire town especially since all of the land area in MA is incorporated into cities and towns. On the other hand, MassDOT can locate all crashes to a city or town, which is at a more fine grained level than perhaps is possible in rural states.

Question:

What is meant by “collision diagrams?”

Answer:

At MassDOT, collision diagrams refer to the drawings that law enforcement officers make in the crash report. MassDOT manually compiles/draws composite crash diagrams from original crash reports for locations that are being more intensively studied to analyze safety issues.

Question:

How much of the crash report data is available to engineering staff?

Answer:

Anyone internally at MassDOT can access the data through a web-based program. When consultants involved in a project request crash data, MassDOT provides them with an Excel file that includes information on all of the crashes in a town or area within a year. The consultants will use the spreadsheet to find the data they seek.

Question:

How is the crash report data being used in-house?

Answer:

MassDOT uses the data for road safety audits. All HSIP projects done now are done through a data-driven process. Project proponents must show that safety is a concern.

However, evaluation has sometimes been problematic due to data quality issues and the time lag associated with when the crash data becomes available. MassDOT currently does not have a micro-forming or electronic imaging process for the paper reports received. Any before-and-after analyses performed require the safety specialist to have the crash report and its narrative in hand. MassDOT has a paper retention deadline after which the crash report is destroyed, causing some data to be eventually lost. Additionally, police departments do not collect and report crash data uniformly. This challenge can be compounded in towns that habitually do not provide crash reports at all, especially when someone tries to evaluate a transportation improvement in those towns. 

Question:

Is there a standard form for police department to enter crash data?

Answer:

Yes. MA has a standard paper form. However, there is no standard for the electronic records management systems used by local police agencies. Towns often want to maintain their autonomy, leading to a number of vendors serving various police departments across the state. MassDOT is not able to dictate or enforce what the various systems do and/or how they validate data. While MassDOT would like to have crash data at the source, the lack of data standards can cause issues for attributes as fundamental as latitude and longitude. Some towns use decimal degrees, others use degrees, minutes and seconds, while others use state plane meters.

Question:

What are some of the challenges in releasing the crash viewer system externally?

Answer:

The primary challenge is a bureaucratic one; IT staffs have some security concerns. Hopefully, in the near future the system will be made available externally.

Question:

Does MassDOT give a confidence scoring when crash locations are geocoded?

Answer:

Yes. Crashes that MassDOT manually locates are given a confidence of 100%. Other scenarios result in different confidence levels. Any crash location with a score of lower than 90% is considered “low confidence.” The low confidence locations get geocoded but are then sent into the queue for a person to review and validate.

Question:

How often does MassDOT produce crash maps or pin maps? Is the annual report the primary output?

Answer:

The annual reports are the primary focus. Few maps are produced. The team does develop a crash clusters map that is available externally without the crash data behind it. When MassDOT does distribute crash data, it is in a flat Excel file and has X and Y coordinates included, thus providing the public the materials to produce maps should it have the desire and necessary GIS to do so.

MEMORANDUM[1]

DATE      January 17, 2012

TO           Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization

FROM    Karl H. Quackenbush, 
CTPS Executive Director

RE          Work Program for: Modeling Support for MassDOT EIS for the I-93/I-95 Interchange Improvements Project North of Boston

Action Required

Review and approval

Proposed Motion

That the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization, upon the recommendation of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, vote to approve the work program for Modeling Support for MassDOT EIS for the I-93/I-95 Interchange Improvements Project North of Boston in the form of the draft dated January 17, 2012.

Project Identification

Unified Planning Work Program Classification

Planning Studies

CTPS Project Number

73216

Clients

Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Highway Division

Project Supervisor: Diane Madden

CTPS Project Supervisors

Principal: Scott Peterson

Manager: Ying Bao

Funding

MassDOT Contract #TBD – Funding Source: State Capital Funds

Impact on MPO Work

The MPO staff has sufficient resources to complete this work in a capable and timely manner. By undertaking this work, the MPO staff will neither delay the completion nor reduce the quality of other work in the UPWP.

Background

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) intends to redesign and reconstruct the I-93/I-95 interchange to improve traffic flow and safety. The I‑93/I-95 interchange lies at the center of a regional highway network serving Massachusetts and the rest of New England. It is also an important facility for the local communities of Woburn, Reading, Stoneham, Wakefield, and neighboring towns. This interchange experiences heavy traffic volumes during peak hours. Delays are common during peak commuting times, with traffic often backed up dangerously from the ramps onto the mainline highways.

The I-93/I-95 interchange ranked among the top five worst crash sites in Massachusetts in terms of safety between 2006 and 2010. This interchange also has had the highest or nearly highest annual crash rates prior to 2006 when compared to other cloverleaf interchanges and all interchanges in Massachusetts. The cloverleaf design creates four weaves that are significantly shorter than weaving distance standards, creating many conflicts between vehicles leaving one loop ramp and those entering the adjacent loop whose paths must cross.

In 2001, the Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS) assisted MassDOT and its consulting team in performing a conceptual design and feasibility study for operational improvements to the I-93/I-95 interchange. That study was suspended by MassDOT and replaced by an in-depth planning study, completed in 2007 that analyzed and recommended several short-term and long-term improvement alternatives, for which CTPS provided travel demand modeling support. As a part of the required National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) processes, and to complete an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Environmental Impact Report (EIR), MassDOT now desires to refine and develop variations of the alternative interchange configurations as well as evaluate the potential for improvements that would enhance mobility and safety for users.[2] A set of alternatives, including interchange improvements, transit service improvements, and other types of improvements, will be modeled and analyzed using the Boston Region MPO’s regional travel demand model set.

The study area is I-95/Route 128 between Exit 35 and Exit 41, I-93 between I-93 between Exit 37C and Exit 36/Montvale Avenue, and the nearby arterials and local roads. Figure 1 (at the end of this work program) shows the study area (not shown in this copy)

Objectives

Using the Boston Region MPO regional travel demand model set, CTPS will support MassDOT and the study team by assessing the existing traffic conditions and travel patterns, and providing modeling results and analyses for use in the evaluation of various proposed construction plans for the I-93/I-95 interchange in the horizon years of 2020 and 2035. CTPS will also provide highway and transit volume forecasts, air quality analyses, and environmental-justice analyses. The results will be summarized in sufficient detail to allow the study team to realistically compare alternatives.

Work Description       

The work required to accomplish the study objectives will be carried out in nine tasks, as described below:

Task 1 Collect Traffic Data

CTPS will compile all available counts relevant to this study, including MassDOT historical traffic volumes, automatic-traffic-recorder (ATR) counts, and turning movement counts already collected by the study team for this study and data from other studies. These counts will be utilized for base-year model calibration to the greatest extent possible.

As part of this task, CTPS will collect auto occupancy counts and vehicle classification counts on I-93 south of this interchange in the AM peak period and will process them for the use of base-year model calibration. CTPS will also coordinate with the study team to investigate the crash data associated with the study area in a recent five-year period.

Products of Task 1

• Tabular summaries of traffic counts in AM and PM peak hours.
• A database consisting of historical accidents and incidents in study area

 Task 2 Conduct License Plate Survey

CTPS will conduct a license plate survey on eight ramps of the I-93/I-95 interchange in the AM peak period. The origin towns and transportation analysis zones (TAZs) of the vehicles using these ramps will be mapped by matching each vehicle license plate to the town where the vehicle is garaged, according to Registry of Motor Vehicles records. The results from this survey will be utilized to analyze the travel patterns estimated by the base-year model.

At the above locations, CTPS staff will station visual equipment for the recording of license plates as vehicles pass these stations.

Products of Task 2

• Tabular summaries of trip origins from license plate survey

Task 3 Perform Base-Year Model Calibration

This task consists of refining the roadway network of the Boston Region MPO regional travel demand model set in the vicinity of the I-93/I-95 interchange study area and along the I-95 and I-93 corridors. CTPS will develop a method to convert the model’s peak-period volumes to peak-hour volumes using the most recent count data. The calibration efforts will focus on comparing peak-hour (AM and PM) and daily volumes to empirical counts for interchanges, connecting links, and up to 20 nearby intersections in the study area.

The peak-period trip flows on the key ramps of the I-93/I-95 interchange will be carefully examined by conducting select link analyses to ensure that trips are coming from the correct TAZs.

Daily ridership on selected transit services in the corridor, including commuter rail and buses, and boardings at selected stations near the study area will be compared to recent counts.

Product of Task 3

• A calibrated multimodal travel demand model set for the study area

Task 4 Develop Land Use Inputs for 2020 and 2035 Scenarios

CTPS will reach out to the communities of Woburn, Reading, Stoneham, and Wakefield to identify proposed developments in the vicinity of the study area. In this task, the proposed developments will be integrated with the Boston Region MPO’s Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) to create the demographic and land use profiles for the 2020 and 2035 no-build scenarios. The reason for choosing year 2020 as an interim year is because it is expected that the construction of this project will start in 2020. CTPS will prepare data for the regional travel demand model set based on the proposed developments and other land use assumptions. The number of jobs and number of residential units generated by the proposed future uses and gross estimates of square footage will be converted into the data format required by the regional model set. CTPS will also consult with the study team and the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) about adjusting the socioeconomic data for the study area. This adjustment will be based on municipal control totals for households, population, and employment from the LRTP. If the data cannot be provided by the towns and city, CTPS staff will produce data using their professional judgment. The resultant land use data will be used as inputs to the Boston Region MPO regional travel demand model set for the horizon years 2020 and 2035.

Products of Task 4

• Refined land use plan at the TAZ level in tabular form for the 2020 and 2035 scenarios in the requested format

Task 5 Model Future-Year No-Build Scenarios for 2020 and 2035

CTPS will develop the 2020 and 2035 no-build scenarios for this study. The no-build scenarios will incorporate the land use assumptions developed in the previous task. CTPS will also update the current LRTP no-build multimodal transportation systems for 2020 and 2035, allowing for limited changes to provide accessibility to the proposed developments. The outputs of the no-build model runs will be used as the basis for analyzing the impacts of the build scenarios described in the next task.

Products of Task 5

• 2020 and 2035 no-build scenarios using the refined land use for study area
• Tabular and graphic summaries of the peak-hour and daily traffic in the 2020 and 2035 no-build scenarios

Task 6 Develop and Model Multiple Build Scenarios and Analyze Results

CTPS will model up to a maximum of six build scenarios for 2020 and for 2035, including a high-occupancy-vehicle (HOV) lane scenario and a transit scenario. The build scenarios will utilize the same land use and demographic assumptions as the no-build scenarios developed in the previous task. The regional model set will be run to produce peak-hour and daily travel forecasts for these alternatives.

The results will be analyzed, comparing traffic conditions under the no-build scenario to conditions with various interchange reconfigurations. The comparisons will be made for peak-hour and daily volumes, daily vehicle-miles traveled (VMT), daily vehicle-hours traveled (VHT), and mode shifts in the study area. CTPS will conduct select link analyses on the I-93 and I-95 mainlines and on the key ramps of the interchange to examine the change of traffic flows and regional travel patterns due to these interchange improvements.

The daily passenger ridership and boardings on the selected transit lines and stations in the study area will be summarized to evaluate the impacts of the interchange improvements and transit service improvements on the transit riders.

 Products of Task 6

• Tabular and graphic summaries comparing each build scenario with the corresponding no-build scenario in terms of traffic volumes, turning movements, VMT, VHT, and transit ridership

Task 7 Perform Air Quality Analyses, Environmental-Justice Analyses, and Health

Impact Analyses

CTPS will work in coordination with the study team on air quality analyses based on the model results. The air quality analysis estimates emissions from cars and trucks of carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10). Emissions from commuter rail diesel locomotives, transit service boats, and MBTA buses and some automobile emissions associated with park-and-ride lots will be estimated off-model.

CTPS will conduct environmental-justice analyses for the proposed interchange improvements. After identifying communities of concern, performance measures—accessibility to health care, higher education, and jobs; mobility and congestion; and environmental impacts—will be used as indicators of benefits and burdens for environmental-justice and non-environmental-justice communities.

CTPS will also conduct health impact analyses and provide data as needed. The health impact analyses will use GIS tools to examine the impacts of the traffic-related exposures of the populations living and/or working in the project study area.

Products of Task 7

• Tabular summaries of emissions in the study area for the air quality study
• Tabular summaries of environmental-justice analysis
• Tabular summaries of health impact analysis

 Task 8 Coordinate with Project Team and Provide Ongoing Technical Assistance

CTPS will work with the project team throughout the study, with an anticipated time frame for modeling involvement of approximately one year. In the event of project delays beyond the control of CTPS, the timing of project deliverables will be consistent with revised schedules set by the MassDOT project team. CTPS staff time and budget estimates reflect attendance at a maximum of seven internal meetings and five project stakeholder meetings. (If necessary, and upon mutual agreement between CTPS and the MassDOT project team, the number of meetings may be revised and/or restructured to be responsive to any changes in the project schedule.) CTPS will fulfill any data requests from the project team when the data are readily available, and will educate the stakeholders about the work included in this scope.

Product of Task 8

• Coordination with the study team, attendance at meetings, and other assistance as needed

Task 9 Produce a Technical Memorandum

A technical memorandum documenting all of the model methodology, assumptions, and results and the analysis findings will be provided to MassDOT and the study team. The technical memorandum will be suitable for general audiences, as appropriate for EIS and EIR documentation.

Product of Task 9

• A technical memorandum documenting the project

Estimated Schedule

It is estimated that this project will be completed approximately 12 months after work commences. The proposed schedule, by task, is shown in Exhibit 1.

Estimated Cost

The total cost of this project is estimated to be $157,000. This includes the cost of 58.6 person-weeks of staff time and overhead at the rate of 96.58 percent. A detailed breakdown of estimated costs is presented in Exhibit 2. (Not shown in this copy)

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), “Our Earth is warming. Earth’s average temperature has risen by 1.4°F over the past century, and is projected to rise another 2 to 11.5°F over the next hundred years. Small changes in the average temperature of the planet can translate to large and potentially dangerous shifts in climate and weather.” The EPA noted, “Over the past century, human activities have released large amounts of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The majority of greenhouse gases come from burning fossil fuels to produce energy, although deforestation, industrial processes, and some agricultural practices also emit gases into the atmosphere.”

Given the magnitude of the climate change problem, the U.S. government is needed as a major problem solver due to the breadth and depth of its resources (i.e., national laboratories, regulatory framework creation, R&D funding, commercialization scale up, and establishing international cooperation). I offer the following thoughts on why the United States and corporations are currently unable to take effective action on climate change:

• Many Republicans believe that the Government is basically the problem and needs to be downsized. This irrational thinking was first started by President Reagan and has persisted to the current day. A downsized government will be incapable of dealing with climate change.
• Fossil fuel corporations contribute vast sums of money to political campaigns in order to gain access, regulatory favors and tax breaks from those that are elected. These corporations have no real interest in promoting renewable energies because those technologies would siphon off money from fossil fuel revenue streams.
• Corporations are incapable of addressing climate change because that problem is essentially long term and requires thinking beyond the current fiscal quarter.
• The U.S. Government is less able to focus on serious problem solving due to the two-year presidential campaign period where almost nothing of substance is accomplished. Recent presidential campaigns are a case in point (e.g., 2011-2012, 2007-2008).
• The U.S. Government should cease spending unspeakable sums on foolish foreign ventures that are doomed to failure (e.g., Afghanistan at the rate of 2$B per week) and divert that money to climate change solutions and renewable energies.
• Our current lifestyle is predicated on ever continuing economic growth, which implies expending increasing amounts of energy, mostly that derived from fossil fuels. That is not sustainable because fossil fuels are not inexhaustible and using them exacerbates climate change.

Recommendations: A national discussion is needed to envision a plan for the post fossil fuel era (i.e., declining oil/gas/coal production after production of these resources has reached their peak levels). The U.S. Department of Energy funded a study on Peak Oil that resulted in the Hirsch Report in 2005. A report on the military implications of Peak Oil was funded by the German Government and published in 2010. These reports could serve as material for public policy discussions. A public relations campaign should be established to penetrate the cocoon of national ignorance that prevails in this country on the subject of energy and the fact that fossil fuels will not last forever.

The U.S. presidential election campaign dragged on for nearly 2 years and raised approximately $2B. Here is a list of energy issues that received almost no discussion:

High gasoline prices

Export of home heating oil

The low level of proved U.S. oil reserves

Potentially unsafe U.S. nuclear power plants

Problem with nuclear waste

Declining U.S. oil production (i.e., Peak Oil)

Escape from crude oil dependency

The futility of crude oil conservation in the United States

U.S. energy policy

Exporting U.S. oil products: Selling America’s energy security

Marginal growth of U.S. wind and solar technologies

Export of home heating oil

U.S. military and clean energy

Shale gas reserves

Energy subsidies

And…saving the best till last, Global warning

Conclusion: Given its current tedious time span and obscene levels of campaign contributions leading to candidate indebtedness (i.e. corruption), the U.S. presidential election process mostly benefits the news media (i.e., “talking heads”), pollsters and advertisers. A national coherent energy policy was not one of the presidential campaign outcomes, this after 2 years and nearly $2B.

Northeastern University
SBIR/STTR Workshop
November 15, 2012

J. H. Everson Consulting

This workshop was a training session for entrepreneurial faculty, students and alumni. Participants  learned how to identify opportunities in the SBIR/STTR space and write competitive proposals for the Department of Defense (DOD) and the National Institute of Health (NIH). My part of the workshop focused on the DOD.

Please contact me for information about similar workshops for your university or company.

Dr. Jeffrey Everson

J. H. Everson Consulting

www.JHEversonConsulting.com

jeff@JHEversonConsulting.com

339-227-0585 (cell)