HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010 Accident Study
City of Oshkosh - Transportation Department
926 Dempsey Trail, Oshkosh, WI 54902 (920) 232-5342 (920)232-5343 fax
MEMORANDUM
TO: Traffic Review Advisory Board
FROM: Christopher Strong, P.E., Director of Transportation
DATE: April 28, 2011
RE: 2010 Accident Study
This memorandum provides a summary review of 2010 accident data. After reviewing overall accident trends in the city, I analyze locations with a higher number of accidents in order to
identify possible countermeasures.
Accident Trends
Table 1 lists the total number of reportable accidents in the City of Oshkosh from 2002 to 2010.
Table 1: Total Number of Accidents, 2002-10
The number of accidents in 2010 was the highest in several years. It is believed that a couple of factors contributed to this. First, there were numerous major construction projects
in the City in 2010 which resulted in significant diversions of traffic, including the construction of the roundabout at Jackson Street and Murdock Avenue, the reconstruction of the
Witzel Avenue and 20th Avenue overpasses at Highway 41, and the reconstruction of Main Street from the Fox River to Irving Avenue. For example, the number of accidents on 9th Avenue
between Oregon Street and Westhaven Drive doubled from 82 in 2009 to 164 in 2010. This likely reflects the diversion of traffic when the Witzel Avenue and 20th Avenue overpasses were
reconstructed.
Second, roundabouts were introduced in the City in 2010, which was a new experience for many drivers and pedestrians.
High Crash Locations
In order to improve traffic safety, it is helpful to identify locations where the rate and frequency of crashes is higher than might be expected. A higher than average crash rate indicates
a location for which some countermeasures might be implemented that could result in an overall safety benefit. A higher than average crash frequency can provide a clearer picture of
potential causes of safety challenges at a location. Used in combination, these measures can help to target safety improvements to those locations where the biggest potential benefit
might be achieved.
Table 2 lists the intersections which had a minimum of four crashes during 2010, along with the number of crashes reported in each year from 2008 through 2010.
Table 2: Accidents by Intersection*
Rank
Traffic Control
Intersection Name
2010 Accidents
2009 Accidents
2008 Accidents
1
Signal/Roundabout
Jackson & Murdock
69
10
12
2
Signal/Roundabout
Washburn & Witzel
21
6
8
3
Traffic Signal
Koeller & 09th
20
7
14
4
Traffic Signal
Hwy 41 & 09th Interchange
18
3
9
5
Traffic Signal
Washburn & 09th
16
7
9
6
Traffic Signal
Oshkosh & Sawyer
11
2
14
7
Traffic Signal
Congress & High
10
7
10
7
Stop-Controlled
Elmwood/Vinland & Murdock
10
9
9
7
Traffic Signal
Oregon & 09th
10
3
8
10
Traffic Signal
Bowen & Murdock
9
8
5
10
Signal/Roundabout
Koeller & Witzel
9
14
14
10
Traffic Signal
Murdock & Wisconsin
9
9
6
10
Traffic Signal
Sawyer & Witzel
9
12
13
10
Traffic Signal
South Park & 20th
9
6
9
15
Traffic Signal
Hwy 44 & Washburn
8
4
4
15
Traffic Signal
Jackson & New York
8
9
7
15
Traffic Signal
Jackson & Pearl
8
3
9
15
Traffic Signal
Ohio & 09th
8
7
7
15
Stop-Controlled
Reichow & 09th
8
1
0
20
Traffic Signal
Algoma & Jackson
7
7
5
20
Traffic Signal
High & Wisconsin
7
4
3
20
Traffic Signal
Hwy 41 & Hwy 44 Interchange
7
7
12
20
Stop-Controlled
Kentucky & Murdock
7
3
5
20
Traffic Signal
Knapp & 09th
7
9
5
20
Traffic Signal
Ohio & South Park
7
6
4
20
Traffic Signal
Oshkosh & Westfield
7
0
5
27
Signal/Roundabout
Algoma & Snell/Westwind
6
4
8
27
Stop-Controlled
Ceape & Court
6
0
0
27
Traffic Signal
Church & Jackson
6
6
8
27
Stop-Controlled
Jackson & Packer
6
4
5
Table 2: Accidents by Intersection* (cont.)
Rank
Traffic Control
Intersection Name
2010 Accidents
2009 Accidents
2008 Accidents
27
Traffic Signal
Oregon & 06th
6
5
9
27
Traffic Signal
Washburn & 20th
6
6
8
27
Stop-Controlled/Signal
Westhaven & 09th
6
3
6
34
Traffic Signal
Algoma & Wisconsin
5
6
6
34
Stop-Controlled
Church & Division
5
4
1
34
Stop-Controlled
Division & Parkway
5
2
0
34
Traffic Signal
Jackson & Snell
5
6
3
34
Traffic Signal
Koeller & Osborn
5
1
2
34
Stop-Controlled
South Park & Venture
5
4
2
34
Traffic Signal
Westhaven & Witzel
5
7
8
41
Traffic Signal
Algoma & Congress
4
4
6
41
Stop-Controlled
Algoma & Division
4
1
1
41
Stop-Controlled
Broad & Ceape
4
1
0
41
Stop-Controlled
Broad & Merritt
4
0
1
41
Stop-Controlled
Broad & Washington (East)
4
3
0
41
Stop-Controlled
Court & Otter
4
1
0
41
Stop-Controlled
Cty Rd A & Snell
4
2
6
41
Traffic Signal
Harrison & Main & New York
4
3
1
41
Stop-Controlled
Harrison & Mt Vernon & Nevada
4
3
1
41
All-Way Stop
Harrison & Murdock
4
7
6
41
Traffic Signal
Irving & Main
4
9
6
41
Stop-Controlled
Jackson & Linwood
4
3
1
41
Stop-Controlled
Jefferson & Lincoln
4
1
0
41
Traffic Signal
Knapp & South Park
4
4
5
41
Traffic Signal
Knapp & Witzel
4
3
5
41
Traffic Signal
Koeller & South Park
4
4
2
41
Stop-Controlled
Linwood & Wisconsin
4
3
0
41
Traffic Signal
Main & Murdock
4
3
8
41
All-Way Stop
New York & Wisconsin
4
4
1
41
Stop-Controlled
Reichow & 05th
4
1
2
41
Stop-Controlled
Sawyer & 09th (West)
4
2
1
41
Stop-Controlled
Sawyer & Taft
4
4
4
41
Stop-Controlled
Westfield & 09th (West)
4
0
1
* - Minimum of four reportable accidents in 2010.
To assist in analysis of high-crash locations, the remainder of this analysis will review crash trends for each type of intersection traffic control.
Roundabouts
The following multi-lane roundabouts opened in the City of Oshkosh in 2010:
Jackson Street and Murdock Avenue (June 25, 2010)
Algoma Boulevard and Fernau Avenue/Lake Butte des Morts Drive (August 18, 2010)
Koeller Street and Witzel Avenue (September 11, 2010)
Washburn Street and Witzel Avenue (September 11, 2010)
These were the first roundabouts to be open within the City. As such, it was expected that there would be a higher initial crash rate as travelers learned how to navigate these safely
and efficiently. As users gained more experience with the roundabouts, it was anticipated that crash frequencies would decline. Oshkosh’s experience with roundabouts to date agrees with
those expectations. As shown in Figure 1, the number of crashes at each roundabout location has tended to decline as the roundabout has been there for a longer period of time.
Figure 1: Number of Roundabout Crashes by Number of Months Since Opening
In addition, it was expected that the severity of crashes at these intersections would be less than those that would be experienced if the intersections were to have remained signalized.
The severity is expected to decrease because the roundabout reduces the number and severity of conflict points, and slows down entering traffic. As shown in Table 3, the average number
of injuries per crash declined for each of the three roundabout locations which were examined. (The
intersection of Algoma and Fernau was not included in this analysis because it is a new intersection.)
Table 3: Crash Frequency and Severity and Roundabout Locations
The following is a narrative summary of the crashes at each of the roundabout locations.
Jackson and Murdock
Of the 66 crashes reported at this intersection in 2010, 35 were precipitated by entering vehicles failing to yield to vehicles already in the roundabout; 19 involved vehicles attempting
to make an improper turn (for example, a left turn from the outside lane in the roundabout); 5 involved lane changes or sideswipe collisions within the circulatory part of the roundabout;
2 involved rear-end collisions in vehicles approaching the roundabout; 2 involved vehicles stopping or yielding within the roundabout; 1 involved a vehicle failing to yield to a bicycle
using the crosswalk; 1 involved a vehicle attempting to turn left through the median; and 1 involved another cause.
Algoma and Fernau
There were only two crashes at this roundabout in 2010, both of which could be traced back to improper lane selection by vehicles entering the roundabout. One involved a southbound vehicle
attempting to change lanes within the circulatory roadway. The other involved a southbound vehicle attempting to make a left turn (onto eastbound Fernau Avenue) from the outside lane,
when it should have been in the inside lane.
Washburn and Witzel
Of the 19 crashes at this location, seven involved a failure to yield by vehicles entering the roundabout, six involved vehicles making an improper turn from within the roundabout, three
involved lane changes within the roundabout, two involved rear-end collisions within the roundabout (in both cases to avoid colliding with a vehicle which entered the roundabout without
yielding), and one involved a rear-end collision on an approach to the roundabout.
Koeller and Witzel
Though this roundabout opened at the same time as the one at Washburn Street and Witzel Avenue, there were noticeably fewer crashes at this location. Of the six crashes, four involved
vehicles attempting to make an improper turn, one involved an entering vehicle failing to yield to traffic in the roundabout, and another involved a lane change within the roundabout.
Summary
The crash frequency and severity at the new roundabouts followed what was expected. The first roundabout experienced a high number of crashes that decreased over time, which likely
indicates that safety improves as people become more familiar with the roundabouts. The initial high crash levels at the first roundabout (Jackson and Murdock) were not seen at the other
locations, which supports the idea that people across the community have been learning how to drive through the roundabouts. The percentage of crashes resulting in injuries has been
lower with the roundabouts than when the intersections were controlled with traffic signals.
It is expected that these trends will continue to be observed in 2011, with a non-increasing number of crashes and a continued lower severity of the crashes which do occur. These trends
may be affected by this year’s reconstruction of the 9th Avenue interchange, which will likely divert some traffic from 9th Avenue to Witzel Avenue. It remains to be seen whether there
will be an increase in crashes due to the increased traffic volumes.
Traffic Signals
Table 4 lists the signalized intersections in the City which had three or more reported crashes in 2010. The table lists the number of crashes reported at each signalized intersection
in 2010 and over the three-year period from 2008-2010. It also shows the crash rate in 2010 for those signalized intersections. The crash rate represents the number of reported crashes
per 1 million vehicles entering the intersection. The expected crash frequency is estimated using a safety performance function (SPF), an algebraic formula used to predict how many crashes
would be expected at an intersection, that is included as a part of the Interactive Highway Safety Design Manual (IHSDM). The final column compares the actual crashes in 2010 with what
would be expected through the use of the SPF. The results are then sorted in descending order by the number of crashes and the 2010 crash rate. To narrow down this list, only those intersections
which had at least 4 crashes in 2010, a crash rate at least 150 percent higher than predicted for 2010, and a crash rate from 2008-2010 that was at least double the predicted crash rate.
These intersections are indicated by italics.
An analysis of each intersection’s crashes follows the table.
Table 4: Summary of High Crash Locations, Signalized Intersections, 2010*
* - Includes crashes that occurred while a signal was in operation. Intersections in which a signal was added or removed in 2010 may have had other crashes.
Koeller and 9th
The unusually high crash rate at this location is likely due to a construction-related increase in traffic volumes. This intersection was not analyzed in further detail because it is
being reconstructed as a roundabout intersection in 2011.
Oshkosh and Sawyer
Nineteen of the 27 accidents which occurred at this intersection from 2008-2010 involved rear-end collisions, which are typically lower-speed crashes and therefore less likely to result
in injuries. The most common crash among these involved a pair of northbound vehicles turning from Sawyer Street to go east onto Oshkosh Avenue, with the trailing vehicle (often an inattentive
driver) colliding with the rear of the lead vehicle.
Oregon and 9th
There were an unusually high number of crashes at this intersection in 2010, but there do not appear to be any major trends in the crash types or causes. Of the 21 crashes reported from
2008-2010, five involved vehicles turning left in front of oncoming traffic, four involved vehicles running red lights, four occurred during flashing signal operations, four involved
rear-end collisions, and three involved turning trucks (due to the intersection’s tight geometry). Of the accidents during flashing operations, none have occurred since March 2009.
Bowen and Murdock
Six of the 22 accidents at this intersection from 2008-10 occurred when the light was operating in flashing mode which, at this intersection, provides flashing amber (yellow) for traffic
on Bowen Street and flashing red for traffic on Murdock Avenue. The crash reports indicated that some crashes were due to motorists failing to respond to the flashing red light, while
others were due to motorists assuming that both directions had a flashing red indication. During the times of day when the accidents occurred, the traffic volumes at this intersection
were low enough that it was appropriate for the signal to operate in flashing mode. There are no sight distance restrictions at this intersection that would make it difficult for Murdock
Avenue traffic to see whether there is an acceptable gap in traffic on Bowen Street. However, department guidelines have suggested that flashing signal operations need to be re-examined
when there is more than one crash in a twelve-month period.
Given that crashes occurred at a variety of times at night, it does not appear that changing the hours of flashing operations would successfully address this issue. One option would
be to switch the amber-red flashing operation to an all-red flashing operation, as was done at two intersections (Main Street and Murdock Avenue, and Oregon Street and South Park Avenue)
last year. Given that the traffic volumes are relatively balanced between the two streets, this may be an appropriate approach.
Another option would be to install vehicle detection at this intersection, and allow the intersection to operate in a semi-actuated or fully actuated mode. Then, the signal could operate
on a non-flashing cycle all night, without causing undue delay when there is little vehicle traffic present. This would require investing in detection equipment at this intersection,
and potentially
an upgraded controller in order to accommodate pedestrian demand (three of the 22 accidents involved bicycles or pedestrians). This would have an additional benefit of helping the signal
to operate more efficiently when a train is blocking Murdock Avenue west of the intersection.
The other common type of crash involved left-turning vehicles turning in front of and failing to yield to oncoming traffic; this accounted for six of the 22 crashes at this intersection.
This frequency is likely due to the “negative offset” at this intersection, which makes it more difficult to see oncoming traffic in the curb lane. Figure 2 compares negative offset,
zero offset and positive offset configurations. The offset refers to how the position of one left turn lane corresponds to the left turn lane from the opposite direction. Positive offset
intersections improve the ability of left-turning vehicles to see conflicting traffic from the opposite direction, whereas negative offset intersections mean that a left-turning vehicle
may have a harder time seeing oncoming vehicles, especially if there is a left-turning vehicle coming from the opposite direction. This phenomenon exists at many other intersections
in the City.
Negative Offset Zero Offset Positive Offset
Figure 2: Pictures of Left-Turn Lane Offsets
The solutions to this problem often involve some difficult decisions. To go toward a zero offset configuration within the existing right-of-way would require elimination of a through
lane, which may have adverse effects on intersection capacity. If it is necessary to preserve both through lanes, then this would require land acquisition and reconstruction of the intersection.
Signal timing changes could be enacted to improve how left-turning vehicles are handled, but these would likely increase delays for other road users.
Sawyer and Witzel
This intersection was been identified as a high-crash location for several consecutive years. Of the 34 crashes which occurred between 2008 and 2010, twelve involved left-turning vehicles
from Witzel Avenue hitting an oncoming vehicle. In some accidents, there was another vehicle in the inner lane which obstructed the left-turning vehicle’s view. In a couple of other
cases, the
vehicles involved in the crash were rushing through the intersection on a yellow signal indication. This is likely a function of this intersection’s negative offset.
Another seven accidents, including four in 2010, involved vehicles running red lights. The police reports indicate that these were typically resulting from driver inattentiveness.
Jackson and New York
The crash trend at this intersection is very clear: 17 of the 24 accidents from 2008-2010 involved a left-turning vehicle on Jackson Street turning in front of oncoming traffic. In at
least half of the cases, the crash report indicated that the view of oncoming traffic was obstructed due to a left-turning vehicle from the opposite direction. The 24 accidents involved
22 injuries, which is higher than the average number of injuries per crash at other intersections.
Jackson Street at this intersection is another case of a negative offset condition. Right-of-way is constrained at this intersection such that it would be very expensive to enact geometric
improvements. Previous analysis of this intersection in 2008 indicated that the creation of a dedicated left-turn lane, which could allow for a zero offset alignment, increased delay
at the intersection. The left-turn volumes are not currently sufficient to justify a protected left-turn at the signal which, even if the volumes were present, would not operate effectively
without a dedicated left-turn lane.
The timing of signals on Jackson Street was changed in 2010 which might potentially improve the availability of gaps for southbound left-turning traffic. However, the construction of
the roundabout at Jackson Street and Murdock Avenue might have adversely affected the availability of gaps for left-turning traffic.
It is worthwhile to examine this intersection in greater detail at a future Board meeting.
Jackson and Pearl
This intersection was identified as a high-crash location in the 2008 accident study. One notable crash type then was southbound vehicles running through a red light. The same trend
was observed in this study, with six of 20 accidents involving this. Recently, a backplate was added to the southbound overhead signal, which should enhance the visibility of this set
of signal heads for southbound traffic and decrease this type of accident in the future.
There were two accidents in 2010 which occurred when the signal was operating in flashing mode, both of which involved westbound motorists. Traffic volumes at the times when the accidents
occurred are low enough that flashing operation is still allowable within the City’s guidelines. It is possible to consider adding vehicle detection for Pearl Avenue traffic, so that
it could operate in semi-actuated mode with fewer (or no) hours of flashing operation. However, the intersection is very close to adjacent signals, so this could significantly affect
signal coordination. It is possible to attempt to add an overhead signal for the westbound traffic, although there are already three sets of signal heads visible to westbound traffic.
Since no accidents occurred during flashing mode at this intersection for 2008 and 2009, it may be better to monitor this intersection to see if this is a new trend or is simply a random
anomaly.
Knapp and 9th
Eight of the 21 accidents at this intersection involved vehicles turning left in front of oncoming traffic, with most of those occurring on 9th Avenue. This is likely the result of the
negative offset of the dedicated left-turn lanes at this intersection. Another six accidents involved vehicles running red lights.
The reconstruction of Knapp Street this year provides the opportunity to help address both of these issues. The roadway will be re-striped so that the left-turn lanes oppose each other,
creating a zero offset condition. Overhead signals will also be implemented to enhance the visibility of signal indications and hopefully decrease red-light running.
Washburn and 20th
Of the 20 accidents at this intersection from 2008 to 2010, six were rear-end accidents, most of which occurred during snow-covered or icy pavement conditions. Five accidents, including
two in 2010, occurred during flashing signal operations. The Transportation Department is currently installing vehicle detection equipment at this intersection which will reduce or eliminate
the amount of time during which the signal is in flashing operations. Eight additional accidents occurred as a result of the negative offset for this intersection’s left turn movements.
Westhaven and Witzel
Nine of 20 crashes from 2008 to 2010 involved left-turning vehicles from Witzel Avenue turning in front of an oncoming vehicle. Many of these occurred when there was a vehicle in the
opposite direction that was in the inner lane, which blocked the left-turning vehicle driver’s ability to see a car in the curb lane. This is due to the negative offset at this intersection.
While a dedicated left-turn signal phase could help with some of these collisions, it is unlikely that this phase would be warranted from a volume perspective. Geometric improvements
as described earlier could offer some potential to improve safety at this intersection.
Another three crashes involved vehicles running red lights, while another four crashes involved rear-end collisions.
All-Way Stop Controlled Intersections
Table 5 lists the all-way stop-controlled intersections in the City which had two or more reported crashes in 2010. The table lists the number of crashes reported at each all-way stop
controlled intersection in 2010 and over the three-year period from 2008-2010. It also shows the crash rate in 2010 for those all-way stop-controlled intersections. The crash rate represents
the number of reported crashes per 1 million vehicles entering the intersection. The expected crash frequency is estimated using a SPF that was developed in research for the State of
Indiana. The final column compares the actual crashes in 2010 with what would be expected through the use of the SPF. The results are then sorted in descending order by the number of
crashes and the 2010 crash rate. As can be seen, only two intersections had more crashes in 2010 than would be predicted by the SPF, and in both cases, these are within the margin of
rounding error. Therefore, no further analysis was conducted on these intersections.
Table 5: Summary of High Crash Locations, All-Way Stop Control, 2010
Stop-Controlled Intersections
Table 6 lists the stop-controlled intersections (stop signs control one, not both, streets) in the City which had three or more reported crashes in 2010. The table lists the number of
crashes reported at each all-way stop controlled intersection in 2010 and over the three-year period from 2008-2010. It also shows the crash rate in 2010 for those stop-controlled intersections.
The expected crash frequency is estimated using a SPF from the IHSDM. The final column compares the actual crashes in 2010 with what would be expected through the use of the SPF. The
results are then sorted in descending order by the number of crashes and the 2010 crash rate. To narrow down this list, only those intersections which had at least 4 crashes in 2010,
a crash rate at least 150 percent higher than predicted for 2010, and a crash rate from 2008-2010 that was at least double the predicted crash rate. These intersections are indicated
by italics.
Table 6: Summary of High Crash Locations, Partial Stop Control, 2010
Elmwood/Vinland & Murdock
For each of the last three years, this intersection has had at least nine reported crashes. Of the 28 crashes that were observed in 2008-10, nine involved a northbound vehicle on Elmwood
Avenue which tried to cross Murdock Avenue and failed to see a vehicle traveling in either direction on Murdock Avenue. There do not appear to be any unusual issues with sight distance
at this location that would explain this. The likelihood of this type of crash may be reduced with a
traffic signal. Eight crashes have involved left-turning traffic from Murdock Avenue turning in front of a vehicle traveling straight from the opposite direction. These are due to a
negative offset configuration at this intersection, as described earlier.
This intersection has been discussed by the Board on numerous occasions, particularly related to requests for a signal. Requests for signalization at this location have typically been
tied to concerns about safety, for left-turning traffic from Murdock Avenue, as well as traffic on Elmwood Avenue or Vinland Street which is trying to cross Murdock Avenue. The Board
has consistently recommended against a signal at this intersection, since it does not satisfy signal warrants. In addition, a traffic signal would likely not affect the frequency of
the crashes involving vehicles turning left from Murdock Avenue unless there was preferential treatment for left-turn movements.
Another possibility at this intersection is to explore a “road diet” lane re-configuration. Under this concept, the existing four-lane cross section would be converted to a three-lane
cross-section with a two-way left turn lane. This would change the existing negative offset shown in Figure 2 to a zero offset. This type of concept works better if it is evaluated on
a corridor-level basis. Additional analysis would be required to see whether this might be feasible on Murdock Avenue.
Kentucky & Murdock
This intersection also includes the driveway off of Murdock Avenue to the Fair Acres shopping center. Of the seven crashes in 2010, four involved vehicles leaving the Fair Acres parking
lot. It appears that none of the accidents in 2010 relate to the construction or opening of the roundabout at Jackson Street and Murdock Avenue.
The estimated crash rate at this intersection may be inaccurate due to a lack of traffic volume data. If traffic volumes are underestimated, this would result in an overstatement of
the actual crash rate.
Potential safety improvements at this intersection could include a traffic signal, which is likely not warranted, or a driveway closure, which would introduce a range of additional issues.
For now, it will remain to be seen whether the number of crashes in 2010 was an aberration.
Ceape & Court
This intersection seldom has crashes, so the occurrence of six crashes in 2010 was quite unusual. All six crashes involved an eastbound vehicle that apparently assumed that Ceape Avenue
was a two-way street, and proceeded to turn left in front of another eastbound vehicle. Five of the crashes occurred while Main Street was closed for reconstruction, so it is likely
that most of these crashes involved people who were not familiar with the street. It is expected that the crashes at this location will return to more typical levels in 2011.
Jackson & Packer
Nine of the 15 accidents which occurred at this intersection from 2008-10 involved Packer Avenue traffic which attempted to cross or enter Jackson Street and collided with Jackson Street
traffic. The frequency of this type of collision could be reduced with a traffic signal. However, a
signal would only be warranted if there were at least five such crashes in a given year, and if there was enough traffic on Packer Avenue. Previous traffic counts have indicated that
about two-thirds of the westbound Packer Avenue traffic is turning right, so it is doubtful that a signal would be warranted at this location in the near future.
Division & Parkway
All but one of the seven crashes from 2008 to 2010 involved a vehicle on Parkway Avenue which failed to yield right-of-way to traffic on Division Street. In some but not all cases, the
vehicle on Parkway Avenue claimed to have not seen the stop sign. Sight triangles on the Parkway Avenue approaches are adequate, so drivers should be able to see the stop sign as well
as traffic on Division Street.
South Park & Venture
This T-intersection serves a number of retail and commercial businesses. Venture Drive has a STOP sign where it intersects with South Park Avenue. This intersection has not normally
been identified as a high-crash location until last year’s analysis, which did not identify any predominant crash type. In contrast, all five of the crashes in 2010 involved vehicles
from Venture Drive trying to turn onto South Park Avenue. It is possible that the increased crash frequency may correlate with additional traffic on South Park Avenue due to the 2010
construction season. However, as was true with the intersection of Kentucky Street and Murdock Avenue, a lack of traffic volume information here may mean that the crash rate here has
not been estimated accurately.
Church & Division
There was a higher than usual number of crashes at this intersection in 2010, perhaps in part due to changed traffic patterns while Main Street was under reconstruction. Of the ten crashes
which occurred here from 2008-2010, four involved vehicles on Division Street failing to yield right-of-way to Church Avenue traffic, two involved westbound vehicles turning left in
front of eastbound vehicles, and two involved eastbound vehicles passing each other.
The Board in February reviewed a citizen request that this intersection be signalized. With the addition of the 2010 data, the crash patterns here still do not suggest that a signal
would be warranted at this location.
Jefferson & Lincoln
There was an unusual increase in the number of crashes at this intersection, with all of the crashes exhibiting the same pattern: a westbound vehicle that collided with a southbound
vehicle. The stop sign is clearly visible on this approach, and sight distance to the north is adequate. Only one crash report indicated that the westbound driver’s view may have been
partially obstructed by a legally parked car north of the intersection.
Reichow & 5th
All of the seven accidents which occurred between 2008 and 2010 at this intersection involved vehicles on Reichow Street failing to properly observe the stop sign. Some crash reports
indicated that the motorist on Reichow Street did not see the stop sign. The signage was recently
upgraded, and flags were added to the signs to further enhance visibility.
Broad & Washington (East)
This intersection is just east of the Canadian Northern rail line. Of the seven accidents at this intersection in 2009 and 2010, four involved northbound vehicles which struck traffic
on Washington Avenue. Some of the northbound motorists claimed that they could not see the Washington Avenue traffic; however, sight distance at this intersection appears to be adequate.
Linwood & Wisconsin
All seven accidents from 2008-2010 were precipitated by an eastbound vehicle on Linwood Avenue failing to observe right-of-way. In two cases, the eastbound vehicle attempted to stop,
but failed to do so when the pavement was snow-covered. In two other cases, the eastbound vehicle stopped, but subsequently collided with a vehicle on Wisconsin Street. In three other
cases, the eastbound vehicle did not appear to stop. In most of these accidents, it seems that the eastbound stop sign was visible, even if motorists did not properly obey it. Sight
distance appears to be adequate. Flags have been added to the stop signs to enhance visibility, similar to what was discussed with Reichow and 5th.
Harrison & Mt. Vernon & Nevada
Of the eight crashes at this five-legged intersection between 2008 and 2010, six involved traffic on Nevada Avenue entering the intersection without yielding to Harrison Street traffic.
In most cases, the Nevada Avenue traffic was reported to have made a complete stop before entering the intersection. Sight distances appear to be adequate.
Yield-Controlled Intersections
Table 7 lists the yield-controlled intersections in the City which had two or more reported crashes in 2010. The table lists the number of crashes reported at each yield-controlled intersection
in 2010 and over the three-year period from 2008-2010. No traffic count data are available for these locations, and staff is not aware of any SPF that could be used to assess the relative
safety of these locations. A review of crashes at these locations did not turn up any unusual factors (i.e. limited sight distance) that would require further investigation.
Table 7: Summary of High Crash Locations, Yield Control, 2010
Uncontrolled Intersections
Only one uncontrolled intersection had more than one crash in 2010: the intersection of Division Street and Scott Avenue, which had two. Both accidents were one-car collisions.