Amish Safety Strategic Plan Stakeholder Meeting #1 Tuesday, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

amish safety strategic plan
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Amish Safety Strategic Plan Stakeholder Meeting #1 Tuesday, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Amish Safety Strategic Plan Stakeholder Meeting #1 Tuesday, January 12, 2016 Welcome and Introductions Steering Committee Members ODOT , County Engineer, OSP , Sheriff, Amish Safety Committee Stakeholder Group 6 Townships


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Amish Safety Strategic Plan

Stakeholder Meeting #1 Tuesday, January 12, 2016

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Welcome and Introductions

 Steering Committee Members

 ODOT

, County Engineer, OSP , Sheriff, Amish Safety Committee

 Stakeholder Group

 6 Townships

 Burton, Claridon, Huntsburg, Middlefield, Parkman, Troy

 Burton Village, Police Department  Middlefield Village, Police Department  ODOT District 4  Geauga County Commissioners  NOACA

 Consultant Support Team, LJB, Inc.

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Purpose

Update and Refine 2000 Statewide

Planning Documents

  • Collect and update data
  • Tailor recommendations to specific

locations in Geauga County

  • Estimate
  • Prioritize
  • Identify funding
slide-4
SLIDE 4

Schedule: What To Expect

  • First of 3 Stakeholder Meetings
  • Meeting #1 (Today): Discuss
  • Meeting #2 (3 Months): Review Draft Plan
  • Meeting #3 (6 Weeks): Confirm
  • Consultant to provide technical support
  • Data analysis, number-crunching
  • Collect and organize input for stakeholder review
  • Provide formal documentation
  • Goal: Establish Framework for Future Action
slide-5
SLIDE 5

Today’s Meeting: What To Expect

  • 1. Review of Previous Studies
  • 2. Presentation of Current Study Approach
  • 3. Overview of Potential Treatments
  • 4. Discussion by Group
slide-6
SLIDE 6
  • 1. Previous Studies
slide-7
SLIDE 7

Recommendations from 2000

Link Link

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Potential Treatments (Roadway)

  • Widen shoulders 8’ on resurfacing cycles
  • Make spot improvement of shoulders in areas

where it makes sense

  • Use heavy-duty asphalt for surface courses
  • Re-evaluate speed limits
  • Improve warning signing
  • Clear sight triangles at intersections from

perspective of buggy driver

slide-9
SLIDE 9
slide-10
SLIDE 10

Potential Treatments (Non-Roadway)

  • Develop “driver’s education” course for buggy

drivers (beginning and refresher)

  • Improve visibility of buggies
  • Increase use of reflective tape, strobe lights
  • Sponsor an “Amish Vehicle Safety Week” prior

to Spring and Harvest seasons

  • Media release
  • Emphasize buggy safety equipment
  • Target speed enforcement
  • Develop information and education pieces to

support public outreach

slide-11
SLIDE 11
  • 2. Current Study
slide-12
SLIDE 12
  • 6 Townships, 2 Villages:
  • Burton
  • Claridon
  • Huntsburg
  • Middlefield
  • Troy
  • Parkman
  • Burton Village
  • Middlefield Village
  • All State Routes (59 Miles)
  • Major County Routes (45 Miles)

Study Area

slide-13
SLIDE 13
  • Data Collection (current phase)
  • Crashes
  • Roadway Characteristics
  • Traffic Counts
  • Sight Distance
  • Amish Survey
  • Stakeholder Feedback
  • Begin Prioritization of Locations

and Treatments

  • Objective, Location-based
  • Recommend Implementation Plan

and Funding Sources Amish Strategic Plan Development

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Traffic Volumes (ADT)

slide-15
SLIDE 15

All Crashes (2010 – 2014)

slide-16
SLIDE 16

All Crashes (Summarized)

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Amish Buggy-Related Crashes

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Speed Limits

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Shoulder Widths

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Buggy Counts (AM)

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Buggy Counts (PM)

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Roadway Grades

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Prioritization - Vehicular

  • Crash History
  • Sight Distance Inventory
  • Traffic Volumes (Total and Amish)
  • Speed Limits
  • Available R/W and # of Property Owners
slide-24
SLIDE 24

Prioritization - Pedestrian

  • Pedestrian Crash History
  • School Locations
  • Shoulder Widths
  • Speed Limits
slide-25
SLIDE 25
  • 3. Potential Treatments
slide-26
SLIDE 26

Range of Treatment Options

  • Short-term, low cost
  • Medium-term, medium-cost
  • $100,000 to $500,000
  • Little to no additional RW
  • Implement in 1-5 years
  • Long-term, high-cost
  • Over $1M
  • Requires significant amounts of RW
  • Requires significant effort to plan and fund
slide-27
SLIDE 27

Upcoming Projects

PID Work Type Fiscal Year Route Begin End Cost Description RS-13IJ-16 Resurfacing 2016 CH 13 7.58 9.04 TBD Chardon Windsor Road, Huntsburg Township: SR 528 East to SR 86 in Huntsburg Township RS-15A-16 Resurfacing 2016 CH 15 0.00 1.02 TBD Hale Road, Burton Township: Burton Windsor Road (CH 14) north to Butternut Road (CH 21) RS-21IJ-16 Resurfacing 2016 CH 21 7.33 8.74 TBD Butternut Road, Burton Township: Claridon Troy Road (CH 3) east to Hale Road (CH 15) RS-34A-16 Widen / Resurfacing 2016 CH 34 0.00 0.65 TBD Gingerich Road, Burton Township: SR 168 North to SR 87 RS-37AB-16 Intersection / Resurfacing 2016 CH 37 0.00 2.32 TBD Clay Street, Huntsburg Township: Burton Windsor Road (CH14) north to US 322 RS-65BC-16 Resurfacing 2016 TR 65 0.29 2.09 TBD Whitney Road, Montville Township: SR 86 to Ashtabula County Line RS-130D-16 Resurfacing 2016 TR 130 2.79 4.38 TBD Newcomb Road, Middlefield Township: Shedd Road(TR 126) to Georgia Road (CH 40) RS-205A-16 Resurfacing 2016 TR 205 0.00 0.93 TBD Patch Road, Troy Township: SR 700 East to Jug Street (CH 46) RS-207C-16 Resurfacing 2016 TR 207 1.68 2.16 TBD Nash Road, Troy Township: Mumford Road (CH 24) East to Parkman Township Line RS-211E-16 Resurfacing 2016 TR 211 1.86 3.06 TBD Grove Road, Parkman Township: Township Line East to SR 88 RS-13EH-17 Resurfacing 2017 CH 13 3.56 6.56 TBD Chardon Windsor Road, Claridon & Huntsburg Townships: SR 608 to SR 528 RS-38AD-18 Bridge Repl./ Resurfacing 2018 CH 38 0.00 3.43 TBD Bundysburg Road, Parkman & Middlefield Townships: SR 88 north to Middlefield Township Line RS-3AC-20 Resurfacing 2020 CH 3 0.00 1.46 TBD Claridon Troy Road, Burton Township: Burton Village Line north to Taylor Wells Road (CH 28) RS-37GJ-20 Resurfacing 2020 CH 37 7.33 10.39 TBD Clay Street, Montville & Thompson Townships: US 6 north to SR 166 RS-44AD-20 Resurfacing 2020 CH 44 0.00 5.19 TBD Kile Road, Claridon, Hambden, Huntsburg & Montville Townships: US 322 north to US 6 92603 Chip Seal 2017 88 0.00 2.07 $155,000 Chip seal from Portage County Line to US 422 84299 Resurfacing 2017 168 1.64 7.90 $2,000,000 Nash to Burton SCL, includes slide repair 22221 Resurfacing 2017 422 9.38 18.12 $3,100,000 SR 44 to West Farmington 99643 Resurfacing 2017 528 6.35 11.48 $1,100,000 SR 87 to US 322 23733 Widen 2018 87 19.75 20.70 $2,190,000 Improve shoulders from Hayes to Trumbull County Line (RW needed) (Safety funding) 78343 Intersection 2018 422 17.35 $300,000 At SR 88, improve curb returns (RW needed) (Safety funding) 80963 Intersection 2018 422 13.04 $749,000 Add left turn slots at SR 700 (RW needed) (Safety funding) 99202 Intersection 2018 528 4.39 $860,000 Add left turn slots at SR 608/Old State Road (Safety funding) 99629 Resurfacing 2018 700 2.71 7.75 $1,130,000 US 422 to SR 168 99679 Prev Maint 2019 322 10.40 14.47 $950,000 SR 44 to SR 608 99640 Prev Maint 2019 608 1.24 7.53 $1,460,000 Middlefield Village SCL to US 322

Summary of Upcoming Projects in Geauga County Amish Strategic Safety Plan Vicinity

Projects Led/Funded by Ohio Department of Transportation Projects Led/Funded by Geauga County Engineer's Office

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Upcoming Projects

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Treatments (Roadway)

  • Provide continuous buggy lanes
  • Make spot improvement of shoulders
  • Hills
  • Areas of limited sight distance
  • Areas of limited passing
  • Areas of pedestrian activity
  • Improve sight triangles at intersections from

perspective of buggy driver

  • Clear brush
  • Remove obstructions
  • Realign approach
slide-30
SLIDE 30

Treatments (Roadway)

  • Re-evaluate speed limits
  • Consider lower speeds limits in areas with

elevated Amish activity

  • Provide improved/additional warning signing
  • Re-evaluate positioning of signing
  • Use lime-green for emphasis
  • Consider systems using active detection
  • Consider nighttime visibility
slide-31
SLIDE 31

Treatments (Non-Roadway)

  • Promote awareness about Amish safety
  • For buggies and pedestrians
  • Within Amish community
  • Outside Amish community
  • Amish Safety Week media campaign
  • Develop and distribute educational materials
  • “Tip Cards”
  • Supplemental instruction for local driver’s ed
  • Provide target speed enforcement
  • Deploy changeable message signs for

awareness

slide-32
SLIDE 32
  • 4. Stakeholder Feedback
slide-33
SLIDE 33

Close – What are one or two things that have to happen to make this study a success for you? What are we missing? Suggestions on treatments? Questions on prioritization process? Questions on data collection? Questions on study area?

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Amish Safety Strategic Plan

Brian Blayney – ODOT D12 – Brian.Blayney@dot.ohio.gov – (216) 584-2102 Kevin Miller – LJB Inc. – Kmiller@LJBInc.com – (937) 259-5166