”

TECNHNICAL MEMORANDUM

 

 

 

Date:                November 30, 2007

 

To:                   Downtown Durango Steering Committee

 

From:               Jeremy R. Klop, AICP

                        Lacy Bell, EIT

Subject:           Main Avenue Crash Record Review     

 

This memorandum summarizes the Main Avenue crash records received from the City of Durango.  The crash records were studied to determine if one pedestrian treatment option is better than the others with regard to improving pedestrian safety related to crash history.  The crash record analysis primarily focused on pedestrian related crashes but all of the records are summarized below.

Summary of Findings

·         26 total crashes were reviewed.  The crashes occurred between November 2004 and July 2007. 

·         18 of the 26 crashes were property damage only (69%).

·         The remaining eight crashes resulted in injuries.  There were no fatalities.

·         Seven of the crashes were very minor as they were related to parked vehicles.

·         Three of the crashes were related to pedestrians.  All occurred at intersections (not mid-block). Two of these resulted in pedestrians being struck and injured.  In addition, there are two rear-end crashes that could have been caused by vehicles stopping for pedestrians, although this was not specified in the reports.  The pedestrian crashes are described in detail in the following section.

·         The locations of the crashes are summarized below:

o        College and Main Avenue – 10 crashes (includes one pedestrian crash)

o        9^th Street and Main Avenue – 9 crashes (includes one pedestrian related crash)

o        8^th Street and Main Avenue – 2 crashes (includes one pedestrian crash)

o        Mid-block 9^th Street – 2 crashes

o        Camino Del Rio and College – 2 crashes

o        Mid-block College – 1 crash

pedestrian related crashes

1.       9^th Street and Main Avenue – Vehicle stopped to make right turn and waited for pedestrian to clear the crosswalk.  While waiting, the vehicle was rear-ended.  The pedestrian was not struck.  The report does not specify which direction the vehicle was traveling or which crosswalk the pedestrian was using. 

2.       8^th Street and Main Avenue – Vehicle was making a left turn from 8^th Street onto Main Avenue when it struck a pedestrian.  The pedestrian was crossing in the crosswalk with the ‘Walk’ signal.

3.       College and Main Avenue – Vehicle was traveling west on College through Main Avenue and a small child ran out in the crosswalk.  The vehicle was not able to stop in time and struck the child.  The driver had a green light and the pedestrian signal was on ‘No Walk’.

conclusions

·         Three of the 26 crashes were related to pedestrians (11%). 

·         Both curb extensions and an all-walk pedestrian phase could be beneficial in reducing crashes similar to the first and second pedestrian crashes if coupled with no turn on red restrictions.  The all-walk pedestrian phase would remove both the right turn and left turn pedestrian conflict by only allowing pedestrians to cross during the all-walk phase.  The curb extensions would minimize the size of the potential conflict area and make the pedestrian more visible while still on the sidewalk.  A smaller conflict zone simplifies decision making for the driver.

·         It is not likely that any of the pedestrian treatments would have prevented the third pedestrian crash.

·         The crash records alone do not provide adequate justification for selecting one of the pedestrian treatments over the others from a safety standpoint.  Either is expected to be a beneficial countermeasure if implemented with a no turn on red restriction.

·         Increased vehicular delay is expected with implementation of turning restrictions.

 

 

 

 

”