Page 1 of 59

VIRGINIA

2018 ANNUAL REPORT
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 59

Table of Contents

Table of Contents.................................................................................................................................................... 2

Disclaimer............................................................................................................................................................... 3

Executive Summary................................................................................................................................................ 4

Introduction............................................................................................................................................................. 6

Program Structure ................................................................................................................................................... 6

Program Administration...................................................................................................................................... 6

Program Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 9

Project Implementation......................................................................................................................................... 18

Funds Programmed ........................................................................................................................................... 18

General Listing of Projects............................................................................................................................... 20

Safety Performance............................................................................................................................................... 27

General Highway Safety Trends....................................................................................................................... 27

Safety Performance Targets.............................................................................................................................. 40

Applicability of Special Rules.......................................................................................................................... 42

Evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................. 44

Program Effectiveness...................................................................................................................................... 44

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements ...................................................................... 44

Year 2017.............................................................................................................................................................. 44

Project Effectiveness......................................................................................................................................... 49

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 54
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 59

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence 

23 U.S.C. 148(h)(4) states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or 

data compiled or collected for any purpose relating to this section [HSIP], 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 identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, schedules, 

lists, or other data.” 

23 U.S.C. 409 states “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.” 
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 59

Executive Summary

This Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 annual report to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) describes the Virginia 

Department of Transportation (VDOT)'s strategic use of FAST-ACT funding of the Commonwealth's Highway 

Safety Improvement Programs (HSIP) for the period July 2017 to June 2018.

FAST-ACT continued the HSIP as a core program under Sections 148 and 130 of US Code Title 23. Under 

Section 154, surface transportation program and national highway performance program funds are transferred 

to be used for HSIP eligible proposals because Virginia does not have all the required components in its Open 

Container legislation. As a result, VDOT's HSIP is composed of the following sub-programs utilizing the above 

mentioned federal funding sources (23 USC Sections):

A) Highway Safety Projects (HSP): Section 148

B) Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Projects (BPSP): Section 148

C) Penalty Transfer-Open Container (OC) Projects: Section 154

D) High Risk Rural Roads (HRRR): Section 148

A link to the HSIP guidelines, safety proposal submission documentation, and resource information is provided 

on-line at http://www.virginiadot.org/business/ted_app_pro.asp

Note: Under ACTION: 23 U.S.C. 148(g) (1) Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 High Risk Rural Roads (HRRR) Special 

Rules. Virginia was identified as experiencing an increase in its fatality rate on rural roads over the most recent 

two-year period. Therefore, the State must obligate a specific amount of funds toward HRRR safety projects in 

the next fiscal year.

Virginia's Strategic Highway Safety Plan

In 2016, VDOT completed a multi-agency and disciplinary update of the Commonwealth's Strategic Highway 

Safety Plan (SHSP). In 2017, FHWA's Virginia Division approved Virginia's SHSP. VDOT continues to 

coordinate with its safety partners and implement the SHSP engineering strategies to drive investment 

decisions to improve safety and reduce deaths and injuries for this reporting period.

Many safety partners are working towards reducing the number and severity of vehicle crashes on the 

Commonwealth's highways. Virginia's HSIP is structured to focus on infrastructure safety emphasis areas that 

may be improved with low cost minimal environmental impact (no right of way) engineering countermeasures, 

namely:

A) Intersection geometry and traffic control

B) Roadway and roadside improvements

C) Bicycle and pedestrian risk reductions

New FY2018 Projects

The Commonwealth of Virginia is committed to developing and maintaining a safe, multimodal transportation 

system. The VDOT district offices spending targets are based on level FHWA funding in future years. Districts 

considered systemic, corridor and intersection improvements for all users on priority routes and intersections 
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 59

identified in the crash data. Districts submitted safety proposals and these proposals included high crash 

locations, along roadway segments, and systemic highway and pedestrian risk locations. New HSIP project 

planning and development processes for HSIP program have been developed in consultation with FHWA given 

the FAST ACT guidelines, final ruling (policy) and funding provided. As such, adding new safety projects to 

Virginia's Six-Year Improvement Program (SYIP) and Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) will 

only be considered if Virginia's Highway Safety Improvement Program Implementation Guidelines are followed.

The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) emphasizes data-driven decision-making and desires to 

improve safety and safety data. From this desire, VDOT implemented a

comprehensive set of State-specific Safety Performance Functions (SPFs) covering 98 percent of its Statemaintained roadway locations. The impetus for VDOT developing their own SPFs and analytical tools arose 

from the decision that AASHTOWare Safety AnalystTM did not meet their needs. VDOT developed Statespecific SPFs using historical crash, traffic, and roadway inventory data. SPF developers worked closely with 

engineers throughout the development process to see whether each SPF was implementable for all types of 

improvements (spot, corridor, and systemic). To date, VDOT has developed 24 SPFs covering a majority of 

roadway facilities, including two-lane roads, intersections, and freeways/multi-lane highways.

After performing network screening, the VDOT central office identifies the top 100 sections and top 100 miles 

of segments with the largest Potential for Safety Improvement (PSI). The list is then sent to the district 

engineers who determine which sites to prioritize based on practical experience and knowledge of their area. 

VDOT has noted several benefits of Virginia’s SPF implementation effort. For example, the advanced datadriven process leads to better use of funds, benefits for both systemic and spot improvements are quantifiable, 

VDOT can better manage public concerns, and VDOT can compare locations to prioritize projects. The SPF 

development team conducts training (including an annual “roadshow” to all nine districts) and hosts webinars 

to ensure district engineers understand the methodology and how to use the SPFs. VDOT has not mandated 

the use of SPFs and PSIs by the districts because the process of introducing a new methodology takes time, 

but the district engineers know it is the preferred method for network screening.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 59

Introduction

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose of achieving 

a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 

924.15, States are required to report annually on the progress being made to advance HSIP implementation and 

evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent with the HSIP Reporting Guidance dated December 

29, 2016 and consists of five sections: program structure, progress in implementing highway safety 

improvement projects, progress in achieving safety outcomes and performance targets, effectiveness of the 

improvements and compliance assessment.

Program Structure

Program Administration

Describe the general structure of the HSIP in the State. 

The primary objective of the HSIP is to identify and improve locations where there is a high concentration, or 

risk, of vehicle crashes that results in deaths, or injuries. Each year, HSIP staff fulfills transportation safety 

planning requirements by producing listings of high severe crash intersections and highway sections on VDOT 

maintained roadways and distribute them to VDOT Traffic Engineering staff. Safety proposals are not limited to 

the locations that are identified by VDOT staff.

HSIP staff conducts network screening for the engineering emphasis areas in Virginia's Strategic Highway 

Safety Plan (SHSP). Priority SHSP emphasis area maps are generated to rank intersection-related crash 

locations and routes with the most severe roadway departure crashes in each district. VDOT districts use the 

safety data mapping information with local knowledge to initiate engineering study of the locations identified 

with the most severe crashes. Detailed crash analysis and site evaluation is typically conducted through a 

documented engineering study or Road Safety Assessment (RSA). 

VDOT also utilizes the systemic approach methodology which provides a consistent framework for addressing 

risk using the HSIP process by focusing on identifying system-wide roadway safety concerns and strategies to 

address these concerns. Applying a systemic approach to addressing safety is beneficial to proactively 

address widespread safety issues and cost-effectively minimize crash potential. Rather than focus on specific 

crash locations, a systemic approach targets consistent crash trends and common risk factors in crashes 

throughout the roadway network. 

Once projects have been programmed and funds have been allocated, HSIP staff monitors the projects from 

scoping through construction to the final voucher. The project monitoring process consists of tracking changes 

that occur to the following functions: advertisement dates, funding authorization dates, engineer’s estimates 

and expenditures. Two activities are monitored and measured to ensure that the HSIP projects are being 

delivered on time and on budget. HSIP project schedules and cost both directly affect the Federal Strategy and 

VDOT’s ability to meet their Obligation Authority for the HSIP Program.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Engineering
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 59

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

In Virginia the Traffic Engineering Division falls under the direction of the Chief Engineer who is responsible for 

all Engineering and Operations Management for VDOT.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

Central Office via Statewide Competitive Application Process

Formula via Districts/Regions

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

HSIP funding target amounts based on the combination of each District’s proportion of Equivalent Property 

Damage Only values and rates. The Equivalent Property Damage Only (EPDO) method allows crash severities 

to be weighted to give more weight to serious crashes. EPDO weights are determined by FHWA’s estimated 

costs to society of the various crash severity levels. The highway safety funding target formula for each VDOT 

District based on the EPDO method is the following:

% Funds Per District = .5*(% of Statewide EPDO Crashes + % of Statewide EPDO Crash Rate)

Describe how local and tribal roads are addressed as part of HSIP.

Local roads safety proposals are required to follow the same prioritization method as VDOT proposals. The 

proposed project must fit into their safety prioritization and they are encouraged to develop systemic safety 

projects. In order to assist localities with their prioritization of strong safety proposals VDOT publishes the 

known locations of all reportable crashes which have occurred within the last 12 months. It should be data 

driven as well as have the support of the local governing body. Localities submit their proposals through the 

VDOT Smart-Portal intake system the same as VDOT submittals. The local VDOT District Office will include 

the localities proposals as part of the district submittal for review. As part of the submittal process workflow 

VDOT district offices must validate all safety proposals submitted by the localities before submitting for 

evaluation. The locality is responsible for providing all supporting documentation pertaining to the proposed 

safety improvement application including but not limited to crash history and local support for the proposal. 

Local roads account for approximately 40 percent of all crashes and 20 percent of all fatal and serious injury 

crashes on Virginia’s highways. Therefore, local safety projects are targeted to received up to 20 percent of 

Virginia’s HSIP funds for implementation and completion of their safety projects. VDOT has been providing the 

state match to these safety projects for the past several years.

Identify which internal partners (e.g., State departments of transportation (DOTs) Bureaus, Divisions) 

are involved with HSIP planning.

Traffic Engineering/Safety

Design

Planning

Operations

Districts/Regions

Local Aid Programs Office/Division
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 59

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe coordination with internal partners.

VDOT provides statewide data analysis to develop the Potential for Safety Improvements (PSI) locations for all 

state routes. This information is provided to the Districts and local agencies through avenues such as webinars 

and the Virginiadot.org website Safety Portal. VDOT also utilizes its Strategically Targeted Affordable Roadway 

Solutions (STARS) Program managed by the Transportation Mobility and Planning Division to address 

congestion and safety concerns throughout the state. 

The HSIP projects are programmed through Virginia's Six-Year Improvement Program. Projects were 

programmed with the appropriate FY allocations needed for a specific phase to be delivered.

Central Office Traffic Engineering HSIP staff shared information with each District regarding FAST-ACT 

requirements, the SHSP Emphasis Areas, and all related safety data. Each district is provided target spending 

that is align with fatality and serious injuries. As part of this outreach program, HSIP staff presented the target 

of allocating ten percent to bike and pedestrian safety projects. At least ninety percent of HSIP Section 148 of 

the previously unallocated future funds would be programmed on existing and new highway safety projects.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

Local Government Agency 

FHWA

Other-District/Design/Pe and Planning Staff

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe coordination with external partners.

Traffic Engineering presented the HSIP to local government representatives at the Local Programs Workshop 

held in Virginia Beach in 2017. The focus of the workshop was to communicate with our external stakeholders 

on the various tools of the HSIP. Review on how to apply for the appropriate safety funds. We provided 

information on clarification of eligibility, the application and project selection process through the SMART-Portal 

and the availability of funding resources for their proposals. Using the Tableau software VDOT HSIP team 

developed both a Crash Analysis Tool and HSIP Project Tracking Tool that is available to our external partners 

for developing their HSIP safety proposals. These tools are available to our external partners once they have 

requested an OutsideVDOT logon from any HSIP Team member. The main role of our external partners such 

as MPOs, and PDCs are the coordination with local government to set or established obtainable target that 

coincide with the Department's SHSP goal. To achieve this objective VDOT has held a series of meetings and 

webinars with local government entities as well as with the MPOs.

Have any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

No
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 59

Are there any other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

Describe other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate. 

Pedestrian fatalities in Virginia have increased by 19 percent since 2012, according to the 2017 Virginia 

Department of Transportation (VDOT) Pedestrian Crash Assessment: Analysis of Pedestrian Crashes 

Occurring Between 2012-2016. In response to the continuing increase in pedestrian fatality rates, the VDOT 

Traffic Engineering Division completed an inaugural statewide Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (PSAP) in early 

2018. This report documents the process VDOT followed to complete the PSAP, considers ways to improve 

pedestrian safety, and ultimately reduce pedestrian fatalities throughout the Commonwealth. VDOT worked 

with a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders to identify and address pedestrian safety concerns through a 

data driven approach. This approach included identifying and addressing locations with a history of pedestrian 

safety crashes along with proactively addressing pedestrian crash risk through the identification of priority 

corridors. This report complements other pedestrian safety efforts in the state, including the Virginia 2017–

2021 Strategic Highway Safety Plan, VDOT Highway Safety Improvement Program, SMART SCALE, 

Transportation Alternatives Program, and Safe Routes to School program. Local, regional, and state agencies 

should review this report to identify and implement potential counter-measures, update design policies, and 

supplement other state pedestrian safety initiatives.

Program Methodology

Does the State have an HSIP manual or similar that clearly describes HSIP planning, implementation 

and evaluation processes?

Yes

To upload a copy of the State processes, attach files below.

File Name:

FINAL VDOT HSIP Implementation Manual.pdf

FINAL VDOT RSA Manual.pdf

VDOT_Crash_Data_Manual_Nov2017.pdf

Final_Pedestrian_Study.pdf

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

Intersection

Bicycle Safety

Roadway Departure

Pedestrian Safety

HRRR

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 59

Program: Bicycle Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2003 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Other-Risk Reduction 

Traffic 

Volume 

Functional classification 

Roadside features 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Other-Available facilities

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Cost Effectiveness : 10
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 59

Other-Community Support and comprehensive network plan : 15

Other-Problem identification inc crashes and risk : 30

Other-Solution study and selection to mitigate risk : 45

Total Relative Weight : 100

Program: HRRR 

Date of Program Methodology: 8/22/2018 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only Traffic 

Volume Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 59

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C : 1

Cost Effectiveness : 3

Other-Targeted K+A crashes : 2

Program: Intersection 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2003 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Traffic 

Volume 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Crash rate

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 59

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C : 1

Available funding : 3

Other-Targeted K+A crashes/people : 2

Program: Pedestrian Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2003 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Other-Risk Reduction 

Traffic 

Volume 

Population 

Median width 

Functional classification 

Roadside features 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Other-Community Support and Missing sidewalk 

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 59

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Cost Effectiveness : 10

Other-Communitysupport, benefit-need and pedestrian accessability : 15

Other-Problem identification inc crashes and risk : 30

Other-Solution proposed for improvement to mitigate risk : 45

Total Relative Weight : 100

Program: Roadway Departure 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2010 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Traffic 

Volume 

Median width 

Horizontal curvature 

Functional classification 

Roadside features 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 59

Crash frequency

Crash rate

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C : 1

Available funding : 3

Other-Targeted K+A crashes and people : 2

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 30

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic improvements? Please check all that 

apply.

Rumble Strips

Pavement/Shoulder Widening

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal

Horizontal curve signs

High friction surface treatment

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 59

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? [Check all that apply]

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Crash data analysis

SHSP/Local road safety plan

Data-driven safety analysis tools (HSM, CMF Clearinghouse, SafetyAnalyst, usRAP)

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal

High friction surface treatment

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

Describe how the State HSIP considers connected vehicles and ITS technologies. 

To maximize the benefit of the new technology available. VDOT launched several Advance Traffic Signal 

Systems (ATS) safety projects in all nine of its construction districts. These projects consisted of advance 

communication technology for the traffic controllers as well hardware and software to manage pre-emption and 

conflict monitors. The ITS technology was deployed for Flashing Yellow Arrow (FYA) technology to ensure that 

the agency was using the most current technology on its safety projects.

Does the State use the Highway Safety Manual to support HSIP efforts?

Yes

Please describe how the State uses the HSM to support HSIP efforts.

VDOT emphasizes data-driven decision-making and makes safety data improvement a focus of continuous 

effort and long-term planning. From this desire, VDOT implemented a comprehensive set of State-specific 

Safety Performance Functions (SPFs) covering 98 percent of its State-maintained roadway locations. VDOT 

developed State-specific SPFs using five-years of historical crash, traffic, and roadway inventory data. To date, 

VDOT has developed 24 SPFs covering a majority of roadway facilities , including two-lane roads, 

intersections, and freeways/multi-lane highways. For each facility/location type, VDOT developed two separate 

SPFs: one for total crashes and the other for fatal + Injury crashes. Actual crash frequency for any specific 

location can be compared to the SPF for locations of that type to see if, for the level of traffic volume, the 

location has more than the predicted number of crashes.

VDOT incorporates the comparisons of actual- to predicted-crash frequencies in is network screening and 

provides district engineers with a list of top 100 intersections and top 100 miles of roadway segments drawn 

from those locations that are above the SPF. VDOT uses the most recent years three years of crash data to 

calculate the Potential for Safety Improvements (PSI). The PSI is the expected number of crashes for the site 

minus the predicted number of crashes based on the SPF for that facility type. As with SPFs, VDOT calculates 
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 59

the PSI for total crashes and fatal + injury crashes. A site with a positive PSI warrants examination and those 

with highest PSI values should be considered high priority.

Have any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

No

Are there any other aspects of the HSIP methodology on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

Describe other aspects of the HSIP methodology on which the State would like to elaborate.

VDOT's Traffic Engineering Central Office administers the HSIP program and provides the VDOT District 

Offices with Targeted Safety Needs (TSN) intersections and segments based in the Highway Safety Manual 

(HSM) network screening methodology. VDOT districts uses this information with local knowledge to initiate 

further engineering studies of the locations and scope projects to be submitted for inclusion in its Six-Year 

Program.

Depending on the scale and complexity of the projects, VDOT district offices conduct Roadway Safety 

Assessments (RSA) as determined by the VDOT District Traffic Engineer. To assist the District Traffic 

Engineer with conducting these RSAs, VDOT's Highway Safety Program developed Virginia specific guidelines 

for performing these assessments. 

The Equivalent Property Damage Only (EPDO) method allows crash severities to be weighted to give more 

weight to serious crashes. EPDO weights are determined by FHWA’s estimated costs to society of the various 

crash severity levels. For the purpose of the funding formula, only injury crashes will be included in the EPDO 

formula calculation. The highway safety funding target formula for each VDOT District based on the EPDO 

method is the following:

% Funds Per District = .5*(% of Statewide EPDO Crashes + % of Statewide EPDO Crash Rate)

Rural areas tend to have higher severe crash rates while urban areas tend to have more total crashes and, 

therefore, a greater proportion of overall crashes. By including equal credit for the proportion of total EPDO 

crashes and crash rate in the formula, this method balances the distinct challenges of urban and rural Districts.

HSIP projects in Virginia are included as part of the Integrated Six-Year Program (iSYP). As part of the iSYP 

these projects are reviewed and discussions are held with each district after project submittals for re-prioritizing 

and scheduling compliance.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 59

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The reporting period is the Virginia Fiscal Year which is July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018.

Enter the programmed and obligated funding for each applicable funding category.

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $38,400,998 $30,458,832 79.32%

HRRR Special Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

$4,459,774 $4,459,774 100%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154) $12,811,307 $13,686,860 106.83%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 164) $0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP purposes) (23 

U.S.C. 130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $55,672,079 $48,605,466 87.31%

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

How much funding is programmed to local (non-state owned and operated) or tribal safety projects?

$1,596,427

How much funding is obligated to local or tribal safety projects?

$1,596,427

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

How much funding is programmed to non-infrastructure safety projects?

$3,104,999

How much funding is obligated to non-infrastructure safety projects?
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 59

$3,104,999

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

How much funding was transferred in to the HSIP from other core program areas during the reporting 

period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

0%

How much funding was transferred out of the HSIP to other core program areas during the reporting 

period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

0%

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Discuss impediments to obligating HSIP funds and plans to overcome this challenge in the future.

Having realistic and attainable project schedules may be considered as an impediment to obligating HSIP 

funds. Though there has been an increase in the ability of local administered projects to meet its obligation 

requirements, this remains an area where the department has concern. As well as a few Engineering Districts 

have struggled in the project development of HSIP funded safety projects. These results in some projects 

missing let dates and HSIP funds not being used for those projects in the planned years. To overcome these 

project delivery issues, the Highway Safety Section is working with the District Traffic Engineers to track the 

milestones of HSIP projects to ensure design project managers stay on schedule to deliver good safety 

improvement projects on time. A District's past project delivery track record may also become part of a 

weighted criteria for HSIP set aside project selection.

VDOT will continue to work through its district offices to provide guidance and support in the project 

development of these safety projects.

Does the State want to elaborate on any other aspects of it’s progress in implementing HSIP projects?

No
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 59

General Listing of Projects

List the projects obligated using HSIP funds for the reporting period.

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

87905 Alignment Vertical alignment or 

elevation change

0.701 Miles $477307 $2924072 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Major 

Collector

1,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

103503 Interchange 

design

Interchange design - other .033 Miles $350000 $2400811 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Major 

Collector

2,700 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

104189 Alignment Horizontal curve 

realignment

.257 Miles $4640518 $6630544 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

8,600 50 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

104337 Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add 

acceleration lane

.4 Miles $1817119 $3040802 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Other 19,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

104679 Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - no control 

to roundabout

1 Locations $2984364 $2987545 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,600 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

105597 Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Install sidewalk .11 Miles $712992 $920000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Other 48,000 50 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Identify corridors 

and locations 

having 

concentrations of 

pedestrian activity 

or the potential for 

c

106240 Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Crosswalk 11 Locations $1817236 $1817237 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Other 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians Identify corridors 

and locations 

having 

concentrations of 

pedestrian activity 

or the potential for 

c
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 59

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

106942 Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control -

modifications to 

roundabout

1 Locations $1900000 $950000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

3,900 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

107014 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or 

other

1.86 Miles $1690344 $1690344 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Other 11,000 60 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

107019 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or 

other

$2065100 $3000000 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure Upgrade and 

improve shoulders 

to provide 

pavement, 

particularly on the 

Primary System, 

where possibl

107051 Roadway Roadway - other 8.07 Miles $4177593 $4205000 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

5,200 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

107053 Roadway Roadway - other 2.34 Miles $1681569 $1681569 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

15,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

107072 Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

18.95 Numbers $3028647 $3028647 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Other 6,100 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

107096 Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

$700000 $700000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

107097 Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

backplates with 

retroreflective borders

$1211068 $2940000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

107098 Roadway Pavement surface - high 

friction surface

$1000000 $1000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 59

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

107123 Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

10 Miles $1385004 $1385004 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Other 4,900 60 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

107769 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

8.8 Miles $2850000 $6758000 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

Urban Principal

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

153,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Other Improve user 

comprehension of 

and compliance 

with intersection 

and interchange 

traffic control 

devic

108077 Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians 

and bicyclists

$82000 $1065000 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

Other 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Bicyclists Identify corridors 

and locations 

having 

concentrations of 

bicycle activity or 

the potential for 

cras

108793 Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

$410000 $410000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Other 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

108896 Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians 

and bicyclists

.5 Miles $250000 $7000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

8,700 35 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Pedestrians Identify corridors 

and locations 

having 

concentrations of 

pedestrian activity 

or the potential for 

c

109558 Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

2 Locations $21251 $21251 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

16,000 35 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

109562 Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

2 Locations $22561 $22561 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

23,000 35 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 59

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

109566 Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

1 Locations $10749 $10749 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

40,000 45 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

109567 Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

1 Locations $10749 $10749 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

7,000 25 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

109569 Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

2 Locations $22690 $22690 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

22,000 30 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

109590 Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Install new crosswalk .217 Miles $576774 $391590 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,100 35 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Pedestrians Identify corridors 

and locations 

having 

concentrations of 

pedestrian activity 

or the potential for 

c

110108 Shoulder 

treatments

Pave existing shoulders 19.5 Miles $4700640 $1580522 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,700 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane Departure Maintain 

shoulders to 

reduce debris and 

edge drop offs. 

Use beveled 

pavement 

wedges, 

particularly on

110829 Roadway Pavement surface - high 

friction surface

1.9 Miles $776137 $1110000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Interstate

33,000 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

111832 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning 

signs and flashers

$500000 $500000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

111976 Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

23.24 Miles $126079 $126079 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

8,200 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane Departure Maintain 

shoulders to 

reduce debris and 

edge drop offs. 

Use beveled 

pavement 
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 59

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

wedges, 

particularly on

111977 Roadway Rumble strips - center 21.52 Miles $64625 $100000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,500 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane Departure Maintain 

shoulders to 

reduce debris and 

edge drop offs. 

Use beveled 

pavement 

wedges, 

particularly on

112104 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning 

signs and flashers

$320000 $320000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Other 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

likelihood of 

vehicles leaving 

the travel lane(s) 

at locations with a 

history of or highe

112286 Non-infrastructure Data/traffic records $1200000 $1200000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Other 0 State Highway 

Agency

Other Data Support HSIP 

Program 

implementation 

and planning 

activities. 

112302 Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

Numbers $498185 $460000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

16,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Other The areas of focus 

include improving 

roadway safety 

devices, speed 

enforcement, 

educating our 

commun

112819 Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

2 Locations $700000 $700000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Other 13,000 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

107795 Interchange 

design

Extend existing lane on 

ramp

.115 Miles $2319992 $650000 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 154)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

141,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

113596 Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - modify 

left-turn lane offset

.1 Miles $70000 $70000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

26,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

frequency and 

severity of 

crashes at 

intersection and 

interchanges 

through geometric 

desi

113229 Non-infrastructure Road safety audits $310500 $310500 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Other To provide 

engineering for 

safety 

countermeasures 
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 59

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

at high crash 

locations or for 

systemic 

treatments

113230 Non-infrastructure Road safety audits $298856 $298857 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Other To provide 

engineering for 

safety 

countermeasures 

at high crash 

locations or for 

systemic 

treatments

113231 Non-infrastructure Road safety audits $326025 $326025 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Other To provide 

engineering for 

safety 

countermeasures 

at high crash 

locations or for 

systemic 

treatments

113232 Non-infrastructure Road safety audits $287213 $287213 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Other To provide 

engineering for 

safety 

countermeasures 

at high crash 

locations or for 

systemic 

treatments

113233 Non-infrastructure Road safety audits $376481 $376482 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Other To provide 

engineering for 

safety 

countermeasures 

at high crash 

locations or for 

systemic 

treatments

113234 Non-infrastructure Road safety audits $430819 $430819 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Other To provide 

engineering for 

safety 

countermeasures 

at high crash 

locations or for 

systemic 

treatments

113235 Non-infrastructure Road safety audits $372600 $372600 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Other To provide 

engineering for 

safety 

countermeasures 

at high crash 

locations or for 

systemic 

treatments

113236 Non-infrastructure Road safety audits $302738 $302738 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Other To provide 

engineering for 

safety 

countermeasures 

at high crash 
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 59

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

locations or for 

systemic 

treatments

113237 Non-infrastructure Road safety audits $399767 $399767 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Other To provide 

engineering for 

safety 

countermeasures 

at high crash 

locations or for 

systemic 

treatments

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 59

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

Present data showing the general highway safety trends in the State for the past five years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Fatalities 760 740 767 775 741 700 753 761 843

Serious Injuries 12,690 11,649 10,897 10,114 8,643 7,597 8,011 8,075 7,634

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 0.990 0.960 1.000 1.010 0.960 0.910 0.940 0.900 0.990

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

16.590 15.060 14.230 13.200 11.200 9.840 10.050 9.580 8.950

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

80 89 79 111 86 102 95 131 131

Number of non-motorized 

serious injuries

595 640 666 771 629 628 635 635 620
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 59

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 59

0.84

0.86

0.88

0.9

0.92

0.94

0.96

0.98

1

1.02

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 59

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe fatality data source.

FARS

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

To the maximum extent possible, present this data by functional classification and ownership.

Year 2017

Functional Classification Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Interstate

47.6 356.6 0.61 4.52

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other

74.2 566.6 1.24 9.43

Rural Minor Arterial 97.4 684 1.93 13.68

Rural Minor Collector 18.6 160.8 2.37 20.85

Rural Major Collector 119.4 922.8 2.94 22.61

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 59

Functional Classification Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Local Road or Street 58.8 583.6 2.19 21.62

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Interstate

60 765.4 0.34 4.43

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

13.2 123.8 0.31 3.03

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other

79 1,104.4 0.67 9.04

Urban Minor Arterial 75.4 1,073.4 0.78 10.9

Urban Minor Collector 42.4 523.6 0.99 11.96

Urban Major Collector

Urban Local Road or Street 13 215 0.47 8.16
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 59

Year 2017

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

State Highway Agency 613.8 5,711.4 0.99 9.19

County Highway Agency 6.4 86.2 0.43 5.57

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

1.6 21.6 0.23 3.56

City of Municipal Highway 

Agency

99.8 1,482 0.59 9.03

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

0.2 0.8 0.04 0.12

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency 0 0.6 0 0.42

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority 0.8 6.4 0.25 2.43

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, University)

Indian Tribe Nation
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 59

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Functional Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 59

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 59

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 59

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 59

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Roadway Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 59

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 59

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 59

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which the State would like to 

elaborate?

No

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2019 Targets * 

Number of Fatalities 840.0 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

Five year average = 808 Follows annual average trend line. These annual and 5 year 

average targets represent an increase that began in 2017 and is anticipated in 2018 and 

the next year. 

Number of Serious Injuries 7689.0 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 59

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

Five year average = 7808 Follows annual average trend line which represents a 

leveling of serious injuries in Virginia. Although there was a reduction between 2016 

and 2017, the large reductions experienced as the SHSP objectives were developed 

have not been sustained. 

Fatality Rate 0.940 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

Five year average = 0.944 Follows annual average trend line for fatalities with a 1.5 

percent anticipated growth in VMT. This represents a 5 percent reduction in the annual 

values from 2017 but about a 1.5 percent anticipated increase in the 5 year average 

values in 2019. 

Serious Injury Rate 8.750 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

Five year average = 9.16 Follows annual average trend line for serious injuries with a 

1.5 percent growth in VMT. The represents 2.2 and 5.3 percent change from the 2017 

annual and 5 year average values, respectively. 

Total Number of Non-Motorized 

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 714.0 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

Five year average = 720 Given the large (57%) increase in 2016 pedestrian fatalities, 

that appears to be consistent in 2017 and 2018, our 2019 annual and 5 year average 

targets are essentially the same as 2017 values. 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The strategies and action steps in each of these areas will help Virginia achieve the SHSP TZD vision and the 

mission “To save lives and reduce motor vehicle crashes and injuries through a data-driven strategic approach 

that uses enforcement, education, engineering, and emergency response after strategies.” The updated plan’s 

goal is to reduce fatalities and serious injuries by half by 2030, which is consistent with the National TZD 

Strategy on Highway Safety.

To achieve the goal, Virginia has also established measurable fatality and serious injury objectives over the 

next five years. These objectives will be tracked each year to determine if the SHSP remains on target to 

achieve the recommended reductions. For 2017 we experienced an 11 percent increase in fatalities, so the 

SHSP objective for the frequency and rates were not met. Serious injuries declined by almost 6 percent in 

2017, but had been level in 2016, so the frequency and rate objectives were also not met. Since the SHSP is a 

living document, the actions in the plan can be updated if it is not meeting the stated objective.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 59

Describe efforts to coordinate with other stakeholders (e.g. MPOs, SHSO) to establish safety performance 

targets. 

VDOT HSIP staff began coordination with the DMV HSO early in the process timeline to set the 2019 annual 

target following 23 CFR 490. With the SHSP update the safety stakeholders at VDOT, DMV, VSP, VDH and 

others set five year objectives for the five required safety performance measures. Based on the percent 

reductions for the 2021 objectives and another year VDOT and DMV met in early 2018 to review changes in 

the annual and 3 and 5 year average safety performance trend lines. The agreed 5 year average based 2019 

targets were consistent with the SHSP objective reductions. Presentation of the 2019 targets to the 

Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) for approval resulted in concurrence that the 5 year average 

trends to 2019 were not attainable based on year to date frequencies. Revised 2019 targets based on the 

annual trend lines (reported above) were agreed to by NHTSA Region 3 and approved by the CTB in July 

2018. During the summer of 2017 VDOT decided to begin holding quarterly MPO coordination meeting for all 

FHWA (and optional FTA) performance measures and target setting. These continued as the MPO safety 

target setting Excel workbook was refined and finalized for submitting their 2018 targets. A SharePoint site was 

developed and introduced for obtaining the workbook and submitting the targets. The workbook update

required refining the FARS geospatial data with Virginia fatality data to provide fatalities that occurred in 

Virginia for the multi-state MPOs. VDOT also provided a submittal letter template for MPOs to indicate if they 

will support the state or choose their own targets. All MPOs submittals were received by the February 27, 2018 

deadline. An Excel summary workbook of all of the MPO submittals was prepared and is available to FHWA 

upon request. Three (of 15) of the larger MPOs decided to set independent targets from the state percent 

reductions.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Applicability of Special Rules

Does the HRRR special rule apply to the State for this reporting period? 

Yes

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Provide the number of older driver and pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries 65 years of age and 

older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Fatalities

97 113 127 102 122 126 159

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Serious Injuries

701 741 690 617 643 665 665
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 59

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

# of Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Years

Number of Older Driver and Pedestrian Fatalities and Serious Injuries by 

Year.

Fatalities Serious Injuries
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 59

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

Change in fatalities and serious injuries

Benefit/Cost Ratio

Lives saved

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Based on the measures of effectiveness selected previously, describe the results of the State's program 

level evaluations.

VDOT is programming more and more Systemic Safety Projects and increasing its efforts to track the 

effectiveness of these safety projects. Because of the nature of systemic projects to be deployed in several 

locations over a common jurisdiction it has proven to be difficult to gather accurate data on the overall 

effectiveness of these improvements. However, starting in 2018 VDOT has engaged in effort to developed a 

project tracking tool specifically designed to enable the agency to track these projects .As more and more 

systemic projects are being programmed the Highway Safety Staff will be able to identify the location and 

effect of these projects.

What other indicators of success does the State use to demonstrate effectiveness and success of the 

Highway Safety Improvement Program?

# miles improved by HSIP

More systemic programs

HSIP Obligations

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any significant programmatic changes that have occurred since the last reporting period? 

No

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2017
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 59

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted 

Crash Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality 

Rate

(per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious 

Injury Rate

(per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Other 1 Other 2 Other 3

Roadway Departure 382.6 3,018.2 0.47 3.63 0 0 0

Intersections 236.2 3,055.2 0.29 3.57 0 0 0

Pedestrians 98 476.8 0.12 0.49 0 0 0

Bicyclists 11 150 0.01 0.18 0 0 0
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 59

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Roadway Departure Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Roadway Departure Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 59

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the reporting period?

No

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Roadway Departure Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Roadway Departure Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 48 of 59

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 59

Project Effectiveness

Provide the following information for previously implemented projects that the State evaluated this reporting period. 

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

96370 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

9.00 6.00 1.00 1.00 10.00 7.00 1.7

104667 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Shoulder 

treatments

Pave existing shoulders 2.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 7.00 4.00 0.1

104669 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

21.00 6.00 2.00 3.00 6.00 6.00 29.00 15.00 24.1

104670 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Roadway Roadway - other 16.00 7.00 2.00 6.00 3.00 10.00 8.00 34.00 18.00 1.6

96371 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

14.00 16.00 1.00 1.00 6.00 3.00 21.00 20.00 1.1

96372 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

11.00 2.00 1.00 5.00 3.00 17.00 5.00 3.3

104685 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection flashers - add 

advance intersection warning 

sign-mounted

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.9

104705 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Access 

management

Median crossover - unspecified 4.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 8.00 3.00 10.3

10600 Rural Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

3.00 6.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 8.00 9.00 1.3

104686 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 1.00 8.00 6.00 1.3

86494 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

17.00 11.00 1.00 2.00 6.00 3.00 24.00 16.00 9.8

89900 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 6.00 2.00 1.5

93601 Urban Local Road 

or Street

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

9.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 6.00 12.00 11.00 .8

93614 Urban Local Road 

or Street

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

3.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 6.00 7.00 1.1
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 50 of 59

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

95633 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add left-turn 

lane

7.00 4.00 1.00 4.00 7.00 9.00 2.1

95885 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Lighting Intersection lighting 5.00 7.00 1.00 6.00 6.00 13.00 11.4

96900 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

1.00 5.00 2.00 13.00 3.00 18.00 98.5

96901 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

2.00 1.00 7.00 2.00 9.00 3.00 3.7

96902 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

5.00 4.00 1.00 4.00 8.00 9.00 13.00 4.7

96904 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 2.6

96905 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

5.00 5.00 10.00 4.00 15.00 9.00 4.6

96906 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

4.00 8.00 1.00 2.00 6.00 9.00 11.00 19.00 11.9

96907 Urban Minor 

Collector

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

1.00 7.00 3.00 8.00 3.00 1.8

96908 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

6.00 7.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 11.00 9.00 .7

97010 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

8.00 14.00 2.00 7.00 11.00 17.00 25.00 7.3

97011 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

6.00 7.00 1.00 1.00 9.00 7.00 17.00 14.00 1.3

97054 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

7.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 12.00 12.00 17.00 4.3

98279 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

8.00 7.00 6.00 2.00 14.00 9.00 3.2

98566 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - extend existing 

left-turn lane

34.00 19.00 2.00 1.00 15.00 19.00 51.00 39.00 4.7

100540 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

realignment to increase cross 

street offset

19.00 4.00 7.00 4.00 26.00 8.00 1.0

71465 Rural Major 

Collector

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add left-turn 

lane

9.00 6.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 14.00 7.00 .4
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 51 of 59

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

86333 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - extend existing 

left-turn lane

6.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 9.00 9.00 0

98283 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 .5

98368 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - modify left-turn 

lane offset

5.00 2.00 7.00 0

98370 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

8.00 10.00 1.00 17.00 8.00 26.00 18.00 2.1

98375 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1.00 1.00 0

98377 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Roadside Curb or curb and gutter 6.00 3.00 2.00 8.00 3.00 .7

98378 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

6.00 10.00 1.00 6.00 5.00 13.00 15.00 1.2

98379 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - modify left-turn 

lane offset

2.00 4.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 6.00 .3

98380 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

4.00 6.00 14.00 8.00 18.00 14.00 1.4

98438 Urban Local Road 

or Street

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

4.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 6.00 7.00 .7

100641 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

12.00 2.00 10.00 2.00 22.00 4.00 1.9

100700 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

36.00 26.00 1.00 23.00 10.00 60.00 36.00 10

103436 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

3.00 2.00 9.00 9.00 12.00 11.00 .6

104002 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Roadside Barrier - cable 26.00 21.00 2.00 47.00 2.00 .9

98281 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

10.00 7.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 14.00 10.00 1.9

19060 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Alignment Horizontal and vertical 

alignment

2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 04

81253 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

4.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 7.00 3.00 1.5

89959 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

36.00 20.00 4.00 1.00 4.00 12.00 44.00 33.00 5.7
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 52 of 59

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY IMPROVEMENT TYPE PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

91849 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - modify 

signal mounting (spanwire to 

mast arm)

11.00 14.00 1.00 1.00 8.00 6.00 20.00 21.00 .5

93395 Urban Local Road 

or Street

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1.00 1.00 0

93933 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

31.00 45.00 1.00 1.00 18.00 14.00 50.00 60.00 8.1

96209 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection flashers - add 

overhead (continuous)

4.00 12.00 1.00 2.00 5.00 14.00 33.8

98381 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

19.00 20.00 5.00 11.00 24.00 31.00 4.3

98382 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Access 

management

Median crossover - directional 

crossover

1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 .7

98383 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

10.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 6.00 1.00 17.00 6.00 1.9

67529 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Alignment Horizontal and vertical 

alignment

1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 .4

93465 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Alignment Horizontal curve realignment 2.00 1.00 4.00 6.00 1.00 .4

98384 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

1.00 6.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 13.00 11.6

100658 Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

modernization/replacement

11.00 11.00 4.00 12.00 15.00 23.00 7

102708 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

196.00 229.00 3.00 3.00 17.00 15.00 81.00 89.00 297.00 336.00 3

102954 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

37.00 63.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 9.00 15.00 22.00 58.00 95.00 2.1

102955 Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

31.00 31.00 1.00 5.00 3.00 8.00 14.00 45.00 48.00 .1

103478 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other 3.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 .4

105360 Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Roadway Roadway - other 6.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 6.00 2.00 13.00 8.00 21.3

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any other aspects of the overall HSIP effectiveness on which the State would like to elaborate?
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 53 of 59

No
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 54 of 59

Compliance Assessment

What date was the State’s current SHSP approved by the Governor or designated State representative?

 05/12/2017

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2017 To: 2021

When does the State anticipate completing it’s next SHSP update?

 2021

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Provide the current status (percent complete) of MIRE fundamental data elements collection efforts using the table below. 

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

ROADWAY SEGMENT

Segment Identifier (12) 100 0 100 0 100 0

Route Number (8) 100 0

Route/Street Name (9) 100 0

Federal Aid/Route Type 

(21)

100 0

Rural/Urban Designation 

(20)

100 0 100 0

Surface Type (23) 100 0 100 0

Begin Point Segment 

Descriptor (10)

100 0 100 0 100 0

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

100 0 100 0 100 0

Segment Length (13) 100 0

Direction of Inventory (18) 100 0

Functional Class (19) 100 0 100 0 100 0

Median Type (54) 100 0

Access Control (22) 100 0
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 55 of 59

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

One/Two Way Operations 

(91)

100 0

Number of Through Lanes 

(31)

100 0 100 0

Average Annual Daily 

Traffic (79)

100 0 100 0

AADT Year (80) 100 0

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 0 100 0 100 0

INTERSECTION

Unique Junction Identifier 

(120)

50 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 1 Crossing Point 

(122)

100 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 2 Crossing Point 

(123)

100 0

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

100 0

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

0 0

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road (79)

96 99

AADT Year (80) 96 99

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

100 0

INTERCHANGE/RAMP

Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

100 0

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Beginning of 

Ramp Terminal (197)

100 0

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

100 0

Ramp Length (187) 100 0

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

100 0

Roadway Type at End 

Ramp Terminal (199)

100 0
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 56 of 59

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Interchange Type (182) 100 0

Ramp AADT (191) 60 0

Year of Ramp AADT (192) 60 0

Functional Class (19) 100 0

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 0

Totals (Average Percent 

Complete):

100.00 0.00 80.25 24.75 92.73 0.00 100.00 0.00 100.00 0.00

*Based on Functional Classification

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe actions the State will take moving forward to meet the requirement to have complete access to the MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads by September 30, 2026.

"To date VDOT has established a MIRE task force committee, verified the completeness and compatibility of data at state-level and collected data for new elements such as Unique Interchange Identifier (178) FDE. VDOT is in process of 

determining roadway characteristics of the counties, cities and towns that are collecting data on non-VDOT maintained roadways. This step is taking longer than expected due but is expected to be complete in early 2019. Once this is 

complete then a data collection plan can be established."

Provide the suspected serious injury identifier, definition and attributes used by the State for both the crash report form and the crash database using the table below. Please also indicate whether or not these elements are 

compliant with the MMUCC 4th edition criteria for data element P5. Injury Status, suspected serious injury. 

CRITERIA SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY 

IDENTIFIER(NAME) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY DEFINITION MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY ATTRIBUTES(DESCRIPTORS) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * 

Crash Report Form Serious Injury Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Report Form Instruction Manual Serious Injury Yes Serious Injury Yes Serious Injury Yes

Crash Database Serious Injury Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Database Data Dictionary Serious Injury Yes Serious Injury Yes Serious Injury Yes

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Did the State conduct an HSIP program assessment during the reporting period?

No

When does the State plan to complete it’s next HSIP program assessment.

2019

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 57 of 59

FHWA conducted the program assessment workshop along with VDOT and other safety stakeholders in March 27th, 2017. The Self-Assessment Tool provides a mechanism for agencies to evaluate HSIP implementation efforts and do a 

compliance check of the HSIP program policies and guidance. The assessment also includes the Rail Highway Grade Crossing program. The Assessment detail information’s is found in the links: VDOT HSIP Program Assessment Report
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 58 of 59

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

FINAL VDOT HSIP Implementation Manual.pdf

FINAL VDOT RSA Manual.pdf

VDOT_Crash_Data_Manual_Nov2017.pdf

Final_Pedestrian_Study.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2018 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 59 of 59

Glossary

5 year rolling 

average 

means the average of five individuals, consecutive annual points of data (e.g. annual 

fatality rate). 

Emphasis area means a highway safety priority in a State’s SHSP, identified through a data-driven, 

collaborative process. 

Highway safety 

improvement 

project 

means strategies, activities and projects on a public road that are consistent with a State 

strategic highway safety plan and corrects or improves a hazardous road location or 

feature or addresses a highway safety problem. 

HMVMT means hundred million vehicle miles traveled. 

Non-infrastructure 

projects 

are projects that do not result in construction. Examples of non-infrastructure projects 

include road safety audits, transportation safety planning activities, improvements in the 

collection and analysis of data, education and outreach, and enforcement activities. 

Older driver special 

rule 

applies if traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over 

the age of 65 in a State increases during the most recent 2-year period for which data are 

available, as defined in the Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule Interim Guidance 

dated February 13, 2013. 

Performance 

measure 

means indicators that enable decision-makers and other stakeholders to monitor changes 

in system condition and performance against established visions, goals, and objectives. 

Programmed funds mean those funds that have been programmed in the Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP) to be expended on highway safety improvement projects. 

Roadway 

Functional 

Classification 

means the process by which streets and highways are grouped into classes, or systems, 

according to the character of service they are intended to provide. 

Strategic Highway 

Safety Plan (SHSP) 

means a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary plan, based on safety data developed by a 

State Department of Transportation in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 148. 

Systematic refers to an approach where an agency deploys countermeasures at all locations across a 

system. 

Systemic safety 

improvement 

means an improvement that is widely implemented based on high risk roadway features 

that are correlated with specific severe crash types. 

Transfer 

means, in accordance with provisions of 23 U.S.C. 126, a State may transfer from an 

apportionment under section 104(b) not to exceed 50 percent of the amount apportioned 

for the fiscal year to any other apportionment of the State under that section.