Page 1 of 80

WASHINGTON

2018 ANNUAL REPORT
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 80

Table of Contents

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

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

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

Introduction............................................................................................................................................................. 5

Program Structure ................................................................................................................................................... 5

Program Administration...................................................................................................................................... 5

Program Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 8

Project Implementation......................................................................................................................................... 29

Funds Programmed ........................................................................................................................................... 29

General Listing of Projects............................................................................................................................... 31

Safety Performance............................................................................................................................................... 51

General Highway Safety Trends....................................................................................................................... 51

Safety Performance Targets.............................................................................................................................. 64

Applicability of Special Rules.......................................................................................................................... 66

Evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................. 68

Program Effectiveness...................................................................................................................................... 68

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements ...................................................................... 69

Year 2017.............................................................................................................................................................. 69

Project Effectiveness......................................................................................................................................... 74

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 75
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 80

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 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 80

Executive Summary

WSDOT is seeing significant increase in growth and travel demand statewide. This increasing exposure trend 

is leading to fatal and serious crash frequency increases statewide. The state set inspirational goals to achieve 

zero fatal and serious crashes by 2030. This inspirational goal will not be carried forward in the next year, as 

increasing crash trend indicate that it is highly unlikely that these goals are achievable. The state believes is 

setting reasonable targets, but still will emphasize the zero based goals by 2030 in the programming of 

projects. The program is transitioning from a reactive spot based program to a proactive systemic approach 

where 70% of the projects are likely to be using a systemic application. The state believes that this approach 

will lead to addressing crash potential before crashes occur. WSDOT provides much of the HSIP funding to 

local roads at about 70% of its total federal safety funds. It supplements this amount with substantial state 

funding for state owned highways. This is also true for the Sec 130 funds which WSDOT is providing solely to 

the local system in the following year, and is also investing how to address bike and pedestrians at rail 

crossings. 

While the program is seeing increasing crash trends due to growth, its strong partnerships and commitment to 

safety is continuing benefit to reduced crash potential. Future emphasis areas of pedestrians, rail terminals, 

compact roundabouts and high friction surface treatments will occur.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 80

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. 

Washington uses a centralized approach for determining HSIP projects within the state. This includes the 

development and analysis of priorities using WSDOT strategic highway safety plan "Target Zero" as the basis 

for establishing emphasis areas. The program structure has both reactive and proactive approaches to 

reducing crash potential. The reactive component focuses on spot locations, intersections and segments. The 

proactive components focus on specific contributing factors and crash types and most of the proactive 

approaches use systemic methods to develop a ranked list of potential projects. Spot location projects use a 

benefit/analysis for prioritization of the program of projects.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Other-multiple organizations

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

WSDOT does not have specific HSIP staff. Multiple Division's participate in development and implementation 

of the program. WSDOT Local Programs allocates approximately 70% of the HSIP funds.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

Central Office via Statewide Competitive Application Process

SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

Other-Funds are allocated centrally

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

Sub categories of funds are allocated based on SHSP emphasis areas with a team of a multidisciplinary team 

recommending improvement sub-categories to WSDOT Highway Safety Executive Committee. Local HSIP 

funds are allocated via competitive statewide application process.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 80

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

Washington uses a data-driven process to determine HSIP funding levels for state vs local roads. The current 

SHSP, "Washington Strategic Highway Safety Plan: Target Zero," (www.targetzero.com) has specified priority 

levels for types/causes/categories of fatal & serious injury crashes based on crash type, driver behaviors, or 

user type. The top 2 infrastructure related priorities are Lane Departure crashes (priority 1) and Intersection 

crashes (priority 1).

To determine the HSIP funding allocation between state and local roadways, WSDOT evaluates the number of 

fatal & serious injury lane departure and intersection-related crashes statewide for a consecutive 5-year period. 

WSDOT calculates the ratio of crashes on local agency responsibility roads to those on state highways then 

allocates HSIP funding between state and local roadways based on that percentage. Currently, local agencies 

receive 70% of HSIP funds and the state receives 30%.

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

are involved with HSIP planning.

Traffic Engineering/Safety

Design

Planning

Maintenance

Operations

Districts/Regions

Local Aid Programs Office/Division

Governors Highway Safety Office

Other-Local Programs

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

WSDOT interacts with the G/SHSO routinely, and is also actively seeking interaction with MPO/RTPOs. All 

disciplines are active or consultant in the development of the program.

Describe coordination with internal partners.

Oversight for the 70% of the HSIP funds that are directed to local agencies is assigned to the Local Programs 

division for management (to identify local agency priorities, distribution of funds to counties & cities, individual 

project selection, federal oversight, project delivery, etc.).

Responsibility for the 30% of the HSIP funds that are directed to the state is managed by the WSDOT Highway 

Safety Executive Committee (HSEC). WSDOT does not have a specific highway safety office solely 

responsible for the HSIP within the DOT, but is a matrixed team. Implementation of highway safety is done 

collaboratively across all of the department's divisions and coordinated between all modes. The highway safety 

program through the HSEC provides department - wide and multimodal coordination and input on highway and 

modal safety issues. Oversight is the responsibility for Transportation Safety, Quality and Enterprise Risk 

Division who sees that the HSEC policy and procedures are carried out throughout each of the respective 

divisions. Roles and responsibilities of each office are defined by a matrix with agreement by the Directors. H 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 80

SEC is comprised of program directors from all of the major highways divisions (Design, Program 

Management, Traffic Operations, Transportation Safety, Quality and Enterprise Risk, Development). The 

Highway Safety Issue Group provides technical support to the HSEC and is comprised of each Headquarter 

Division and Regional participants from each of WSDOT six regions.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

Regional Planning Organizations (e.g. MPOs, RPOs, COGs)

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Technical Assistance Program

Local Government Agency 

Tribal Agency

Law Enforcement Agency

Academia/University

FHWA

Other-WSDOT has organized a Safety Target Setting Organization to establish targets. A safety data business 

plan group is also in place to assist with WSDOT Safety Data needs identification

Other-MPOs are part of target setting activities

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

All coordinate through development of the Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

Describe coordination with external partners.

WSDOT interacts and coordinates with multiple external partners as part of development of Target Zero and in 

setting targets. WSDOT routinely meets with MPOs and State Highway Safety Office (SHSO) and its federal 

divisions in carrying out its safety program activities.

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

period?

Yes

Describe HSIP program administration practices that have changed since the last reporting period.

WSDOT has updated its approach to its safety program. The program is approximately 70% proactive 

(systemic) safety and 30% reactive. The program follows the emphasis areas of Target Zero, the state's 

Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

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. 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 80

WSDOT has developed an Safety Improvement Program implementation plan to clearly tie the SHSP 

emphasis area to WSDOT safety program. The plan identifies safety-sub categories to each SHSP emphasis 

area, and also identifies performance measures for each sub-category. The Department also reports 

performance monthly as part of performance reporting activities. The state is beginning to update that plan in 

fall 2018.

Program Methodology

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

and evaluation processes?

No

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

File Name:

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

No, there is no HSIP manual, but documents are developed and maintained by various divisions necessary to 

carry out the program.

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

Median Barrier

Intersection

Horizontal Curve

Bicycle Safety

Roadway Departure

Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Local Safety

Pedestrian Safety

HRRR

Other-State - Collision Analysis Corridors

Other-State - Collision Analysis Locations

Other-State - Intersection Analysis Locations

Other-Local - City Safety Program

Other-Local - County Safety Program

Other-Compact Roundabouts

Other-High Friction Surface Treatments

Other-Barrier and Terminal Modifications

Other-Rumble Strips

Other-Operational Assessments

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

Program: Bicycle Safety 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 80

Date of Program Methodology: 10/1/2018 

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]

Other-Competes with other vulnerable road user projects

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only Traffic 

Volume Other-Shoulders 

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

Other-Process under development

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

No

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

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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

Other-Ranking by B/C and other factors : 100

Program: Horizontal Curve 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 80

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

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

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

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

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Program: HRRR 

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 80

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

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

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

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

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Program: Intersection 

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 80

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

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

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

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Program: Local Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

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

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 80

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

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Program: Low-Cost Spot Improvements 

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

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

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

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

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

Page 14 of 80

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Program: Median Barrier 

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

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

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

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

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 80

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).

Program: Pedestrian Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

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

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

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

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Program: Roadway Departure 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 80

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

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

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

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

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Program: Other-State - Collision Analysis 

Corridors 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2012 

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

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 80

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 

Median width 

Horizontal curvature 

Functional classification 

Roadside features 

Other-Roadway data required for 

the HSM predictive method 

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

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

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?

No

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

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

Other-Project selection criteria approved by executive management; projects reviewed and approved by a 

technical panel

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
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 80

Available funding : 2

Other-Fatal and serious injury crash history : 3

Program: Other-State - Collision Analysis 

Locations 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2012 

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]

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 

Median width 

Horizontal curvature 

Functional classification 

Roadside features 

Other-Roadway data required for 

the HSM predictive method 

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

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

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?

No

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

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 80

Competitive application process

selection committee

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-Fatal and serious injury crash history : 2

Program: 

Other-State - Intersection Analysis 

Locations 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2012 

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]

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 Volume 

Functional classification 

Other-Roadway data required for 

the HSM predictive method 

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

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

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

No

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

Page 20 of 80

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

Other-Project selection criteria approved by executive management; projects reviewed and approved by a 

technical panel

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-Fatal and serious injury crash history : 2

Program: Other-Local - City Safety Program 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2018 

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]

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 

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

Crash frequency

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 80

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

Other-Completion of a Local Road Safety Plan

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-Completion of a Local Road Safety Plan : 2

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

Cities are required (as of 2018) to submit a Local Road Safety Plan if they apply for systemic safety funding for 

risk-based projects.

Program: Other-Local - County Safety Program 

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2014 

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]

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 Lane miles 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 80

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

Crash frequency

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?

Other-Allocation of funds to each county based on rate of fatal and serious injury crashes per mile

Other-Completion of a local road safety plan

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

Available funding : 2

Other-Completion of Local Road Safety Plan : 1

Program: Other-Compact Roundabouts 

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 80

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

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

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?

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).

Program: Other-High Friction Surface 

Treatments 

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

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

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 80

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?

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).

Program: Other-Barrier and Terminal 

Modifications 

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

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

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

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 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 80

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Program: Other-Rumble Strips 

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

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

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

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?

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 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 80

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).

Program: Other-Operational Assessments 

Date of Program Methodology: 

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

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

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

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

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

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

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?

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).

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 80

 70

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

apply.

Cable Median Barriers

Rumble Strips

Install/Improve Signing

Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

Upgrade Guard Rails

Clear Zone Improvements

Horizontal curve signs

High friction surface treatment

Other-compact roundabouts

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

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)

Other-Use of HSM, Statistical analysis

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. 

ITS technology is an appropriate countermeasure for safety and could be a selected countermeasure to 

address fatal and serious crashes. A new office has been created within WSDOT related to connected 

vehicles.

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.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 80

WSDOT uses the HSM throughout its HSIP efforts. The state uses SafetyAnalyst for screen of projects. Has 

developed a guide on safety analysis in planning and design.

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

period?

Yes

Describe program methodology practices that have changed since the last reporting period.

WSDOT is updating its program structure with new safety sub-categories within its safety program. These 

efforts are still underway and hope to be completed in fall of 2018.

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.

WSDOT continues to focus on data driven safety analysis throughout its program efforts. WSDOT is using 

performance based practical design and a sustainable safety approach. WSDOT has focused on data driven 

approaches through identifying the 5th E of safety as Evaluation, analysis and diagnosis. It is thought that this 

approach allows for the targeting of specific crash types and contributing factors, and also maximizes the 

return on safety benefit for selected countermeasures. WSDOT is developing new systemic sub-categories 

that focus on rural road crashes.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 80

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

Calendar Year

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

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $18,451,952 $6,500,356 35.23%

HRRR Special Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154) $0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 164) $930,533 $12,958,418 1392.58%

RHCP (for HSIP purposes) (23 

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

$12,694,508 $101,279 0.8%

Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

$16,611,809 $8,335,974 50.18%

State and Local Funds $16,535,250 $1,085,225 6.56%

Totals $65,224,052 $28,981,252 44.43%

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

It should be noted that the for both the 23 USC 130(e)(2) and the 23 USC 164 funds WSDOT has chosen to 

shift obligation between federal programs to better manage its existing federal funds and obligation authority. It 

should also be noted that WSDOT supplements federal safety funds with state funds.

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

70%

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

70%

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

The state allocates approximately 70% of its HSIP funds to local governments. The state then supplements its 

program with additional state funds. The state program is typically in the range of $100-$150M including HSIP 

Funding.

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

Page 30 of 80

0%

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

0%

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?

$16,611,809

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.

WSDOT provides much of its HSIP appropriation to its local partners. Delivery of federally-funded projects with

all of the attendant paperwork/regulations can make delivery of these projects by local agencies a challenge, 

especially considering the low-cost nature of many safety improvements.

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

Yes

Describe any other aspects of the State’s progress in implementing HSIP projects on which the State 

would like to elaborate. 

WSDOT believes that having the ability to use HSIP funds for non-infrastructure improvements is important to 

reestablish. It would also be helpful to continue to emphasize that expenditure for safety software and data is 

appropriate. Given the changes under MAP-21 and FAST additional wording would be beneficial in 23 USC 

409 and 23 USC 148 that highlights that safety shared with Safety Partners (MPOs, Health, State Police, 

SHSO) is protected for the agency sharing and receiving the data when used for HSIP purposes (e.g., SHSP, 

Target Setting, Safety Planning, Public Awareness). MPOs in our opinion are reluctant to use this data 

because of potential liability concerns.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 80

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

Adams County -

McKinney/Thacker 

Rd Safety Project

Roadway Superelevation / cross slope $910000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.2 - Design 

safer slopes and 

ditches to prevent 

rollovers.

City of Auburn -

Auburn Way South 

(SR 164) Corridor 

Safety 

Improvements

Access 

management

Change in access -

miscellaneous/unspecified

$2333108 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.11 -

Implement restricted 

access to 

properties/driveways 

adjacent to 

intersections.

City of Auburn - A 

Street SE and 37th 

Street SE

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

$792260 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections

City of Auburn - A 

Street SE Corridor 

Signal 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$458500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Auburn -

22nd Street NE 

and I Street NE 

Roundabout

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - two-way stop to 

roundabout

$1057500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.1 - Install or 

convert intersections 

to roundabouts.

Benton County -

2017 Safety -

Roadside 

Improvements

Roadside Roadside grading $463800 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.2 - Design 

safer slopes and 

ditches to prevent 

rollovers.

Benton County -

2017 Guardrail 

Inventory

Non-infrastructure Data/traffic records $54000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

No Sites Data LDX 3.7 - Locate 

and inventory fixed 

objects inside the 

clear zone.

City of Bremerton -

Bremerton 

Highway Safety 

Improvements, 

Phase 2

Lighting Lighting - other $1085100 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Pedestrians PED 4.4 - Improve 

sight distance and 

visibility at 

pedestrian 

crossings.

City of Bremerton -

West Belfair Valley 

and Tracyton 

Beach Roads

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

$1675490 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Lane Departure LDX 2.3 - Increase 

road surface skid 

resistance using 

high friction surface 

treatments.

City of Burlington -

George Hopper 

Road Signal

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$753822 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

Chelan County -

Countywide 

Roadway Safety 

Plan

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning $180000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

No Sites Data

Chelan County -

Countywide 

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

$271500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 80

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

Signing 

Improvements

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Chelan County -

Countywide 

Striping 

Improvements

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal pavement 

markings - new

$375600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Clallam County -

Guardrail 

Improvements

Roadside Barrier- metal $364990 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

Clallam County -

Black Diamond Rd 

#31030

Roadside Roadside grading $268000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.2 - Design 

safer slopes and 

ditches to prevent 

rollovers.

Clark County -

Hazel Dell Avenue 

Adaptive Traffic 

Signals

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

signal coordination

$1004000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

Clark County -

Curve Safety 

Improvement

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

$331000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.3 - Increase 

road surface skid 

resistance using 

high friction surface 

treatments.

Clark County - NE 

259th St & NE 

72nd Ave 

Intersection

Roadside Roadside grading $441500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 3.1 - Redesign 

intersection 

approaches to 

improve sight 

distances.

Clark County - NE 

63rd St & NE 58th 

Ave Signal

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

$925500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

Columbia County -

Safety Data 

Collection & 

Analysis 

(Countywide Sign 

Upgrade)

Non-infrastructure Data/traffic records $98000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

No Sites Data LDX 3.7 - Locate 

and inventory fixed 

objects inside the 

clear zone.

Columbia County -

Tucannon Road -

Phase 3

Roadside Barrier- metal $168750 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

Cowlitz County -

2017 Safety -

Guardrail

Roadside Barrier- metal $377000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 80

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

Cowlitz County -

2017 Safety -

Warning Signs

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

$427000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Cowlitz County -

2017 Safety -

Curve Data 

Collection

Non-infrastructure Data/traffic records $99000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 County Highway 

Agency

No Sites Data LDX 3.7 - Locate 

and inventory fixed 

objects inside the 

clear zone.

Douglas County -

2017 Douglas Co. 

Rumble Strips

Roadway Rumble strips - center $49300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 1.1 - Install 

centerline rumble 

strips.

Douglas County -

Rock Island Rd -

Safety 

Improvements

Roadside Barrier- metal $37970 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

Douglas County -

McNeil Canyon Rd 

- Runaway Truck 

Ramp

Roadside Roadside - other $551560 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

City of Edmonds -

SR 99 Illumination 

- 220th St SW to 

212th St SW

Lighting Continuous roadway lighting $684000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.4 - Install 

illumination at 

locations with 

nighttime crashes.

City of Edmonds -

228th St SW 

Corridor 

Improvements

Roadway Roadway - other $4234000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections

City of Everett -

Pacific Avenue and 

Broadway Safety

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Modify existing crosswalk $780000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Pedestrians PED 4.6 - Invest in 

and construct 

roadway 

reconfigurations.

City of Everett -

Everett Citywide 

Intersection 

Signing

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

$965566 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 1.13 - Improve 

visibility of 

intersections by 

providing enhanced 

signing and 

delineation.

City of Everett -

Everett Mall Way 

Intersection Safety

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$498091 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Everett -

Broadway - 10th 

St. to 19th St. 

Intersection Safety

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$531344 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Federal 

Way - Citywide 

Adaptive Traffic 

Control System

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

signal coordination

$1000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 80

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

City of Federal 

Way - Military Rd S 

/ S 298th St 

Compact 

Roundabout

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - two-way stop to 

roundabout

$803436 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.1 - Install or 

convert intersections 

to roundabouts.

Ferry County -

Curve Signing 

Upgrades

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

$259618 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Ferry County -

Safety Data 

Collection

Non-infrastructure Data/traffic records $31500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

No Sites Data LDX 3.7 - Locate 

and inventory fixed 

objects inside the 

clear zone.

Ferry County -

Enhanced 

Pavement Surface 

Treatments

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

$363471 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.3 - Increase 

road surface skid 

resistance using 

high friction surface 

treatments.

City of Fircrest -

Traffic Signal 

Safety 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

$337560 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.8 - Employ 

flashing yellow 

arrows at signals.

Franklin County -

2017 Safety -

Rumble Bars

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

$123900 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.4 - Install 

center and/or edge 

line rumble strips.

Franklin County -

2017 Safety -

Flexible 

Guideposts

Roadway 

delineation

Delineators post-mounted or on 

barrier 

$158500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Franklin County -

2017 Safety -

Countywide 

Intersections

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection signing -

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

$292500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Local Road 

or Street

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 1.13 - Improve 

visibility of 

intersections by 

providing enhanced 

signing and 

delineation.

Garfield County -

2014 Highway 

Safety Project

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

$272500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Garfield County -

Countywide Bridge 

Guardrail Retrofit & 

Upgrade

Roadside Barrier- metal $594000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

Grant County -

Centerline & 

Shoulder Rumble 

Strips

Roadway Rumble strips - center $957800 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.4 - Install 

center and/or edge 

line rumble strips.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 80

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

Grant County -

Horizontal Curve 

Signs - Phase 3

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

$630200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Island County -

County Signing 

Upgrades

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

$152242 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Island County -

Island Co. 2017 

Safety - Guardrail

Roadside Barrier- metal $312000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

Island County -

Island Co. 2017 

Safety - Flexible 

Guideposts

Roadway 

delineation

Delineators post-mounted or on 

barrier 

$44500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Island County -

Island Co. 2017 

Safety - Shoulder 

Paving

Shoulder 

treatments

Pave existing shoulders $495000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure

City of Kenmore -

62nd Avenue NE 

Corridor Safety

Speed 

management

Traffic calming feature $813200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Local Road 

or Street

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Speeding SPE 2.2 - Use 

traffic-calming and 

other design factors 

to influence driver 

speed.

City of Kennewick -

Clearwater Ave. -

Leslie Rd. to US 

395

Access 

management

Change in access - close or 

restrict existing access

$2120000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.11 -

Implement restricted 

access to 

properties/driveways 

adjacent to 

intersections.

City of Kent - Kent 

Valley Signal 

System

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

$869153 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.8 - Employ 

flashing yellow 

arrows at signals.

City of Kent - SR 

515 (108th Ave. 

SE) and SE 208th 

St. Intersection 

Safety

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add left-turn 

lane

$700000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.3 -

Provide/improve leftand right-turn 

channelization.

King County - 2014 

County Safety 

Selection

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

$3180500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.3 - Increase 

road surface skid 

resistance using 

high friction surface 

treatments.

King County - Mini 

Roundabouts in 

Highline and 

Fairwood

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - two-way stop to 

roundabout

$737826 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Local Road 

or Street

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 1.1 - Install or 

convert intersections 

to roundabouts.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 80

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

King County - King 

Co. 2017 High 

Friction Surface 

Treatment

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

$3270000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.3 - Increase 

road surface skid 

resistance using 

high friction surface 

treatments.

City of Kirkland -

Citywide Safety 

and Traffic Flow 

Improvement

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

signal coordination

$300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Kirkland -

Lakefront 

Pedestrian and 

Bicycle 

Improvements

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian warning signs -

add/modify flashers

$989400 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Pedestrians PED 4.2 - Increase 

the use of RRFB 

and PHB where 

these crosswalk 

enhancements are 

needed.

City of Kirkland -

Juanita Drive Quick 

Wins

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Modify existing crosswalk $1287395 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Pedestrians PED 4.4 - Improve 

sight distance and 

visibility at 

pedestrian 

crossings.

Kittitas County -

Roadside Hazard 

Safety 

Improvements -

Countywide

Roadside Barrier- metal $689000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

Klickitat County -

County Road 

Safety Plan

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning $112500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

No Sites Data

Klickitat County -

Klickitat County 

2017 Safety 

Program

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

$589500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

City of Lakewood -

40th Ave. SW and 

96th St. SW Safety

Roadside Barrier- metal $823350 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

City of Lakewood -

Dekoven Drive 

Traffic Calming

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - two-way stop to 

roundabout

$212000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.1 - Install or 

convert intersections 

to roundabouts.

City of Lakewood -

Military Rd. & 

112th St. Safety

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$788500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Lakewood -

Steilacoom 

Boulevard Safety 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$2405000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

Lewis County -

2014 County Road 

Safety 

Improvements

Roadside Barrier- metal $1214939 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 80

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

hardware such as 

guardrail.

Lewis County -

2017 Safety -

Guideposts (Phase 

I)

Roadway 

delineation

Delineators post-mounted or on 

barrier 

$203500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Lewis County -

2017 Safety -

Signing & Clear 

Zone (Phase II)

Roadside Roadside grading $912000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.2 - Design 

safer slopes and 

ditches to prevent 

rollovers.

Lincoln County -

Safety Data 

Collection

Non-infrastructure Data/traffic records $31500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 County Highway 

Agency

No Sites Data LDX 3.7 - Locate 

and inventory fixed 

objects inside the 

clear zone.

Lincoln County -

FFY 2014 Safety -

Signing Upgrades

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

$138975 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Lincoln County -

2017 Countywide 

Guardrail 

Installation

Roadside Barrier- metal $630500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

City of Longview -

Washington Way & 

15th Ave. Corridor 

Traffic Signal 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

flashing yellow arrow

$670450 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Pedestrians PED 4.4 - Improve 

sight distance and 

visibility at 

pedestrian 

crossings.

City of Lynnwood -

SR 99 and SR 524 

Safety 

Improvements

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

$931000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.13 - Improve 

visibility of 

intersections by 

providing enhanced 

signing and 

delineation.

City of Lynnwood -

SR 99 and SR 524 

Real-Time 

Adaptive Signal 

Control 

Implementation

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

signal coordination

$472500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Marysville -

Citywide 

Intersection 

Improvement 

Project

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$422000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Marysville -

State Ave. - 1st St. 

to 88th St. NE

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

$1744000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 80

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

Mason County -

Guardrail 

Improvements

Roadside Barrier- metal $291179 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

Mason County -

County Road 

Safety Plan

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning $90000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 County Highway 

Agency

No Sites Data

Mason County -

Bear Creek 

Dewatto Rd

Roadside Roadside grading $265864 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.2 - Design 

safer slopes and 

ditches to prevent 

rollovers.

City of Mountlake 

Terrace - 220th St 

SW Adaptive 

Signal System

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

signal coordination

$725750 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

Okanogan County -

2017 Countywide 

Sign Safety

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

$122959 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Local Road 

or Street

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Okanogan County -

Countywide 

Guardrail Safety

Roadside Barrier- metal $542500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

Okanogan County -

Countywide 

Roadside Hazard 

Removal

Roadside Removal of roadside objects 

(trees, poles, etc.)

$91600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.3 -

Remove/relocate 

objects, such as 

trees and utility 

poles.

City of Olympia -

Pacific Avenue 

Pedestrian 

Crossing 

Improvements

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian warning signs -

add/modify flashers

$327405 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Pedestrians PED 4.2 - Increase 

the use of RRFB 

and PHB where 

these crosswalk 

enhancements are 

needed.

Pacific County -

Pacific Co. 2017 

Safety - Guardrail

Roadside Barrier- metal $218500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

Pacific County -

Pacific Co. 2017 

Safety - Signing

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

$156300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

Pacific County -

Camp One 

Rd/Heckard Rd 

Intersection 

Realignment

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics - modify 

skew angle

$159000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 3.1 - Redesign 

intersection 

approaches to 

improve sight 

distances.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 80

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

City of Pasco -

Oregon Avenue 

(SR 397) Corridor -

Phase 1

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add two-way 

left-turn lane

$875900 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.3 -

Provide/improve leftand right-turn 

channelization.

City of Pasco - N. 

20th Ave. Safety 

Improvements

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian signal - Pedestrian 

Hybrid Beacon

$1373500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Pedestrians PED 4.2 - Increase 

the use of RRFB 

and PHB where 

these crosswalk 

enhancements are 

needed.

Pierce County -

High Friction 

Surface Treatment

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

$1172300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.3 - Increase 

road surface skid 

resistance using 

high friction surface 

treatments.

Pierce County -

Spanaway Loop 

Road So./Steele 

Street 

So./Wollochet 

Drive NW

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

backplates with retroreflective 

borders

$191200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 3.2 - Add back 

plates with retroreflective borders to 

signals.

Pierce County -

High Friction 

Surface Treatment 

& Centerline 

Rumble Strips

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

$763000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.3 - Increase 

road surface skid 

resistance using 

high friction surface 

treatments.

Pierce County -

Road Safety-176th 

Street East Signals

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

backplates with retroreflective 

borders

$229400 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 3.2 - Add back 

plates with retroreflective borders to 

signals.

Pierce County -

38th Ave E & 

152nd St E - Signal

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

$769590 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

Pierce County -

Military Rd & 

Bresemann Blvd S 

Safety 

Improvements

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Medians and pedestrian refuge 

areas

$206100 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians PED 4.1 - Improve 

safety at ped xings 

by installing refuge 

islands and 

shortening xing 

distances.

Pierce County -

Road SafetyCanyon Road East 

Signals

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

backplates with retroreflective 

borders

$440100 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 3.2 - Add back 

plates with retroreflective borders to 

signals.

City of Puyallup -

River Road and 9th 

St SW Safety 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

signal coordination

$1689000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Puyallup -

5th Street SW/NW 

Adaptive Traffic 

Control

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

signal coordination

$900000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 80

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

City of Renton -

SW 43rd St./SE 

Carr Rd./SE 176th 

St./SE Petrovitsky 

Rd. Corridor Safety 

Project

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$660000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Seattle -

Vision Zero - High 

Friction Surface 

Treatments

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

$407523 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Lane Departure LDX 2.3 - Increase 

road surface skid 

resistance using 

high friction surface 

treatments.

City of Seattle -

Vision Zero -

Signalized 

Intersections

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal -

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

$502000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 4.3 - Improve 

sight distance 

and/or visibility 

between motor 

vehicles and 

pedestrians.

City of Shoreline -

Radar Speed Sign 

Installations

Speed 

management

Radar speed signs $119514 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Speeding SPE 2.5 - Support 

the limited use of 

speed feedback 

signs.

City of Shoreline -

Meridian Ave. N. 

and N. 155th Street 

Intersection Phase 

Changes

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$352385 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Spokane -

Monroe St Lane 

Reduction & 

Hardscape Project 

1

Roadway Roadway narrowing (road diet, 

roadway reconfiguration)

$1886600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 4.1 - Improve 

safety at ped xings 

by installing refuge 

islands and 

shortening xing 

distances.

City of Spokane -

Monroe St Lane 

Reduction & 

Hardscape Project 

2

Roadway Roadway narrowing (road diet, 

roadway reconfiguration)

$1886600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 4.1 - Improve 

safety at ped xings 

by installing refuge 

islands and 

shortening xing 

distances.

City of Spokane -

Maxwell-Mission 

Avenue Lane 

Reduction

Roadway Roadway narrowing (road diet, 

roadway reconfiguration)

$434900 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 4.1 - Improve 

safety at ped xings 

by installing refuge 

islands and 

shortening xing 

distances.

City of Spokane -

Crestline Street 

Lane Reduction

Roadway Roadway narrowing (road diet, 

roadway reconfiguration)

$721200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 4.1 - Improve 

safety at ped xings 

by installing refuge 

islands and 

shortening xing 

distances.

Spokane County -

Safety Data 

Collection & 

Evaluation

Non-infrastructure Data/traffic records $98775 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

No Sites Data LDX 3.7 - Locate 

and inventory fixed 

objects inside the 

clear zone.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 80

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

Spokane County -

2016 Spokane 

County Signal 

Safety

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$476300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

Spokane County -

Glenrose Rd & 

Carnahan Rd 

Safety 

Improvements

Alignment Horizontal and vertical 

alignment

$771600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 3.1 - Redesign 

intersection 

approaches to 

improve sight 

distances.

Spokane County -

Argonne Road 

Overlay - MP 2.55 

to MP 4.13

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

$297000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.3 - Increase 

road surface skid 

resistance using 

high friction surface 

treatments.

City of Spokane 

Valley - Citywide 

Reflective Signal 

Back Plates

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

backplates with retroreflective 

borders

$80100 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 3.2 - Add back 

plates with retroreflective borders to 

signals.

City of Spokane 

Valley - Citywide 

Signal Backplates

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal - add 

backplates with retroreflective 

borders

$123830 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 3.2 - Add back 

plates with retroreflective borders to 

signals.

City of Spokane 

Valley - Pines Rd. 

(SR 27) and Grace 

Ave. Intersection 

Safety

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add two-way 

left-turn lane

$671050 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.3 -

Provide/improve leftand right-turn 

channelization.

Stevens County -

2015 Countywide 

Safety 

Improvements 

(2015 Guardrail 

Improvements)

Roadside Barrier- metal $243547 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

City of Tacoma -

Pacific Ave. (SR 7) 

Corridor -

Intersection Signal 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

signal coordination

$945166 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Tacoma -

South Tacoma 

Way Corridor 

Safety 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$923930 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

City of Tacoma -

East Portland 

Avenue Safety 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

general retiming

$1368535 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.7 - Employ 

signal coordination.

Thurston County -

County Road 

Safety Plan

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning $180000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 County Highway 

Agency

No Sites Data
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 80

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

Thurston County -

High Friction 

Surface Treatment

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

$2000000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.3 - Increase 

road surface skid 

resistance using 

high friction surface 

treatments.

Thurston County -

2018 Highway 

Safety 

Improvements

Roadway Rumble strips - center $1287000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.4 - Install 

center and/or edge 

line rumble strips.

City of Vancouver -

Mill Plain Blvd. -

104th to NE 

Chkalov Dr.

Access 

management

Change in access - close or 

restrict existing access

$2180000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.11 -

Implement restricted 

access to 

properties/driveways 

adjacent to 

intersections.

Walla Walla 

County - Middle 

Waitsburg Rd - MP 

6.10 to MP 7.92

Alignment Horizontal and vertical 

alignment

$1142000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.2 - Improve 

roadway geometry.

City of Wenatchee 

- Citywide 

Pedestrian Safety

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian warning signs -

add/modify flashers

$395900 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Pedestrians PED 4.2 - Increase 

the use of RRFB 

and PHB where 

these crosswalk 

enhancements are 

needed.

City of Wenatchee 

- Wenatchee 

Signage Safety

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

$149950 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 1.13 - Improve 

visibility of 

intersections by 

providing enhanced 

signing and 

delineation.

Whatcom County -

Guardrail Safety 

Program

Roadside Barrier- metal $899500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 3.1 -

Install/maintain 

roadside safety 

hardware such as 

guardrail.

Whitman County -

Countywide 

Signing & Clear 

Zone 

Improvements

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs (including post) 

- new or updated

$600000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure LDX 2.1 - Improve 

roadway signing and 

shoulder 

delineation, 

especially in curves.

City of Yakima -

Fruitvale Blvd at 

River Rd & River 

Rd at N 34th Ave 

Roundabouts

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - two-way stop to 

roundabout

$1012898 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections INT 1.1 - Install or 

convert intersections 

to roundabouts.

Yakima County -

Yakima Valley Hwy 

& Van Belle Rd. 

Intersection 

Conflict Warning

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection flashers - add 

"when flashing" warning signmounted

$187200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections INT 1.9 - Provide 

dynamic intersection 

warning (real-time) 

to drivers.

Franklin County -

Hailey Road 

Railroad Crossing

Railroad grade 

crossings

Railroad grade crossing signing $95000 RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 

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

Rural Local Road 

or Street

0 County Highway 

Agency

Spot Vehicle-Train
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 80

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

City of Mount 

Vernon - 4th Street 

N/Riverside Drive 

RR Crossing

Railroad grade 

crossings

Railroad grade crossing gates $1447950 RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 

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

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Vehicle-Train

Port of Bellingham 

- Harris Avenue 

Crossing

Railroad grade 

crossings

Protective devices $350000 RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 

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

Urban Major 

Collector

0 Other Local 

Agency

Spot Vehicle-Train

Walla Walla 

County - Port Kelly 

Railroad Crossing

Railroad grade 

crossings

Railroad grade crossing gates $586300 RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 

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

Rural Local Road 

or Street

0 County Highway 

Agency

Spot Vehicle-Train

Walla Walla 

County - Dodd 

Road Railroad 

Crossing

Railroad grade 

crossings

Railroad grade crossing gates $481030 RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 

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

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Spot Vehicle-Train

Spokane County -

Bigelow Gulch Rd. 

- Project 2

Roadway Roadway widening - add 

lane(s) along segment

$145800 Other Federalaid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 County Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane Departure LDX 2.2 - Improve 

roadway geometry.

Traffic Operations 

Assessments

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $416639 $416639 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic multiple areas

NCR Centerline 

Rumble 

Strips/Section B

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $1284638 $1284638 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

NCR Traffic 

Operation 

Assessments

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $631680 $631680 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic multiple areas

Olympic Region -

Intersection Safety 

Implementation 

Program 15-17

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

Signs $820928 $820928 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

SWR - Regionwide 

Curve Warning 

Signing Phase II

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

Curves $377481 $377481 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure

I-5/Northbound Off 

Ramp at Fourth 

Plain Blvd -

Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

Signal heads $306559 $306559 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 510/Meridian 

Rd SE -

Roundabout

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - traffic signal to 

roundabout

Intersections $1981589 $1981589 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Eastern Region 

HMA Route 

Rumble Strips -

Install Rumble Strip

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $340106 $340106 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

NCR 15-17 

Regionwide 

Shoulder Rumble 

Strip

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $712348 $712348 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 80

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

SR 8/Winslow Dr 

SW to Vic US 101 -

Safety 

Improvements

Roadside Removal of roadside objects 

(trees, poles, etc.)

Locations $958873 $958873 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 240/SR 

224/Van Giesen 

Street -

Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add 

acceleration lane

Intersections $407589 $407589 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

US 101/Evergreen 

Parkway to Vic 

Crosby Blvd -

Install Cable 

Barrier

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $154224 $1077196 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

US 195/CheneySpokane Rd - New 

Interchange

Interchange 

design

Convert at-grade intersection to 

interchange

Interchanges $5695587 $5695587 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Northwest Region 

Intersection Safety 

Implementation 

(15-17)

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

Signs $486963 $486963 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Traffic Operation 

Assessments -

NWR

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $531148 $531148 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

NCR 17-19 

Regionwide Curve 

Warning Sign 

Update

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

Signs $893884 $893884 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

NCR 15-17 

Regionwide 

Guardrail 

Installations

Roadside Barrier - concrete Miles $301124 $301124 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

NCR 15-17 

Regionwide 

Intersection Safety 

Implementation

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

Locations $116468 $843277 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Traffic Operation 

Assessments

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $541441 $541441 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic multiple areas

Olympic Region -

Guardrail 

Installations

Roadside Barrier- metal Miles $464486 $2830747 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SWR - Traffic 

Operation 

Assessments

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $541439 $541439 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic multiple areas

SW Region/Clark 

County Locations -

High Friction 

Surfacing

Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

Locations $399261 $399261 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 80

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

SWR Regionwide 

Safety - Shoulder 

Rumble Strips 

Phase II

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Locations $391200 $391200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SW 

Region/Regionwide 

Curve Warning 

Sign Update 2017-

2019

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

Signs $347894 $347894 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure

South Central 

Region - Traffic 

Operation 

Assessments

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $541441 $541441 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic multiple areas

SCR 17-19 Region 

Wide - Shoulder 

Rumble Strips

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $390400 $390400 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

15-17 SCR -

Intersection Safety 

Implementation 

Program

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

Intersections $685759 $685759 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

15-17 SCR -

Guardrail 

Installations

Roadside Barrier- metal Miles $263580 $263580 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Eastern Region 

Intersection Safety 

Implementation 

Program

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

Intersections $755473 $755473 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

Eastern Region 

Traffic Operation 

Assessment

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $541440 $541440 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic multiple areas

Eastern Region 

Curve Warning 

Sign Update 2017-

19

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

Curves $165748 $1268248 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure

Eastern Region 

Shoulder Rumble 

Strip Installation 

2017-19

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $390000 $390000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

I-5/NB Martin 

Luther King Jr Way 

- Barrier Extension

Roadside Barrier- metal Miles $561198 $561198 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

I-5/NB NE 39th St 

& SR 500/NE 15th 

Ave - Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify traffic signal timing -

signal coordination

Locations $275677 $275677 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

I-5/300th St NW to 

Anderson Rd -

Cable Barrier 

Upgrade

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $335214 $3049881 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 80

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

I-5/Northbound 

Lakeway Dr 

Vicinity - Guardrail 

Installation

Roadside Barrier- metal Miles $89819 $89819 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

I-5/SR 11 to 

Samish River Vic -

Cable Barrier 

Upgrade

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $145063 $1044574 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

I-5/SR 11 Vic to SR 

548 Vic - Cable 

Barrier Upgrade

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $296008 $2695040 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 9/Francis Rd -

Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics - reassign existing lane useLanes $575154 $2994745 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 548/Kickerville 

Rd - Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - all-way stop to 

roundabout

Intersections $1091423 $1091423 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 24/ Bench Rd 

Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - all-way stop to 

roundabout

Intersections $239112 $239112 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 241/Forsell 

Rd/Green Valley 

Rd - Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

Intersections $836762 $836762 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 397/S Yew St 

Vicinity - Roadside 

Improvements

Roadside Removal of roadside objects 

(trees, poles, etc.)

Miles $246367 $246367 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

US 97/Branch 

Road - Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection flashers - add 

advance intersection warning 

sign-mounted

Intersections $70505 $70505 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

US 97/Progressive 

- Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection flashers - add 

advance intersection warning 

sign-mounted

Intersections $68282 $68282 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 20/Cascade Rd 

Vic to Goodell 

Creek 

Campground -

Rumblestrip

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $940543 $940543 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 20/Westbound 

Diablo Dam Rd 

Vicinity - Guardrail 

Installation

Roadside Barrier- metal Miles $30979 $30979 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 20/Newhalem 

to Lillian Creek -

Rumblestrip 

Installation

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $197736 $1112805 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 20/Lillian Creek 

to Granite Creek -

Rumblestrip 

Installation

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $968112 $968112 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 80

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

Eastern Region 

BST Rumble Strips 

A - Install Rumble 

Strip

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $342137 $342137 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Eastern Region 

BST Rumble Strips 

B - Install Rumble 

Strip

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $347633 $347633 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

NCR 17-19 

Regionwide 

Shoulder Rumble 

Strip Installation

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $391200 $391200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 22 ET 

AL/Benton and 

Yakima CoCenterline Rumble 

Strips

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $363473 $363473 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Corridor wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

US 2/Bickford Ave 

SE to Roosevelt 

Rd Vic - Safety 

Improvements

Roadway Roadway - other Lanes $303475 $303475 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot multiple areas

US 2/Roosevelt Rd 

Vic to SR 522 Vic -

Rumble Strip 

Installation

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $242442 $242442 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 20/Banta Rd -

Intersection Safety 

Improvements

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add auxiliary 

through lane

Lanes $1703872 $2147872 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 525/SB 

Alderwood Mall 

Pkwy - Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

Intersections $182874 $1265343 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 546/Northwood 

Rd - Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

Intersections $354958 $354958 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

US 2/W of Coles 

Corner - Roadside 

Safety

Roadside Barrier- metal Miles $276070 $276070 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

US 2/SR 207 Coles 

Corner - Two Way 

Left Turn Lane

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add two-way 

left-turn lane

Lanes $561689 $697821 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 17/Airway Drive 

to Phoenix Drive -

Roadside Safety 

Improvements

Roadside Roadside grading Miles $265282 $265282 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 17/I-90 to 

Broadway Ave 

Safety 

Improvements

Roadway Roadway - other Locations $843233 $843233 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 48 of 80

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

SR 26/Thacker 

Road - Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection flashers - add 

advance intersection warning 

sign-mounted

Signs $659672 $659672 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 26/SR 243 

Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection signing -

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

Miles $151275 $151275 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 28/5th Street 

Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control -

other

Intersections $186900 $1359649 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 28/17th to 19th 

St. E. Wenatchee -

Two Way Left Turn 

Lane

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add two-way 

left-turn lane

Lanes $444538 $444538 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

SR 28/North of 

East Wenatchee -

Safety 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection flashers - add 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

Signal heads $202604 $202604 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

US 97/Brays 

Landing Rd. -

Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add left-turn 

lane

Lanes $453500 $453500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 171/Beech St 

Intersection -

Safety 

Improvements

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics -

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

Intersections $95965 $95965 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 7/Pedestrian 

Crossing - Safety 

Improvement

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Pedestrian warning signs -

add/modify flashers

Signs $558207 $558207 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians

US 12/Monte 

Brady Rd to 

Schouweiler Rd -

Study

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $336000 $336000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic multiple areas

SR 14/Marble Rd 

Vicinity to Belle 

Center Rd - Safety 

Improvements

Roadway Roadway widening - curve Curves $4039890 $4039890 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 500/NE 42nd 

Ave and 54th Ave 

Intersections -

Safety Evaluation

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $96000 $96000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic multiple areas

SR 503/Padden 

Parkway -

Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add right-turn 

lane

Lanes $354190 $354190 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 503/NE 154th 

St to SR 502 -

Median Barrier

Roadway Roadway - restripe to revise 

separation between opposing 

lanes and/or shoulder widths 

$168590 $168590 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

US 97/2nd Ave 

Vicinity - Roadside 

Improvements

Roadside Barrier - concrete Miles $343489 $343489 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 80

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

US 97/SR 22 to 

Lateral A - Corridor 

Intersection Safety

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $334080 $334080 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

US 395/Deer Park 

- Intersection 

Improvement Study

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $138220 $138220 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

Northwest Region 

Curve Warning 

Signs (15-17)

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Curve-related warning signs 

and flashers

Curves $1601537 $1601537 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure

SR 18/Soosette 

Creek Vic to 

Issaquah Hobart 

Rd Vic - Cable 

Barrier

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $118599 $851721 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 20/SR 536 Vic 

to Pulver Rd Vic -

Cable Barrier 

Upgrade

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $134281 $964211 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 99/Tukwila Int'l 

Blvd to Holden St

Vic - Cable Barrier 

Upgrade

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $796483 $796483 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 522/North 

Creek Vic to NE 

195th St - Cable 

Barrier Upgrade

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $710099 $710099 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 539/Ten Mile 

Rd Vic to 

Nooksack River 

Overflow Br -

Cable Barrier

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $83313 $766013 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 17/Prior Farms 

- Left Turn Lane

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add left-turn 

lane

Lanes $425285 $425285 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

15-17 Olympic 

Region Centerline 

Rumble Strips -

Install Rumble 

Strips

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $330883 $330883 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

15-17 Olympic 

Region Shoulder 

Rumble Strips -

Install Rumble 

Strips

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $318618 $318618 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Region wide 0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 3/Kitsap Way to 

SR 305 - Install 

Cable Barrier

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $250250 $4662138 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 16/Olympic Dr 

NW to Burley 

Olalla Rd - Install 

Cable Barrier

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $336648 $2331005 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 50 of 80

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

SR 4 Centerline 

Rumblestrips -

Safety

Roadside Barrier - cable Miles $254748 $254748 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

US 101/SR 101 

Alternate I/S Vic to 

Raymond -

Centerline Rumble 

Strips

Roadway Rumble strips - center Miles $229954 $229954 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure

US 12/Low Rd -

Intersection Safety 

Improvements

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes - add left-turn 

lane

Lanes $311117 $311117 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 17/US 395 to 

0.15 North of Mesa 

- Shoulder Rumble 

Strips

Roadway Rumble strips - edge or 

shoulder

Miles $16776 $16776 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

SR 240/Steptoe 

Roundabout 

Improvements

Intersection 

geometry

Splitter island - unspecified Intersections $217022 $217022 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 524/Locust & 

Larch Way -

Intersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - all-way stop to 

roundabout

Intersections $0 $4303816 Other Federalaid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

SR 542/SR 9 East 

JunctionIntersection 

Improvements

Intersection traffic 

control

Modify control - all-way stop to 

roundabout

Intersections $0 $1409091 Other Federalaid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

US 2/Jct SR 206 

Intersection 

Analysis of 

Alternatives

Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning assestment $0 $496320 Other Federalaid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic multiple areas

US 2/Deer Rd to 

Day Mt Spokane 

Rd - Corridor 

Improvements

Roadway Roadway - other Locations $0 $3720017 Other Federalaid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

US 395/Deer Park 

Corridor Safety 

Improvements

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other Locations $0 $4268026 Other Federalaid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections

SR 546/Depot Rd 

and Bender Rd -

Intersections 

Improvements

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometry - other Locations $0 $4101812 Other Federalaid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

SR 503/4th Plain to 

107th St - Median 

Curb

Access 

management

Median crossover - close 

crossover

Miles $0 $286474 Other Federalaid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

0 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

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

The total cost shown are for HSIP fund only and do not include WSDOT associated cost, the cost are primarily borne by associated state and local funds, as well as direct project support that is considered as distributed funds for 

WSDOT.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 51 of 80

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 492 460 454 438 436 462 551 536 565

Serious Injuries 2,648 2,478 2,135 2,201 1,916 2,004 2,100 2,217 2,224

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 0.871 0.804 0.797 0.774 0.762 0.796 0.924 0.881 0.920

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

4.690 4.333 3.748 3.888 3.349 3.452 3.520 3.643 3.621

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

71 69 79 87 61 85 100 105 122

Number of non-motorized 

serious injuries

399 408 402 449 343 408 393 489 453
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 52 of 80

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Serious Injuries

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

Page 53 of 80

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

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

Page 54 of 80

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

22 60.8 4.75 13.16

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

54 48.2 31.33 27.81

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other

35.2 98.8 15.76 44.35

Rural Minor Arterial 72 94.8 33.57 44.15

Rural Minor Collector 16 55.6 4.58 15.9

Rural Major Collector 23 0.2 21.7 0.18

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

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

Page 55 of 80

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 5.8 0.2 5.1 0.17

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Interstate

22 133.8 1.87 11.32

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

88.6 106 15.41 18.63

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other

61 220.2 6.39 23.07

Urban Minor Arterial 30.6 64 3.96 8.29

Urban Minor Collector 22.8 8.2 6.58 2.37

Urban Major Collector 15.6 0 146.49 0

Urban Local Road or Street 3.2 0 0.66 0
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 56 of 80

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 238.2 891.4 7.15 26.8

County Highway Agency 140 531.4 14.59 55.37

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

0 0 0 0

City of Municipal Highway 

Agency

119.2 784.6 7.53 49.61

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

0 0 0 0

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

0 0 0 0

Other State Agency 0 0 0 0

Other Local Agency 0 0 0 0

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

0 0 0 0

Railroad 0 0 0 0

State Toll Authority 0 0 0 0

Local Toll Authority 0 0 0 0

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, University)

0 0 0 0

Indian Tribe Nation 0 0 0 0
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 57 of 80

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Functional Classification 

5 Year Average

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

Page 58 of 80

0

50

100

150

200

250

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

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

Page 59 of 80

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

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

Page 60 of 80

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

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 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 61 of 80

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Roadway Ownership 

5 Year Average

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

Page 62 of 80

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

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

Page 63 of 80

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

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

Page 64 of 80

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 489.2 

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

The linear trend line of the five year rolling average was used to set the target unless 

the target showed an increase this way: then the 5-year average value for 2013-2017 

was used to set the target for 2019. The target for Fatalities was set on the linear trend 

line of the 5-year rolling average. Fatalities is a performance measure in the SHSP. 

Number of Serious Injuries 1855.2 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

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 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 65 of 80

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

The linear trend line of the five year rolling average was used to set the target unless 

the target showed an increase this way: then the 5-year average value for 2013-2017 

was used to set the target for 2019. The target for Serious Injuries was set on the linear 

trend line of the 5-year rolling average. Serious injuries is a performance measure in 

the SHSP. 

Fatality Rate 0.813 

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

The linear trend line of the five year rolling average was used to set the target unless 

the target showed an increase this way: then the 5-year average value for 2013-2017 

was used to set the target for 2019. The target for Fatality Rate was set on the linear 

trend line of the 5-year rolling average. The SHSP does not use rates as a performance 

metric. 

Serious Injury Rate 3.068 

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

The linear trend line of the five year rolling average was used to set the target unless 

the target showed an increase this way: then the 5-year average value for 2013-2017 

was used to set the target for 2019. The target for Serious Injury Rate was set on the 

linear trend line of the 5-year rolling average. The SHSP does not use rates as a 

performance metric. 

Total Number of Non-Motorized 

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 511.8 

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

The linear trend line of the five year rolling average was used to set the target unless 

the target showed an increase this way: then the 5-year average value for 2013-2017 

was used to set the target for 2019. The target for Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries was set equal the 5-year rolling average for 2013 - 2017. Pedestrian 

and bicyclist fatalities and serious injuries are part of two emphasis areas in the SHSP. 

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

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

targets. 

WSDOT worked directly with partners in setting targets this year. Including multiple meetings with SHSO and 

MPOs. The MPO meetings included outreach to technical, coordinating and executive committees. In addition, 

WSDOT developed worksheets for describing MPO proportional share of safety targets for tracking purposes. 

The WSDOT also made presentations to governing bodies of a number of the MPOs.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 66 of 80

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

71 61 60 81 90 85 92

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Serious Injuries

150 149 150 160 169 189 189

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

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 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 67 of 80

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

Page 68 of 80

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

Change in fatalities and serious injuries

Benefit/Cost Ratio

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

While HSIP effectiveness has historically been tracked using B/C for each project (and overall), that is now 

shifting to a measure of the change in fatalities and serious injuries overall. This is due to the fact that a greater 

proportion of projects are now risk-based, which is not something measurable by a typical B/C ratio.

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

level evaluations.

While fatal and serious injury crashes have been on the rise across all jurisdictional road types since a low in 

2013, we continue to measure overall progress by jurisdictional type of road (state, county, city). Since each of 

these jurisdiction types is primarily funded through separate programs within the HSIP, this seems like a 

reasonable approach to monitor progress.

For projects completed in calendar year 2013, we compare the 5-year rolling average from 2009-2013 with the 

5-year rolling average from 2013-2017. This overlaps the year 2013 in each data set, which then is really a 

comparison of the 4 years before the projects were completed with the 4 years after the projects were 

completed. By jurisdictional road type, those comparisons show:

State Highways: 2009-2013 = 771.4 fatal/serious crashes vs 2013-2017 = 733.6 fatal/serious crashes, or a 5% 

decrease.

County Roads: 2009-2013 = 604.2 fatal/serious crashes vs 2013-2017 = 534.8 fatal/serious crashes, or an 

11% decrease.

City Streets: 2009-2013 = 949.4 fatal/serious crashes vs 2013-2017 = 956.8 fatal/serious crashes, or a 1% 

increase.

Note that state highways that serve as city streets (in cities of 27,500+ population) are included in the city 

streets data here.

This data seems to highlight that the full systemic safety approach on county roadways, implemented in 2010 

(with projects being completed primarily in 2012-2013), is showing some effectiveness (with a greater 

decrease than that seen on state or city roadways). Additional years of data and years of investment on the 

county road network in this manner should help to solidify these early results.

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

Highway Safety Improvement Program?

More systemic programs

Policy change

Organizational change

Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

Increased focus on local road safety
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 69 of 80

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? 

Yes

Describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting period.

WSDOT has updated its approach in its safety program. The program is about 70% prevention (systemic) and 

30% reactive (crash based). The program has new sub-categories for high friction surface treatment, 

vulnerable road users, terminals and rail modifications, and field operational assessments.

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2017

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

Lane Departure 257.2 785 4.33 13.2 0 0 0

Roadway Departure 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Intersections 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pedestrians 82.4 315.2 1.38 5.29 0 0 0

Bicyclists 9.6 83.4 0.16 1.41 0 0 0

Older Drivers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Motorcyclists 74.6 375.2 1.25 6.31 0 0 0

Work Zones 4 29 0.07 0.49 0 0 0

Data 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Impaired driver-involved 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Speeding-involved 165.8 524.6 2.79 8.83 0 0 0
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 70 of 80

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

Young driver age 16-25 

involved

161.8 712.2 2.72 11.97 0 0 0

Distracted driver involved 32.6 129.2 0.53 2.1 0 0 0

Unrestrained passenger 

vehicle occupant

102 326.6 1.72 5.49 0 0 0

Unlicensed driver-involved 92.4 9 1.55 0.15 0 0 0

Opposite Direction Multivehicle (Headon)0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pedestrian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Older Driver-Involved (age 

70+)

68 189.6 1.14 3.19 0 0 0

Heavy Truck-Involved 

(GVWR>10,000 lbs)

50.8 130.2 0.85 2.19 0 0 0

Drowsy Driver-Involved 14 77 0.24 1.29 0 0 0

Bicyclist 2.6 18.6 0.04 0.3 0 0 0

Wildlife 2.6 17.2 0.04 0.29 0 0 0

Vehicle-Train 2.6 1.2 0.04 0.02 0 0 0

School bus-involved 0.8 5.8 0.01 0.1 0 0 0

Impairment involved 287.4 410.2 4.83 6.91 0 0 0

Distraction involved 120.6 492 2.04 8.34 0 0 0

Intersection related 113.8 727 1.91 12.22 0 0 0

Run off the road 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 71 of 80

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Lane Departure

Roadway Departure

Intersections

Pedestrians

Bicyclists

Older Drivers

Motorcyclists

Work Zones

Data

Impaired driver-...

Speeding-involved

Young driver age 16-...

Distracted driver...

Unrestrained...

Unlicensed driver-...

Opposite Direction...

Pedestrian

Older Driver-Involved...

Heavy Truck-Involved...

Drowsy Driver-Involved

Bicyclist

Wildlife

Vehicle-Train

School bus-involved

Impairment involved

Distraction involved

Intersection related

Run off the road

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

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

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Lane Departure

Roadway Departure

Intersections

Pedestrians

Bicyclists

Older Drivers

Motorcyclists

Work Zones

Data

Impaired driver-...

Speeding-involved

Young driver age 16-...

Distracted driver...

Unrestrained...

Unlicensed driver-...

Opposite Direction...

Pedestrian

Older Driver-Involved...

Heavy Truck-Involved...

Drowsy Driver-Involved

Bicyclist

Wildlife

Vehicle-Train

School bus-involved

Impairment involved

Distraction involved

Intersection related

Run off the road

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

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

Page 72 of 80

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

1

2

3

4

5

6

Lane Departure

Roadway Departure

Intersections

Pedestrians

Bicyclists

Older Drivers

Motorcyclists

Work Zones

Data

Impaired driver-...

Speeding-involved

Young driver age 16-...

Distracted driver...

Unrestrained...

Unlicensed driver-...

Opposite Direction...

Pedestrian

Older Driver-Involved...

Heavy Truck-Involved...

Drowsy Driver-Involved

Bicyclist

Wildlife

Vehicle-Train

School bus-involved

Impairment involved

Distraction involved

Intersection related

Run off the road

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Lane Departure

Roadway Departure

Intersections

Pedestrians

Bicyclists

Older Drivers

Motorcyclists

Work Zones

Data

Impaired driver-...

Speeding-involved

Young driver age 16-...

Distracted driver...

Unrestrained...

Unlicensed driver-...

Opposite Direction...

Pedestrian

Older Driver-Involved...

Heavy Truck-Involved...

Drowsy Driver-Involved

Bicyclist

Wildlife

Vehicle-Train

School bus-involved

Impairment involved

Distraction involved

Intersection related

Run off the road

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

Page 73 of 80

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

Page 74 of 80

Project Effectiveness

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

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?

No
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 75 of 80

Compliance Assessment

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

 08/18/2016

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2012 To: 2014

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

 2019

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

The state is in the process of updating the SHSP.

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) 100 100 100 100 100 98

Route Number (8) 100 100

Route/Street Name (9) 100 100

Federal Aid/Route Type 

(21)

100 100

Rural/Urban Designation 

(20)

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 100 9 100 100

Begin Point Segment 

Descriptor (10)

100 100 100 100 100 98

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

100 100 100 100 100 98

Segment Length (13) 100 100

Direction of Inventory (18) 100 100

Functional Class (19) 100 100 100 100 100 98

Median Type (54) 100 5
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 76 of 80

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

Access Control (22) 100 10

One/Two Way Operations 

(91)

100 100

Number of Through Lanes 

(31)

100 100 100 100

Average Annual Daily 

Traffic (79)

100 100 100 0

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION

Unique Junction Identifier 

(120)

0 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 1 Crossing Point 

(122)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Road 2 Crossing Point 

(123)

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

100 5

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road (79)

100 100

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

100 100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP

Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Beginning of 

Ramp Terminal (197)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

100 100

Ramp Length (187) 100 100

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

100 100
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 77 of 80

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 Type at End 

Ramp Terminal (199)

100 100

Interchange Type (182) 0 0

Ramp AADT (191) 75 100

Year of Ramp AADT (192) 100 100

Functional Class (19) 100 100

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100

Totals (Average Percent 

Complete):

100.00 84.67 87.50 75.63 88.64 90.91 100.00 88.89 100.00 98.40

*Based on Functional Classification

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

Many current production data elements have been collected over a period of decades with varying degrees of precision and accuracy. We also know that changes to the system take place without our knowledge/involvement, such as a 

local developer doing work on our highway system. This data is not always captured on a highway construction contract. We are therefore, unable to identify and report these changes.

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.

WSDOT is in the process of implementing ESRI’s Roads and Highways and Transcend Tools that will help us capture the remaining elements on our state routes and CRAB is in the process of forming a MIRE technical steering 

committee for the purpose of coordinating the collection the counties MIRE FDE’s elements. WSDOT has been invited to participate on this committee which should also help bridge any gaps we may have between state and county 

roadways. The challenge is going to be getting the local system collected which is where we would rely on the Local Programs Office for outreach and coordination with local agencies to help with this effort.

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 No N/A No N/A No

Crash Report Form Instruction Manual Suspected Serious Injury Yes Suspected Serious Injury (Serious Injury) –

applies to any injury other than fatal

that results in one or more of the following: 

Severe lacerations resulting in

exposure of underlying 

tissues/muscle/organs or resulting in 

significant loss of blood, broken or distorted 

extremity, crush injuries, suspected skull, 

chest, or abdominal injury other than 

bruises or minor lacerations, significant 

burns, unconsciousness when taken from 

the scene, paralysis.

Yes N/A Yes

Crash Database Suspected Serious Injury Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 78 of 80

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 Database Data Dictionary Suspected Serious Injury Yes Applies when law enforcement officer 

observes any injury that results in one or 

more of the following:

•Severe lacerations resulting in exposure of 

underlying tissues/muscle/organs or 

resulting in significant loss of blood

•Broken or distorted extremity (arm or 

leg)or Crush injuries 

•Suspected skull, chest or abdominal injury 

other than bruises or minor lacerations

•Significant burns (2nd/3rd degree over 

10% or more of the body)

•Unconsciousness when taken from the 

crash scene

Paralysis

Yes N/A Yes

Please describe the actions the State is taking to become compliant by April 15, 2019.

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?

Yes

Describe the purpose and outcomes of the State’s HSIP program assessment.

The WSDOT reviewed its overall program and approach to HSIP projects and reporting this assessment was not formal.
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 79 of 80

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2018 Washington Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 80 of 80

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.