New Jersey

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2016 Annual Report

Prepared by: NJ
ii

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.”
iii

Table of Contents

Disclaimer...................................................................................................................................................... ii

Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 1

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

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

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

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

Progress in Implementing Projects............................................................................................................. 14

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................. 14

General Listing of Projects.................................................................................................................. 17

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets .................................................................................... 24

Overview of General Safety Trends........................................................................................................ 24

Application of Special Rules.................................................................................................................... 39

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................41

SHSP Emphasis Areas.............................................................................................................................. 44

Groups of similar project types............................................................................................................... 48

Systemic Treatments............................................................................................................................... 53

Project Evaluation....................................................................................................................................... 60

Glossary....................................................................................................................................................... 62
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

Executive Summary

The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) went into effect on December 4, 2015. The 

FAST Act continues the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) as a core Federal-aid program to 

achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads, including nonState-owned public roads. 

The FAST Act requires the development of a Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), a High Risk Rural 

Roads Program (HRRRP) and the Railway-Highway Crossings Program (RHXP). In order to obligate HSIP 

funds, states are required to (1) develop, implement and update a SHSP; (2) produce a program of 

projects or strategies to reduce identified safety problems; (3) evaluate the plan on a regular basis, and 

(4) submit an annual transparency report. 

HSIP requires a data-driven, strategic approach to improving highway safety on all public roads that 

focuses on performance. 

New Jersey has analyzed roadway safety performance as described in the table “Overview of General 

Safety Trends”. Over the five year period, 2011- 2015, the New Jersey’s five-year rolling average for the 

fatalities as well as fatality rates dropped approximately 7% and 8% respectively. Similarly, for the 

number of serious injuries and serious injury rates, the five-year rolling average dropped approximately 

29% and 30% respectively. However, over the same five-year period, the actual number of crashes 

resulting in fatalities and incapacitating injuries in each year has fluctuated. 

NJDOT has a broad spectrum of safety programs designed to reduce the frequency and severity of 

crashes as follows: 

• Intersection Improvement Program; 

• Crash Reduction Program (Road Departure and Corridor Segment); 

• Utility Pole Mitigation Program; 

• Pedestrian Safety Improvement Program; 

• Rail Highway Grade Crossing Program (State); 

• Rail Highway Grade Crossing Program (Federal); 

• High Risk Rural Roads Program; and the 

• Local Safety Program 

NJDOT continued to employ a data-driven systemic safety improvement approach that concentrated our 

resources and focused our energies on high risk roadway features that correlate with specific severe 

crash types. Using crash data, NJDOT screened New Jersey roadways for center line cross over, head-on 

crashes. A systemic Center Line Rumble Stripes Program was developed in 2014. At this time centerline 
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

2

rumble stripes continue to be installed on all the state roads that meet the criteria to mitigate these 

head-on crashes. NJDOT also encourages and supports, the local partners for the installation of 

centerline rumble stripes on their roadways. 

New Jersey continued to expand its use of systemic safety improvements with respect to roadway 

departure crashes. In 2015, New Jersey developed a pilot program to provide high friction surface 

treatment on roadway curves which experience high roadway departure crashes such as fixed object 

and overturn crashes. Two projects, Interstate Ramps Pilot Project and Land Service Roads Pilot Project, 

are currently in the design process. In addition, in late 2015, the systemic pilot program was developed 

for intersection improvements which has been identified by FHWA as a Focus Approach to Safety 

category and is an identified emphasis area for New Jersey. Under this program, counties and 

municipalities are encouraged to construct roundabouts, where feasible, as this is one of the FHWA 

proven countermeasures for intersections. This is also done to get the New Jersey residents familiar 

with the safety benefits of roundabout who are resistance to incorporating design with modern 

roundabout due to New Jersey's history with wide use of traffic circles. The program has been well 

received and NJDOT has already received eight applications for roundabout projects. 

New Jersey has completed the first update to their Strategic Highway Safety Plan. As per the updated 

2015 Strategic Highway Safety Plan, New Jersey has adopted the national vision for highway safety -

Toward Zero Deaths: A National Strategy on Highway Safety (Toward Zero Deaths). This calls for a 

national goal of reducing the number of traffic fatalities by half by the year 2030. As a part of New 

Jersey's updated SHSP, New Jersey's crash reduction goal is to reduce serious injuries and fatalities by 

2.5 percent annually with the support of all safety partners. The SHSP is linked to the New Jersey 

Highway Safety Plan, prepared by the New Jersey Division of Highway Traffic Safety (NJDHTS), and the 

New Jersey Comprehensive Statewide Freight Plan, prepared by the New Jersey Department of 

Transportation. Both agencies, in collaboration with their safety partners, are committed to 

implementing the SHSP. This is evidenced in the identified emphasis areas and strategies. The plan 

provides NJDOT Infrastructure related direction and focuses on lane departure, intersections, and 

pedestrians as a top priority. 

New Jersey’s commitment to an effective data driven program is evidenced in fiscal goals established in 

the SHSP update. The update provides direction to focus approximately 40 percent of the annual HSIP 

funding on state highways and 60 percent on county and municipal network in line with the current 

distribution of serious injuries and fatalities. In the current reporting period, NJDOT has supported 

approximately $23 million out of approximate $42.5 million anticipated obligated funds for projects on 

the local system, which nearly aligns with the percentage of fatal and serious injury crashes on local 

roadways. 

New Jersey continues to be proactive with respect to implementation and use of New Jersey’s updated 

SHSP. While a complete update to the SHSP is required every 4 years, NJDOT, along with the New Jersey 

Division of Highway Traffic Safety (NJDHTS) will review progress against the plan on an annual basis. To 
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

aid in this task, NJDOT is in the process of developing a 5 year outlook HSIP Action Plan incorporating 

emphasis area, agency, strategy/action (project), performance objective, investment level and resource. 

Also, NJDOT is in the process of developing Safety Performance Targets for next year’s HSIP. NJDOT is 

coordinating with NJDHTS to help develop these Safety Performance Targets prior to next year’s 

submission of Highway Safety Plan (HSP). 

The NJDOT’s vision is shared by safety stakeholders, involved State agencies, each of the three regional 

Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) covering New Jersey, counties and municipalities through 

their respective safety advisory committees. Also, New Jersey recognizes the benefits of collaboration in 

achieving overall safety. Over the last year, NJDOT has attended numerous peer exchanges to share and 

obtain knowledge to help better our program. FHWA resource center provides continued technical 

support to NJDOT and MPOs with the use and understanding of AASHTO’s Highway Safety Manual to 

perform project analyses. The NJDOT along with the MPOs have utilized these resources to provide the 

support to counties and municipalities. NJDOT has made design assistance funding available to all MPOs 

and has increased technical support provided to the MPOs with the performing/assisting of HSM 

analyses as well as other activities related to the HSIP program. NJDOT also provides support and 

encouragement to MPOs to use innovative techniques for intersection design under EDC-2 initiative and 

Data-Driven Safety Analysis (DDSA) and Road Diets under EDC-3. New Jersey was featured in an EDC-3 

DDSA high level video (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc-3/ddsa.cfm) along 

with a New Jersey Case Study video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHv086TQ2LI) for its use of 

innovative approaches to solve safety issues. Going forward, NJDOT will assist the MPOs in the 

monitoring and investigation of evaluated projects that, at this time, did not meet expectations. 

NJTPA 

The North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) is the MPO serving the 13-county northern 

New Jersey region. NJTPA continues to work with its federal partners, the New Jersey Department of 

Transportation (NJDOT), NJ TRANSIT, member counties and cities and other state and local agencies to 

make travel safer and more reliable for all users of the region's transportation system. 

The NJTPA is proactive when it comes to safety, actively engaging in Safety Conscious Planning. While 

traditional safety planning is reactive—a problem is identified through crash data analysis and then the 

appropriate engineering, enforcement and/or education countermeasures are implemented—Safety 

Conscious Planning integrates safety into all phases of transportation improvement planning and 

development so that safety is an integral part of all decision-making. 

FY 2016 marked the 11th year of the Local Safety Program (LSP) and 6th year of the High Risk Rural 

Roads Program (HRRRP). Prior to FY 2014, the NJTPA had an annual apportionment of $3 million for 

both programs combined. This apportionment was subsequently increased by NJDOT, and in FY 2014 

$16.3 million was obligated followed, by $18.3 million in FY 2015. In January 2015, The NJTPA Board of 
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

Trustees approved a FY 2016-2017 LSP/HRRRP program of over $32 Million. $10 million is anticipated to 

be obligated in FY 2016, with the balance anticipated to be authorized in FY 2017. 

The NJTPA recognizes the need to assist member counties and cities in preparing plans, specs & 

estimates (PS&E) for construction authorization of projects in both programs. In FY2013, the NJTPA 

created the Local Safety Engineering Assistance Program (LSEAP). This annual program has grown from 

38% of the projects in the program year requesting engineering assistance in FY 2013 to 75% requesting 

assistance in FY 2016. In another measure, the program has increased from one consultant and five 

design projects to four consultants and sixteen projects. This engineering assistance program has 

resulted in high levels of timely, high quality documentation submitted for authorization and has 

improved the state’s ability to successfully address safety issues on local roads, where 60% of crashes 

occur. For more information on the location safety program, visit the webpage: 

http://www.njtpa.org/local-safety. 

Another recent NJTPA initiative, Street Smart NJ is a public education, awareness and behavioral change 

pedestrian safety campaign first piloted in 2013 by five New Jersey municipalities. The program has 

been expanded to run vigorous campaigns in 12 partner communities in 2016, as well as to encourage 

and support additional communities and the Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) to run 

their own campaigns. Street Smart NJ uses outdoor, transit and online advertising, along with grassroots 

public awareness efforts and law enforcement to address pedestrian safety. Street Smart NJ emphasizes 

educating drivers and pedestrians through mass media, as well as targeted enforcement. It 

complements, but doesn’t replace, other state and local efforts to build safer streets and sidewalks, 

enforce laws and train better roadway users. The Street Smart NJ program was expanded in 2016 to 

include six new partner communities — Elizabeth, Passaic, Toms River, Lakewood, Red Bank, Metuchen 

and Franklin Borough in Sussex County. Throughout March 2016, every partner — with the exception of 

Long Beach Island, which runs summer campaigns —participated in the Street Smart NJ program. In 

addition, several New Jersey shore communities (Asbury Park, Belmar, Bradley Beach, and Manasquan) 

conducted campaigns over the summer, reaching thousands of beach goers. For more information, visit 

the campaign website www.bestreetsmartnj.org. 

In addition, the NJTPA worked with Newark to develop the City of Newark Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety 

Action Plan, which was completed in February 2016 and adopted by the City Council in May 2016. The 

plan's intent is two-fold: to serve as a guide for city staff to prioritize locations of greatest concern and 

also to inform the public where the city intends to focus its efforts. The plan has identified specific 

treatments for high crash locations which will provide the city with the data needed for future HSIP 

project applications. For more information, visit the webpage: http://njtpa.org/planning/regionalstudies/bicycle-pedestrian/newark-safety-action-plan. 

DVRPC 
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) is the MPO that serves four counties in 

central New Jersey: Burlington, Camden, Gloucester and Mercer. 

DVRPC conducted a formal project application solicitation in January of 2016 for the Local Federal HSIP 

and HRRR Programs, offering design assistance (for completion of final PS&E packages by a consultant 

and paid for with HSIP) and construction funds. Though no completed applications were received, 

DVRPC worked with Camden, Gloucester and Burlington Counties on potential candidates. Progress was 

made in the advancement of two earlier applications. Specifically, the Mt Ephraim Avenue Corridor-wide 

Pedestrian Safety Improvements application was granted HSIP for Concept Development. Also advanced 

was preliminary engineering for the Mercer County Brunswick Circle Extension Roundabout. Consultant 

selection process was conducted in July and August for these two projects. 

In addition, under the systemic pilot program for intersection improvements on local roadways, the 

Gloucester County roundabout, at the intersection of Auburn Road (CR 551) and High Hill Road (CR 662), 

was the first roundabout funded. Since, two more roundabouts have been identified as candidates for 

this program. 

Lastly, DVRPC along with Burlington County was featured in the EDC-3 Data Driven Safety Analysis video 

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHv086TQ2LI) for its use of innovative intersections as well as 

data driven approaches to safety. Burlington County implemented a roundabout at a data-driven 

location which was the scene of a fatal crash earlier this decade. This project was paid for with HSIP and 

the HSM was used to measure the project benefit. DVRPC facilitated this collaborative effort which 

involved NJDOT and FHWA, with assistance from SJTPO. 

SJTPO 

The South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization (SJTPO) is the MPO serving four counties in 

southern New Jersey. 

Building off activities to strengthen its Local Safety Program in recent years, SJTPO continues to engage 

their local partners in an effort to reduce the number of fatal injury crashes and fatalities. SJTPO utilizes 

a robust yet intuitive, project application, which guides applicants through a five-step process: selecting 

a location; identifying the problem; determining an appropriate safety improvement; measuring its 

effectiveness, and checking for barriers to implementation. This process ensures a well-supported, datadriven approach to project selection. 

In working towards authorization of our FY 2016 projects, SJTPO continued to partner with NJDOT 

Traffic Data & Safety in the State to understand and incorporate the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) 

safety performance analysis. Together with benefit/cost analysis, these analyses were utilized to 
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed hot spot projects. 

As New Jersey is a focus state for both intersection and pedestrian crashes, network screening lists 

developed for each of the MPO regions including both County and Municipal owned roadways, include a 

focus on “At Intersection”, pedestrian corridor, pedestrian spot crashes utilizing a weighted severity 

scale. These lists are shared with the local governments and guides hot spot project location selection.

Additionally, SJTPO has worked closely with NJDOT staff, FHWA-NJ Division, and the other MPOs to 

develop two pilot projects for the installation of roundabouts and road diets. As both FHWA Proven 

Safety Countermeasures are not widely used in the State, the partners felt it was crucial to encourage 

their use. SJTPO staff is working with their subregions to select good candidate for both pilot projects 

and hopes to have several roundabouts installed in their region, which has been historically opposed to 

their installation because of their experience with traffic circles and the counterintuitive nature of road 

diets. 

With our FY 2016 projects, SJTPO has worked to invest HSIP funding through a mix of hot spot locations 

and systemic installations of centerline rumble strips; installing approximately 165 miles of centerline 

rumble strip in both Cumberland and Salem Counties. Along with their State partners, SJTPO is excited 

to investigate other systemic applications addressing lane departure and pedestrian crashes in the 

upcoming year. 

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 MAP-21 Reporting Guidance dated February 13, 2013 and consists 

of four sections: program structure, progress in implementing HSIP projects, 

progress in achieving safety performance targets, and assessment of the 

effectiveness of the improvements. 

Program Structure

Program Administration

How are Highway Safety Improvement Program funds allocated in a State? 

Central
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

Describe how local roads are addressed as part of Highway Safety Improvement Program.

Local Roadways are eligible for HSIP improvements through application with the respective MPOs. All 

Local Roadways in New Jersey are covered by one of three MPOs – NJTPA, SJTPO, or DVRPC. NJDOT 

oversees the production of network screening lists for each of the MPO regions, including both County 

and Municipal owned roadways, which help the MPOs prioritize their projects. As New Jersey is a focus 

state for both intersection and pedestrian crashes, screening lists include a focus on Intersection, 

Pedestrian Corridor, High Risk Rural Roads, and Pedestrian Intersection crashes utilizing a weighted 

severity scale. These lists were shared with local roadway owners and government officials in order to 

help select regional priority locations to development HSIP funded projects, and better invest the 

increased local system funding efforts.

Identify which internal partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Design

Planning

Operations

Other-Project Management

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

NJDOT's Bureau of Transportation Data and Safety, under the Assistant Commissioner of Capital 

Investment Planning and Grant Administration is responsible for crash data compilation, analysis and 

program development. The Division of Project Management under the Assistant Commissioner of 

Capital Program Management is responsible for final design and implementation of improvements. New 

Jersey's HSIP Manual identifies the process for coordination and delivery of HSIP projects for roadways 

under state jurisdiction. This manual has been recently updated. Regular meetings are conducted 

between Capital Investment Planning & Grant Administration and staff from Division of Program 

Management under Division of Project Management to monitor and assist as the projects move through 

project development to advertisement. NJDOT supports the advancement of projects under local 

jurisdiction by participating in the Technical Assistance Team for local safety projects. The Technical 

Assistance Team consist of NJDOT's Safety, Environmental, and Local Aid staff. NJDOT's Division of Local 

Aid, under the Assistant Commissioner of Capital Investment Planning and Grant Administration is 

responsible for coordinating with the MPOs in the selection, authorization and oversight of projects 

implemented on the local road network. 

Identify which external partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Metropolitan Planning Organizations
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Government Association

Identify any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since 

the last reporting period.

Other-NJDOT continues to refine the transition to the revised program delivery process. NJDOT is 

additionally increasing the portfolio of projects identified using the systemic approach. 

Other-all projects whether under state or local jurisdiction now include a Highway Safety Manual 

evaluation to ensure that invested HSIP funds maximize the return on investment to improved safety 

performance.

Describe any other aspects of Highway Safety Improvement Program Administration on which you 

would like to elaborate.

The Assistant Commissioner of Capital Investment Planning and Grant Administration continues to 

conduct quarterly collaboration meetings with all three MPOs along with subject matter experts at the 

NJDOT. These meetings promote partnering with a focus on safety. NJDOT’s Division of Local Aid 

coordinates with the MPOs on regular basis to ensure advancement of Local Safety Projects.

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

Intersection Roadway Departure Local Safety

Pedestrian Safety Segments Other-High Risk Rural Roads

Other-Utility Pole Mitigation

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2015

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

All crashes

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Using the ranking to identify priorities, NJDOT selects and implements projects.

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

Cost Effectiveness 1

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology: 9/16/2008

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Lane miles Roadside features

Other-Horizontal Curvature

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Sites identified based on methodology developed for systemic treatment for roadway departure 

crashes

Other-Using the ranking to identify priorities, NJDOT selects and implement projects

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 
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

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 net benefit 1

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 9/16/2005

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other-Priority given to State's focus areas

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

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

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

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

Relative Weight in Scoring

Available funding 20

Ranking based on net benefit 60

Project to address established 

safety problem as shown through 

crash history, risk-based 

(systemic) analysis and/or local 

roadway knowledge

20
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 9/16/2011

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

Other-Pedestrian Crashes Other-NJ is a pedestrian focus 

state

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

Other-Pedestrian generators

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Using the ranking to identify priorities, NJDOT selects and implements projects.

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 net benefit 1

FHWA Ped Focus State 1

Program: Segments

Date of Program Methodology: 2/1/2016

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Volume

Lane miles

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

Other-Exposure is taken into consideration

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Using the ranking to identify priorities, NJDOT selects and implement projects

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

Cost Effectiveness 1

Program: Other-High Risk Rural Roads

Date of Program Methodology: 9/16/2005

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Functional classification

Other-Rural

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

Crash rate

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

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).
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

Relative Weight in Scoring

Available funding 20

Ranking based on net benefit 60

Project to address established 

safety problem as shown through 

crash history, risk-based 

(systemic) analysis and/or local 

roadway knowledge.

20

Program: Other-Utility Pole Mitigation

Date of Program Methodology: 10/1/2015

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

Other-Fixed Object crashes Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-by ranking

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

Field investigation 1

What proportion of highway safety improvement program funds address systemic improvements? 

29%
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

Highway safety improvement program funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements?

Rumble Strips

Other-High Friction Surface Treatment

Other-Local pilot roundabouts

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Other-with alternatives Analysis utilizing the HSM

Identify any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since the 

last reporting period.

Other-The Safe Corridor program has been eliminated

Other-Corridor Segment program has been added

Other-Utility Pole Mitigation program has been added

Other-Systemic countermeasure treatments increased (HFST, Pilot Roundabouts)

Describe any other aspects of the Highway Safety Improvement Program methodology on which you 

would like to elaborate. 

N/A

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

Federal Fiscal Year
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

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

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

$19,700,000.00

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

$23,056,214.00

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

$5,347,000.00

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

$7,659,000.00

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

period?

$0.00

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

period?

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

HSIP (Section 148) $43,872,000.00 93 % $40,018,054.00 94 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU) $0.00 0 % $0.00 0 %

HRRR Special Rule $3,300,000.00 7 % $2,475,160.00 6 %

Totals $47,172,000.00 100% $42,493,214.00 100%
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

$0.00

Discuss impediments to obligating Highway Safety Improvement Program funds and plans to 

overcome this in the future.

N/A

Describe any other aspects of the general Highway Safety Improvement Program implementation 

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

N/A
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

General Listing of Projects

List each highway safety improvement project obligated during the reporting period. 

Project Improvement Category Outpu

t 

HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Fundi

ng 

Categ

ory

Function

al 

Classifica

tion

AA

DT

Spe

ed

Roadw

ay 

Owners

hip

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasi

s Area

Strategy

2016 Staff Work 

Program - Rail

Non-infrastructure 

Transportation safety 

planning

0 24980

00

24980

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Statewid

e

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Planning Staff Work 

Program - Rail

2016 Staff Work 

Program - Safety

Non-infrastructure 

Transportation safety 

planning

0 20990

00

20990

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Statewid

e

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Planning Staff Work 

Program -

Safety

2016 Statewide 

Utility Pole 

Relocation/Repla

cement

Roadside Removal of 

roadside objects (trees, 

poles, etc.)

0 14500

0

14500

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Statewid

e

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Relocation of 

utility pole

2016 Utility Pole 

Relocation/Repla

cement (DVRPC)

Roadside Removal of 

roadside objects (trees, 

poles, etc.)

0 10000

0

10000

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

DVRPC 

area

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Relocation of 

utility pole

2016 Utility Pole 

Relocation/Repla

cement (NJTPA)

Roadside Removal of 

roadside objects (trees, 

poles, etc.)

0 20000

0

20000

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

NJTPA 

area

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Relocation of 

utility pole

2016 Utility Pole 

Relocation/Repla

Roadside Removal of 

roadside objects (trees, 

0 16000

0

16000

0

HSIP 

(Secti

SJTPO 

area

0 0 State 

Highwa

Relocation of 

utility pole
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

cement (SJTPO) poles, etc.) on 

148)

y 

Agency

2016 Verifiers Non-infrastructure 

Transportation safety 

planning

0 23120

00

23120

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Statewid

e

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Data Staff work -

verifies

Bergen St - Ped 

Safety Corridor 

Improvements -

FD

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

3 

Numb

ers

12200

0

12200

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 25 City of 

Munici

pal 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Pedestri

ans

Provide 

crosswalk 

enhancement

s, including 

curb ext

Broad St (CR 11) 

& Bergen Place, 

Red Bank - FD

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replace

ment

1 

Numb

ers

11700

0

11700

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 30 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

D1-Improve 

visibility of 

signals

Byram-Kingwood 

Road (CR 651) 

from CR 519 to 

SR 29 

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

0 62000 62000 HRRR 

Specia

l Rule

Rural 

Local 

Road or 

Street

0 40 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

High friction 

treatment

CR 524 (Stage 

Coach Road) 

Improvements 

and Resurfa

Roadway 

Superelevation / cross 

slope

0 11700

0

11700

0

HRRR 

Specia

l Rule

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 50 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Superelevatio

n 

improvement

s

Garden Road & 

Mill Road Traffic 

Signalization - FD

Intersection traffic 

control Intersection 

traffic control - other

1 

Numb

ers

10000

0

10000

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

122

00

45 City of 

Munici

pal 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

Convert twoway stop 

control to 

traffic signal

HFST Pilot 

Program at Route 

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

3.27 

Miles

25700

0

25700

0

HSIP 

(Secti

Rural and 

Urban 

0 0 State 

Highwa

Roadway 

Departur

Install High 

Friction 
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

I-80 Interchanges 

(25%

surface on 

148)

Interstat

e

y 

Agency

e Surface 

Treatment

HFST Pilot 

Program at Route 

I-80 Interchanges 

(25%

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

3.27 

Miles

30820

00

30820

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Rural and 

Urban 

Interstat

e

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Install High 

Friction 

Surface 

Treatment

Intersection 

Improvements at 

CR 551 (Auburn 

Rd.) a

Intersection traffic 

control Modify control 

- two-way stop to 

roundabout

1

Numb

ers

10000

00

10000

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Major 

Collector

150

00

35 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

Install 

roundabouts 

to control 

traffic and 

reduce 

JFK Blvd E at 

Bergenline 

Improvements -

FD

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replace

ment

2 

Numb

ers

38775 38775 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 25 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

D1-Improve 

visibility of 

signals

Mercer 

Roundabout - PE

Intersection traffic 

control Modify control 

- two-way stop to 

roundabout

1 

Numb

ers

19000

0

19000

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

205

00

25 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

Install 

roundabouts 

to reduce 

conflicts

MLK Blvd - Ped 

Safety Corridor 

Improvements 

(Newar

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists Medians and 

pedestrian refuge areas

2 

Numb

ers

13100

0

13100

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Major 

Collector

0 25 City of 

Munici

pal 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Pedestri

ans

Provide 

crosswalk 

enhancement

s, including 

curb ext

MLK Blvd 

Intersection 

Improvements 

(Jersey City) -

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists Pedestrian 

signal - install new at 

intersection

0 86500

0

86500

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 25 City of 

Munici

pal 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Pedestri

ans

upgrade 

traffic and 

pedestrian 

signals

Mt. Ephraim Pedestrians and 1.4 30000 30000 HSIP Urban 120 35 County Pedestri lighting and 
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

Avenue Safety 

Improvements -

pedestria

bicyclists Miscellaneous 

pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miles 0 0 (Secti

on 

148)

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

00 Highwa

y 

Agency

ans other 

pedestrian 

improvement

s

NJ 47 and 

Almond, 

Vineland - CON

Intersection traffic 

control Intersection 

traffic control - other

1 

Numb

ers

21000 21000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

161

39

40 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

Improve lane 

use

NJ 47 and Forest 

Grove, Vineland -

CON

Intersection traffic 

control Intersection 

flashers - add 

miscellaneous/other/u

nspecified

1 

Numb

ers

32000

0

32000

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

161

39

40 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

Flashing 

beacon 

installation

Passaic CLRS -

CON - Systemic

Roadway Rumble strips 

- center

0 80000

0

80000

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

NJTPA 

area -

Passaic 

County

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Lane 

Departur

e

install 

centerline 

rumble strips

Passaic 

Horizontal Curve 

High Friction 

Surface Tre

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

0 53760

00

53760

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

NJTPA 

area -

Passaic 

County

0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

provide skidresisteant 

pavement 

surfaces

Paterson Plank 

Rd (CR 681) at 

Webster Ave 

Improvem

Intersection traffic 

control Intersection 

traffic control - other

0 43439 43439 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 25 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Pedestri

ans

Install traffic 

and 

pedestrian 

signals

Route 15 & 

Berkshire Valley 

Road (CR 699) -

PE

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal timing - left-turn 

phasing (permissive to 

protected/permissive)

2 

Numb

ers

80000

0

80000

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressw

ays

480

00

55 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

Provide/Impr

ove left-turn 

channelizatio

ns
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

21

Stuyvesant 

Avenue (CR 619) 

& 18th Avenue, 

South Or

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replace

ment

0 27210

00

27210

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 35 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

D1-Improve 

visibility of 

signals

Summit Ave 

Intersection 

Improvement 

Phase III (Cha

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists Modify 

existing crosswalk

12 

Numb

ers

45000

0

45000

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 25 City of 

Munici

pal 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Pedestri

ans

improve 

pavement 

markings at 

intersections

US 130 and 30/38 

(Airport Circle), 

Pennsauken - CO

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replace

ment

3 

Numb

ers

31000 31000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

640

00

40 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

signal 

upgrade

US 130 and 

Union, 

Pennsauken -

CON

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replace

ment

1 

Numb

ers

34000 34000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

392

60

50 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

signal 

upgrade

US 206 

Whitehorse Circle 

- CON

Intersection traffic 

control Modify control 

- modifications to 

roundabout

1 

Numb

ers

47060

00

47060

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 45 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

Conver a 

traffic circle to 

a modern 

roundabout

US 22 

Westbound 

(Vauxhall to Bloy) 

- FD

Roadway Roadway 

widening - travel lanes

0.5 

Miles

12550

00

12550

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

604

24

45 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Congesti

on

Adding 

auxiliary lanes

US 40/322 and 

Rt.9 and Decatur, 

Pleasantville - CO

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replace

1 

Numb

ers

78000 78000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

230

09

40 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

signal 

upgrade
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

22

ment

W. Seventh St 

(CR 601) 

Intersection 

Improvements -

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replace

ment

3 

Numb

ers

82000 82000 HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 35 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

D1-Improve 

visibility of 

signals

Washington 

Avenue (CR 503) 

Phase I & II 

(Bergen) -

Roadway Roadway -

other

1.36 

Miles

30020

00

30020

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

200

00

40 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Pedestri

ans

provide 

sidewalks/wal

kways and 

curb ramps

2016 Safety 

Programs 

Consultant 

Services - CD

Non-infrastructure 

Transportation safety 

planning

0 75000

0

75000

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Statewid

e

0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Safety 

Program

s 

Consulta

nt 

Services

Horizontal Curve 

Safety 

Treatment, Rt 47 

and RT 5

Roadway Pavement 

surface - high friction 

surface

0 58900

0

58900

0

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Multiple 0 0 State 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Roadway 

Departur

e

Install High 

Friction 

Surface 

Treatment

Lyons Avenue (CR 

602) (different 

segment from 

FFY1

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replace

ment

0 33800

00

33800

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 25 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

D1-Improve 

visibility of 

signals

Chancellor 

Avenue (CR 601) -

(different 

segment fr

Intersection traffic 

control Modify traffic 

signal -

modernization/replace

ment

0 31040

00

31040

00

HSIP 

(Secti

on 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 25 County 

Highwa

y 

Agency

Intersect

ions

D1-Improve 

visibility of 

signals

Burlington 

County CLRS 

Local Pilot (Rural 

Roadway Rumble strips 

- center

94 

Miles

10550

00

10550

00

HRRR 

Specia

l Rule

Multiple 0 0 County 

Highwa

y 

Lane 

Departur

e

Minimize 

roadway 

Departure 
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

miles) - Agency crashes
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General Safety Trends

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

Performance Measures* 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Number of fatalities 616 589 580 574 575

Number of serious injuries 1709 1593 1468 1339 1218

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 0.84 0.81 0.79 0.78 0.77

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 2.33 2.19 2.01 1.82 1.64

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

25
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

26
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

27

To the maximum extent possible, present performance measure* data by functional classification and ownership. 

Year - 2015

Function Classification Number of fatalities Number of serious injuries Fatality rate (per HMVMT) Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

6 3 0.53 0.23

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

19 25 1.48 1.93

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

14 15 2.07 2.17

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

4 7 1.89 3.04

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

17 30 1.87 3.31

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

18 9 2.99 1.45

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

60 50 0.42 0.36

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

49 47 0.4 0.38
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

28

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

154 287 0.94 1.76

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

120 252 1.08 2.27

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

51 84 0.49 0.8

OTHER 23 315

URBAN COLLECTOR -

MAJOR AND MINOR

39 95 0.78 1.96
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

29
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

30
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

31
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

32
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

33

Year - 2015

Roadway Ownership Number of 

fatalities

Number of serious 

injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

STATE HIGHWAY AGENCY 241 330 0.81 1.11

COUNTY HIGHWAY AGENCY 180 346 1.23 2.36

CITY OF MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY 

AGENCY

105 88 1.49 1.31

OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 1 0.52

STATE TOLL AUTHORITY 51 44 0.37 0.33

OTHER 410
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

34
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

35
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

36
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

37
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

38
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

39

Describe any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which you would like to elaborate.

N/A

Application of Special Rules

Present the rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over the 

age of 65. 

Older Driver

Performance Measures

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Fatality rate (per capita) 0.052 0.072 0.088 0.09 0.088

Serious injury rate (per 

capita)

0.084 0.104 0.13 0.118 0.108

Fatality and serious injury 

rate (per capita)

0.138 0.178 0.218 0.208 0.196

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.

NJ Population of 65 Years and Older (In Thousands)

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

1150 1169 1191 1207 1250 1284 1312

As per: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/guidance/guideolder.cfm

NJ Census Estimates

2008 = 8,663,398

2009 = 8,707,739

2010 = 8,803,881

2011 = 8,842,934

2012 = 8,874,893

2013 = 8,907,384

2014 = 8,938,844

As per: https://www.census.gov/popest/data/historical/2000s/index.html

 https://www.census.gov/popest/data/index.html
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

40

For Fatal Rate:

[(F 2014 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2014 Population Figure) + (F 2013 Drivers 

and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2013 Population Figure) + (F 2012 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 

years of age and older/2012 Population Figure) + (F 2011 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and 

older /2011 Population Figure) + (F 2010 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2010 

Population Figure)] / 5

[(103/1312) + (118/1248) + (96/1250) + (121/1207) + (113/1191)]/5

For Serious Injury Rate:

[(SI 2014 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2014 Population Figure) + (SI 2013 Drivers 

and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2013 Population Figure) + (SI 2012 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 

years of age and older/2012 Population Figure) + (SI 2011 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and 

older /2011 Population Figure) + (SI 2010 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2010 

Population Figure)] / 5

[(118/1312) + (115/1248) + (159/1250) + (124/1207) + (155/1191)]/5

For Fatality and Serious Injury Rate:

[(F+SI 2014 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2014 Population Figure) + (F+SI 2013 

Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2013 Population Figure) + (F+SI 2012 Drivers and 

Pedestrians 65 years of age and older/2012 Population Figure) + (F+SI 2011 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 

years of age and older /2011 Population Figure) + (F+SI 2010 Drivers and Pedestrians 65 years of age and 

older/2010 Population Figure)] / 5

[(221/1312) + (233/1248) + (255/1250) + (245/1207) + (268/1191)]/5
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

41

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

42

What indicators of success can you use to demonstrate effectiveness and success in the Highway 

Safety Improvement Program?

Benefit/cost

If 'benefit/cost', indicate the overall Highway Safety Improvement Program benefit/cost ratio.

Equal or greater than 1

Policy change

if 'policy change', list the policy changes made.

Including HSM on all local projects

Other-Continue to obligate more funds to MPOs as well as to State to target crashes on public roadways

What significant programmatic changes have occurred since the last reporting period? 

Other-Implemented Corridor Segment List

Other-Aligned investments for Local and State based on Fatalities and Serious Injury crashes

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

- Safe Corridor List has been eliminated

- Corridor Segment list has been initiated with new methodology

- Systemic HFST has been initiated

- New Jersey has developed a new software application for crash data analysis called NJ Voyager

- New Jersey has purchase the license for Safety Analyst and will be working towards developing Safety 

Management Lists
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

43
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

44

SHSP Emphasis Areas

For each SHSP emphasis area that relates to the HSIP, present trends in emphasis area performance measures. 

Year - 2015

HSIP-related SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Target Crash 

Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury 

rate (per 

HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Lane Departure Run-off-road 307 615 0.41 0.83

Intersections Intersections 133 411 0.18 0.55

Older Drivers All 125 210 0.17 0.28

Motorcyclists All 66 132 0.09 0.18

Work Zones All 13 19 0.02 0.03

Reduce Young Driver 

Crashes

All 56 139 0.08 0.19

Reduce Impaired 

Driving

All 64 217 0.09 0.29

Drawsy & Distracted All 205 541 0.28 0.73

Aggressive Driving All 170 364 0.23 0.49

Ped. & Bike Vehicle-ped 

+Vehicle-bike

152 244 0.2 0.33

Unbelted All 293 517 0.39 0.7

Heavy Vehicle All 74 84 0.1 0.11

Unlicensed Drivers All 20 64 0.03 0.09

Railcar-Vehicle 2 1
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

45
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

46
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

47
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

48

Groups of similar project types
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

49

Present the overall effectiveness of groups of similar types of projects.

Year - 2015

HSIP Sub-program 

Types

Target Crash Type Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Pedestrian Safety Vehicle/pedestrian 152 219 0.2 0.29

Roadway 

Departure

Run-off-road 209 360 0.28 0.48

Local Safety All 271 741 1.37 3.76

Segments Run-off-road 437 807 0.59 1.09

Other-High Risk 

Rural Roads

All 32 45 0.04 0.06

Intersection Intersections 133 411 0.18 0.55
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

50
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

51
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

52
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

53

Systemic Treatments
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

54

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.

Year - 2015

Systemic 

improvement

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

State Cross Center 

Line Crashes

Head on 145 286 0.2 0.39
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

55
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

56
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

57
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

58
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

59

Describe any other aspects of the overall Highway Safety Improvement Program effectiveness on 

which you would like to elaborate. 

N/A
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

60

Project Evaluation

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvement 

Category

Improvement 

Type

BefFatalBefSerious 

Injury

Bef-All 

Injuries

BefPDOBefTotalAftFatalAftSerious 

Injury

Aft-All 

Injuries

AftPDOAftTotalEvaluation 

Results 

(Benefit/ Cost 

Ratio)

see 

attached 

file
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

61

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached

Program Structure: Program Administration Project Evaluation.docx

Program Structure: Program Administration 2016 ASR General Notes.docx
2016 New Jersey Highway Safety Improvement Program

62

Glossary

5 year rolling average means the average of five individual, 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 noninfrastructure 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.