Utah

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2014 Annual Report

Prepared by: UT
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 .................................................................................................................................................. 2

Program Structure ........................................................................................................................................ 2

Program Administration ........................................................................................................................... 2

Program Methodology.............................................................................................................................. 5

Progress in Implementing Projects............................................................................................................. 11

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................. 11

General Listing of Projects.................................................................................................................. 14

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets .................................................................................... 26

Overview of General Safety Trends........................................................................................................ 26

Application of Special Rules.................................................................................................................... 40

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................42

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

Groups of similar project types............................................................................................................... 51

Systemic Treatments............................................................................................................................... 56

Glossary....................................................................................................................................................... 68
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

Executive Summary

UDOT continues to have success lowering the numbers and rates of serious and fatal injuries. The 

statewide 5-year rolling averages show steady declines from 2009 through 2013. The decline of serious 

and fatal injuries holds true for nearly all crash types, roadway functional classifications, roadway 

ownership (State and non-State) categories, and SHSP focus areas. Because the declines have been so 

large, UDOT will have to continually find ways in the future to identify targeted construction projects 

and non-infrastructure programs to sustain the downward trend. To that end, UDOT continues to fund 

efforts to strengthen its ability to identify safety projects on all roads in the state as well as to find and 

correct systemic conditions that correlate with serious and fatal injuries.
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

2

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

District

Other

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

Local roads are eligible for HSIP funds if projects meet program requirements. However, UDOT lacks 

linear referencing systems and other information about local roads (non-State and non-Federal Aid) that 

would make it easier to compare relative safety needs on State roads and local roads, especially for 

systemic treatments. UDOT does perform crash analysis on non-State Federal Aid routes and accept 

applications from local agencies for HSIP funding consideration. Also, UDOT is planning to initiate pilot 

projects to apply the usRAP safety protocol to local roads in a few counties in 2015. This protocol is not 

dependent upon a linear referencing system or limited by UDOT's current roadway attribute databases.
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

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

Design

Planning

Maintenance

Operations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Other: 

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

Infrastructure Project Selection Criteria

The process that UDOT uses to address the emphasis areas outlined in the Utah Strategic Highway 

Safety Plan is divided into the following five sections; Planning, Analysis, Prioritization, Programming, 

and Implementation. 

Planning

UDOT uses two methods to plan HSIP projects. For the first method, each UDOT region sends an annual 

submittal to the Traffic & Safety Division that identifies their priority projects for HSIP funding 

consideration. The Traffic & Safety Division then screens the crash data, traffic data, and input from the 

region offices. A meeting is then held with each region office to identify potential spot safety locations 

based on the screened data and the region submittals. Although the annual submittal is the primary 

mechanism by which the regions request HSIP funding, the regions may request other projects mid-year 

and the same process is conducted to analyze, prioritize, program, and implement them.

For the second method, the Traffic & Safety Division employs a systemic approach to identify projects. 

This is done by looking at crash and roadway attribute data from a statewide perspective. UDOT has 

several efforts underway to identify projects systemically.

Analysis

A three-year crash history is compiled for each candidate location. Crash characteristics are analyzed 

and potential measures to mitigate those characteristics are identified. Benefit-to-cost ratios are 
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

calculated for each location based on crash history, expected decrease in crashes for a potential 

mitigation measure, and cost of that mitigation measure. The Traffic & Safety Division conducts a formal 

meeting with each region to review potential HSIP project locations. Traffic and Safety Division staff, an 

FHWA representative, and various region staff attend these review meetings. 

Prioritization

Prioritization is based on the following factors and is conducted by the Traffic & Safety Division:

• Greatest benefit to reduce fatal & serious injuries

• Benefit-to-cost ratio

• Timeline to completion

• Coordination with other projects 

Programming

Each project is assigned a specific funding year within a three-year planning horizon and is set up in 

UDOT’s project management system. Because the planning horizon covers a three-year period but is reevaluated annually, project are frequently re-prioritized. This may result in modified or new projects 

with higher priorities taking the place of previously programmed projects. The Traffic & Safety Division 

conducts the programming process. 

Implementation

After projects are programmed, project managers from the applicable UDOT region offices are assigned 

to each project. These project managers then shepherd the projects through UDOT's standard federal 

environmental, design, and construction processes.

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

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Government Association

Other: Other-SHSP Partners

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

the last reporting period.
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

Multi-disciplinary HSIP steering committee

Other: Other-UDOT has adapted to the new processes associated with MAP-21

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

would like to elaborate.

UDOT focuses its infrastructure improvements primarily on the Roadway Departure Crashes, Drowsy 

Driving, Distracted Driving, and Intersection Safety emphasis areas. The other emphasis areas (Public 

Outreach and Education, Use of Safety Restraints, Impaired Driving, Aggressive Driving, Teen Driving 

Safety, Motorcycle Safety, and Speed Management) are addressed primarily through non-infrastructure 

efforts such as education, media, and enforcement campaigns. UDOT partners with other state, local, 

and federal agencies to implement the non-infrastructure components of the SHSP. A "Zero Fatalities" 

goal (ut.zerofatalities.com) is also part of the SHSP.

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

Median Barrier Intersection Safe Corridor

Horizontal Curve Bicycle Safety Rural State Highways

Skid Hazard Crash Data Red Light Running Prevention

Roadway Departure Low-Cost Spot Improvements Sign Replacement And 

Improvement

Local Safety Pedestrian Safety Right Angle Crash

Left Turn Crash Shoulder Improvement Segments

Other: Other-Reduce Serious 

& Fatal Injuries
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

Program: Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Date of Program Methodology: 3/5/2014

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other-Hierarchical Bayesian Model

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

Yes

No

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

Yes

No

If no, describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

We do not currently have tools to do network screening on local roads based on the physical 

characteristics of the roadway. However, since 2012 UDOT geospacially locates all crashes on every 

public road and performs hot spot analysis.

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Selection committee

Other 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

Ranking based on B/C 20

Available funding 20

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit 20

Other 

Time to Completion 20

Coordination with other 

Projects

20

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

50

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

improvments?

Cable Median Barriers Rumble Strips

Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation Pavement/Shoulder Widening

Install/Improve Signing Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or 

Delineation

Upgrade Guard Rails Clear Zone Improvements

Safety Edge Install/Improve Lighting

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal Other Other-Structure Protection on Interstate 

Freeways
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Other: 

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

last reporting period.

Highway Safety Manual

Road Safety audits

Systemic Approach

Other: Other-Roadway data collection for usRAP protocol

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

would like to elaborate. 

Non-Infrastructure Projects

UDOT uses some of its HSIP funding for non-infrastructure projects that aid roadway safety efforts. Such 

projects include:
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

Educational Campaigns

Zero Fatalities is a mutual effort between various state safety partners to address the top behaviors that 

lead to fatalities on Utah's roads. The program targets behaviors such as drowsy driving, distracted 

driving, aggressive driving, impaired driving, and lack of seatbelt usage.

Integrating Safety Into Planning

UDOT Traffic & Safety Division personnel work internally with other UDOT divisions to integrate safety 

planning into their core processes. UDOT also works with MPOs and other safety partners across the 

state to supply them with needed data and tools so they can better integrate safety into their internal 

planning processes. UDOT continues to partner with the MPOs in order to provide them with tools to 

incorporate safety into their transportation planning efforts. Integrating safety into UDOT and MPO 

planning processes helps all agencies proactively address safety.

Improving Crash Data Analysis

HSIP funding is also used to improve UDOT's crash database. The ability to accurately locate crashes and 

understand crash characteristics is vital to programming HSIP funds.

University & Consultant Support

The Traffic & Safety Division uses HSIP funding to contract with universities and consultants who assist 

with various HSIP functions. The functions include items such as program management, project 

management, crash data mapping, statistical analysis, safety modeling, report preparation, SPF/CMF 

development, training, and HSM analysis.
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

Calendar Year

State Fiscal Year

Federal Fiscal Year

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

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

HSIP (Section 148) 28565375 68 % 18871115 62 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU) 646644 2 % 237641 1 %

HRRR Special Rule

Penalty Transfer -

Section 154

Penalty Transfer –

Section 164

6799210 16 % 7419080 24 %

Incentive Grants - 

Section 163

Incentive Grants 

(Section 406)

Other Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. STP, NHPP)

State and Local Funds 5959759 14 % 3926348 13 %
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

Totals 41970988 100% 30454184 100%

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

$1,752,945.00

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

$979,389.00

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

$4,342,331.00

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

$4,342,331.00

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

period?

$7,419,080.00
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

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

period? 

$0.00

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

overcome this in the future.

Our biggest obstacle to obligating HSIP funds continues to be the addition of the Section 164 penalty 

transfer funds. During FY14 we knew that we were going to get these funds, so we programmed nearly 

all of the money. We were not able to obligate all of the money, however, largely due to not being able 

to meet fiscal year advertising deadlines. In order to address this situation in FY15, we began setting up 

the FY15 projects in July 2014 and seeded them with enough FY14 money to begin design. We anticipate 

that this will allow the regions to begin design early enough to comfortably advertise the projects before 

the end of FY15 and achieve higher obligated percentages next year.

Another obstacle was scope changes that resulted in some projects either being cancelled or advertised 

with estimates far below the funded amounts. We are working with the regions to get them more 

involved in up-front scoping of their safety projects so that initial concept estimates are closer in line 

with the amounts of funding we place in the projects.

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

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

Project delivery is administered through the UDOT region offices. We are working closely with our 

region counterparts to make sure safety projects are addressed in a timely manner. After projects are 

programmed, project managers from the applicable UDOT region offices are assigned to each project. 

These project managers then shepherd the projects through UDOT's standard federal environmental, 

design, and construction processes.
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

General Listing of Projects

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

Project Improveme

nt Category 

Output HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Funding 

Category

Functional 

Classificati

on

AAD

T

Spee

d

Roadway 

Ownersh

ip

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasis 

Area

Strategy

I-15; Median 

Cable Barrier 

(PIN 11381)

Roadside 

Barrier -

cable

12 

Miles

101886

5

101886

5

Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

164 

($948,484)

; HSIP 

($70,381)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

1500

0

75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Cable 

Barrier

SR-39; 

Shoulder 

Improvements 

(PIN 11382)

Roadside 

Barriermetal

11 

Miles

370000 370000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

400 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Guardrail

SR-67; Median 

Cable Barrier 

(PIN 11384)

Roadside 

Barrier -

cable

8 Miles 108967

7

108967

7

Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

164 

($481,360)

; HSIP 

($608,316)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expresswa

ys

2250

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Cable 

Barrier
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

I-84; Rumble 

Strips (PIN 

11951)

Roadway 

Rumble 

strips - edge 

or shoulder

31 

Miles

199301 199301 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

8200 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Rumble 

Strips

SR-225; 

Interchange 

Signing 

Improvements 

(PIN 12175)

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control -

other

1 Miles 130000

0

130000

0

Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

164 

($125,000)

; HSIP 

($1,075,00

0)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

6000 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Signing

I-15 & I-84 

Interstate 

Structure 

Protection 

(PIN 12176)

Roadside 

Barrier -

concrete

201 

Miles

120000

0

120000

0

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

1050

0

75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Concrete 

Barrier

US-89; 

Upgrade MidBlock 

Crosswalks 

(PIN 12177)

Pedestrians 

and 

bicyclists 

Pedestrian 

warning 

signs -

add/modify 

flashers

3 

Numbe

rs

290000 429744 Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

164 

($240,000)

; HSIP 

($50,000)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

2600

0

35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Pedestrian

s

Signing
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

US-91; 3200 W 

& 2000 W 

Intersection 

Realignment 

(PIN 12614)

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometrics -

modify skew 

angle

1 

Numbe

rs

275000

0

275000

0

Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

164 

($275,000)

; HSIP 

($2,500,00

0) 

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

2065

0

60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersectio

ns

Intersectio

n 

Realignme

nt

US-89; Median 

Barrier (PIN 

12884)

Roadside 

Barrier -

concrete

1 Miles 400000 400000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

3100

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Concrete 

Barrier

US-89; Two 

Locations, 

Median 

Barrier (PIN 

12892)

Roadside 

Barrier -

concrete

5 Miles 170000

0

170000

0

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

3400

0

55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Concrete 

Barrier

SR-273; 

Intersection 

Realign & 

Signal (PIN 

13023)

Intersection 

traffic 

control 

Systemic 

improvemen

ts - signalcontrolled

1 

Numbe

rs

600000 200000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

1500

0

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersectio

ns

Intersectio

n 

Signalizati

on

I-84: Cable 

Barrier (PIN 

Roadside 

Barrier -

6 Miles 355115 355115 Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

1850

0

65 State 

Highway 

Roadway 

Departure

Cable 

Barrier
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

11385) cable 164 

($301,094)

; HSIP 

($54,021)

Interstate Agency

SR-71/2700 W 

Signal 

Reconstruction 

(PIN 11402)

Intersection 

traffic 

control 

Modify 

traffic signal 

timing - leftturn phasing 

(permissive 

to 

protectedonly)

1 

Numbe

rs

150000

0

150000

0

Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

164 

($100,000)

; HSIP 

($1,400,00

0)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

2960

0

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersectio

ns

Intersectio

n 

Signalizati

on

SR-266/SR-71 

Intersection 

Reconstruction 

(PIN 11404)

Intersection 

traffic 

control 

Modify 

traffic signal 

timing - leftturn phasing 

(permissive 

to 

protectedonly)

1 

Numbe

rs

150000

0

150000

0

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

2750

0

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersectio

ns

Intersectio

n 

Signalizati

on

SR-266/Auto Intersection 1 210000 210000 Penalty Urban 4350 40 State Intersectio Intersectio
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

Blvd/Main St 

Intersection 

Improvements 

(PIN 11405)

traffic 

control 

Modify 

traffic signal 

timing - leftturn phasing 

(permissive 

to 

protectedonly)

Numbe

rs

0 0 Transfer –

Section 

164

($80,000); 

HSIP 

($2,020,00

0)

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 Highway 

Agency

ns n 

Signalizati

on

SR-266/500 W 

Intersection 

Improvements 

(PIN 11408)

Intersection 

traffic 

control 

Modify 

traffic signal 

timing - leftturn phasing 

(permissive 

to 

protectedonly)

1 

Numbe

rs

120000

0

120000

0

Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

164 

($30,000); 

HSIP 

($1,170,00

0)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

4650

0

40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersectio

ns

Intersectio

n 

Signalizati

on

SR-172/4100 S 

Intersection & 

Signal 

Improvements 

(PIN 12215)

Intersection 

traffic 

control 

Modify 

traffic signal 

timing - leftturn phasing 

1 

Numbe

rs

124800

0

124800

0

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

4405

0

45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersectio

ns

Intersectio

n 

Signalizati

on
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

(permissive 

to 

protectedonly)

I-80; Upgrade 

Barrier (PIN 

12221)

Roadside 

Barrier -

cable

14 

Miles

121000

0

121000

0

Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

164 

($100,000)

; HSIP 

($1,110,00

0)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

2100

0

75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Cable 

Barrier

I-15, I-215, I80; Interstate 

Structure 

Protection 

(PIN 12222)

Roadside 

Barrier -

concrete

1 

Numbe

rs

100000

0

100000

0

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Concrete 

Barrier

SR-201 EB & I80 EB; 

Overhead Sign 

Replacement 

(PIN 11499)

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control Sign 

sheeting -

upgrade or 

replacement

1 

Numbe

rs

100000

0

200000

0

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Signing

SR-35/SR-208; 

Intersection 

Realignment 

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

1 

Numbe

952912 952912 Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

850 55 State 

Highway 

Intersectio

ns

Intersectio

n 

Realignme
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

(PIN 11395) geometrics -

modify skew 

angle

rs 164 

($652,111)

; HSIP 

($300,801)

Other Agency nt

I-15; Interstate 

Structure 

Protection

Roadside 

Barrier -

concrete

30 

Miles

409871 400000 Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

164 

($317,234)

; HSIP 

($82,766)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

1500

0

80 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Concrete 

Barrier

I-15 & US-40; 

Freeway 

Structure 

Protection 

(PIN 12984)

Roadside 

Barrier -

concrete

17 

Miles

100000

0

100000

0

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

2140

0

75 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Concrete 

Barrier

US-189; Signal 

Improvements 

(PIN 12181)

Intersection 

traffic 

control 

Modify 

traffic signal 

- add 

flashing 

yellow 

arrow

4 

Numbe

rs

376938 378230 Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

164 

($296,938)

; HSIP 

($80,000)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

4800

0

35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersectio

ns

Intersectio

n 

Signalizati

on

Bulldog/Freed

om Blvd (PIN 

Intersection 

traffic 

4 

Numbe

372945 373136 Penalty 

Transfer –

Rural 

Minor 

3700 35 City of 

Municipa

Intersectio Intersectio

n 
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

21

12232) control 

Modify 

traffic signal 

- add 

flashing 

yellow 

arrow

rs Section 

164 

($259,945)

; HSIP 

($113,000)

Collector 0 l 

Highway 

Agency

ns Signalizati

on

SR-12; Sign & 

Geometry 

Improvements 

(PIN 12186)

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Curverelated 

warning 

signs and 

flashers

53 

Miles

800000 800000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

550 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Signing

SR-14; 

Guardrail & 

Barrier 

Improvements 

(PIN 12187)

Roadside 

Barriermetal

4 Miles 400000 500000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

1090 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Guardrail

US-163; Install 

Guardrail (PIN 

12188)

Roadside 

Barriermetal

41 

Miles

115000

0

141700

0

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

1000 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Guardrail

I-15 & I-70; 

Structure 

Roadside 

Barrier -

1 

Numbe

296000 296000 Penalty 

Transfer –

Rural 

Principal 

75 State 

Highway 

Roadway Concrete 
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

22

Protection 

(PIN 12189)

concrete rs 0 0 Section 

164 

($22,062); 

HSIP 

($2,937,93

8)

Arterial -

Interstate

Agency Departure Barrier

Various 

Locations; 

Install Rumble 

Strips (PIN 

12190)

Roadway 

Rumble 

strips - edge 

or shoulder

1 

Numbe

rs

280000

0

280000

0

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Rumble 

Strips

US-191; 

Roadside 

Improvements 

(PIN 12191)

Roadside 

Barriermetal

8 Miles 250000 250000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

865 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Guardrail

SR-14; Curve 

Improvements 

(PIN 12192)

Roadside 

Barrier -

concrete

1 

Numbe

rs

600000 600000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

810 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Concrete 

Barrier

SR-95; 

Roadside 

Improvements 

(PIN 12193)

Roadside 

Barrier -

concrete

4 Miles 400000 400000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

405 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Concrete 

Barrier

No Passing 

Signage (PIN 

12202)

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

1 

Numbe

rs

453250 453250 Penalty 

Transfer –

Section 

164 

n/a State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Signing
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

($361,385)

; HSIP 

($91,865)

No Passing 

Signage (PIN 

12301)

Roadway 

signs and 

traffic 

control 

Roadway 

signs 

(including 

post) - new 

or updated

1 

Numbe

rs

500000 500000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

n/a State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Signing

Interstate 

Structure 

Protection 

(PIN 12931)

Roadside 

Barrier -

concrete

1 

Numbe

rs

150000

0

150000

0

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Concrete 

Barrier

Rural Roads in 

Garfield 

County (PIN 

11742)

Roadside 

Barriermetal

1 

Numbe

rs

325000 325000 HRRRP 

(SAFETEALU)

n/a County 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Guardrail

Research 

External 

Factors' Effect 

on Crashes 

Noninfrastructur

e 

Transportati

on safety 

1 

Numbe

rs

40000 40000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

n/a n/a Creating 

more 

effective 

processes 

and safety 

Crash 

Mapping 

& Analysis
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

(PIN 12963) planning manageme

nt systems

usRAP Safer 

Roads 

Investment 

Plans (PIN 

13019)

Noninfrastructur

e 

Transportati

on safety 

planning

1 

Numbe

rs

150000 150000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

n/a n/a Creating 

more 

effective 

processes 

and safety 

manageme

nt systems

Crash 

Mapping 

& Analysis

AGRC Local 

Roads 

Feasibility 

Study (PIN 

13021)

Noninfrastructur

e 

Data/traffic 

records

1 

Numbe

rs

50000 50000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

n/a Data Crash 

Mapping 

& Analysis

Crash 

Database 

Maintenance 

(PIN 13022)

Noninfrastructur

e 

Data/traffic 

records

1 

Numbe

rs

300000 300000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

n/a n/a Data Crash 

Mapping 

& Analysis

Utah CODES 

2014-2015 

(PIN 13027)

Noninfrastructur

e 

Data/traffic 

records

1 

Numbe

rs

75000 75000 HSIP 

(Section 

148)

n/a n/a Data Crash 

Mapping 

& Analysis

Safety 

Campaigns, 

Noninfrastructur1 

Numbe

200000 200000 Penalty 

Transfer –

n/a n/a Increasing 

driver 

Education
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

25

Education, & 

Enf FY14 (PIN 

12207)

e 

Educational 

efforts

rs 0 0 Section 

164

safety 

awareness

T&S Program 

Mgmt Support 

2014 (PIN 

12209)

Noninfrastructur

e Noninfrastructur

e - other

1 

Numbe

rs

120000

0

120000

0

HSIP 

(Section 

148)

n/a n/a Creating 

more 

effective 

processes 

and safety 

manageme

nt systems

Statewide 

Safety 

Planning 

Support
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

26

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* 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Number of fatalities 278 272 263 247 236

Number of serious injuries 2129 1604 1407 1328 1291

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.07 1.03 1 0.94 0.89

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

8.18 6.09 5.33 5.04 4.86

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

27
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

28
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

29

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

Year - 2013

Function 

Classification

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

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

32 108 0.87 2.89

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0 0 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

29 69 1.43 3.44

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

19 60 1.9 6.03

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

3 12 1.09 3.72

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

17 56 1.57 5.24

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

4 34 0.34 2.56

URBAN PRINCIPAL 27 112 0.36 1.5
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

30

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

2 7 0.67 2.02

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

31 251 0.72 5.84

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

34 296 0.91 7.99

URBAN MINOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

8 71 0.18 1.48

URBAN COLLECTOR 14 100 0.76 5.61

UNKNOWN 0 0 0 0
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

31
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

32
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

33
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

34
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

35

Year - 2013

Roadway Ownership Number of 

fatalities

Number of serious 

injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

STATE HIGHWAY AGENCY 174 813 0.99 4.61

COUNTY HIGHWAY AGENCY 0 0 0 0

TOWN OR TOWNSHIP HIGHWAY AGENCY 0 0 0 0

CITY OF MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY AGENCY 0 0 0 0

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

ALL OTHER 62 478 0.69 5.35
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

36
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

37
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

38
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

39
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

40

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

Overall, serious injury and fatality rates continue to decline in Utah. Serious injury rates have been 

reduced on a statewide basis by approximately 40% (on a rolling 5-year basis) from 2009 to 2013. 

Fatality rates have been reduced by approximately 15%. 

When broken down by functional class, all classifications have experienced steady declines in serious 

injury and fatality rates except for rural crashes (both urban and rural). This is probably because UDOT's 

ability to track local road crashes has become better over the past few years. This has likely resulted in 

some crashes that were classified as "unknown" as now being attributed to local roads.

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

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Fatality rate (per 

capita)

0.536 0.54 0.532 0.514 0.392

Serious injury rate 

(per capita)

2.788 2.168 1.942 1.948 1.45

Fatality and serious 

injury rate (per capita)

3.322 2.706 2.474 2.46 1.84

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

Each year's fatalities and serious injuries were divided by the "Number of People 65 Years of Age and 

Older (per 1,000 total population)" figures for each of the respective years, as instructed in Interim 

Guidance for the Older Driver Rule provided on the FHWA website. Those are the values we entered in 

the spreadsheet above. Then the system calculated the 5-yr rolling averages automatically. This method 

is in line with the instructions on the FHWA website.
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

41

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

42

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)

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

Safety Improvement Program?

None

Benefit/cost

Policy change

Other: Other-Reduction in serious injuries and fatalities

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

Shift Focus to Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Include Local Roads in Highway Safety Improvement Program

Organizational Changes

None

Other: Other-UDOT continues to invest more in systemic analysis. We are working on implementing 

usRAP and other models that will help us better identify worthy projects, especially off of the State 

system.

Briefly describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting period. 
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

43

1) UDOT has continued to work with BYU to further develop a statewide crash model capable of 

identifying systemic trends, locations where certain crash types are over-represented, and HSM 

calibration factors.

2) UDOT is in the beginning stages of developing Safer Roads Investment Plans using the usRAP protocol 

for the entire State highway system as well as a couple of counties where non-State roads will also be 

evaluated with the protocol.
2014 Utah 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 - 2013

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

Roadway Departure Run-off-road 110 384 0.42 1.44 0 0 0

Intersections Intersection 49 492 0.18 1.85 0 0 0

Pedestrians Vehicle/pedestrian 28 106 0.11 0.4 0 0 0

Bicyclists Vehicle/bicycle 5 62 0.02 0.23 0 0 0

Older Drivers Older Drivers 43 169 0.16 0.64 0 0 0

Motorcyclists Motorcycle Involved 29 198 0.11 0.74 0 0 0

Work Zones Work Zone Related 12 57 0.05 0.21 0 0 0

Adverse Roadway 

Surface Condition

Wet road 36 223 0.14 0.84 0 0 0

Adverse Weather Poor weather 

conditions

22 120 0.08 0.45 0 0 0

Aggressive Driving Aggressive Driving 12 48 0.05 0.18 0 0 0

Collision with Fixed Run-off-road 55 243 0.21 0.91 0 0 0
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

45

Object

Commercial Motor 

Vehicle

Truck-related 30 87 0.11 0.33 0 0 0

Distracted Driving Distracted Driving 18 130 0.07 0.49 0 0 0

Domestic Animal 

Related

Domestic Animals 0 5 0 0.02 0 0 0

Drowsy Driving Drowsy Driving 13 57 0.05 0.21 0 0 0

DUI DUI 45 153 0.17 0.58 0 0 0

Interstate Highway Interstates 59 219 0.22 0.83 0 0 0

Night/Dark Condition Night-time 85 350 0.32 1.32 0 0 0

Overturn/Rollover Rollover 93 350 0.35 1.32 0 0 0

Railroad Crossing Railroad Related 1 4 0.01 0.02 0 0 0

Roadway Geometry 

Related

Road Geometry 109 437 0.41 1.65 0 0 0

State Route Crashes on State 

Routes

174 813 0.65 3.06 0 0 0

Single Vehicle Single Vehicle 133 614 0.5 2.31 0 0 0

Speed Related Speed-related 60 240 0.23 0.91 0 0 0

Teenage Driver Teen Drivers 35 216 0.13 0.81 0 0 0
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

46

Involved

Train Involved Train Involved 2 3 0.01 0.01 0 0 0

Transit Vehicle 

Involved

Transit Vehicle 4 12 0.02 0.05 0 0 0

Urban County Urban County 132 916 0.5 3.45 0 0 0

Wild Animal Related Vehicle/animal 3 18 0.01 0.07 0 0 0

Improper Restraint Improper Restraint 86 255 0.32 0.96 0 0 0

Rural Non-State Rural Non-State 

Roads

19 108 0.07 0.41 0 0 0
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

47
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

48
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

49
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

50
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

51

Groups of similar project types

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

Year - 2013

HSIP Sub-program 

Types

Target Crash 

Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury 

rate (per 

HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Low-Cost Spot 

Improvements

Roadway 

Departure

110 384 0.42 1.44 0 0 0

Other-Reduce Serious 

& Fatal Injuries

All 236 1291 0.89 4.86 0 0 0
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

52
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

53
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

54
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

55

Most of our low-cost spot improvements have been rumble strips and median barrier, both of which target run-off-road crashes. For this reason, 

we estimated the impact of that program by using the "Roadway Departure" crash totals.

The only other real sub-program that UDOT does is "reducing fatal and serious injury crashes" and we used the overall crash totals to estimate 

that.
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

56

Systemic Treatments

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.

Year - 2013

Systemic improvement Target Crash 

Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury 

rate (per 

HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Median Barriers, Rumble 

Strips, Guardrails

Roadway 

Departure

110 384 0.42 1.44 0 0 0
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

57
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

58
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

59
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

60

Most of our systemic safety improvements have been geared toward mitigating run-off-road crashes, so we used the "Roadway Departure" 

crash type to estimate our impact on systemic crash types.
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

61

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

which you would like to elaborate. 

As has been demonstrated in the other questions, Utah continues to experience a downward trend in 

overall serious and fatal injury crashes. Also, nearly all individual crash categories (whether broken down 

by crash type, road ownership, SHSP emphasis area, etc) have experienced declines. As fatalities 

continue to be reduced it will become more difficult to find projects that have a large impact on 

improving safety. UDOT will need to be vigilant about continuing to identify ways to further reduce 

serious and fatal injury crashes. Our gradual shift towards using systemic methods continues and we will 

be dependent upon projects identified through systemic means to continue our downward trends.
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

62

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvement 

Category

Improvement 

Type

BefFatalBefSerious 

Injury

BefOther 

Injury

BefPDOBefTotalAftFatalAftSerious 

Injury

AftOther 

Injury

AftPDOAftTotalEvaluation 

Results 

(Benefit/ 

Cost 

Ratio)

I-15; Benjamin 

to Spanish 

Fork - MP 253 

TO 255 (PIN 

6932)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

Roadside Barrier - cable 0 3 14 12 29 1 0 3 17 21 10.03

SR-12 AT MP 

121.5 (PIN 

6525)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Roadside Barrier- metal 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1.45

I-15 Cable 

Barrier (PIN 

6934)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

Roadside Barrier - cable 0 1 1 9 11 0 3 3 30 36 0

I-215; 

REDWOOD 

RD. TO I-15 

(PIN 7769)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

Roadside Barrier - cable 1 1 4 12 18 1 0 3 9 13 18.67
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

63

US-6; MP 

235.5 TO MP 

239 (PIN 

6847)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Animal-related Wildlife 

Fencing

0 0 1 17 18 0 0 0 9 9 0.54

US-91, 

MANTUA TO 

CACHE 

COUNTY 

LINE (PIN 

6922)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Roadside Barrier -

concrete

1 1 2 5 9 0 1 1 4 6 2.58

SR-154; 

NORTH OF 

SR-201 (PIN 

7829)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other 

Freeways 

and 

Expressways

Roadside Barrier - cable 0 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 2 2 4.93

US-89; 

SPRINGVILLE 

TO PROVO 

(PIN 7119)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or other

1 0 8 2 11 0 0 2 1 3 30.69

SR-28 AT MP 

38; NEPHI 

SANDSTONE 

ACCESS (PIN 

7111)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Auxiliary lanes 

- add 

acceleration 

lane

0 0 1 3 4 0 0 0 2 2 0.61
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

64

VARIOUS 

LOCATIONS 

ON US-40 

AND US-189 

(PIN 7469)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Roadway Rumble strips -

edge or 

shoulder

3 10 31 81 125 1 4 23 82 110 265.9

US-89 -

MILEPOST 22 

TO 26 (PIN 

6555)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Roadside Barrier- metal 0 2 2 4 8 0 0 2 1 3 9.08

US-191 - MP 

86 to 114 

(PIN 6557)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Roadside Barrier- metal 0 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 2 2 1.05

I-15, 2700 

NORTH TO 

HOT 

SPRINGS 

(PIN 6921)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

Roadside Barrier - cable 2 1 11 23 37 0 0 6 18 24 12.86

I-15 FROM 

SR-193 TO 

SR-97, MP 

334 TO 338 

(PIN 7524)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

Roadside Barrier - cable 3 3 29 59 94 2 4 13 64 83 9.49

SR-24; MP 86 

TO 117 (PIN 

7575)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Roadside Barrier- metal 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 10.43
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

65

Other

US-91 MP 14 

TO 16 (PIN 

8240)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Roadside Barrier -

concrete

0 0 6 4 10 1 0 0 4 5 0

I-80 WEST 

VARIOUS 

LOCATIONS 

BETWEEN 

MP 0 AND 99 

(PIN 8357)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

Roadside Barrier - cable 0 2 5 11 18 0 0 5 17 22 6.97

I-80 WB, 

MAINLINE 

MP 127 AND 

RAMP (PIN 

8236)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

Roadside Barrier -

concrete

0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0.31

US-189 

PROVO 

CANYON MP 

9 TO 12 (PIN 

8223)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Roadside Barrier - cable 2 1 2 4 9 0 0 2 2 4 13.39

I-15 

VARIOUS 

LOCATIONS 

BETWEEN 

MP 221.95 -

253.04 (PIN 

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

Roadside Barrier - cable 8 6 72 90 176 4 11 42 135 192 1.31
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

66

8287)

We spoke with the UDOT RE in charge of construction supervision for the I-15 Cable Barrier Project (PIN 6934). He feels that the cable barrier is 

too close to the roadway (8') and that ROR type crashes are now reported higher because they get tangled in the cable barrier easier than if it 

were placed further back. He was not able to provide plan sets for us to look at to determine whether the barrier was installed per plans or not.

For the US-91 project (PIN 8240), overall crashes were reduced by 50% but a lone fatality in the "after" period resulted in the low B/C. We 

reviewed the fatal crash report, confirmed the existence of the project upgrade, and verified that the crash was not mitigated by the 

improvement. 
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

67

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached
2014 Utah Highway Safety Improvement Program

68

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. 

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.