Virginia

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2015 Annual Report

  

   

Prepared by: VA

  
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 ..................................................................................................................................................4

Program Structure ........................................................................................................................................4

Program Administration ........................................................................................................................... 4

Program Methodology.............................................................................................................................. 7

Progress in Implementing Projects............................................................................................................. 24

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................. 24

General Listing of Projects.................................................................................................................. 27

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets .................................................................................... 50

Overview of General Safety Trends........................................................................................................ 50

Application of Special Rules.................................................................................................................... 65

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) .......................................... 67

SHSP Emphasis Areas.............................................................................................................................. 69

Groups of similar project types............................................................................................................... 74

Systemic Treatments............................................................................................................................... 79

Project Evaluation...................................................................................................................................85

Glossary.......................................................................................................................................................94
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

Executive Summary

This State Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 annual report to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

describes the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)'s strategic use of MAP‐21 funding

of the Commonwealth's Highway Safety Improvement Programs (HSIP) for the period July 2014

to June 2015.

MAP‐21 continues the HSIP as a core program under Sections 148 and 130 of US Code Title 23

and increased the HSIP allocations in Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2015.  Under Section 154, surface

transportation program and national highway performance program funds are transferred to

be used for HSIP eligible proposals because Virginia does not have all the required components

in its Open Container legislation.  As a result, VDOT's HSIP is composed of the following sub‐

programs utilizing the above mentioned federal funding sources (23 USC Sections):

A)  Highway Safety Projects (HSP): Section 148

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

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

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

information is provided on‐line at http://www.virginiadot.org/business/ted_app_pro.asp

Virginia's Strategic Highway Safety Plan

In 2013, VDOT completed a multi‐agency and disciplinary, engineering, education,

enforcement, and emergency response (4‐E) update of the Commonwealth's Strategic Highway

Safety Plan (SHSP).  In 2013, FHWA's Virginia Division approved Virginia's SHSP.  VDOT

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

to drive investment decisions to improve safety and reduce deaths and injuries for this FY2015

reporting period.

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

on the Commonwealth's highways.  Virginia's HSIP is structured to focus on infrastructure

safety emphasis areas that may be improved with low cost minimal environmental impact (no

right of way) engineering countermeasures, namely:
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

2

A)  Intersection geometry and traffic control

B)  Roadway and roadside improvements

C)  Bicycle and pedestrian risk reductions

New FY2016 Projects

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

transportation system. For the development of Virginia’s transportation FY 2016 Six‐Year

Improvement Program (SYIP), the HSIP project selection structure and approach was previously

modified to follow the updated SHSP and the MAP‐21 allowances.  HSIP staff developed annual

HSIP spending targets for each district based on the combined proportions of lane‐miles,

vehicle miles travelled and deaths plus severe injuries to consider multiple year project

development.  The district spending targets are based on level FHWA funding in future years.  

Districts considered systemic, corridor and intersection improvements for all users on priority

routes and intersections identified in the crash data. Districts submitted safety proposals and

these proposals included high crash locations, long roadway segments, and systemic highway

and pedestrian risk locations.

Highway Safety Performance

This report provides safety performance measures for deaths and severe injuries and the

associated rates per 100 million vehicle miles travelled (HMVMT).  Since 2001, injury crashes

have declined to about 45 thousand per year (almost a 20 percent reduction from the 1990's).  

Severe injuries have decreased by approximately 63 percent since 2001, some 7.8 percent per

year.  Injuries per capital have also continued to decline for the last 20 years.

Traffic deaths per population in Virginia remained fairly stable for about 15 years after the

declines that were seen in the early 1990's.  However, 2007 saw a peak in fatal crashes resulting

in 1,026 deaths, the first time deaths exceeded 1,000 since the early 1990's.  Since 2007, a 25

percent in reduction has been experienced, although traffic deaths increased slightly in 2011

and 2012 the year 2014 decline to 700.

Severe traffic crash decreases indicate the effectiveness of improved driver regulations, safer

cars, education, enforcement, emergency services, and engineering solutions in reducing
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

related injuries.  

This report documents the following elements of the federally funded HSIP using the FHWA

MAP‐21 (2015) reporting guidance:

1)  Program administration and methodology;

2)  Progress in administrating safety projects;

3)  Evaluation of effectiveness of completed projects;
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

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

If District, how are the HSIP funds allocated?

Formula

Crash Data

Population

Other
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

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

Virginia previously programmed SAFETEA‐LU and prior HSIP funds on local roads. Approximately a

third of active projects are on local roads. Some local projects needed more funds due to increased

scope and/or impacts. As such, local agency projects were provided additional HSIP allocations

needed to fund the cost estimates for construction (thus obligation). New procedures and

requirements for locally administered HSIP projects were developed and approved by the agency

in 2015.  

Local roads safety proposals when submitted are required to follow the same prioritization

method as VDOT proposals. The proposed project must fit into the localities strategic safety plan.  

It should be data driven as well as have the support of the local governing body.  Localities should

submit their proposals through the local VDOT District Office for inclusion in the district submittal

for review. The locality maintains its own data system with regards to crash history and local

support for the proposal.  Local roads account for 40 percent of all crashes and 20 percent of all

fatal and serious injury crashes on Virginia’s highways. However, local safety projects have

received up to 30 percent of Virginia’s HSIP funds for implementation and completion of their

safety projects.  VDOT has been providing the state match to these safety projects for the past

several years.

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

Design

Planning

Maintenance

Operations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Other:  

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners.  
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

To facilitate and expedite the scoping of HSIP projects, HSIP staff visited each District and trained

regarding MAP‐21 requirements, the updated SHSP Emphasis Areas, related safety data available,

and the multi‐disciplinary team needed to provide sound scope, cost, and schedule information.

Traffic, planning, design and programming and sometimes VDOT Residency (county) liaison staff

attended the briefings. The SHSP three percent reduction targets by Emphasis Areas were also

presented. Finally, the briefing provided information on Systemic Treatment eligibility in MAP‐21

and related information available from the FHWA.  

As in the past, HSIP staff presented the target of allocating ten percent to bike and pedestrian

safety projects was presented.  At least ninety percent of HSIP Section 148 of the previously

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

District staff submitted safety proposal funding requests with the following set of priorities for

managing the target annual HSIP obligation from FY2016 to 21:

 Additional funding needs to complete existing HSIP projects or those ongoing projects

with a specific safety benefit needing additional funds.

 New safety projects that could be designed and advertised within FY2016

 New safety projects that could be potentially started in FY2016 and 17 but would need

additional time and funding to be designed and awarded for construction in future

years.

Projects were programmed with the appropriate FY allocations needed for a specific phase to be

delivered from FY 2016 to 2021.

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

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Government Association

Other: Other‐District/Design/Pe and Planning Staff
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

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

the last reporting period.

Multi‐disciplinary HSIP steering committee

Other: Other‐District/Design/PE and Planning Staff

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

would like to elaborate.

For the FY2015 HSIP, Virginia has implemented its new guidelines and policy for submission to the HSIP.  

For the first time in five years VDOT is accepting local administered safety projects providing they meet

the minimum criteria as described in the new VDOT HSIP Implementation Manual.

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:      

   
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

   

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2014

    

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

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other  

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

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

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding 3

Incremental B/C   
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

Ranking based on net benefit   

Other    

Targeted K+A crashes/people 2

   

Program: Bicycle Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2014

    

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‐Risk Reduction 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
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other‐Available facilities

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

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
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C   

Available funding   

Incremental B/C   

Ranking based on net benefit   

Cost Effectiveness 10

Community Support and

comprehensive network plan

15

Problem identification inc

crashes and risk

30

Solution study and selection to

mitigate risk

45

   

Program: Crash Data

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2014

    

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
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

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

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other  

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
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

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

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding 3

Incremental B/C   

Ranking based on net benefit   

Other    

Targeted K+A crashes/people 2

   

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2014

    

What data types were used in the program methodology?  

Crashes Exposure Roadway
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

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

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other  

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

Yes
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

No

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

Yes

No

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

Ranking based on B/C 1

Available funding 3

Incremental B/C   

Ranking based on net benefit   

Other    

Targeted K+A crashes and

people

2

   
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 7/1/2014

    

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‐Risk Reduction 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

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other‐Community Support and Missing sidewalk  

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

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

Ranking based on B/C   

Available funding   

Incremental B/C   

Ranking based on net benefit   
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

Cost Effectiveness 10

Communitysupport, benefit‐

need and pedestrian accessability

15

Problem identification inc

crashes and risk

30

Solution proposed for

improvement to mitigate risk

45

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

25   

   

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

improvements?

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  

   
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

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:  

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

would like to elaborate.  

About 85 percent of the roadway centerline miles are maintained by VDOT on three systems:

interstate, primary, and secondary (county) roadways except for secondary roads in Arlington and

Henrico Counties.  Statewide transportation safety planning on VDOT maintained systems is

performed centrally by HSIP staff in the Traffic Engineering Division each year.  

Listings and maps of high crash routes and intersections following the SHSP Emphasis Areas were

provided to VDOT district staff to identify candidate locations for project development.  On the

VDOT systems the following safety planning data is available:
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

21

 Intersections ranked by Deaths (type K) plus Severe Injuries (type A) in the most recent 3

years within each jurisdiction.  Those locations in the top 5 percent are first priority.  

Those between the top 5 and 15 percent are second priority and the remainders are

lower priority.

 For Roadway Departure emphasis, each route (ID) segment within a jurisdiction was

ranked by the number of K plus A severe injury plus visible injuries (type B) for the most

recent 5 years. The first priority route segments are those with at least one percent of

the jurisdictions KAB injuries. The second priority is routes with less than one percent

but more than two KAB injuries per year (10 in five years).

 For Speed and Bicycle and Pedestrian crash the same route ranking and priority

thresholds were used but only for K+A injuries.     

To aid the safety planning and project development, VDOT’s HSIP recommends conducting

crash analysis and Roadway Safety Assessments(RSA) or a documented safety engineering

study at identified high crash locations and corridors. RSA guidelines were developed and

posted on VDOT’s HSIP web page with outreach and training of VDOT, locality, and MPO

engineering and planning staff.  In addition to crash analysis tools, VDOT staff has access to

roadway traffic volume, cross‐section and pavement condition inventory in the RNS to

support the RSA process and HSIP benefit‐cost analysis.  Further, a new crash analysis

screening method and Engineering Safety Review (RSA) process were developed for

reviewing 1 to 3R projects that are federally funded. In the past, some urban jurisdictions

have used HSIP funds to identify high crash locations, prioritize for study and conduct RSAs

to propose projects for funding.

VDOT has updated the safety project economic evaluation methodology to its present

form in 2006. Refinements have occurred since SAFETEA‐LU in the emphasis areas

identified in Virginia's Strategic Highway Safety Plan; in transportation safety planning

methods; and in the economic benefit values used in the benefit ‐cost economic analysis

used to evaluate proposed projects. All guidelines, project submittal forms, and benefit‐

cost spreadsheets (including crash modification factors) are provided on the VDOT HSIP

web page.  Eligible highway safety project proposals must meet the following

requirements:

(1)   Proposed improvements are at locations identified through analysis of crashes.

(2)   Projects must be relevant to the program purpose of reducing crashes and/or their

consequences using HSIP eligible treatments.  The treatments should implement and

target the emphasis area strategies in Virginia’s 2012‐16 Strategic Highway Safety Plan

(SHSP).
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

22

(3)   Improvement project studies that evaluate potential engineering countermeasures

(physical changes to the travel way improvements and/or use of traffic control devices)

require a PE seal after July 1, 2010.

(4)   All projects with known crash modification factors (CMF) must have an economic

analysis to show the proposed safety benefits exceed the project cost (Benefit/Cost >

1).  If CMF’s are unknown for a treatment then the estimated factor or expected risk

reductions should be documented.

(5) All projects should upgrade non‐standard safety features to existing standards, when

those features are within the scope (that is, the treatment addresses targeted crashes)

and work area of the project proposal study.

(6)   Project effectiveness is evaluated with a before/after crash analysis three years

after completion.  

VDOT’s HSIP has promoted and programmed systemic safety treatmentsfor several years.

Projects such as high friction surfacing, rumble strips, guard rail, enhanced markings and

signing, signal timing, signal head and battery backup upgrades are several types of

systemic treatmentsrecently implemented. When appropriate CMF information is

available the B/C analysis is requested. However, system wide assessment of roadway

inventory and associated crashes has not been performed to define low unit cost systemic

treatments.        

Identified locations were assessed by VDOT district staff to conduct RSAs/engineering

studies and then analyzed to propose safety improvements based on expected benefit‐cost

(B/C) ratio.  The economic evaluation procedure compiles crashes by type and severity

(KABCO scale), and applies a crash modification factor (CMF) to determine the annualized

benefits from reductions expected for the total project cost. Engineering studies submitted

each year are reviewed and evaluated by central office HSIP staff. Modifications are

negotiated on the project scope and cost estimates.  The improvement projects with the

greatest return on the dollar that target the most crashes in each District are approved

based on the targeted Highway Safety funds. Projects that are prioritized by HSIP staff are

then programmed by District staff in the VDOT Six‐Year Improvement Program (SYIP) for

final Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) approval (typically in June of each year,

but can be added at any monthly meeting). District staff delivers the projects by functional

area depending on the type of project. HSIP staff work with the districts to refine the

project scopes and funding during the design and construction process.  District Local
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

Assistance project coordinators oversee locally administered project design and

construction.
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

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) 52983155   79 % 40741157   84 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA‐LU) 0     0 % 226893     0 %

HRRR Special Rule

Penalty Transfer	‐	

Section 154

13782750    21 % 7773223    16 %

Penalty Transfer –

Section 164

Incentive Grants	‐		

Section 163

      

Incentive Grants

(Section 406)

Other Federal‐aid

Funds (i.e. STP, NHPP)

      

State and Local Funds
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

25

Totals 66765905 100% 48741273 100%

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

$8,077,033.00

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

$8,288,412.00

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

$1,016,667.00

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

$665,000.00

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

period?

$0.00
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

26

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

period?

0 %

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

overcome this in the future.

One of the major impediments that VDOT faces with obligating its Penalty Transfer Section 154 funds is

the shortness in time that the Traffic Engineering Division has to obligate the funds once the final

Obligation Authority is release.  This coming fiscal year Traffic Engineering will facilitate a financial

planning meeting with all of the interested parties to identify the process for streamlining this particular

issue.

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

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

VDOT has implemented a new Highway Safety Implementation Manual, new Benefit‐Cost Ratio for

traditional spot improvements and in the process of developing a BCR Worksheet for identifying

systemic improvements. Virginia has also developed specific PSI base upon HSM SPFs.
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

General Listing of ProjectsList each highway safety improvement project obligated during the reporting period.

Project Improvement

Category

Output HSIP Cost Total

Cost

FundingCategory

FunctionalClassification

AADT Spee

d

RoadwayOwnership

Rela

EmpArea

100546 Intersection

traffic control

Modify traffic

signal ‐ modify signal

mounting(spanwire to

mast arm)

4Numbers

2380626 412773

0

HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Other

0 0 City of

MunicipalHighwayAgency

Intens

104681

RoadwaydelineationRaisedpavementmarkers

0 Miles 907565 103000

0

HSIP(Section148)

RuralPrincipalArterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

104682

ShouldertreatmentsWidenshoulder ‐ paved orother

0 Miles 931506 171924

7

HSIP

(Section148)

RuralPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep

104683

ShouldertreatmentsWidenshoulder ‐ paved orother

0 Miles 1147000 374678

9

HSIP(Section148)

RuralPrincipalArterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

105470

RoadwayRumble strips

‐ edge orshoulder

38.6Miles

4860750 490212

8

PenaltyTransfer‐ Section154

RuralPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep

105486

RoadwayPavementsurface ‐ highfrictionsurface

0 Miles 2270416 316000

0

HSIP(Section148)

UrbanMajorCollector

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

105736

RoadwaydelineationImproveretroreflectivity

0 Miles 149491 166101 HRRRP

(SAFETEA‐LU)

Rural MinorArterial

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep

105800

Non‐infrastructureRoad safetyaudits

31 Miles 315000 350000 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipalArterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

105808

RoadwayRumble strips

‐ edge orshoulder

15 Miles 574382 212438

2

PenaltyTransfer‐ Section154

RuralPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep

105809

RoadwayPavementsurface ‐ highfrictionsurface

3.8Miles

698165 123016

5

PenaltyTransfer‐ Section154

UrbanPrincipalArterial ‐ Interstate

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

105831

RoadwayRoadway ‐ other

0 Miles 1539926 303992

6

PenaltyTransfer‐ Section154

RuralPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep

105832

Intersectiontraffic controlIntersectiontraffic control‐ other

2Numbers

111707 500000 HSIP

(Section148)

RuralPrincipalArterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

106239

RoadwayPavementsurface ‐ high

friction

4.65Miles

1807221 215000

0

HSIP

(Section148)

Rural Major

Collector

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

surface 

106293

Intersectiontraffic controlIntersectiontraffic control‐ other

3Numbers

760743 930000 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipalArterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

106485

Intersectiontraffic control

Modify traffic

signal ‐ addbackplates

0 Miles 328994 134304

6

HSIP(Section148)

Rural Major

Collector

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

10467 Intersection 0 Miles 550233 653111 HSIP Rural 0 0 State Inte
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

2 traffic control

Modify trafficsignal ‐ addflashingyellow arrow

(Section148)

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

HighwayAgency

ns 

104743

Intersectiontraffic control

Modify traffic

signal ‐ modify signal

mounting(spanwire to

mast arm)

0 Miles 839948 100000

0

HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Other

0 0 City of

MunicipalHighwayAgency

Intens

106133

RoadsideBarrier‐ metal

0 Miles 190000 200000 HSIP

(Section148)

RuralPrincipalArterial ‐ Interstate

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

100655

AlignmentHorizontaland verticalalignment

0.4Miles

1151206 401477

3

HSIP

(Section148)

RuralPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep

104684

ShouldertreatmentsWidenshoulder ‐ paved orother

5.29Miles

170000 185425

7

HSIP(Section148)

RuralPrincipalArterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

96752 Pedestrians

and bicyclists

Pedestriansignal

0.08Miles

300155 649441 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanMinor

Arterial

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Pede

93669 Pedestrians

and bicyclistsMiscellaneouspedestriansand bicyclists

0.4Miles

208807 382090 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanMinorArterial

0 0 City of

MunicipalHighwayAgency

Pede
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

104363

IntersectiongeometryIntersectiongeometry ‐ other

0.1Miles

353009 654222 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Interstate

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep

106536

RoadsideRoadside ‐ other

0.26Miles

180478 315000 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipalArterial ‐ Interstate

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

94529 Intersection

geometryAuxiliary lanes

‐ add left‐turn

lane

0.09Miles

134197 243156 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Other

15000

0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

86490 Intersection

geometryAuxiliary lanes‐ add left‐turnlane

1Numbers

401834 563000 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanMinorArterial

18000

0 City of

MunicipalHighwayAgency

Intens

94531 Intersection

geometryAuxiliary lanes

‐ add left‐turn

lane

1Numbers

279191 538870 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Other

17000

0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

99403 Alignment

Verticalalignment orelevationchange

0.43Miles

2947347 471767

4

HSIP(Section148)

Rural MinorArterial

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep

98371 Intersection

traffic control

Intersection

traffic control

‐ other

1Numbers

1549047 212899

9

HSIP(Section148)

UrbanMinor

Arterial

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

89904 Intersection

traffic controlIntersectiontraffic control‐ other

1Numbers

122213 160875 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipalArterial ‐ Other

25000

0 City of

MunicipalHighwayAgency

Intens
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

98372 Intersection

geometryIntersectiongeometry ‐ other

1Numbers

812227 337278

1

HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanMinor

Arterial

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

104687

Intersectiontraffic controlModify trafficsignal ‐ modify signalmounting(spanwire tomast arm)

0.12Miles

275760 368804 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanMinorArterial

26000

0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

104703

RoadsideDrainageimprovements

6.67Miles

813312.49

1600000

HSIP

(Section148)

Rural Minor

Arterial

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

86678 Intersection

traffic controlIntersectiontraffic control‐ other

1Numbers

77078 125000 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipalArterial ‐ Other

0 0 City of

MunicipalHighwayAgency

Intens

98095 Intersection

geometryAuxiliary lanes

‐ add left‐turn

lane

0.09Miles

232837 561591 HSIP

(Section148)

RuralPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Other

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

100656

Pedestriansand bicyclistsInstallsidewalk

0.67Miles

490247 594720 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipalArterial ‐ Other

0 0 City of

MunicipalHighwayAgency

Pede
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

104674

RoadwayRoadway ‐ other

8.96Miles

3231233 354343

6

HSIP(Section148)

Rural Major

Collector

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep

104686

Intersectiontraffic controlIntersectiontraffic control‐ other

1Numbers

300000 375000 HSIP

(Section148)

RuralPrincipalArterial ‐ Other

31000

0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

93938 Intersection

traffic control

Modifycontrol ‐ modifications

toroundabout

1Numbers

269878 639580 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanMajor

Collector

0 0 City of

Municipal

HighwayAgency

Intens

100559

Pedestriansand bicyclistsInstallsidewalk

0.12Miles

129865 441290 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanMinorArterial

3600 0 State

HighwayAgency

Pede

104673

RoadwayRoadway ‐ 

3.24Miles

2207297 231114

4

HSIP

(Section

Rural MinorArterial

0 0 State

Highway

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

other 148) Agency 

100632

Pedestriansand bicyclistsMiscellaneouspedestriansand bicyclists

0.367Miles

102112 127574

3

HSIP(Section148)

UrbanMajorCollector

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Pede
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

96939 Intersection

geometryAuxiliary lanes

‐ add right‐

turn lane

0.09Miles

389451 943841 HSIP

(Section148)

Rural Major

Collector

5000 0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

95423 Intersection

traffic controlIntersectiontraffic control‐ other

0.2Miles

77402 513900 HRRRP

(SAFETEA‐LU)

Rural MajorCollector

5600 0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

97029 Intersection

geometryAuxiliary lanes

‐ add left‐turn

lane

0.2Miles

1177545 191971

8

HSIP(Section148)

UrbanMajor

Collector

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

93347 Shoulder

treatmentsWiden

0.317Miles

965367 231571

0

HSIP(Section148)

UrbanMajorCollector

6000 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

shoulder ‐ paved orother

103461

Intersectiontraffic control

Intersection

traffic control

‐ other

1Numbers

481267 785000 HSIP

(Section148)

Rural Minor

Arterial

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

104668

AlignmentAlignment ‐ other

0.263Miles

1331370 160190

5

HSIP(Section148)

Rural MinorArterial

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

RoadDep
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

96733 Pedestrians

and bicyclists

Installsidewalk

0.19Miles

139146 318323 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanMinor

Arterial

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Pede

100560

Pedestriansand bicyclistsInstallsidewalk

0.36Miles

207969 487262 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanMinorArterial

0 0 State

HighwayAgency

Pede
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

84358 Intersection

traffic control

Intersection

traffic control

‐ other

1Numbers

2756301 235610

4

HSIP(Section148)

Rural Major

Collector

9700 0 State

HighwayAgency

Intens

86544 Intersection

traffic controlIntersectiontraffic control‐ other

1Numbers

464279 910700 HSIP

(Section148)

UrbanPrincipalArterial ‐ Other

12000

45 City of

MunicipalHighwayAgency

Intens

105493

Non‐infrastructureData/trafficrecords

1Numbers

350000 350000 HSIP

(Section148)

RuralPrincipal

Arterial ‐ Interstate

StateHighwayAgency

Data 
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

50

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* 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Number of fatalities 861.8 823 772.8 756.6 744.6

Number of serious injuries 16386.8 14314.2 12377.8 10798.6 9780

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.12 1.07 1 0.98 0.97

Serious injury rate (per

HMVMT)

21.31 18.58 16.1 14.06 12.71

*Performance measure data is presented using a five‐year rolling average.
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

51
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

52
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

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

Year ‐ 2014

FunctionClassification

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

RURAL PRINCIPALARTERIAL ‐ INTERSTATE

48 492.8 0.52 5.3

RURAL PRINCIPALARTERIAL ‐ OTHERFREEWAYS ANDEXPRESSWAYS

67.4 675.6 1.08 10.79

RURAL PRINCIPALARTERIAL ‐ OTHER

0 0 0 0

RURAL MINORARTERIAL

97 836.2 1.87 16.11

RURAL MINOR

COLLECTOR

15.2 155.4 2.79 28.57

RURAL MAJORCOLLECTOR

122.2 1210.6 2.45 24.25

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR

STREET

65.2 766.2 2.17 25.47

URBAN PRINCIPAL 54 1075.4 0.35 7.06
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

ARTERIAL ‐ INTERSTATEURBAN PRINCIPALARTERIAL ‐ OTHER

FREEWAYS AND

EXPRESSWAYS

11 127.4 0.33 3.81

URBAN PRINCIPALARTERIAL ‐ OTHER

85.8 1335 0.68 10.61

URBAN MINOR

ARTERIAL

82.2 1334.2 0.79 12.86

URBAN MINORCOLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN MAJOR

COLLECTOR

45.2 637.6 1.1 15.59

URBAN LOCAL ROADOR STREET

11 252.6 0.57 13.15

OTHER 5.6 95.2 0 0
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Year ‐ 2014

Roadway Ownership Number of

fatalities

Number of seriousinjuries

Fatality rate (perHMVMT)

SH

STATE HIGHWAY AGENCY 591.8 7111.6 0.93 1COUNTY HIGHWAY AGENCY 8.6 80.6 0.71 6TOWN OR TOWNSHIP HIGHWAY AGENCY 1.4 29.2 0.26 6CITY OF MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY AGENCY 103.2 1687.6 0.75 1STATE PARK, FOREST, OR RESERVATION AGENCY 0 0.8 0 0LOCAL PARK, FOREST OR RESERVATION AGENCY 0 0 0 0OTHER STATE AGENCY 0 0 0 0OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 0 0 0 0PRIVATE (OTHER THAN RAILROAD) 0 0 0 0RAILROAD 0 0 0 0STATE TOLL AUTHORITY 0.2 0.6 0.23 0LOCAL TOLL AUTHORITY 0.8 7 0.21 2OTHER PUBLIC INSTRUMENTALITY (E.G. AIRPORT,

SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY)

0.4 2.2 NaN N

INDIAN TRIBE NATION 0 0 0 0
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

OTHER 38.2 865.6 NaN N
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

65

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

The following statistics denotes Virginia crash experience a 5.53 percent decrease on fatalities, a 2.66

percent decrease on injuries and a 1.22 percent decrease on total reported crashes from 2013.

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)

1.91 1.834 1.76 1.71 1.796

Serious injury rate

(per capita)

29.93 26.69 23.37 20.58 18.55

Fatality and serious

injury rate (per capita)

31.84 28.52 25.13 22.29 20.35

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

Report will not allow to upload year 2014 Average.

Fatal rate 1.95

Serious Injury 15.51

Fatal and Serious Injury 17.45
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

66

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state?  

No
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

67

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‐Developed in‐house HSIP Project Tracking tool to measure the expenditure and project

schedule for project delivery.  

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‐The local administered projects are now being included in this year's HSIP plan.

Briefly describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting period.  
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

68

VDOT has developed a HSIP Implementation Guide Manual which includes direction on the use of the

new BCR worksheet as well as how to apply for systemic improvements. VDOT has also develop in‐house

and HSIP Project Tracking Tool to assist with ensuring the timely delivery of its safety projects.  Also,

VDOT publishes it's top 100 PSI locations including segments and intersections to aid in the identification

of potential safety projects.

For the first time in five years VDOT has open its HSIP to local administered projects.  New guidance for

these projects are included in the new Implementation Manual.

  
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

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

Year ‐ 2013

HSIP‐related SHSPEmphasis Areas

TargetCrash Type

Number offatalities

Number ofserious injuries

Fatality rate(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate(per HMVMT)

Ot1

Roadway Departure 407 4168.2 0.5 5.14 0 Intersections 192.2 3366.2 0.24 4.15 0 Pedestrians 79.2 470.2 0.1 0.58 0 Bicyclists 9.8 190 0.01 0.23 0 
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Groups of similar project typesPresent the overall effectiveness of groups of similar types of projects.

Year ‐ 2014

HSIP Sub‐program Types

TargetCrash Type

Number offatalities

Number ofserious injuries

Fatality rate (perHMVMT)

Serious injury rate(per HMVMT)

Ot1

Crash Data 744.6 9780 0.97 12.71 0 RoadwayDeparture

393.4 3763.8 0.49 4.64 0 

Bicycle Safety 83.4 482.2 0.1 0.6 0 Intersection 194.2 3007.8 0.24 3.71 0 
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Systemic TreatmentsPresent the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.Systemicimprovement

TargetCrash Type

Number offatalities

Number ofserious injuries

Fatality rate (perHMVMT)

Serious injury rate(per HMVMT)

Ot1
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

84

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

which you would like to elaborate.  

Last year Virginia experience the lowest number of highway fatal crashes in its history with an all time

low of 700 persons killed on our highways.  Due to the development of the its in‐house HSIP Project

Tracking Tool VDOT has seen its HSIP project delivery rise from a 77% to a high of 96% project delivery

rate.

Highway Safety Performance

This report provides safety performance measures for deaths and severe injuries and the 

associated rates per 100 million vehicle miles travelled (HMVMT). Since 2001, injury crashes 

have declined to about 45 thousand per year (almost a 20 percent reduction from the 1990's). 

Severe injuries have decreased by approximately 63 percent since 2001, some 7.8 percent per 

year. Injuries per capital have also continued to decline for the last 20 years.Highway Safety 

Performance

This report provides safety performance measures for deaths and severe injuries and the 

associated rates per 100 million vehicle miles travelled (HMVMT). Since 2001, injury crashes 

have declined to about 45 thousand per year (almost a 20 percent reduction from the 1990's). 

Severe injuries have decreased by approximately 63 percent since 2001, some 7.8 percent per 

year. Injuries per capital have also continued to decline for the last 20 years.

Traffic deaths per population in Virginia remained fairly stable for about 15 years after the 

declines that were seen in the early 1990's. However, 2007 saw a peak in fatal crashes resulting 

in 1,026 deaths, the first time deaths exceeded 1,000 since the early 1990's. Since 2007, a 25 

percent in reduction has been experienced, although traffic deaths increased slightly in 2011 and 

2012 the year 2014 decline to 700.

Severe traffic crash decreases indicate the effectiveness of improved driver regulations, safer 

cars, education, enforcement, emergency services, and engineering solutions in reducing related 

injuries.
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Project EvaluationProvide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional).

Location

Functional Class

Improvement Category

Improvement Type Bef‐

Fatal

Bef‐SeriousInjury

Bef‐AllInjuries

Bef‐PDO

Bef‐Total

Aft‐Fatal

Aft‐SeriousInjury

Aft‐Al

Injuris

98898 Rural

PrincipalArterial ‐ Interstate

Roadway Rumble strips ‐ edge or

shoulder

0 6 4 6 16 0 3 5 

86475 Rural

MinorArterial

Shouldertreatments

Pave existing shoulders 0 4 5 5 14 0 0 0 

93548 Rural

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Roadwaydelineation

Raised pavement markers 1 2 1 4 8 0 0 0 

93549 Rural

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Roadwaydelineation

Raised pavement markers 0 8 11 16 35 0 0 4 

97570 Rural Roadway Improve retroreflectivity 4 8 31 59 102 3 4 36 
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

delineation

90193 Rural

MinorArterial

Shouldertreatments

Widen shoulder ‐ paved or

other

0 5 7 19 31 0 4 9 

95638 Rural

MinorArterial

Intersectiontraffic control

Intersection traffic control ‐ other

0 2 4 4 10 0 1 2 

89662 Rural

MinorArterial

Roadway Rumble strips ‐ edge or

shoulder

0 1 1 7 9 1 1 1 

97611 Rural

MinorArterial

Roadside Drainage improvements 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 

92061 Rural

PrincipalArterial ‐ Interstate

Roadside Barrier ‐ other 0 5 3 14 22 1 1 10 

92060 Rural

PrincipalArterial ‐ Interstate

Roadside Barrier ‐ other 0 3 6 22 31 0 4 6 

81466 Rural Shoulder Pave existing shoulders 0 3 2 7 12 0 1 2 
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

PrincipalArterial ‐ Interstate

treatments

94835 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Intersectiontraffic control

Modify traffic signal ‐ modernization/replacement

0 2 0 5 7 0 0 1 

95410 Rural

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Intersectiontraffic control

Intersection flashers ‐ add

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

0 5 1 2 8 0 0 3 

95408 Rural

MinorArterial

Intersectiontraffic control

Modify traffic signal ‐ modernization/replacement3

0 2 0 3 5 0 0 0 

81445 Urban

Minor

Arterial

Alignment Horizontal curve realignment 1 2 9 4 16 0 0 1 

81446 Urban

MinorArterial

Pedestriansand bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestriansand bicyclists

0 0 2 2 4 0 0 1 

17522 Urban

MajorCollector

Alignment Alignment ‐ other 0 0 3 12 15 0 0 3 

86502 Urban Intersection Auxiliary lanes ‐ add left‐turn 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

MinorArterial

geometry lane

94630 Rural

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Intersectiontraffic control

Modify traffic signal ‐ modernization/replacement

0 2 10 8 20 0 0 1 

86497 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Intersectiongeometry

Auxiliary lanes ‐ extendexisting left‐turn lane

0 2 7 6 15 0 2 2 

86508 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Pedestriansand bicyclists

Pedestrian signal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

95532 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ OtherFreewaysandExpressways

Roadway Rumble strips ‐ edge or

shoulder

0 5 9 11 25 0 0 0 

95511 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Roadway Rumble strips ‐ edge or

shoulder

1 7 4 8 20 0 0 0 
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

FreewaysandExpressways

96768 Rural

MinorArterial

Intersectiontraffic control

Intersection flashers ‐ addmiscellaneous/other/unspecified

0 3 0 2 5 0 1 0 

71721 Urban

MajorCollector

Pedestriansand bicyclists

Install new "smart" crosswalk 1 1 2 1 5 0 0 0 

95836 Urban

MinorArterial

Intersectiontraffic control

Modify traffic signal ‐ modernization/replacement

0 0 5 17 22 0 1 27 

89658 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Roadway Rumble strips ‐ center 0 4 8 7 19 0 4 4 

95503 Urban

MinorArterial

Intersectiontraffic control

Intersection traffic control ‐ other

0 1 12 13 26 0 0 2 

94868 Urban

Minor

Arterial

Intersectiontraffic control

Intersection traffic control ‐ 

other

0 4 8 35 47 0 0 1 

97673 Urban Intersection Modify traffic signal ‐  0 0 10 17 27 0 0 9 
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

MinorArterial

traffic control modernization/replacement

92243 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Interstate

Roadway Rumble strips ‐ edge or

shoulder

0 7 22 59 88 0 4 9 

97674 Urban

MinorArterial

Intersectiontraffic control

Modify traffic signal ‐ modernization/replacement

0 2 9 16 27 0 0 3 

97671 Urban

Minor

Arterial

Intersectiontraffic control

Modify traffic signal ‐ modernization/replacement

0 3 8 17 28 0 3 10 

97675 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Intersectiontraffic control

Modify traffic signal ‐ modernization/replacement

0 0 4 10 14 0 0 1 

97672 Urban

Minor

Arterial

Intersectiontraffic control

Modify traffic signal ‐ modernization/replacement

0 1 3 7 11 0 0 6 

90254 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Lighting Continuous roadway lighting 1 5 31 58 95 0 6 40 

90210 Urban Lighting Continuous roadway lighting 0 0 9 16 25 0 1 13 
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

90212 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Lighting Continuous roadway lighting 0 1 11 20 32 0 2 12 

90203 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Lighting Continuous roadway lighting 0 3 18 30 51 0 0 11 

95496 Urban

MinorArterial

Intersectiontraffic control

Modify traffic signal ‐ modernization/replacement

0 3 9 10 22 1 0 7 

90209 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ OtherFreewaysand

Expressways

Lighting Continuous roadway lighting 0 1 22 37 60 0 3 17 

94225 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ 

Pedestriansand bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestriansand bicyclists

0 7 22 59 88 0 4 9 
2015 Virginia Highway Safety Improvement Program

Other

97261 Rural

PrincipalArterial ‐ Interstate

Shouldertreatments

Shoulder treatments ‐ other 2 51 30 155 238 4 26 28 

89449 Rural

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Roadwaydelineation

Roadway delineation ‐ other 0 4 9 25 38 0 8 13 

81345 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Pedestriansand bicyclists

Medians and pedestrian

refuge areas

0 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 

77162 Urban

PrincipalArterial ‐ Other

Lighting Continuous roadway lighting 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

93

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached

   
2015 Virginia     Highway Safety Improvement Program

94

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 non‐

infrastructure projects include road safety audits, transportation safety planning activities,

improvements in the collection and analysis of data, education and outreach, and enforcement

activities.

Older driver special rule applies if traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and

pedestrians over the age of 65 in a State increases during the most recent 2‐year period for which data

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

February 13, 2013.  

Performance measure means indicators that enable decision‐makers and other stakeholders to monitor

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

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

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

Roadway Functional Classification means the process by which streets and highways are grouped into

classes, or systems, according to the character of service they are intended to provide.

Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) means a comprehensive, multi‐disciplinary plan, based on safety

data developed by a State Department of Transportation in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 148.  

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.