|
Abstract
|
Key Findings
• Larger rural and urban seagull intersections, especially those on four-lane roads and those with wide medians, have higher crash rates (per vehicle) than smaller seagull intersections;
• Distraction to the left of side-roads resulting from road features, such as parking and movement from nearby accesses/side-roads and the operation of right turn bays does increase right turn out versus through vehicle crashes at T-intersections;
• The design of left turn slip lanes, especially where this restricts visibility to through vehicles, does increase the risk of right turn out versus through vehicle crashes at rural seagull intersections.
Alternative intersection layouts may reduce traffic delays and/or improve road safety. Two alternatives are reviewed in this research: 'priority-controlled Seagull intersections' and 'priority-controlled intersections with a Left Turn Slip Lane'. Seagull intersections are used to reduce traffic delays. Some do experience high crash rates, however. Left Turn Slip Lanes allow turning traffic to move clear of the through traffic before decelerating, thereby reducing the risk of rear-end crashes. Although there is debate about the safety problems that occur at Seagull intersections and Left Turn Slip Lanes there has been very little research to quantify the safety impact of different layouts. In this study, crash prediction models have been developed to quantify the effect of various Seagull intersection and Left Turn Slip Lane designs on the key crash types that occur at priority intersections. The analysis showed that seagulls are not safe on 4-lane roads, that roadway features like kerb-side parking and nearby intersections can increase crash rates and that left turners in LTSLs can restrict visibility and create safety problems.
Language: en |