ROAD SAFETY AUDIT. South Street (Route 1A) at East Bacon Street (Route 106) and West Bacon Street Town of Plainville.

Transcription

1 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT South Street (Route 1A) at East Bacon Street (Route 106) and West Bacon Street Town of Plainville March 15, 2018 Prepared For: MassDOT On Behalf Of: Town of Plainville Prepared By: BETA Group, Inc.

2 Table of Contents Background... 1 Project Data... 1 Project Description... 2 Audit Observations and Potential Safety Enhancements... 5 Potential Safety Enhancements... 9 Summary of Road Safety Audit... 9 List of Appendices Appendix A. Appendix B. Appendix C. Appendix D. RSA Meeting Agenda RSA Audit Team Contact List Detailed Crash Data Speed Regulations List of Figures Figure 1. Location Map... 3 List of Tables Table 1. Participating Audit Team Members... 1 Table 2. Project Estimated Time Frame and Costs Breakdown... 9 Table 3. Potential Safety Enhancement Summary... 10

3 Background The Federal Highway Administration defines a Road Safety Audit (RSA) as the formal safety examination of an existing or future road or intersection by an independent, multidisciplinary team. The purpose of an RSA is to identify potential safety issues and possible opportunities for safety improvements considering all roadway users. A Road Safety Audit was scheduled for the intersection of South Street (Route 1A) with East Bacon Street (Route 106) and West Bacon Street because the intersection has been identified as a high crash location and a top 5% location within the Southeast Regional Planning and Economic Development District (SRPEDD) region. A project has been initiated to make traffic and safety improvements to the South Street corridor including this intersection (MassDOT File No ). The RSA is intended to identify potential short and long term safety improvements that can be made at the intersection, which can then be implemented through general maintenance for short term low cost improvements or incorporated into the future project to the greatest extent practicable. Project Data A Road Safety Audit for South Street (Route 1A) at East Bacon Street (Route 106) and West Bacon Street in the Town of Plainville was held on February 12, 2018 at Plainville Department of Public Works in Plainville, MA. As indicated in Table 1, the audit team consisted of representatives from State, Regional and Local agencies and included a cross-section of engineering, planning, and emergency response expertise. Table 1. Participating Audit Team Members Audit Team Member Kevin Fitzgerald Elsa Chan Alex Duggan Bianca Marshall Luis de Oliveira James Alfred Justin Alexander Paul Scott Tyler de Ruiter Justin Curewitz Agency/Affiliation MassDOT Highway Division Safety Section MassDOT Highway Division Safety Section MassDOT Highway Division District 5 Projects MassDOT Highway Division District 5 Traffic SRPEDD Plainville Police Chief Plainville Fire Chief Plainville Department of Public Works Director BETA Group, Inc. BETA Group, Inc. Page 1

4 Project Description South Street (Route 1A), shown in Figure 1, is an Urban Minor Arterial under Town jurisdiction throughout the Town of Plainville. Route 1A follows a general north-south alignment and is signed as a north-south route. South Street provides a connection to Wrentham and Interstate 495 to the north, and to North Attleborough and Route 1 to the south. Land use along South Street in the vicinity of the intersection is primarily commercial, with residential homes along intersecting side streets. South Street (Route 1A) at East Bacon Street (Route 106) and West Bacon Street South Street (Route 1A), East Bacon Street (Route 106) and West Bacon Street form a four-legged intersection under traffic signal control. East Bacon Street is classified as an Urban Minor Arterial and West Bacon Street is classified as an Urban Collector, with both roadways under Town jurisdiction. The signal is owned and maintained by the Town of Plainville. East Bacon Street is a primary connection to Route 1 and Mansfield to the east. Land use in the area is commercial, with An Unlikely Story bookstore and café on the northeast corner, Plainville House of Pizza on the southeast corner, Queen s Nails & Spa on the northwest corner and an additional parking lot for the An Unlikely Story on the southwest corner. Adjacent businesses impact operations at the intersection, with most patrons utilizing the parking lot on the southwest corner. South Street provides a single travel lane in each direction at East and West Bacon Street, with turns accommodated from the single lane. A solid white edge line is provided to delineate a shoulder, but widths are not sufficient to safely accommodate bicycles. The northbound and southbound approaches are wide enough to allow through traffic to pass queued left-turning vehicles waiting at the intersection. It was noted that drivers show aggressive tendencies, bypassing queued vehicles when possible, when traveling through the intersection because of the lengthy traffic queues that exist northbound during the morning peak period and southbound during the afternoon peak period. The close proximity of buildings on the intersection corners creates tight turns for truck traffic. This is especially true for the northeast and southeast corners. East Bacon Street (Route 106) and West Bacon Street both provide a single lane in each direction. Route 106 begins at the intersection with South Street and follows East Bacon Street to the east. Image 1: South Street at E/W Bacon Street (looking north) Page 2

5 N SOUTH STREET (ROUTE 1A) AN UNLIKELY STORY EAST BACON STREET (ROUTE 106) QUEEN'S NAILS PLAINVILLE HOUSE OF PIZZA WEST BACON STREET PARKING LOT (FOR PATRONS) SOUTH STREET (ROUTE 1A) LEGEND PROJECT LOCATION SCALE IN FEET: 1"=200' Road Safety Audit South Street (Route 1A) at East Bacon St (Route 106) & West Bacon Street Plainville, MA Figure 1 Location Map

6 A solid white edge line is provided to delineate a shoulder, but widths are not sufficient to safely accommodate bicycles. The traffic signal provides a phase for the South Street approaches, an exclusive pedestrian phase, and a phase for the East and West Bacon Street approaches. An exclusive pedestrian phase is activated by pedestrian pushbutton on all four corners of the intersection. No Turn on Red restrictions are signed for all four approaches. Continuous sidewalks are provided along both sides of all roadways and marked crosswalks are provided across all four approaches. Crash Data Crash data provided by the Plainville Police Department show 40 crashes occurred at the intersection for the five year period from 2012 through A crash data summary and a collision diagram are included in the Appendix. Rear-end and angle crashes are both prevalent, with rear-end crashes comprising 43% of all crashes and angle crashes comprising 40% of all crashes. Rear-end crashes occurred on three of the four approaches; including thirteen southbound (eight involving two vehicles and five involving three vehicles), one involving three vehicles northbound, and two involving two vehicles westbound. Rear-end crashes were often a result of queued traffic and distracted/inattentive drivers. Angle crashes were also seen at the intersection with five crashes involving a northbound through vehicle and a westbound through vehicle, two involving a southbound through and a westbound through, and one involving a northbound through and an eastbound through. Six additional angle crashes involved turning vehicles: four crashes with vehicles making left-turns and two making right turns. A significant amount of these angle crashes are attributed to red light violations or vehicles using the clearance interval to navigate through the intersection due to heavy traffic volumes and queuing. Six sideswipe crashes in the same direction were seen at the intersection with at least one occurring on each approach. Sideswipe crashes were typically seen in periods of queued traffic, especially when vehicles were attempting to pass queued turning vehicles. Page 4

7 Audit Observations and Potential Safety Enhancements Following a brief introduction to the RSA process and a summary of existing geometry and crash information, the audit participants were asked to discuss safety issues at the intersection of South Street (Route 1A) with East Bacon Street (Route 106) and West Bacon Street. Audit participants then conducted a site visit as a group, at which time they offered observations on safety issues and concerns. A summary of those major safety considerations and the potential enhancements identified during the RSA is as follows: Safety Issue #1: Lack of Turning Lanes Observations: It was noted by audit participants that the intersection geometry results in traffic queuing and longer delays due to the lack of turn lanes for both approaches on South Street. Left turning vehicles often queue back waiting for acceptable gaps in traffic. Northbound and southbound approaches along South Street are wide enough to allow a through vehicle to pass by these queued left turning vehicles when they wait as close to the double yellow centerline as possible. Vehicles can then pass on the right of these left turning vehicles to continue through the intersection; however, these makeshift two lane approaches would be introducing the potential for sideswipe crashes that were noted as part of the crash history at the intersection as well as potential crashes for left turning vehicles not expecting a bypassing vehicle in the opposite direction. In addition, if a vehicle attempting to pass on the right suddenly realizes they do not have enough room, it could lead to potential rear-end crashes with the trailing vehicle. Yet, without this makeshift two lane approach the intersection experiences long queues in both peak periods: northbound during the morning and southbound during the afternoon. In addition to vehicular traffic, truck traffic was also noted as a concern at the intersection. Larger trucks access the intersection from local businesses including the Plainville Quarry and Aggregate Industries, as East Bacon Street is a primary connection to Route 1. Currently trucks must swing out and make wider turns to navigate the narrow intersection and often times cannot accept the same gaps that other vehicles can, resulting in longer delays. When trucks are waiting for an appropriate gap to turn, the entire lane is blocked and through vehicles will not be able to bypass, resulting in significant queuing. It was discussed during the meeting that trucks making a westbound right turn would often cross the South Street centerline, encroaching on the southbound approach and leading to potential angle crashes; however, there were no crashes listed that involved trucks turning at the intersection. The close proximity of buildings to the roadway also presents a challenge to accommodate larger truck turns and any widening of the intersection would need to be done on the west side. Driver aggression could also be a contributing factor in angle crashes where driver frustration and longer queues results in drivers accepting shorter gaps and utilizing clearance phases to complete turns. Enhancements: Consider providing dedicated left turn lanes on South Street. This enhancement would require widening South Street to provide left turn lanes for both northbound and southbound approaches, Page 5

8 while maintaining a shared through/right-turn lane in each direction and a shoulder accommodating bicycles. The installation of left turn lanes for both South Street approaches would help reduce the probability of sideswipe and angle crashes. Review truck turning paths, and consider the need for widening and/or realignment. This is of specific concern for the South Street southbound left turn, but should be reviewed for all turning movements. Any required widening of the intersection would need to be done on the west side of South Street due to the buildings at the back of sidewalk on the northeast and southeast corners. Consider adjusting the center and shoulder line striping to narrow the approach and departure lanes and discourage cars from passing on the right. This would have negative capacity impacts but would decrease conflicts in the intersection. Safety Issue #2: Pedestrian Accommodations Observations: Several issues related to pedestrian traffic and accommodations were noted by audit participants. The intersection experiences higher pedestrian traffic due to the local area businesses, with the An Unlikely Story bookstore and café generating a significant amount. The bookstore utilizes two parking lots, one behind its building on the northeast corner of the intersection and one on the southwest corner, which requires pedestrians to cross two legs of the intersection. Audit participants noted that pedestrians will typically push the button to cross and when displayed with the WALK symbol, they will cross diagonally through the intersection instead of using the crosswalks. This in turn eliminates the need to push two separate buttons and wait two cycles. It was noted that the current pedestrian clearance time is not long enough to allow for a diagonal crossing; however, pedestrians familiar with the intersection will still make the crossing. This crossing pattern was observed during the site visit on the day of the audit. In addition to the bookstore and café, functions are also held on the second floor of the building which has been seen to generate significant interest and higher than usual pedestrian traffic. Although the bookstore owns the southwest corner parking lot, Plainville House of Pizza and the Nail Salon also access the lot, requiring pedestrians to cross at the intersection. Placement of pedestrian pushbuttons was also noted as an issue. Currently, the southwest and northeast corners of the intersection have separate pushbuttons for each crosswalk, while the remaining two corners provide only a single pushbutton for crossing. Current MUTCD guidance requires one pushbutton for each wheelchair ramp to a crosswalk. Enhancements: Consider the installation of diagonal crosswalks at the intersection in addition to the four existing crosswalks. This would require updated clearance times to allow for the pedestrian to safely cross diagonally. Pedestrians would have the ability to cross within one cycle length instead of two and would help reduce delays and queuing from multiple pedestrian calls at the intersection. Page 6

9 Consider the installation of a raised intersection or color/textured pavement to allow for pedestrians to cross to all corners of the intersection when the pedestrian phase is called. This would bring attention to the intersection, specifically the significant pedestrian activity. Consider concurrent pedestrian phasing to allow pedestrian traffic to cross during vehicular phases. Evaluate the conflicting left and right turning movements to ensure concurrent pedestrian phasing will not result in unsafe conditions or crossing conflicts. Consider Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) for concurrent phasing. If concurrent pedestrian phasing is decided on, consider including "Turning Vehicles Yield to Pedestrians" (R10-15) signs. Install countdown heads that display the time remaining in the Flashing Don t Walk interval, this can help pedestrians decide whether they have adequate time to cross the street. Consider installation of Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) including pushbuttons and signage for all crosswalks and their respective ramps. This should also include installation additional pushbuttons for the missing accommodations. These pushbuttons shall meet APS standards for placement of pushbuttons in relation to curb and crosswalk offset. Evaluate pedestrian desire lines to provide improved accommodations where increased pedestrian activity exists. These improvements could include reconstructed sidewalks and ramps, better defined/restriped crosswalks and flashing beacons for mid-block pedestrian desire lines. This can be applied to the intersection as well as the entire project corridor. Safety Issue #3: Driver Frustration Due to Traffic Congestion Observations: Traffic congestion was noted as an issue at the intersection. Heavy traffic volumes, especially during the morning and afternoon peak periods lead to increased driver frustration and aggression and could result in drivers accepting less than desirable gaps for turns or attempting to navigate through the intersection during yellow and red clearances. It was noted that southbound queues in the afternoon will often extend to the Plainville Public Safety Building, a distance of approximately 1,300 feet. Congestion could be a contributing factor in several of the crashes at the intersection. Another key factor in traffic congestion at the intersection is the significant pedestrian traffic and the increased calls of Image 2: Nail Salon Driveway Access the pedestrian phase at the intersection, exacerbating delays and extending queues further. It was noted that vehicles use the Nail Salon parking lot and driveways to bypass the intersection. The parking lot has access from both the southbound and eastbound approaches and vehicles have been seen using the lot as a cut through for both southbound right turns and eastbound left turns. Page 7

10 Enhancements: Consider time of day plans for signal timing to accommodate varying peak periods traffic volumes. Coordinate with Nail Salon property owner to prevent cut through traffic through added signage or reducing curb cuts for smaller driveway access. Consider adding a physical barrier within the parking lot to prevent cut through traffic. Consider evaluating signal phasing to include a leading protected left turn phase southbound. This would allow vehicles the chance to clear the intersection during each cycle and reduce them from queuing through multiple cycles. Consider adding retroreflective borders to the overhead back plates as well as adding back plates and borders to the post mounted signals. Safety Issue #4: Potentially Insufficient Clearance Times Observations: Yellow and red clearance times were noted to be potentially inadequate due to the history of red light running and vehicles remaining in the intersection during the clearance period. The issue of drivers remaining in the intersection is likely also related to previously noted congestion. The history of rear-end crashes on three of the four approaches can also be the result of inadequate clearance intervals. It was also suggested that pedestrian clearance intervals are inadequate at the intersection. Audit team members clarified that pedestrian signals are typically designed so that the Flashing Don t Walk (FDW) interval is long enough to allow a pedestrian to cross the street at an assumed typical walking speed, as dictated in the MUTCD. Enhancements: Study clearance times, and update if necessary. The existing yellow and all red clearance times should be determined from the existing traffic signal controller and compared to minimum requirements calculated based on the latest ITE and MassDOT guidance. If existing clearance times are insufficient, clearance times should be increased accordingly. This change in clearance times could reduce the number of rear-end or angle (red light running) crashes occurring at the intersection. Review pedestrian clearance times, and update if necessary. Pedestrian clearance times should be calculated based on the latest MUTCD and MassDOT guidance. Page 8

11 Safety Issue #5: Steep Westbound Grade and Speed Approaching Intersection Observations: It was noted by audit participants that the steep downhill grade westbound on East Bacon Street causes higher speeds approaching the intersection with South Street. These noted speeds make it difficult for opposing traffic to judge acceptable gaps. Enhancements: Consider installing additional warning signs or speed check signs heading westbound which will alert drivers to their increased speeds. Image 3: Westbound Downhill Grade (looking eastbound) Potential Safety Enhancements Following review of available materials and a discussion of existing safety issues, audit participants were asked to consider improvements. Audit participants were encouraged to consider both short and long term improvements for each issue. Each improvement considered has been categorized as short-term, midterm, or long-term based on the definitions shown in Table 2. Additionally, a cost category has been assigned to each improvement based on the parameters set forth in Table 2. Table 2. Project Estimated Time Frame and Costs Breakdown Time Frame Costs Short-Term <1 Year Low $10,000 Mid-Term 1-3 Years Medium $10,001-$50,000 Long-Term >3 Years High >$50,000 Summary of Road Safety Audit Table 3 summarizes potential recommendations discussed by the audit team. The recommendations are categorized based on the potential safety payoff, as well as by time frame and cost. The safety payoff is a qualitative judgment of the effectiveness of the potential safety improvements. Each recommendation has a responsibility assigned to it stating whether MassDOT or the Town of Plainville would be responsible for implementing the recommended improvement. The term Project refers to improvements that are assumed to be included or could reasonably be accommodated as part of planned improvements. Page 9

12 Table 3. Potential Safety Enhancement Summary Safety Issue Potential Safety Enhancement Safety Payoff Time Frame Cost Jurisdiction Lack of Turning Lanes Lack of Turning Lanes Lack of Turning Lanes Pedestrian Accommodations Pedestrian Accommodations Pedestrian Accommodations Consider Providing dedicated left turn lanes on South Street. Review truck turning paths, and consider the need for widening and/or realignment. Consider adjusting the center and shoulder line striping to narrow the departure lanes and discourage cars from passing on the right. Consider the installation of diagonal crosswalks at the intersection in addition to the four existing crosswalks. Consider the installation of a raised intersection or color/textured pavement to allow for pedestrians to cross to all corners of the intersection when the pedestrian phase is called. Consider concurrent pedestrian phasing to allow pedestrian traffic to cross during vehicular phases. Consider Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) for concurrent phasing. If concurrent pedestrian phasing is decided on, consider including "Turning Vehicles Yield to Pedestrians" (R10-15) signs. High Mid-term High* Town Medium Mid-term Medium* Town Low Short-term Low* Town Low Short-term Low* Town Low Mid-term Meduim* Town Low Short-term Low* Town Page 10

13 Safety Issue Potential Safety Enhancement Safety Payoff Time Frame Cost Jurisdiction Pedestrian Accommodations Pedestrian Accommodations Pedestrian Accommodations Driver Frustration Due to Traffic Congestion Driver Frustration Due to Traffic Congestion Driver Frustration Due to Traffic Congestion Driver Frustration Due to Traffic Congestion Clearance Times Consider installation of Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) including pushbuttons and signage for all crosswalks and their respective ramps. Install countdown heads that display the time remaining in the Flashing Don t Walk interval, this can help pedestrians decide whether they have adequate time to cross the street. Evaluate pedestrian desire lines to provide improved accommodations where increased pedestrian activity exists. Consider time of day plans for signal timing to accommodate varying peak periods traffic volumes. Coordinate with Nail Salon property owner to prevent cut through traffic through added signage or reducing curb cuts for smaller driveway access. Evaluate signal phasing to include a leading protected left turn phase southbound. Consider adding retroreflective borders to the overhead back plates as well as adding back plates and borders to the post mounted signals. Study clearance times, and update if necessary. Medium Short-term Medium* Town Medium Short-term Medium* Town Medium Long-term Low* Town Medium Medium Short-term (Study) Low* Town Long-term (Implementation) Low* Town Medium Mid-term Low* Town/ Property Owner Low Short-term Low* Town Low Short-term Low* Town Medium Short-term Low Town Page 11

14 Safety Issue Potential Safety Enhancement Safety Payoff Time Frame Cost Jurisdiction Pedestrian Clearance Times Review pedestrian clearance times, and update if necessary. Medium Short-term Low Town Westbound Grade Consider installing additional warning signs or speed check signs heading westbound which will alert drivers to their increased speeds. Low Short-term Low Town * Improvements to be incorporated into the proposed project are assumed to be included as part of the overall project cost. Page 12

15 Appendix A. RSA Meeting Agenda

16 Road Safety Audit Plainville, MA South Street (Route 1A) at West Bacon Street & East Bacon Street (Route 106) Meeting Location: Department of Public Works 29 West Bacon Street, Plainville, MA Monday, February 12, :00 AM Noon Type of meeting: Attendees: Please bring: High Crash Location Road Safety Audit Invited Participants to Comprise a Multidisciplinary Team Thoughts and Enthusiasm!! 10:00 AM Welcome and Introductions 10:15 AM Discussion of Safety Issues 11:00 AM Site Visit Crash history, Speed Regulations provided in advance Existing Geometries and Conditions Drive or walk to the intersection of South Street at West Bacon Street & East Bacon Street As a group, identify areas for improvement 11:30 AM Discussion of Potential Improvements Discuss observations and finalize safety issue areas Discuss potential improvements and finalize recommendations 12:00 PM Adjourn for the Day but the RSA has not ended Instructions for Participants: Before attending the RSA on February 12th, participants are encouraged to drive/walk through the intersection and complete/consider elements on the RSA Prompt List with a focus on safety. All participants will be actively involved in the process throughout. Participants are encouraged to come with thoughts and ideas, but are reminded that the synergy that develops and respect for others opinions are key elements to the success of the overall RSA process. After the RSA meeting, participants will be asked to comment and respond to the document materials to assure it is reflective of the RSA completed by the multidisciplinary team.

17 Appendix B. RSA Audit Team Contact List

18 Participating Audit Team Members Date: February 12, 2018 Location: Plainville South Street (Route 1A) at W Bacon Street & E Bacon Street (Route 106) Audit Team Member Agency/Affiliation Address Phone Number Justin Curewitz BETA JCurewitz@BETA-Inc.com Tyler de Ruiter BETA TDeRuiter@BETA-Inc.com Luis de Oliveira SRPEDD ldeoliveira@srpedd.org Paul Scott Plainville DPW PScott@plainville.ma.us James Alfred Plainville Police JAlfred@police.plainville.ma.us Bianca Marshall MassDOT D5 Traffic Bianca.Marshall@dot.state.ma.us Alex Duggan MassDOT D5 Projects Alex.Duggan@state.ma.us Kevin Fitzgerald MassDOT Traffic Safety Kevin.T.Fitzgerald@state.ma.us Elsa Chan MassDOT Traffic Safety Elsa.Chan@state.ma.us Justin Alexander Plainville Fire JAlexander@fire.plainville.ma.us

19 Appendix C. Detailed Crash Data

20 COLLISION DIAGRAM Intersection: South Street (Route 1A) at West/East Bacon Street (Route 106) Date Range: January December 2016 SYMBOLS Moving Vehicle Backing Vehicle Non-Involved Vehicle Pedestrian Bicycle Parked Vehicle Fixed Object Fatal Accident Injury Accident COLLISION TYPES # Rear End Head On Side Swipe Out of Control Left Turn Right Angle Nighttime Crash

21 Crash Data Summary Table South Street (Route 1A) at West/East Bacon Street (Route 106), Plainville, MA January 1, December 31, 2016 Crash Diagram Crash Date Time of Day Manner of Collision Box 11 Light Condition Box 1 Weather Condition Box 2, 3 Road Surface Box 6 Driver Contributing Code Box 24 Ages Injury Status Box 32 Comments Ref # m/d/y hh:mm # Type # Type # Type # Type # Type D1 D2 D3 D4 # Type 1 6/16/12 18:49 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 20 Distracted PDO "Looked Down" 2 8/31/12 11:19 4 Sideswipe, same direction 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 19 Inattention PDO Passed on Right of a Turning Vehicle 3 9/9/12 11:31 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 1 No Improper Driving Possible Injury "Foot slipped off brake" 4 9/19/12 10:12 3 Angle 1 Daylight 99 Unknown 1 Dry 3 Disregarded traffic signs, signals, road markings PDO WB Red Signal Disregarded traffic signs, signals, 5 11/2/12 13:23 3 Angle 1 Daylight 2 Cloudy 1 Dry 3 road markings Possible Injury 6 11/8/12 15:50 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 3 Rain 2 Wet 19 Inattention PDO 7 12/7/12 20:04 3 Angle 4 Dark - lighted roadway 3 Rain 2 Wet 3 Disregarded traffic signs, signals, road markings PDO NB Red Signal 3 Year Old Passenger of V2 was evaluated but NOT transported. WB Red Signal 8 12/18/12 16:52 2 Rear-end 4 Dark - lighted roadway 3 Rain 2 Wet 19 Inattention PDO Failed Brakes 9 2/20/13 14:17 3 Angle 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 2 Exceeded authorized speed limit PDO Left turn failed to yield ROW 10 6/24/13 17:29 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 19 Inattention PDO 11 7/4/13 17:52 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 19 Inattention PDO 12 7/24/13 10:17 1 Single Vehicle Crash 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 1 No Improper Driving 59 5 PDO Traveling around construction zone, mirror clipped utility pole. 13 8/29/13 07:53 4 Sideswipe, same direction 1 Daylight 2 Cloudy 2 Wet 1 No Improper Driving PDO 14 9/9/13 16:31 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 99 Unknown PDO Disregarded traffic signs, signals, 15 10/6/13 11:48 3 Angle 1 Daylight 3 Rain 2 Wet 3 road markings Incapacitating NB Red Signal 16 10/16/13 06:34 3 Angle 4 Dark - lighted roadway 1 Clear 1 Dry 99 Unknown PDO SB V1 failed to negotiate turn, struck EB V2 stopped on red Operating Vehicle in erratic, reckless, careless, negligent, or aggressive 17 11/2/13 15:59 3 Angle 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 10 manner Incapacitating NB Red Signal. All transported to area hospitals 18 11/3/13 09:08 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 2 Cloudy 1 Dry 99 Unknown PDO 19 12/12/13 14:40 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 99 Unknown 1 Dry 21 Fatigued/asleep PDO Opp stated "may have fallen asleep" 20 2/6/14 20:38 4 Sideswipe, same direction 4 Dark - lighted roadway 1 Clear 1 Dry 1 No Improper Driving 32 Passed on Right, Hit and Run 21 2/24/14 07:51 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 1 Clear 2 Wet 20 Distracted PDO School van (4 passengers) rear-ended another vehicle 22 3/3/14 13:55 3 Angle 1 Daylight 2 Cloudy 1 Dry 3 Disregarded traffic signs, signals, road markings Possible Injury NB Red Signal 23 3/11/14 17:45 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 99 Unknown Non-Incapacitating 2 Injuries 24 4/15/14 14:07 3 Angle 1 Daylight 3 Rain 2 Wet 6 Made an improper turn Incapacitating 25 8/18/14 14:36 3 Angle 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 1 No Improper Driving Incapacitating Motorcycle (V2) evasive maneuver, doesn't specify in report but suggests motorcyclist dumped his bike as part of the evasive maneuver. No collision between car and bike. 26 9/30/14 20:21 3 Angle 4 Dark - lighted roadway 2 Cloudy 2 Wet 19 Inattention PDO SB Red Signal 27 11/6/14 16:36 4 Sideswipe, same direction 4 Dark - lighted roadway 3 Rain 2 Wet 1 No Improper Driving PDO V3 Straddled DYCL to jump the EB queue. Sideswiped V1 (EB) and V2 (WB) vehicles. Crash reported unknown crash type as both "same dir" and "opposite dir" sideswipes occurred /15/14 15:12 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 19 Inattention PDO 29 1/22/15 12:00 3 Angle 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 4 Failed to yield right of way Possible Injury Police Vehicle with Emergency Lights, report states V2 entered intersection unsafey, no report of which approach had green signal / red signal. Both Transported 30 2/18/15 12:44 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 1 Clear 3 Snow 19 Inattention PDO 31 5/4/15 16:24 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 99 Unknown PDO 120 South Street (Long Signal Queue) 32 8/4/15 19:29 3 Angle 3 Dusk 1 Clear 1 Dry 4 Failed to yield right of way Non-Incapacitating V1 failed to yield ROW while making a left turn 33 11/28/15 16:24 2 Rear-end 4 Dark - lighted roadway 3 Rain 2 Wet 19 Inattention PDO 34 12/14/15 06:19 3 Angle 4 Dark - lighted roadway 1 Clear 1 Dry 3 Disregarded traffic signs, signals, road markings Non-Incapacitating SB Red Signal, Lost control and struck corner of House of Pizza. V1 Oper and V2 Pass Transported /29/15 06:54 3 Angle 1 Daylight 5 Sleet, Hail, Freezing Rain 3 Snow 99 Unknown PDO Both drivers claimed they had the green signal. 36 3/6/16 10:26 4 Sideswipe, same direction 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 19 Inattention Possible Injury V2 tried to pass on the right of a right turning vehicle. Opp2 Transported 37 7/2/16 16:12 3 Angle 1 Daylight 1 Clear 1 Dry 19 Inattention Incapacitating V2 encroached NB lane while turning left. Struck and ran over a stopped V1 (Motorcycle) and its occupants dragging them underneath vehicle. Motorcyle occ transported /8/16 16:20 2 Rear-end 1 Daylight 3 Rain 2 Wet 97 Other improper action PDO Opp stated his flop flop was wet and foot slipped off brake. V2 Oper stated they may have had a seizure causing the crash. V2 Oper 39 11/13/16 20:31 2 Rear-end 4 Dark - lighted roadway 1 Clear 1 Dry 16 Illness Possible Injury Transported /17/16 17:14 4 Sideswipe, same direction 4 Dark - lighted roadway 1 Clear 1 Dry 9 Failure to keep in proper lane or running off road PDO V1 tried to form two lanes or pass on the right. Red codes updated based on narrative/diagram Summary based on Crash Reports obtained from the TOWN OF PLAINVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT

22 Crash Data Summary Tables and Charts South Street (Route 1A) at West/East Bacon Street (Route 106), Plainville, MA 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% CRASH MONTH 20% 15% 10% 10% 10% 8% 8% 8% 5% 3% 3% 3% J F M A M J J A S O N D 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% CRASH DAY OF WEEK 20% 20% 15% 13% 13% 13% 8% Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday 30% CRASH TIME OF DAY 28% 20% 10% 0% 13% 6AM- 8AM 3% 8AM- 10AM 18% 15% 10% 10AM- 12PM 12PM- 2PM 5% 2PM- 4PM4PM- 6PM6PM- 8PM 10% 8PM- 10PM 0% 0% 0% 0% 10PM- 12AM 12AM- 2AM 2AM- 4AM4AM- 6AM 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% CRASH MANNER OF COLLISION 43% 40% 15% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% Single Rear-end Angle Sideswipe, Sideswipe, Head on Rear to Rear Unknown Vehicle same opposite Crash direction direction MassDOT RSA Crash Data Spreadsheet.xlsx 2 of 3 01/31/2018

23 Crash Data Summary Tables and Charts South Street (Route 1A) at West/East Bacon Street (Route 106), Plainville, MA 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 73% 0% 3% CRASH LIGHT CONDITION 25% Daylight Dawn Dusk Dark - Lighted Roadway 0% 0% 0% 0% Dark - Roadway not lighted Dark - unknown roadway lighting Other Unknown 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 60% Clear 13% Cloudy CRASH WEATHER CONDITION 20% Rain 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% Snow Sleet, Hail, Freezing Rain Fog, Smog, Smoke Severe Crosswinds Blowing sand, snow Other 5% Unknown 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 30% 20% 10% 0% 68% 28% 5% CRASH ROAD SURFACE Dry Wet Snow Ice Sand, mud, dirt, oil, gravel 11% 19% 16% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% CRASH DRIVER AGES 20% Water (standing, moving) 15% 13% Slush Other Unknown 6% % MassDOT RSA Crash Data Spreadsheet.xlsx 3 of 3 01/31/2018

24 Appendix D. Speed Regulations

25

26 0 NO SCHOOL STREET---WESTBOUND Beginning at Everett w. Skinner Road and George Street Thence w~sterly on School Street 0.68 miles at 30 miles per hour 0.10 miles at 25 miles per hour 0.39 miles at 30 miles per hour ending at South Street; the total di tance being 1.17 miles. GEORGE STREET---SOUTHBOUND Begir~dr~ at School Street Thence southbound on George Street 0.25 miles at 35 miles per hour 0.10 miles at 30 miles per hour 0.52 miles at 35 miles per hour 0. 1!1 miles at 30 miles per hour ending at Messenger Street; the total distance being 1.01 miles. GEORGE STR~ET---NORTHBOUND Beginnin~ at Messenger Street ~ ~nee northbound on George Street 0.14 miles at 30 miles per hour miles at 35 miles per hour 0.10 miles at 30 miles per hour 0.25 miles at 35 miles per hour ending at School Street ; the total distance being 1.01 miles. EVERETT W. SKINNER ROAD--- NORTHBOUND Beginning at School Street Thence northerly 0.98 miles at 30 miles per hour ending at Wampum Street; the distance being 0.98 miles. EVERETT W. SKIIUIER ROAD---SOUTHBOUUD Beginning at Wampum Street Thence southerly o. 98 miles at 30 miles per hour ending at School Street; the total distance being 0.98 miles. TAUNTON STREET---NORTHBOUND Beginning at Washington Street. (Route 1) Thence northbound on Taunton Street \ I

27

28

29

30

31