Citation

Le TQ, Gross F, Harmon T. Transp. Res. Rec. 2018; 2672(21): 10-19.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences USA, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0361198118796709

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This study evaluates the safety effectiveness of physical right-in-right-out (RIRO) operations compared with full turning movements at stop-controlled intersections. Geometric, traffic, and crash data from California were obtained for urban, three-legged, stop-controlled intersections with full movement and RIRO operations, as well as the downstream four-legged, stop-controlled or signalized intersections with full movement. A cross-sectional analysis provided estimates of the effects of turning movement restrictions while controlling for other differences between sites with RIRO and full movement. The aggregate results indicate reductions in total, all intersection-related, and fatal and injury intersection-related crashes at intersections with RIRO operations compared with full movement, with estimated crash modification factors of 0.55, 0.32, and 0.20, respectively. The reductions are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level for all crash types. Based on the disaggregate results, it does not appear that RIRO operations have different effects for different levels of traffic, design speed, or number of lanes. The analysis also examined the potential for crash migration from intersections where RIRO is implemented to the downstream intersection when determining the net benefits. The results indicate potential crash increases at downstream intersections, but many of the increases are not statistically significant at the 90% confidence level. Although the safety benefit-cost analysis suggests the strategy can be cost effective in reducing crashes at stop-controlled intersections, there is a need to analyze potential costs and benefits on a case-by-case basis with site-specific values.

Language: en