Study Details
Study Title: Safety Evaluation of Corner Clearance at Signalized Intersections
Authors: Le et al.
Publication Date: FEB, 2018
Abstract: This study evaluates corner clearance at signalized intersections under the Development of Crash Modification Factors program for the Evaluation of Low-Cost Safety Improvements Pooled Fund Study. Geometric, traffic, and crash data were obtained for signalized intersections with various corner clearances from the State of California and City of Charlotte, North Carolina. A cross-sectional analysis was conducted to estimate the effects of corner clearance while controlling for other differences among study sites. The estimated CMFs indicated that more limited clearance (i.e., driveway(s) within 50 ft of the signalized intersection) on receiving corners was associated with increases for all crash types, based on the data included in this analysis. These increases were statistically significant at the 90-percent level or greater for total, fatal and injury, rear-end, sideswipe, right-angle, and nighttime crashes. Only the results for turning crashes were not statistically significant at the 90-percent level. For limiter corner clearance on the approach corners, the results indicated statistically significant reductions in total, fatal and injury, and rear end crashes. The results also indicated reductions in sideswipe and nighttime crashes, and increases in right-angle and turning crashes, but none of these results were statistically significant at the 90-percent level.
Study Citation: Le, T. Q., Gross, F., Harmon, T, & Eccles, K. "Safety Evaluation of Corner Clearance at Signalized Intersections." Report No. 18-03676, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. (February 2018).
Study Report: Download the Study Report Document
CMFs Associated With This Study
Category: Access management
Countermeasure: Presence of driveway on an intersection approach corner
| CMF |
CRF(%) |
Quality |
Crash Type |
Crash Severity |
Roadway Type |
Area Type |
|
0.82
|
18
|
|
All |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
0.67
|
33
|
|
All |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
0.79
|
21
|
|
All |
K,A,B,C |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
0.62
|
38
|
|
All |
K,A,B,C |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
0.79
|
21
|
|
Rear end |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
0.63
|
37
|
|
Rear end |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
0.83
|
17
|
|
Sideswipe |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
0.69
|
31
|
|
Sideswipe |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.03
|
-3
|
|
Angle |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.06
|
-6
|
|
Angle |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1
|
0
|
|
Left turn,Right turn |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.01
|
-1
|
|
Left turn,Right turn |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
0.94
|
6
|
|
Nighttime |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
0.87
|
13
|
|
Nighttime |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
Countermeasure: Presence of driveway on an intersection receiving corner
| CMF |
CRF(%) |
Quality |
Crash Type |
Crash Severity |
Roadway Type |
Area Type |
|
1.33
|
-33
|
|
All |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.76
|
-76
|
|
All |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.29
|
-29
|
|
All |
K,A,B,C |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.68
|
-68
|
|
All |
K,A,B,C |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.36
|
-36
|
|
Rear end |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.86
|
-86
|
|
Rear end |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.31
|
-31
|
|
Sideswipe |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.71
|
-71
|
|
All |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.42
|
-42
|
|
Angle |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
2.02
|
-102
|
|
Angle |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.22
|
-22
|
|
Left turn,Right turn |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.49
|
-49
|
|
Left turn,Right turn |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.29
|
-29
|
|
Nighttime |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
|
1.67
|
-67
|
|
Nighttime |
All |
Not specified |
Not specified |
