SPRING 2004 VOLUME 2 ISSUE 1
NATIONAL TRANSIT DATABASE
SAFETY AND SECURITY NEWSLETTER
 |
For
example, it is important to understand the severity of the collisions in
terms of injuries and property damage. NTD data show that 11 of the
incidents (38 percent) were essentially “fender benders” that did not
meet FTA reporting thresholds for rail collisions (one or more injuries
requiring transport to medical care, or $7,500 or more in property
damage). The remaining 18 collisions met FTA major incident thresholds,
but, even among this group, one third of the collisions did not involve
any injuries and none of the incidents had fatalities.In all 29 collisions, police cited the drivers of the cars involved, rather than the LRT. The causes of the collisions included illegal left turns, running red lights, failing to yield, and disregarding (going around) rail-crossing gates.
In some cases,
certainly, drivers simply did not exercise good judgment – as when they
drove around rail crossing gates. In other cases, however, signage and
signal designs may have contributed. Many drivers complained that
METRO’s “no left turn” signs were difficult to see, especially in bright
sunlight. Also, the placement of the signs with respect to specific road
lanes confused some drivers. Work is now underway to address these
possible deficiencies. Sign positions have been changed, and traffic
signals have been modified to turn red in all directions when an LRT
train approaches. In addition, METRO has launched televised
public-service announcements highlighting specific unsafe driving
behaviors, such as illegal left turns.
METRO’s experience with collisions is
comparable to what other LRT systems that operate in mixed traffic
experienced during their initial months of operation. In these “peer”
systems, collision rates were relatively high during the first year, but
then declined as community outreach and redesigns of signs and signals
took effect.