Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />II <br />" <br />II <br />. <br />I~ <br />'. <br />i <br />" <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />16 <br /> <br />The night-day accident ratios were as follows: <br /> <br />Location <br /> <br />132nd to 146th <br />146th to 167th <br /> <br />Before <br /> <br />3.0:1 <br />2.9:1 <br /> <br />After <br /> <br />1.3:1 <br />2.0:1 <br /> <br />The chi-square test was applied to the night-day ratios. The probability of the differ- <br />ence in rates being due to chance occurrence was found to l?:e less than 1 in 100 (a chi- <br />square value significant at 1 percent). This result suggests that the accident rate ratio <br />is significantly lower after lighting was Installed. However, the data consist of only 12 <br />observations, which does not fuifill the generally accepted requirements of at least 20 <br />observations for a 2 by 2 chi-square contingency test (each cell shouid have an expected <br />value of at least 5). Hence, the result of thi,s test must be treated with some caution. <br />As a second statistical test, it was assumed that any trend in day accident figures <br />would also be representative of any trend in night accidents. From the day values for <br />the 2 study sections, a trend was established during the period covering both the before <br />and the after conditions. This trend was applied to the before night figures to obtain <br />the expected number of accidents during the after period, if lighting had not been in- <br />stalled. A t-test was then'performed on the difference between this expected figure and <br />the actual figure after installation of lighting. The t-value for both sections together <br />was significant at the 10 percent level. For the north section only, a t-va1ue of 5 per- <br />cent was found. <br />These tests indicate that the installation of lighting quite possibly lowered the night <br />accident rate, but an exhaustive statistical confirmation is lacking. <br /> <br />LIGHTED VERSUS UNLIGHTED SECTIONS OF SAME ROUTE <br /> <br />Interstate 85 in Atlanta is lighted, but its extension in DeKa1b County is unlighted. <br />Direct comparison studies were performed in which 2 years of data from the lighted <br />section and 4 years from the unlighted section were used. <br />The lighted portion is 3.4 miles in length and extends northeast from a major inter- <br />change point. The basic design consists of two 24-ft roadways with a 14-ft median. <br />There are 4 interchanges along this section, in addition to the main freeway junction. <br />The junction is of a directional type, and the interchanges are essentially of the dia- <br />mond type. During the 1966 and 1967 study period, the route experienced 189 MVMT. <br />Fixed lighting utilizes a 28-ft mounting height, type 3 distribution, 6-ft overhang, and <br />120-ft staggered spacing. Measurements taken at an interchange location on the route <br />during 1967 showed a maintained illumination level of 0.38 HFC and a uniformity ratio <br />of 2.7 to 1. However, subsequent measurements in a location more typical of the over- <br />ail route average found a level of 0.33 HFC and a uniformity ratio of 16 to 1. <br />The unlighted section is 8.8 miles in length and is generaily similar to the lighted <br />portion except for a wider median and lower traffic volume. The section has 7 inter- <br />changes, generally of the diamond type. One is a major interchange with a partiaily <br />completed circumferentiai freeway loop. During the 1963 to 1967 study period, the un- <br />lighted section had 523 MVMT. <br />The relation of the number of accidents, roadway elem"ents, and day or night condi- <br />tions is gtven in Table 4. The accidents have been grouped into the foilowing types: <br /> <br />Accident Type <br /> <br />Rear end 1 <br />Other vehicular 2 <br />Pedestrian and parked car 3 <br />Fixed object and other off-road 4 <br /> <br />The day and night accidents/MVM and the night-day ratios are aiso given in Table 4. <br />(Ratios are omitted where only small accident sample sizes were available.) A <br />substantial difference in direct accident rates exists between the 2 sections. It is, <br />therefore, necessary to relate these rates on a ratio basis. The ratios for the unlighted <br />route are higher for type 1 thanior type 2 accidents. Conversely, the ratio for type 3 <br />