<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Research in Progress (RIP)</title>
    <link>https://rip.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://rip.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Developing Guidelines for Right-Turn Lane Pockets for Intersections in Nevada</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2713605</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Nevada is overrepresented in intersection-related crashes and has been designated as an Intersection-Focused state by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).  Further research exploring how dedicated right-turn lane pockets could mitigate fatal and serious injury crashes is needed.  Currently, the criteria used to determine when an exclusive right-turn lane is required may be inconsistently applied given today’s traffic volumes, vehicle mix, pedestrian activity, and safety expectations. In some cases, right-turn lanes are omitted even when they could improve operations or safety, while in others, they are added despite limited benefits and significant cost or right-of-way impacts.
The main objective of this research is to produce an updated, data-driven, and context-sensitive framework for determining when and where exclusive right-turn lane pockets should be required or clearly not required at access points in Nevada.  In particular, a tool will be provided that will improve the Nevada Department of Transportation’s (NDOT’s) ability to consistently evaluate access points to the state highway system and will maximize the safety and operational benefits of exclusive right-turn lanes. Additionally, the research results will provide NDOT with a process model that supports consistent, transparent, and technically-sound decision making for new developments and access modifications.
The University of Nevada, Reno team plans to reach the research objective by: (1) Synthesizing the current state of knowledge and practice for right-turn lane warrants nationally and among peer agencies. (2) Collecting high-resolution field data and developing calibrated VISSIM microsimulation models.  (3) Conducting systematic scenario-based simulations using the calibrated VISSIM models and crash data analyses.  (4) Developing guidelines, using the empirical findings from the aforementioned tasks, for determining when an exclusive right-turn lane pocket is warranted. (5) Developing a user-friendly, implementation-ready decision-support tool for use by NDOT reviewers, local agency staff, developers, and consulting engineers. (6) Compiling all research findings, guidelines, and tools into a comprehensive final report and conducting a training workshop to facilitate implementation.
The final deliverables will be designed from the outset for direct integration into NDOT’s policies, procedures, and operations. 
Additionally, the implementation plan will be structured as a phased approach that transitions from research completion through pilot application, full deployment, and sustained use.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 14:33:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2713605</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Two-Lane to Three-Lane Roadway Conversions: Active Transportation Safety Implications</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712207</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Land development patterns often shift two-lane collector roadways from serving primarily through traffic to accommodating a greater mix of through and local access traffic. In other cases, local destinations remain while downstream development increases through-traffic demand. In both scenarios, turning movements and through traffic increasingly conflict with each other. Where no alternative corridor options exist, through traffic remains on the road along with increased traffic volumes generated by new land uses. Prior to development, these roads may have included paved shoulders occasionally used by pedestrians and bicyclists, though active transportation activity was generally limited because fewer nearby destinations existed. As development intensifies, pedestrian and bicycle activity increases alongside turning conflicts, creating pressure on agencies to widen the roadway cross-section by adding center turn lanes, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, or shared-use paths.

While active transportation users benefit from dedicated facilities, they may not benefit from roadway changes that increase vehicle speeds, traffic volumes, or unprotected crossing distances. Meanwhile, motorists on two-lane roadways with frequent left-turning vehicles may experience more rear-end crashes, driver frustration, and risky drive-around maneuvers. Drivers making left turns under these conditions may also accept smaller traffic gaps or perform less thorough scans for pedestrians and bicyclists. When agencies determine that adding pedestrian and bicycle facilities alone is insufficient to meet operational needs, an important question remains: how can transportation agencies improve traffic operations while optimizing safety for active transportation users?

The objective of this research is to evaluate and compare the safety performance of two-lane roadway cross-sections without dedicated turn lanes and three-lane cross-sections with center two-way left-turn lanes along corridors that include bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and effective pedestrian crossing treatments. The research will identify the traffic, land use, and operational conditions under which each cross-section is more effective at improving pedestrian and bicyclist safety while balancing multimodal operational performance.

A secondary objective is to develop a guide with evidence-based recommendations, design considerations, and implementation strategies for improving multimodal safety along suburban and urbanizing corridors with current or projected high through-motorist travel and left-turn motorist demand.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 11:36:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712207</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Crash Evaluation of Roadsides in Urban and Suburban Contexts</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712180</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) places strong emphasis on multimodal design, flexibility, and addressing bicyclist and pedestrian serious injuries and fatalities. Pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities account for approximately 20% of all roadway fatalities. Research is needed to help state departments of transportation identify roadside design or in-roadway or cross-section treatments that reduce vehicle speeds and that will significantly reduce vulnerable road user fatal and serious injury crashes.

The 7th edition of A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (the AASHTO Green Book) provides some qualitative guidance on roadside design within urban or restricted environments, but there also is a need for quantitative data on the benefits and drawbacks associated with lateral offsets and roadside treatments. Roadway designers currently lack the information needed to make related data-driven decisions on roadside and in-roadway design.

The objective of this research is to develop a guide to support designers’ efforts to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate potential safety impacts of various roadside design configurations. The guide will include measures to determine safety impacts on each type of user (drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcyclists, etc.) for each configuration. The research will provide greater insight into how roadside design decisions—primarily lateral offsets—affect the safety of all road users in different urban and suburban roadway contexts. The research will explore how future Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) specifications could offer new guidance for evaluating safety systems for vulnerable road users. ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 15:10:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712180</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Safety Performance of Safe System Treatments for Corridors and Intersections that May Impact Capacity</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712178</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Transportation agencies are increasingly adopting the Safe System Approach (SSA), which emphasizes a holistic approach to eliminating all fatal and serious traffic injuries on road segments and at intersections. Historically, efforts to reduce congestion often led to the addition of through lanes, implementation of short auxiliary lanes at intersections to facilitate right turns and through movements, and other treatments. However, agencies are now exploring lane reductions—commonly referred to as right-of-way reallocation, road diets, or reconfigurations—to improve safety. In some cases, roads previously widened to accommodate peak-hour traffic are being reevaluated through the lens of the SSA.

Implementing these changes requires a comprehensive understanding of the associated safety impacts and the ability to predict crash outcomes resulting from modifications to roadway capacity. Safety outcomes associated with capacity modifications carry substantial weight in routine planning and operational decisions. Current evidence, however, is limited, and context-specific effects, especially for vulnerable road users, are not well quantified. Additional research is therefore needed to quantify how short auxiliary lanes and cross-section changes affect exposure, likelihood, and severity.

The objectives of this research are to (1) quantify the safety impacts of SSA treatments that may affect roadway capacity and (2) develop analysis methodologies, such as crash modification factors (CMFs) and crash prediction models, to evaluate how these treatments affect crash exposure, likelihood, and severity across all road users and crash types, including pedestrian and bicyclist crashes. The research results can enable planners, designers, traffic engineers, and other decision-makers to make evidence-based choices that balance safety with operational and capacity needs.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 15:00:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712178</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Implementing Self-Explaining and Self-Enforcing Roads</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712170</link>
      <description><![CDATA[It is often stated that approximately 95% of crashes are related to human behavior. While the exact percentage is debated, most crashes involve human factors, highlighting the limits of treating crashes solely as driver failings rather than as predictable interactions between people and the road environment. There are clear opportunities to address human factors and behavior throughout the planning, design, and operation of roadway networks. The Safe System Approach (SSA) encourages agencies to reframe safety by designing systems that anticipate human limitations and ensure that inevitable mistakes do not lead to fatal outcomes. Making that approach routine requires changes to both the physical roadway and agency procedures, so that networks better align with how people perceive, decide, and act.

Human-factors research shows how roadway geometry, visual clutter, inconsistent signing, unexpected transitions, and operational variability increase cognitive load and the likelihood of errors.  Human-factors research also identifies countermeasures that improve expectancy, reduce task demand, and encourage compliance. Despite this evidence and existing guidance, implementation barriers remain. Design manuals and operational policies often emphasize mobility, capacity, or legacy practice over behavioral predictability, and research recommendations are not always framed in language agencies can adopt as policy. This gap slows adoption of treatments that would make roads more self-explaining—where users immediately understand how to behave—and self-enforcing—where the environment naturally limits unsafe choices. Agencies, therefore, need a practical bridge from science to policy and routine practice to implement SSA principles at scale.

The objective of this research is to develop a guide and draft sample policies that enable transportation agencies to operationalize human-factors principles through roadway design and operations manuals and policies. This work will translate existing human-factors research into clearly written, implementable edits for design and operations manuals; illustrate practice-ready examples across facility types; and identify pragmatic changes to agency business processes and policies to support adoption.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 12:41:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712170</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of Alternative Intersection and Interchange Options for Nebraska </title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2689408</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Nebraska Department of Transportation (NDOT) has implemented and developed guidance for a limited set of unconventional designs (e.g., certain RCUTs and diverging diamond interchanges) and has accumulated experience through selected projects and research studies. NDOT lacks robust, Nebraska-specific tools to: (1) screen and select candidate unconventional facilities; (2) quantify trade-offs in operations, safety, and cost; and (3) develop practical guidelines that can be directly used by designers, planners, and district staff. This gap creates uncertainty when considering unconventional options and may limit NDOT’s ability to fully leverage designs that could offer meaningful safety and mobility benefits. The proposed research will provide NDOT with a structured and evidence-based approach for identifying the most suitable unconventional intersection and interchange options for Nebraska. By evaluating both the designs already implemented within the state and additional alternatives that may be considered soon, the study will broaden NDOT’s understanding of how various unconventional treatments perform under different traffic, geometric, and environmental conditions in Nebraska.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 12:26:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2689408</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Investigating Contributing Factors and Potential Countermeasures to Reduce Pedestrian Crashes at Intersections</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2705384</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Commonwealth of Virginia has experienced an increase in pedestrian related crashes, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Pedestrian fatalities have increased approximately 19% - from an average of 120 per year to 143 per year - when comparing the three years before (2017-2019) the COVID-19 pandemic business closures to the three years after (2021-2023) the pandemic closures (VDOT, 2025). Anecdotal evidence suggests that certain geometric design elements—including tight right-turns, skewed intersections, and poor crosswalk placement or setback—may reduce sight distance and increase the risk of vehicle-pedestrian collisions. Concurrently, vehicle design changes, particularly the growing prevalence of larger A-pillars in newer vehicles, may exacerbate driver blind spots and further obstruct pedestrian visibility at intersections.

This research seeks to investigate how specific intersection design features and vehicle design characteristics contribute to pedestrian fatalities at intersections. The goal is to identify high-risk design conditions and vehicle configurations that impair visibility or increase the likelihood of fatal pedestrian-vehicle conflicts. A thorough understanding of the factors contributing to the increase in pedestrian fatalities will help 
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) implement countermeasures proactively to improve pedestrian safety at intersections across the state. The findings can be used to inform geometric design standards, identify and prioritize intersections for pedestrian safety improvements, and support efforts to include direct vision obstruction in vehicle safety ratings. 
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2026 08:03:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2705384</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Assessing the Impacts of Safety-Focused Design Interventions on Arterial Roadways</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2677552</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Arterial roadways serve as critical connectors in urban transportation networks, yet their design often prioritizes vehicular mobility over safety. Despite the widespread application of safety-focused infrastructure interventions on local and collector streets, similar strategies are rarely implemented on arterials due to concerns over congestion, emergency response, and operational efficiency. However, these design choices have proven to result in unsafe conditions.

This project investigates how infrastructure design interventions can improve safety on arterial roadways while addressing operational and institutional constraints. The research follows a phased approach. First, it examines the historical, regulatory, and policy factors that have limited the adoption of safety-focused interventions on arterials, including the influence of fire codes and emergency response standards. Second, it assesses the real-world impacts of infrastructure changes on speeds, crashes, and emergency response metrics. Finally, it synthesizes findings to develop actionable recommendations and a decision-making framework for arterial design.

By providing an evidence-based understanding of how design choices affect safety, mobility, and community outcomes on arterial corridors, this study aims to inform infrastructure design practices.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2026 20:07:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2677552</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Designing Safer Streets</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2662686</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Designing Safer Streets is an implementation strategy in which the transportation network is planned, designed, built, operated, and maintained to enable safe mobility within the transportation system. The pooled fund will be established to conduct research on innovative strategies to design and implement a safe streets.  

OBJECTIVES: To assemble a consortium composed of State Departments of Transportation; County, regional, local, or tribal transportation agencies; additional interested entities or organizations; and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) program offices to meet national needs in support of safer streets. Activities of the consortium include: Identify planning, roadway design, human factors, safety, and operational issues related to safe streets elements and projects; Select new and existing safe Streets elements and/or projects for evaluation; Initiate and monitor research projects; Disseminate results; and Facilitate collaboration and information sharing among members.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2026 16:30:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2662686</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Impact of Passing Lane Guidance through Angled Markings on Two-Lane Rural Highways</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2655580</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Previous research has shown that the provision of low-cost measures, such as passing lanes, can be highly cost-effective in improving the level of service of two-lane highways, by increasing passing opportunities and safety. The passing lanes, such as Super 2 highways adopted by Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) are beneficial in dispersing platoons at locations where passing sight distance is shorter than the designated passing zones.
However, drivers should be informed, educated, and receptive to such design changes to have any positive impact on driving behavior and safety on these highways. In addition, the adopted pavement markings or design features used along passing lanes should be intuitive and considerate of human factors. Therefore, it is essential to investigate drivers’ perception and behavioral response to design changes in the passing lanes, such as any transitional lane markings, to ensure the desired safety and operational benefits prior to the installation at selected sites.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2026 13:01:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2655580</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Optimize Tradeoffs between Centerline Buffers, Lane Width, and Shoulders for Rural Undivided Highways</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2652072</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The research team will provide a practical framework for the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) to choose between cross-sectional design alternatives to optimize operational and safety performance on rural two-lane undivided highways. This framework will incorporate variables such as traffic volume, heavy vehicle mix, speed, and access density. Texas and other states have increasingly used a narrow centerline buffer area, separated by longitudinal pavement markings, to introduce physical separation between approaching vehicles, producing operational and safety benefits on undivided roadways without widening to a traditional divided cross-section. However, providing centerline buffers require reduced lane or shoulder widths. Project 0-7035 “Examine Trade-Offs between Center Separation and Shoulder Width Allotment for a Given Roadway Width” studied this effect for four-lane roadways with positive results, but less is known about two-lane roadways; understanding the benefits of center separation, along with the effects of various lane and shoulder combinations, would be useful for making decisions on cross-sections for new and resurfaced two-lane roadway segments. The research team will collect and analyze data for two-lane highways with centerline buffers and compare their safety and operational performances with traditional two-lane undivided highways. Additionally, the research team will quantify differences in the performance of two-lane undivided highways compared to other cross-sectional designs. The research team will use observed data and simulation to achieve the project objectives.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2026 16:29:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2652072</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Practices. Topic 57-06. Integrating Safety into Development Reviews and Transportation Impact Practices</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2630481</link>
      <description><![CDATA[State departments of transportation (DOTs) are seeking multimodal opportunities to reduce fatalities and serious injuries by adopting goals and policies that incorporate safety measures at the planning stage and later during the design stage, especially during the access permitting process. The criteria for development reviews have historically been focused on the evaluation of traffic operations, with traffic delays and level of service as the primary metrics for identifying potential operational impacts. More recently, vehicle miles travelled has been considered as a different metric for assessing development impacts. 

Safety is also a consideration but may be addressed in a more qualitative manner. Some materials or metrics that agencies use for a quantitative safety assessment include crash modification factors, the Highway Safety Manual (HSM), research done subsequently to publication of the HSM, conflict analysis, and locally developed resources. As a result, there may be a wide range of how safety is reflected in a transportation agency’s development review process. The net effect may be that potential safety impacts of new development are not identified or addressed.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this synthesis is to document state DOTs’ development review and access permit processes, with an emphasis on how such processes might reflect or integrate safety considerations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2025 18:20:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2630481</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Practices. Topic 57-01. Performance-Based Design Practices</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2630482</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Roadway geometric design has traditionally involved the application of tools, methods, dimensions, and criteria. The tools used in the current process have been dimensionally based, and designers typically follow the values in tables and equations from American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) or agency policies. The typical purpose of the roadway geometric design process is to provide the necessary three-dimensional features (horizontal alignment, vertical alignment, cross-section) for a roadway to address identified problems/needs and provide the appropriate level of mobility and safety outcomes for all road users. The traditional philosophical approach to design has been to treat minimum or desirable design criteria as adequate to produce acceptable performance. More recently, performance-based design (PBD) for roadways has advanced within the design profession and focuses on using specific, quantifiable (and sometimes qualitative) performance measures to guide design decisions, rather than simply adhering to traditional, dimensionally driven design standards. 

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this synthesis is to document current state department of transportation (DOT) practices for development and use of performance-based geometric design tools, methods, and approaches, also known as “performance-based practical design” (PBPD).]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2025 18:14:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2630482</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Practices. Topic 57-19. Design Practices to Achieve Desired Travel Speeds
</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2630498</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Speed management is an approach to achieving appropriate motor vehicle speeds in consideration of the roadway context and the safety of all road users, including pedestrians and bicycles. Speed management may entail changes to speed limits, changes to roadway and roadside designs, and the use of traffic control measures to maintain or achieve desired speeds. Also included is the use of enforcement and technology to increase compliance with speed limits and provide feedback to drivers about desirable “target” speeds. Any phase of roadway development from preliminary design and planning stages through construction, to improving any known or existing roadway conditions may consider speed management.

When selecting appropriate speed management designs and treatments, it is necessary to consider the current and future project needs and objectives, performance goals, roadway context, purpose of the roadway facility for all users, and budgetary constraints. Managing and achieving appropriate vehicle speeds usually requires a multifaceted approach that leverages appropriate speed limit setting, roadway design and other infrastructure techniques, operational strategies, education, and enforcement.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and many state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) have developed a variety of speed management resources, and many state DOTs have developed policies and practices for managing roadway speeds in different contexts.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this synthesis is to document state DOT design policies and practices for managing vehicle operating speeds proactively and reactively on streets and highways.

]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 15:53:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2630498</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Developing Guidance for Calculating the Downstream Functional Area of an Intersection</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2628203</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Appendix F of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)’s Road Design Manual (RDM) provides guidance and standards for several spacing standards including entrance, corner clearance, and intersection functional area.  Of these, the spacing standard with the least guidance is on the dimensions of the functional area.  VDOT RDM has guidance derived from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) (2018) for upstream functional area dimensions but provides no guidance for the dimensions of the downstream functional area. The purpose of this project is to provide clearer guidance on calculating the downstream functional area for signalized intersections.  

The project tasks will include conducting a (1) literature review, (2) survey of best practices, and (3) exploratory crash analysis.  Based on the results of these tasks, guidance will be developed for inclusion into Appendix F of VDOT’s Road Design Manual (VDOT, 2025). This guidance will include methods and a spreadsheet-based tool for calculating appropriate areas (distances) for downstream functional areas as well as more descriptive details on calculating upstream functional areas.  The deliverable will be a final report documenting findings from the research tasks.  With clear appropriate guidance on functional area dimensions, more consistent entrance connection standards can be applied across the Commonwealth - thus improving predictability and saving time for VDOT, localities, and land developers in the approval process.   
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2025 08:48:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2628203</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>