[T6] ARRB Introduction to Road Safety Audit Training - Day 1

7/30/2019 [T6] ARRB Introduction to Road Safety Audit Training - Day 1

1/222

Introduction to RoadSafety Auditing (RSA)

Paul Hillier ARRB Group Ltd

Day 1 (Friday 9 November 2012)

Transport Community of Practice


2/222

ARRB Group & your presenter

2


3/222

ARRB Group Ltd

Formerly Australian Road Research Board

50 years old in 2011 Not for profit, government owned

250+ staff

Trusted advisor to Australian road authorities Research of national importance for

which member authorities have a common need

Safety, traffic management, road design, parking,

transport economics, asset management,pavements, road surfacing

International developed & developing countries

3


4/222

ARRB Members

4
http://www.nt.gov.au/


5/222


6/222

6


7/222

The program for Day 1

7


8/222

Day 1 (of 2)

There will be 3 sessions:An introduction to RSA (1300hrs 1400hrs)

RSA 101 (1400hrs 1445hrs)

Break RSA 101 (1500hrs - 1530hrs)

Risks / hazards: their management &mitigation (1530hrs 1655hrs)

Wrap up & Day 2 preview (1655hrs - 1700hrs)

CLOSE

8


9/222

Objectives of training

9


10/222

Training objectives

The training will provide / cover:

Context - how RSAs fit into the overall road safety effort

Awareness of what an RSA is and costs / benefits

Knowledge how to conduct an RSA & manage risk

Application how this fits with ADB cycles & initiatives

Experience - through both case studies & exercises

10


11/222

Style

Practical focus

Using visual e.gs & case studies wherever possible

Mixed audience not all engineers, different

experience and needs, but trying to providesomething useful for everyone even if just a recap

Active participation (especially group exercises)

11


12/222

Session 1 an introduction to

RS Auditing

12


13/222

Day 1, Session 1 An introduction to RSA

A practical introduction to risks / hazards

How do we define a risk/hazard in simple terms?

How network managers find out about risks on

their network and where RSA fits in

The Safe System and RSA

ADB interest in RSA

Cost / benefits of RSA Any questions?


14/222

An Introduction to Road

Related Risks and Hazards

14


15/222

15


16/22216


17/222

17


18/222

18


19/222

19


20/222


21/222

21


22/222


23/222

23


24/222

24


25/222

25


26/222

26


27/222

27


28/222

28


29/222

29


30/222

30


31/222

31


32/222

32


33/222

33


34/222

34


35/222

35


36/222

36


37/222

37


38/222

What did we learn?

Keep it simple!

Dont be afraid to say the obvious - what you see

First impressions often very important

Use your experience as a road user

Establish who the primary road users are

38


39/222

How Road Network Managers

Find Out About Risks andHazards On Their Networks

39


40/222

40

What has been successful?


41/222

41

What has been successful?

ROAD

SAFETYAUDIT


42/222

Where does RSA Fit Into The

Safe System Approach?

42


43/222

43

Five pillars for a Safe System approach

Roadsafetymanagement

Safer userbehaviour

Buildsaferroads

Buildsafervehicles

Improvepost-crash

care

www.who.int/roadsafety/decade_of_action/

Decade Action Plan

A Safe Road System


44/222

RSA in the Safe System


45/222

Specific ADB Interest in

Road Safety Auditing

45


46/222

Specific ADB interest in RSA

Outlined in multiple documents:

Safety on the Roads Joining Forces to Save Lives(signatory, Nov 2009)

Collaboration of seven (7) development banks (inc. ADB)

Safe System (systematic) approach

Four broad categories of action, one of which isimplementing safety approaches in the planning, design,

construction, operation and maintenance of road infrastructureprojects

and includes:

ensuring that safety is integrated in all phases. (as above)

promote the adoption of good practice, proactive approaches to improve

the safety of road infrastructure including the use ofroad safety audits,road safety inspections and road safety impact assessments

46


47/222


Mainstreaming RS in ADB Operations - Action Plan

(Jan 2012) + associated presentation by Oleg Tonkonojenkov

Identifies the being of 129 measures in 10 different areas of roadsafety including road safety audits

Identifies issues in delivery of ADB road projects, mainly related to

lack of systemic approach and specifically:implementation of road safety support is often less effective because of

limitations in thedesignof components and insufficient use of availabletools such as road safety audits

Key action areas includestrengthening ADB internal road safety

capabilities, including provision of more detailed guidance and ToRneeded by operations staff

Action Plan 2012 inc. training in RSA and iRAP

47


48/222


ADB Supported Road Safety Actions

(presentation by Jeff Miller ADB, Mar 2012)

On-going and future activities identified in detail

Many individual locations, plus regional actions (e.g.Improving Road Safety in ASEAN)

Road Safety Action Plan (RSAP) 7 key areas

48


49/222


Road Safety Action Plan (April 2012)

road safety audits reduce annual fatal

and injury crash frequency

Integration of road safety into the project cycle

Mainstreaming road safety

ADB established a funded Road Safety Group

Implementation of road safety measures

Adopting existing (successful) tools and processes

Structured Action Plan (first 2-3 years focus on capacity building,including RS management and engineering)

Towards stand alone road safety investment in all projects

49


50/222

Specific WB interest in RSA

World Bank also encouraging RSA:

Most recently - press release 29 September 2012Road Safety Audits Can Improve Road Safety

Refers to WB case study from China Strengthening theUse of RSA by Deng, Jordan and Goodge (Aug 2012)

Five action steps recommended: Develop a comprehensive national audit standard

Improve the technical guidelines for RSA

Develop provincial RSA policies

Provide training on RSA to project managers and auditors

Establish an accreditation system

50


51/222

The Benefits and Costs of

Road Safety Auditing

51


52/222

Benefits of RSA (1)

safer new highways through crash prevention and

crash severity reduction safer road networks

more uniform road environment that is more easily

understood by road users reduced whole of life costs

providing one component of local and state crash

reduction targets a reduced need to modify new schemes after they

are built

52


53/222

Benefits of RSA (2)

eventual safety improvements to standards

and procedures

more explicit consideration of traffic mix andthe safety needs of vulnerable road users

the encouragement of other personnel inroad safety

better understanding and documentation ofroad safety engineering

5353

f di i d d i


54/222

Cost of auditing road designs

For a large scale project, typically 4-10% of theroad design costs (but can be much less)

Which is typically about 0.5% oftotal projectcosts for larger projects

the cost of rectifying any inadequacies dependson how early in the design process they areidentified and the consequent amount of

redundant design time..

The earlier the better !

54

C d i h h f h ?


55/222

Compared with the cost of crashes?

Hard to quantify..India estimates cost offatals = US$65bn per year??

iRAP use 70 x GDP/person In Australia the monetary cost of road traffic incidents on a public road

(cost to society) are often taken as:

Fatal = AUD$ 2.4 million

[Approx 1,400 deaths of Australias roads per annum]

(Profound impairment $ 3.82 million)

Serious Injury $ 0.214 million

(BITRE, 2008. $ in 2006 equivalent)

Also think of the many other components to that cost !! (not just $$)

Prevention is definitely better than cure!

C B fi


56/222

Cost Benefits

Lots of studies!e.g. for findings from existing RSA:

analysis of a range of existing RSAs indicated BCRs

of implementing the proposed actions between 2.4:1and 84:1

BCRs of individual proposed actions 0.003:1 and

460:1 over 78% of all proposed actions had BCRs > 1.0

(Source: AustRoads Report prepared by ARRB Ap-R209 2002)

56

C t B fit


57/222

Cost Benefits

Another example, on average: 36:1 benefit for design stage audits

6:1 benefit for existing road audits

(ref. within World Bank paper by Deng et al. 2012)

57


58/222

Any Questions?

58


59/222

Session 2 RS Auditing 101

59

D 1 S i 2 RSA 101


60/222

Day 1, Session 2 RSA 101

RSA what and why?

Technical standards guarantee of safety

Definition / objectives of RSA (what it is & isnt !)

Stages of RSA (& ADB cycle) How to the steps / use of checklists etc.

The audit team

Reporting and record keeping Any questions?


61/222

RSAs Why And What?

61

Ro d S fet A dit?


62/222

Road Safety Audit?

What is it ?

Why do we need it ?

62

What is safety audit?


63/222

What is safety audit?

a formal check

systematic, evidence-based

auditors typically include experienced road safety and

traffic management engineers

auditors are independent of the designers

safety recommendations are set out in an audit report

final decision should rest with the client project manager

63

Wh f di d d ?


64/222

Why are safety audits needed ?

Experience is that new roads are not always as safe as

they should or can be, because: potential safety problems are often overlooked during design, or

over reliance on technical standards and/or technical standardsdo not match up / work together well (more later)

quality/experience of designers

Designing a road is hard ! there are many factors to consider .

does the designer have all the factors / local issues?

can we expect the designer to address everything?

Our insurance - much easier (& cheaper!) to change adesign than have to change the road once it is built.

64

Aims of Road Safety Audit


65/222

Aims of Road Safety Audit

to ensure all highway schemes operate as safely aspractically possible

to minimise casualty numbers and severity (notnecessarily the same thing)

to consider the safety of all road users especiallyvulnerable road users and where traffic is mixed

to improve the awareness of safe design practices bydesign, construction and maintenance staff

65

Road Safety Audit is NOT


66/222

Road Safety Audit is NOT

an opportunity to redesign a scheme

a technical check on the designers competence

a technical compliance audit

design standards/structural safety check

an assessment of the merits (or otherwise) of the

scheme

66

Technical standards


67/222

Technical standards

Standards dont necessarily guarantee safety

they are an important starting point their correct application would remove many hazards

combinations of minimum (but acceptable) standards canstill result in an unsafe road

Often a failure to apply basic national/state/localstandards, e.g. signs and markings

parking road design

road construction specifications

67

An example combining standards


68/222

Mountainterrain

An example. combining standards

68

Design Speed 120 km/h 60 km/h 120 km/h

120

Base case

120120


69/222

Mountainterrain

69


120

Option 1 Speed signs

120120

60

60

Complies with standards, but is it safe???


70/222

Mountainterrain

70


120

Option 2 Transition the speed signs

120120

60

60

Complies with standards, is it safer?

60100 80


71/222

Mountainterrain

71


120

Option 3 Transition the road alignment

120120

60

Much safer !!!

100 80

Transition zone Transition zone


72/222

What Can Be Audited?

72

What can be audited ?


73/222

What can be audited ?

all works that involve new road/ highway construction

permanent changes to existing highway layout/ features

major and minor highway schemes

traffic management schemes development schemes

highway maintenance schemes

temporary traffic management schemes

73

RSA can be conducted on:


74/222

RSA can be conducted on:

new freeways

major divided roads

reconstruction and realignment projects

intersection projects

pedestrian and bicycle routes

deviated local roads near major projects local area traffic management schemes and their components

signal upgrading

subdivision proposals

crash reduction schemes safe routes to school projects

maintenance with improvement activities

74


75/222

Possible Stages of RSA

(and the ADB cycle)

75

When to audit ?


76/222

When to audit ?

at the Feasibility stage (also linked to audits ofland use adjacent to highwayexample coming)

once the Preliminary Designhas been developed

once the Detailed Designstage is complete

at the Pre-opening stage (or soon after theconstruction is complete)

continued

76

When to audit ?


77/222

When to audit ?

Roadwork Traffic Schemes required during construction ofsignificant / large / complex projects

on the Existing Road network (nb. also known as a roadsafety assessment orroad safety review)

Thematic audits [road user group, PWD (DisabilityDiscrimination) & gender audits?]

Maintainability audits

(Audits due to a specific trigger e.g. crash, crash study,public and/or media concern etc, etc.)

77

When to audit ?


78/222

When to audit ?

Interim audits? (might be less formal) during a lengthy/complex design process?

conducted in the same format asfeasibility/prelim/detailed design audits

not mandatory

not a substitute for the formal stages

(thematic and maintainability audits)

78


79/222

Summary..

Audit at all stages, ifpossible!

Has cost implications

Possible options:

Mandatory?

(ring fence funds)

Audit on project size? Audit on project cost?

79


80/222

80

Ref. RMS of NSW


81/222

The Stages of RSA

in More Detail

81


82/222

82

(feasibility)

Feasibility Stage


83/222

y g

Considerations:

appropriate concept?

route choice

intersection numbers, locations, spacing

what standards?

impacts on nearby network

83


84/222

Residential area is separated from school

and working places by a major road.

Workers and students have to crossthe road

All development on the same side of the

major road removes the need for regular

crossings

One Sided DevelopmentSplit Development

Planning/feasibility stage


85/222

Planning/feasibility stage

85

Rat running

Solution!


86/222

86

Feasibility stage RSA


87/222

87

y g

Interchange located to save bridge costs:

bridge pier becomes a gore


88/222

88

bridge pier becomes a gore

ultimately needs protection !


89/222

89Source: Austroads Guide AGRS06-09, prepared by ARRB

Preliminary Design Stage


90/222

y g g

Considerations:

horizontal/vertical alignment

intersection layouts

sight lines

roadside?

90

Detailed Design Stage


91/222

g g

Considerations:

signs & lines

lighting

signals

roadside crash protection intersection details

91

Design Audit Should Have Picked Up...


92/222

g p

92

Design audit should have picked up.


93/222

93

Tight off-ramp, sloping gore area


94/222

94

Example of Detailed Design RSA


95/222

95

Designing for Road safety


96/222

96

Follow respected general principles!

Use appropriate design vehicles

Have an understanding of likely traffic volumesand traffic composition

Understand limitations of design software e.g. usingcorrect tool, impact of accuracy of inputs andassumptions, check of outputs (right ballpark?)

g g y

Designing for road safety


97/222

97

g g y

Horizontal geometry

Rmin = V2

127 (n + f)

where :Rmin = minimum radius of circular curve (m)

V = vehicle speed km/h

n = superelevation m/mf = coefficient of side friction



98/222

98

g g y

Horizontal sight distance available sight distance should be greater than the

stopping distance of the design vehicle

where :

SSD = safe stopping distance (m)

Rt = reaction time (s) [2.0-2.5 s]

V = vehicle speed (km/h)

d = coefficient of longitudinal deceleration

g = longitudinal grade (%)

SSD = +

RtV V 2

3.6 254 (d+0.01g)



99/222

99

Vertical geometry avoid crestsand dips, wherever possible

avoid horizontal curves

on crests, wherever possible



100/222

100

Width appropriate not too narrow and not too wide

Keep water off the road - good cross-fall and takewater away (use natural drainage if possible)

Appropriate signage / delineation etc

Avoid / minimise roadside hazards, or protect them

Good running surface (in good conditions)

Designing for Road Safety -Intersections


101/222

101

Good principles:

1.Preference should always be given to three-wayover four-way intersections, T or staggered Tnot X

2.Favour direction of major traffic flow

3.Accommodate the largest design vehicleexpected to regularly use the road

4.Intersections should be positioned in safelocations away from horizontal and verticalalignment changes

5.The terminating road should be positioned at 90degrees to the through road to allow for maximumsight distance, i.e. T not Y

Intersections

Designing for road safety -Intersections


102/222

102

Design principles (all roads)

6. Give Way signage preferred. STOP signsshould only be installed if the required sightdistance cannot be achieved (or crash history)

(see next slide)

Intersections

Intersection sight distance


103/222

103

Safe intersection stopping distance

Distance for a driver on the through road to observe a vehicle on aminor road approach moving into a collision situation and todecelerate to a stop before reaching the collision point

where :

SISD = safe intersection stopping distance (m)

Dt = decision time (s) [2.0-2.5 + 3 s]V = vehicle speed (km/h)

d = coefficient of longitudinal deceleration

g = longitudinal grade (%)

SISD= +

DtV V 2

3.6 254 (d+0.01g)



104/222

104

Design principles (all roads)

7. The minor approach roads should beconstructed on a flat area for the minimumlength of the longest vehicles that will use the

intersection8.Locate intersections with thought

te sect o s


105/222

105



106/222

106

address any changes in trafficpriority by changing thealignment of anintersection and not

by relocating/installingsignage

Construction (Roadworks) Audit


107/222

Considerations: staging

changes & interim layouts

signs & lines, lighting

temporary barriers

readability

107


108/222

108


109/222

109


110/222

110


111/222

111


112/222

112

Ad-hoc signs posted in construction zones


113/222

113


114/222

114

Before RSAexposed hazard

After RSA

Pre-opening Stage


115/222

Considerations:

the effectiveness & correctness of:

signs & lines

landscaping crash protection

readability of the road

115

Some problems may not be obvious on a plan


116/222

116


117/222

117


118/222

118

View from the side road


119/222

119

Bicycles

Pre-opening audit


120/222

120

Sign designed & installed incorrectly; arrows are not alignedover the lanes to which they apply


121/222

121


122/222

122

Dont Forget Your Night Audit !!!


123/222

123

Audit of Existing Roads (nb. a.k.a)


124/222

Considerations:

the level of safety, considering the function of the road

Multiple issues:

roadside hazards

readability of road

delineation

signs

A few examples here, many more later in Day 1

124


125/222

125


126/222

126


127/222

127


128/222

128


129/222

129

Dont Forget Your Night Audit !!!


130/222

130

Minimum Requirements??


131/222

131

(ref. RMS of NSW, Aus)


132/222

RSA And The ADB cycle

132

Stages in the ADB project cycle


133/222

133


134/222

134


135/222

How Do We Do This?The Steps In

Conducting An RSA

(inc. the use of checklists)

135


136/222

136 Ref. Austroads 2009

Agree Brief

The Brief (ToR) For An RSA


137/222

Needs to specify: project details

RSA guideline/procedure to be followed

auditor qualifications/accreditation / experience(required for lead and team member/s)

type of audit to be performed

reporting requirements

Source: NSW RTA

137

Typical Brief (ToR) For An RSA


138/222

Source: NSW RTA

138



139/222

Source: NSW RTA

139



140/222

Source: NSW RTA

140

local


141/222

Checklists

141

Checklists


142/222

Myriad of checklists available

Typically extensive Cover wide range of issues (but not all?)

A help / guide (especially for less experienced auditors toensure all road user groups considered), but no substitute

for experience by doing and mentoring Disadvantages (?):

makes audit very mechanical and rigid

need to think about the whole road system

need to think like a road user

can prompt finding a problem for a solution

142


143/222

143 Ref. Austroads (2009)


144/222

The Key Players &

The Audit Team

144

The Key Players and Audit Team

Cli t ( ) / j t


145/222

Client (sponsor) / project manager

Designer

Audit Team:

independent of the design team

at least two people

lead and team member/s

relevant experience & training (and accreditation?)

co-opt / call in other specialisms as needed

145

Auditor qualifications (typical)


146/222

road safety / traffic management engineeringexperience essential

5 years absolute minimum

10+ years desirable

RS auditor accreditation requirements? experience needed is relative to role in the team

(lead, team member)

experience based on the type of project

experience in developed and developing countries?

146


147/222

Reporting And Recordkeeping

147

Typical Report Contents


148/222

cover / title page

introduction / background on scheme (audit details)

observations: risks / hazards observed & their location

reasons for concern: narrative (description), supported with

pictures to help others appreciate the issue

prioritisation(?): e.g. essential, highly desirable anddesirable or H,M,L system, red, amber, green system

recommendations(?): suggested RS / TM engineeringmitigation measure/s for each observed risk / hazard

148148

Typical Report Content


149/222

Signed statement by auditors

Often tabulated component, with spaces forresponses from:

designer?

project manager ultimate decision by client / owner?

ADB report format (inc. table) examined in Day 2

149

Recordkeeping


150/222

Essential (inc. legal concerns?)

Need to retain:

RSA working file/s (inc. photos / video)

Retention of RSA report (inc. CAR & responses)

Action Plan

Scheme evaluation(?)

150


151/222

Any Questions?

151


152/222

Day 1, Session 3 Risks and Hazardstheir management and mitigation


153/222

Identifying risks / hazards (practical exercise)

How do we succinctly and usefully define risks /hazards and mitigation options

Responses to RSA reports

Managing risks/hazards identified: to mitigate or not?

Mitigation options and their returns

Any questions?

Looking ahead to Day 2


154/222

Identifying Risks/Hazards

& Defining Them(focus on RSA of existing roads design RSA on Day 2)

154


155/222

155


156/222


157/222

157


158/222

158

Pedestrian facility


159/222

159

Wide carriageway no central refuge


160/222

160

Unauthorised median openings


161/222

161

Geometry - high speed road


162/222

162

Geometry - high speed road


163/222

163

Unprotected drop upper tolower carriageways


164/222

164

Freeway without shoulders


165/222

165

Deficient design/implementation


166/222

166


167/222

167

Uncontrolled Linear Development


168/222

168

Bus stop used as a cyclerickshaw stand


169/222

169

Traffic control & management


170/222

170Animal traffic

Two-wheelers


171/222

171

Two-wheelers


172/222

172

TRAFFIC MOVING ON WRONG SIDE


173/222

Wrong way traffic (UAE)


174/222

Unmarked barrier hazards


175/222

175

Roadside hazards - Dubai


176/222

Safety barriers

176

Barrier ends


177/222

Roadside hazards light poles


178/222

Light poles located within the clear zone pose a hazard.

178


179/222

179

Barrier hazard/objects in clear zone


180/222

180


181/222

181


182/222

TREE ON CARRIAGEWAY - HAZARD

Non Standard Signs (Permitted U-turn)


183/222

183

Non Standard Signs (Prohibited U-turn)


184/222

184

Conflicting speed signs


185/222

185


186/222

186


187/222


188/222

So How Did We Define TheRisk / Hazard?

188

Think of the Ws

What is the risk / hazard?


189/222

at

Where is it? What might it lead to (or cause)?

What would be the end result/s (outcomes)?

When does this risk/hazard apply? (e.g. time ofday, direction of travel)

What road user group/s will be affected?

(What can be done about it?)

189

Teamwork is important ..


190/222

Do you see what I see? Acknowledge different K,S,E

Respect views of others

Work through any differences

If in doubt can always photograph a situationand discuss / seek further advice regarding

technical standards etc.

190

Lack of Spatial Awareness

When Auditing ?


191/222

19


192/222

19


193/222

Responding To An RSA Report

193

Responding To An RSA Report


194/222

194

Austroads, 2009

?????


195/222


196/222

To Mitigate Or Not?

196

To Mitigate Or Not?


197/222

Risk Management !

197

Ref. Austroads, 2009


198/222

198

Risk Matrix?

Frequency Between 1-3 years

(Possible)

Between 3-7 years

(Remote)

Between 7-20 years

(Improbable)

More than once a

year (probable) Score

Risk Rating Scores


199/222

199

Severity

Risk score = Frequency score x Severity Score

A risk score of 1-3 is 'low' risk

A risk score of 4-6 is 'medium risk

A risk score above 6 is 'high' risk

3 2 1

9 6 3

6 4 2

Score 3 Score 2 Score 1

12 8 4

Fatal or very serious

injuries (Extreme)

Score 4

Less severe serious

injuries (severe) Score

3

Slight Injury (Minor)

Score 2

Damage Only

(Negligible) Score 1

4

12

4

8

16


200/222

When a client receives an audit report:

To Mitigate Or Not?


201/222

201

When a client receives an audit report:

look beyond the recommendations identify any limitations to auditors appreciation for

operational conditions

consider the findings and the underlying safety

concerns (i.e. the intent of the report)

Client may develop alternative mitigation

measures, if justified, but must have anddocument reasons / rationale !!

Why recommendations do not get implemented?

save money (make profit) / financial pressures

To Mitigate or Not?


202/222

202

save money (make profit) / financial pressures

other more urgent issues

change of management (i.e. forgotten)

responsibility for audit stages not defined

operational reasons alternative solutions

nothings happened yet! / itll never happen here(i.e. poor risk management)

hiding behind monitoring (we will continue to monitor)

other?


203/222

Mitigation Options

Hierarchy of Controls


204/222

204

PPE

Procedural

Engineering

Substitution

Elimination Higher costs/ complexity

Lower costs /complexity

Least effective

Most effective

Expected Returns


205/222

Lots of research from developed world % crash reduction factors for measures (CRFs)

Crash Modification Factors (CMFs)

Very recent OECD International

Transport Forum document

International framework for CMFs

Aim to develop local, reliable CMFs!

205


206/222

Treatment Environment Crash

ReductionFactor (CRF)

Crash

ModificationFactor (CMF)

Confidence

Install guideposts All 5% 0.95 Low

Install CAMs Curves 25% 0.75 Low


207/222

207

Pavementmarkings Edge Lines 10% 0.90 Low

Centrelines 20% 0.80 Low

Edge andcentre lines

30% 0.70 Low

Profile linemarkings Edge lines 20% (all)40% (ROR) 0.8 (all)0.6 (ROR) MediumLow

Centre lines 15% (all)30% (head on)

0.85 (all)0.7 (head on)

MediumLow

Install curvewarnings

Curves 25% 0.75 High

Speed advisory Curves 40% 0.6 Low

Install pedestrianfencing / barriers

All 20% (peds) 0.8 (peds) Medium

Improved lighting All 60% (peds, night) 0.4 (peds, night) Medium

Provide refuge All 45% (peds) 0.55 (peds) Medium

Treatment Environment Crash

ReductionFactor (CRF)

Crash

ModificationFactor (CMF)

Confidence

New lighting Intersections 50% (night) 0.5 (night) High

Mid-block 40% (night) 0.6 (night) High


208/222

208

Ruralintersections 30% (night) 0.7 (night) Medium

Urbanintersections

30% (night) 0.7 (night) Low

Channelisation atintersections

Splitter islands 30-35% 0.65-0.7 Medium

Mountablemedian

15% 0.85 Low

Non-mountablemedian

25% 0.75 Low

Install turning

lanes

Rural T

intersection

40% 0.6 Low

Rural +intersection

30% 0.7 Medium

Painted 30% 0.7 High

Ph i l lid 35% 0 65 L

iRAP toolkit (www.toolkit.irap.org)

Focus on developing world


209/222

Focus on developing world

Gives treatment options formany common crashscenarios (all road users)

Use of photos

Data on effectiveness (crashreduction), cost and longevityof treatments

Implementation issues and

guidance

References

209


210/222

210


211/222

211

Linear villages guidance

WHO PedestrianManual


212/222

Manual

PIARC journal Technical Committee C1

(Safer Road Infrastructure)

Vollpacht

Diallo

Linear settlements andsafety issues alonghighways in India bySharma et al

212

Netherlands DfID, UK

The golden rule

Do no harm!


213/222

We should never consciously set out tomake a situation or position worse!!

213

But, remember .


214/222

214

But, remember .


215/222

215

But, remember ..


216/222

216


217/222

Any Questions?

217


218/222

Looking Ahead To Day 2

218

Day 2 Sessions 4,5 and 6


219/222

Session 4 evaluation, capacity building, whereto get guidance & toolkits, ADB protocols

Session 5 conceptual / preliminary design casestudy & practical group exercise

Session 6 Existing road RSA: practical exercise

0845hrs for a prompt 0900hrs start please!

Hi-vis vest, hat, sunscreen, folder/pad/pens Casual dress?

219


220/222

Wrap Up Of Day 1

220


221/222

Close

221


222/222

Thank you!

Documents

[T6] ARRB Introduction to Road Safety Audit Training - Day 1