26 Issued February 2006

Transcription

1 Road Environment Safety Update 26 Issued February 2006 Road safety benefit-cost analysis: Materials for program submissions Introduction Improving safety on NSW roads is one of the primary objectives of the RTA. With limited budgets and resources, it is imperative that the RTA has a means of objectively assessing and prioritising road environment safety projects, which also ensure that funds used to improve road safety, provide optimum benefits for the community. In the mid 1990 s, a Benefit Cost Analysis model was developed for assessing the benefit cost ratio (BCR) and net present value (NPV) of road environment safety projects. This spreadsheet can be used to assess the road safety (crash saving) merits of projects at blackspots (point locations such as intersections or isolated curves) as well as homogenous sections of road where treatments are applied uniformly along that stretch (mass action treatments). The purpose of this Road environment safety update is to provide access to BCR documentation, spreadsheets and information on how to use them. Use of road safety benefit cost analysis in NSW Each year, the Road Safety Strategy Branch provides the Annual Regional Program Development Process Guidelines to assist the Operations and Services Directorate develop Road Environment Safety Programs. The Guidelines for Accident Blackspot and Mass Action treatments are provided under program positions and respectively of the Road Environment and Light Vehicle Standards (RELVS) Program. All projects funded under program positions and are funded by the State Government. The feature of this program is to objectively and systematically identify blackspot/mass action locations and to implement cost-effective measures designed to reduce the incidence and severity of road crashes. The Guidelines specify that funding proposals for Accident Blackspot and Mass Action treatments need to satisfy stringent criteria with regard to project and program benefit cost ratios (BCRs). Council Blackspot submissions for local roads as well as projects where there are multiple sources of funds may be accepted within this Program provided they satisfy all of the requirements specified within the Guidelines. Road safety benefit cost analysis: Materials for program submissions Approved by: Version: 1.0 Issued: February 2006 Effective date: February 2006 GM Road Safety Strategy UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED Page 1 (4 pages)

2 Benefit-cost ratio overview and methodology All Blackspot and Mass Action projects must meet a set of criteria to be eligible for funding. One criterion is a benefit cost ratio (BCR) that meets or surpasses the required level. For a Blackspot, the BCR must be greater than or equal to 3.0. For a Mass Action project, the BCR must be greater than or equal to 2.0. For example, the BCR of reducing 24 right-through opposing direction crashes (DCA 202) at an intersection by installing traffic signals can be calculated as follow: Safety BCR = Economic Benefit of reducing 24 DCA202 crashes Costs of installing signal hardware and software adjustments + Costs of additional ongoing maintenance to the signals (over the life of the facility) The benefits can be determined by estimating the likely number of crashes prevented multiplied by the crash cost. (Comment: To be consistent with other RTA publications this definition was adopted from the Economic Analysis Manual). Costs include the initial cost of treatment and the cost of maintaining that treatment over a period in which the treatment will remain effective. BCRs can be determined using the State Blackspot Program- Safety BCR and NPV Calculation sheet (6 th Release), using either the State or Federal models depending upon the category into which the proposed project falls. The calculation sheet is a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. It is regularly updated to reflect the most up to date crash costs and crash reduction rates for treatments. The calculation sheet is available from the RTA internet website or by contacting the Manager, Accident Investigation and Blackspot Program. There are two types of methodologies that can be used to determine remedial treatments for a crash site, with these being a crash by type methodology and a crash by outcome methodology. The RTA uses the crash by type methodology to determine the best remedial treatment to reduce crashes at any given site. Knowing the types of crashes that are predominant at a site or along a length of road makes it easier to determine the correct treatment or treatments that will reduce those crashes. An alternative crash by outcome methodology can be used to determine treatments. However due to the nature of crashes, these events can sometimes show an innocuous site to be very dangerous and another much more unsafe one to be deceptively benign. Crash by type methodology The crash by type methodology uses a crash reduction matrix 1 that looks at the generic influence a remedial treatment has in reducing certain types of crashes at a site. It has a high-speed list of reduction percentages for rural roads and a low-speed list for urban roads. A detailed methodology for economically assessing road safety projects can be found in the attached Notes on the use of the RTA s Road Safety Benefit Cost Spreadsheets. 1 Developed by Dr David Andreassen Page 2 (4 pages) Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006

3 Where to find information on Road Safety Benefit Cost Analysis 1. Austroads (2004) Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice Series: Part 4 -Treatment of Crash Locations, Austroads, Canberra This document provides an overview of crash analysis, investigation and the treatment of crash locations in a cost-effective manner. It is the nationally accepted document endorsed by all road authorities in Australia and New Zealand. 2. Roads and Traffic Authority (2004) Accident Reduction Guide: Part 1 Accident Investigation and Prevention, Version 1 This document provides specific details on the RTA administered programs such as the Blackspot and Mass Action Programs as well as step-by-step guidance for crash analysis and investigation, development and economic evaluation of countermeasures, formulation of a ranked program of works and monitoring and evaluation of the countermeasures. This document also contains worked examples of the use of road safety benefit cost analysis in justifying projects. The document is available on the RTA s website and can be accessed using the following path: - road safety - road environment safety - technical directions /RS01: Accident Reduction Guide Part 1: Accident Investigation and Prevention. 3. Roads and Traffic Authority (2004) Road Safety Strategy Branch: Road Environment and Light Vehicle Standards (RELVS) Bidding Guidelines This document provides guidance on the criteria required in the annual funding for proposed Blackspot and mass action projects. They also advise the format in which the projects are to be submitted. These Guidelines are updated and issued to the Client Services Directorate (RTA Regional Offices) each year. A copy of these Guidelines can be obtained by contacting the RELVS section at the details found on page number 4 of this document. 4. Roads and Traffic Authority (1999). Economic Analysis Manual, Version 2 This document provides a set of practical guidelines to assist with the undertaking of economic and financial appraisal of investment proposals within the RTA. Cost-Benefit analysis is covered in more detail because it is the most common method used for the assessment of RTA road and bridge investment proposals. A copy of this document can be obtained through the RTA Corporate Finance Advisory Service. Ph: (02) Commonwealth Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS), The National Black Spot Program, Notes on Administration This document provides guidance on how to submit proposals for road environment safety projects. It outlines minimum criteria that must be met before projects can be funded. Successful projects are funded under the National Blackspot Program, which is a Federal Government funding source Roads and Traffic Authority (2004) National Blackspot Program Safety BCR and NPV Calculation Sheet This is the spreadsheet model that enables users to determine the BCR and NPV of road environment safety projects using the parameters required by the National Blackspot Program, i.e. 5% p.a. discounting. Guidance for the use of this model can be found in References 2 and road safety - road environment safety - road environment safety updates Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006 Page 3 (4 pages)

4 7. Roads and Traffic Authority (2004) State Blackspot Program Safety BCR and NPV Calculation Sheet This is the spreadsheet model that enables users to determine the BCR and NPV of road environment safety projects using the parameters required by the State Blackspot and Mass Action Programs, i.e. 7% p.a. discounting. Guidance for the use of this model can be found in Reference road safety - road environment safety - road environment safety updates. 8. Roads and Traffic Authority. Percentage Reduction in Accidents Tables This is a set of six tables that provide details on percentage reduction rates for standard treatments, project life, maintenance costs per treatment and costs of crashes by crash types. It is available on the RTA s website and can be accessed using the following path: - road safety - road environment safety - technical directions /RS01: Accident Reduction Guide Part 1: Accident Investigation and Prevention, Appendix C, page Roads and Traffic Authority. Pro forma for Strategic Estimate of Costs This pro forma acts as a checklist enabling a holistic estimation of costs associated with blackspot and mass action treatments. There are three pro forma sheets currently available for estimating construction costs associated with the installation of roundabouts, the installation of traffic signals and road realignment works. These pro forma sheets are available on the RTA s website and can be accessed using the following path: - road safety - road environment safety - technical directions /RS01: Accident Reduction Guide Part 1: Accident Investigation and Prevention. Attachments 1. Notes on the use of the RTA s Safety Benefit Cost Spreadsheet Model. 2. National Black Spot Program Nomination Checklist. 3. National Black Spot Program Nomination Forms. 4. Black Spot Consultative Panel. For further enquiries: Accident Investigation and Blackspot Program Manager ww.rta.nsw.gov.au Page 4 (4 pages) Road Environment Safety Update / No. 26 / February 2006 RTA/Pub Page 4 (4 pages) Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006

5 Attachment 1 Notes on the use of the RTA s Safety Benefit Cost Spreadsheet 1.0 Introduction This model has been produced to assist practitioners in calculating the safety benefit cost ratios for treatments at a site. For the purposes of the model a site can either be a single location (intersection/isolated curve) or a homogeneous section of road where a treatment is being uniformly implemented (shoulder widening/street lighting). The model has been produced both to simplify the calculation of safety benefit cost ratios and to ensure that submissions for funding have been evaluated in a consistent and supportable manner. 2.0 Use of the model 2.1 Computer requirements The spreadsheet model is written in Microsoft Excel V5.0. Each copy of the spreadsheet requires approximately 330 kilobytes of hard disk storage. 2.2 Cell protection The Model has been write-protected for cells, which perform calculations, hold background data or contain labels. This has been done so that critical parts of the spreadsheet cannot be inadvertently changed. The print area of the spreadsheet has also been pre-set. 2.3 General inputs and outputs for the Benefit Cost Model General inputs The general inputs required by the benefit cost Model are described below. The reference letter, [A] gives the position of the cell on the worked example spreadsheet contained at the end of these notes. Local [A]. This cell should contain a brief location description of the site being evaluated. Speed limit of Main Road [B]. The speed limit determines the accident costs to be used. That is, if the speed limit is 70 km/h or less, then urban accident costs are used. If the speed limit is 80 km/h or greater then rural accident costs are used. If the site involves roads with differing speed limits intersecting, the greater speed limit should be selected. Expected annual traffic growth [C]. This is the estimated traffic growth at the site over the assumed project life. Where there is an increase in traffic volumes assumed that model assumes that accidents will also increase. That is, in the years following the implementation of treatments, reductions in accidents will increase in line with the increase in traffic volumes. Assumed project life [D]. This is the assumed project life that is the period for which the benefits of the project are assumed to occur. The RTA has compiled a list of assumed project life for the treatment types. (The model allows for project lives up to 30 years). Years of accident data [E]. Normally at least three years (in urban areas) and five years (in rural areas) of accident data should be used (check requirement with the Guidelines produced by the relevant Road Authority). However in special circumstances greater or lesser accident periods could be used. For example, the site being investigated could have been treated with a measure which has only been installed for two years, but which had already resulted in a demonstrated accident history. In these circumstances the two year figures could be used. Start [F]. This is the start of the period for which accident data is used. This parameter together with the number of years of accident data defines the years over which the accident data used in the benefit cost calculations have been taken. Total accidents [G1 - G5]. The total number of accidents reported at the site during the study period, grouped into 20 categories according to DCA code. These accident numbers are not directly used in any of the calculations, but are provided to give the total accident picture at the site. Attachment 1 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006 Page 1 (8 page)

6 2.3.2 General outputs TOTAL [G6]. This cell sums the total numbers of accidents within each category and gives the total number of reported accidents at the site over the study period. 2.4 Evaluation of proposed treatments Standard treatments A standard list of site treatments has been produced. These standard treatments are listed in Tables A1 to A4 in the BCR spreadsheets. These treatments should cover most circumstances but not necessarily all possible treatments. They do not specifically account for combinations of treatments at a site. For each treatment assumed accident reductions have been estimated. These accident reductions are also shown tables A1 to A4 in the BCR spreadsheets. Where possible these accident reductions have been derived by consideration of before and after studies conducted both in Australia and overseas. Where this information was not available for a particular treatment, the assessment of benefits has been derived by an assessment of the likely impact of the treatment on risk at the site. The continued monitoring of treatments and their effectiveness (via the upkeep of RTA s Accident Blackspot Program Database) will lead to further refinements of these accident reduction factors Inputs for evaluation of a single treatment The model allows for up to three treatments to be evaluated on the same sheet. For each treatment the following information should be entered into the model: Treatment code [H]. This is a number, which can be read from the description of the treatment shown in the tables in Appendix A. When the treatment code is entered the description of the treatment will be automatically displayed, as will be the assumed accident reductions associated with this treatment. Initial cost of treatment [K]. This is the initial cost of the treatment, which is generally the cost incurred up to the completion of the treatment. Annual maintenance [L]. These are the annual maintenance or running costs of the treatment. If there are no ongoing costs, then a 0 (zero) should be inputted. Target accidents [M1 - M5]. This is the number of target accidents associated with each accident group. In some cases this will be the total accidents reported at the site. In others, this will be a lesser number of accidents, which result from the specific deficiency, which is to be addressed by the treatment. Appendix A provides a guide as to whether all accidents at the site should be used as the target accidents or only those which relate to specific deficiencies to be addressed by the treatment. For example, if the treatment involves a right turn lane, then only turning and rear-end accidents associated with the approach for which this lane is proposed will be entered as the target accidents. Custom reduction [N]. The model provides for a custom reduction of any of the accident types to be made for any treatment. Once a non-zero number is added into custom treatment, this value rather than the custom reduction is used in the model calculations. The use of a custom reduction should only occur after a systematic on-site investigation has been conducted. Full documentation of the reasons for the use of alternative reductions should be made available Outputs for each treatment evaluated Treatment A [I]. This cell automatically displays the description of the treatment, which corresponds to the treatment code entered in [H]. Assumed reduction. This cell automatically displays the percentage reductions in accidents expected from the nominated treatment. These reductions are shown in Tables A1 to A4 in Appendix A. A negative number indicates that the treatment is expected to result in an increase in accidents. TOTAL (Target accidents) [M7]. This cell gives the total of target accidents for the treatment selected. Page 2 (8 pages) Attachment 1 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006

7 TOTAL (Discounted benefits) [O1]. This is the total discounted benefit at the appropriate discount rate over the assumed project life. A bracket around this figure (or any of the individual discounted benefits in the column above it) represents a negative benefit (disbenefit). Discounted costs [O2]. This is the total discounted cost of the Treatment. It is calculated by adding the estimated cost over the life of the project to the Annual Maintenance costs, extrapolated over the assumed life of the project. 7% or 5% [O3]. This is the total discounted benefit of the treatment minus the total discounted costs (note: the NPV value is calculated at 5% for National Blackspot Program nominations). NPV/Cap cost [O4]. This is the NPV divided by the Capital Cost, (Capital Cost is the Initial Cost of the Measure and does not include Annual Maintenance). BC 7% or 5% [O5]. This is the total discounted benefit divided by the total discounted costs. It should be noted that not all of the standard treatments apply for both low and high speed limit roads. Where a treatment type does not apply to the respective speed limit selected the model displays the words, "Check code/speed" in the cells in the Assumed Reduction column Evaluation of alternative treatments on the same sheet Where the treatment at the site can be described by one treatment code the model provides the safety benefit cost ratio and the NPV of the treatment. When this is the case two or three different treatments at a site can be examined on the same sheet and the more cost-effective or practical treatment recommended for implementation Evaluation of a combination of treatments Where more than one treatment is being examined at a site the model can be still be used, but caution must be taken when assessing the target accidents. That is, the target accidents of a second treatment should not include those accidents, which would have already been reduced as result of the first treatment. For example, if the two treatments proposed on the approach to an intersection involve both installing an additional priority sign on median islands and moving limit lines forward using line marking and kerb extensions on the main road, then if there were 10 right angle accidents on that approach, there would be 10 target accidents for the median island treatment, but only 8.5 target accidents for moving the limit lines forward (as the signs on median islands are expected to save 15% or 1.5 accidents). The overall safety benefit cost ratio of both treatments can be derived by adding the discounted benefits and discounted costs together and dividing the two totals to give the overall safety benefit cost ratio Use of custom reductions The use of a custom reduction should be utilised when the treatment proposed is not in the tables supplied or the user has validated research background after a systematic on-site investigation has been conducted. 2.5 Summary of parameters and formulas used in the model The various parameters and formulae used in the model are summarised at the foot of the main worksheet. A copy of this information is contained in Table C, within the spreadsheet. The parameters include the accident costs currently being used in the model. 3.0 Updates to model The safety benefit cost model is updated at yearly intervals. Updates include: Annual updates of accident costs. Additional standard treatments based on the identified need for additional categories. Changes in treatment effectiveness in response to monitoring the effects of implemented treatments. Attachment 1 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006 Page 3 (8 pages)

8 4.0 Worked example A worked example has been prepared to illustrate the use of the model. The example involves the evaluation of traffic signals installed at a cross intersection. On the main road approach it is intended to install 100 metres of raised median either side of the new signals. There is also intended to be no right turn filters on the main road approaches to the intersection (right turns controlled by arrows), whereas filters will be used (common phasing) on the side-road approaches to the intersection. The cells of the spreadsheet model required to be filled in to undertake this evaluation are described in the following table: 4.1 Summary table Cell label Description of cell Entered in example Ref. Location Speed limit of main road Expected annual traffic growth Assumed project life Years of accident data Start Total accidents (DCA codes ) Total accidents (DCA codes 201;501) Total accidents (DCA codes ) Total accidents (DCA codes ) Total accidents (DCA codes ,901,902) TOTAL Treatment code TREATMENT A User enters the description of the site where the evaluation is taking place. The speed limit at the site (or on the main road if lower speed limit on side road). Expected traffic growth during the payback period. To give 2.2% traffic growth 2.2 should be entered into this cell. Enter the time period over which benefits from the treatment are assumed to accrue. The years of accident data used in the analysis. In the example assumed to start at the beginning of the second quarter of 1992 (April) and end after the second quarter of 1997, which is 5.25 years. The start of the time period when accidents commenced. To indicate the beginning of January 1997 enter 1/97. Enter the total accidents, which have occurred at the site during the study period classified into accident groupings. For this example there are 20 accidents in the category DCA Intersection of North Road and South Road, Westville A 60 B 2.2 C 15 D 5 E 1/97 F 20 G1 Enter 2 accidents in this category. 2 G2 Enter 8 accidents in this category. 8 G3 Enter 3 accidents in this category. 3 G4 Enter 3 accidents in this category. 3 G5 Automatically provides the total accidents at the site (36 in this example) Enter the number, which is in front of the Treatment. Lists of treatments and their codes are given in Tables A and B. For traffic signals with no filter turns the treatment code is 4. Automatically displayed when a treatment code is entered in H. G6 4 H I Page 4 (8 pages) Attachment 1 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006

9 Cell label Description of cell Entered in example Ref. Assumed reduction Initial cost of treatment Annual maintenance Target accidents (DCA codes ) Target accidents (DCA codes 201;501) Automatically displays the percentage reductions in accidents expected from the nominated treatment. These reductions are shown in Table B. The [-40] displayed for rear-end accidents indicate an expected 40 increase in this category of accidents. Enter the initial cost of the treatment. This should the total costs estimated to be incurred on the implementation of the treatment up until the time the treatment is completed. Enter the estimated annual maintenance/running costs of the treatment. Enter the accidents, which are targeted by the proposed treatment. This should be based on application of the accident investigation process. Enter all 20 accidents in this category K 6000 L 20 M1 Enter 2 accidents for this category. 2 M2 J Target accidents (DCA codes ) Enter 4 accidents for this category. For this example target accidents of 4 have been selected since 4 of the accidents in this category have occurred on approaches to the intersection for which it is not proposed to install filter turns. 4 M3 Target accidents (DCA codes ) Enter 3 accidents for this category. 3 M4 Target accidents (DCA codes ,901,902) TOTAL Custom reduction Enter 2 accidents for this category. For this example target accidents of 2 have been selected since 1 of the accidents in this category has occurred on where the pedestrian movement would conflict with a filter turn movement. Calculates the total number of target accidents for this treatment. Enter the percentage reduction, which overrides the Assumed Reduction that is displayed by the model. A custom reduction should only be implemented where it is considered that exceptional circumstances exist. In this example the provision of an extended median in association with the signals would be expected to reduce the incidence of head-on accidents by 20% (see treatment 90 in Table B). 2 M5 M7 20 N [Economic parameters] Cells giving outputs of the model for TREATMENT A. O1- O5 Treatment code Enter Treatment code for traffic signals with right turn filters. For this example this treatment has been selected to account for those accidents, which have not been targeted by the portion of the traffic signals with right turn filters. This treatment code could also be used to account for an alternative treatment. 3 P Attachment 1 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006 Page 5 (8 pages)

10 Cell label Description of cell Entered in example Ref. Target accidents (DCA codes ) Target accidents (DCA codes ,901,902) BCR combining treatments A & B BCR combining treatments A, B & C Enter those accidents, which were not targeted by the portion of the signals without right turn filters. Enter the accident, which was not targeted by the portion of the signals without right turn filters. Calculates a safety BCR by combining the discounted costs and benefits of Treatments A & B. In this example this is the final Safety BCR for the project. It also incorporates the additional benefits (which are negative) associated with the portion of the signals which have right turn filters as well as the negative impact on rear-end accidents. Calculates a safety BRC by combining the discounted costs and benefits of Treatments A, B & C. 4 Q1 1 Q2 R S Page 6 (8 pages) Attachment 1 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006

11 4.2 Worked Example Cell References LOCATION: [A] TREATMENT A TREATMENT B [B] Speed Limit of Main Road [I] [C] [D] [E] Expected Annual Traffic Growth (%) Assumed Project Life Years of Accident Data/Start [F] Initial Cost of Treatment Annual Maintenance Treatment Code [K] [L] [H] Initial Cost of Treatment Annual Maintenance Treatment Code [P] DCA Codes Descriptions Total Accidents Target Accidents Assumed Reduction Custom Reduction Discounted Benefits (RTA 7%) Target Accidents Assumed Reduction Custom Reduction Discounted Benefits (RTA 7%) Intersection, adjacent [G1] [M1] [O1] approaches 201 Head-on [G2] [M2] [N] [O2] Opposing vehicles; turning [G3] [M3] [O3] [Q1] 207; 304 U-turn Rear-end [G4] [M4] [O4] [Q2] Lane change Parallel lanes; turning 406; 407 Vehicle leaving driveway Overtaking; same direction 601 Hit parked vehicle 903 Hit railway train Pedestrian crossing [G5] [M5] [O5] carriageway 605 Permanent obstruction on carriageway 609 Hit animal 701; 702 Off carriageway, on straight 703; 704 Off carriageway on straight, hit object 705; 502 Out of control on straight 801; 802 Off carriageway, on curve 803; 804 Off carriageway on curve, hit object 805 Out of control on curve TOTAL [G6] [M7] TOTAL TOTAL [R] BCR Combining Treatments A & B for RTA (7%) B/C 7 % NPV/Cap Cost 7% Discounted Costs B/C 7 % NPV/Cap Cost 7% Discounted Costs Attachment 1 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006 Page 7 (8 pages)

12 (This page intentionally left blank) Page 8 (8 pages) Attachment 1 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006

13 Attachment 2 The National Black Spot Program Nomination checklist Black spot sites A Black spot can be up to 3 km in length. However, crashes along a section can only be included in the BCR calculations if they occur along the length being treated. The minimum criterion for eligibility is at least 3 casualty crashes in the most recent 5 years of crash data. However all crashes, including towaways can be used when calculating the Safety BCR. It is also useful to include crash diagrams and trend analysis sheets to help explain the nomination. Black length sites A Black Length is any section of road being treated that is longer than 3 km. The minimum criterion for eligibility is an average of 0.2 casualty crashes per kilometre per annum over the last 5 years of crash data. Raw crash numbers should also be included as well as the crash rates per km over both 1 and 5 year periods. Maximum project size The Federal contribution for any crash conforming project will be no greater than $750,000. The minimum project cost that will be considered by the Consultative Panel is $10,000. Audit identified projects that cost more than $300,000 will not be considered. Councils will be allocated funding based on the Estimate of Cost submitted on the nomination form. Therefore Councils must be sure that all expected costs are identified and included, along with possible variations and contingencies. Road safety audits Projects can be nominated from sites identified in a Road Safety Audit; however, the audit has to have been undertaken by an independent audit team who are on the IPWEA s Auditors Accreditation list, not just a safety assessment by council engineers. Each audit nomination will be ranked by the RTA using a simplified risk assessment process. Ineligible roads Funding is not available for projects located on National Highways or on Roads of National Importance (RONI s) where federally funded work is currently taking place. Regional split The Federal Government has a requirement that at least 50% of each state s funding must be allocated to projects in regional areas. Economic evaluation of projects To be eligible for Federal funding all projects must have a safety Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) of 2.0 or greater as the program is prioritised on BCR and cost. The discount rate for benefits and costs in the economic evaluation of all projects is 5%. There is a new spreadsheet called the National Black Spot Program Model for Calculating Road Safety BCR and NPV and it is available from me or from the local RTA Regional Office. It uses a crash by type methodology to calculate the BCR and is the only one accepted by the RTA for economic analysis. Different treatments can be compared or a number of treatments combined to determine the most economically efficient way to target and reduce crashes. Attachment 2 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006 Page 1 (2 pages)

14 Contentious projects Any large projects nominated by Councils on State roads or ones that involve the construction of traffic signals on local roads will require a full investigation of the proposal to ensure they meet with RTA warrants and long term planning strategies. Construction requirements The design and construction of all projects must conform to RTA and/or Austroads design guidelines. They are also subject to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and Section 30 of the Australian Heritage Commission Act Federal Black Spot signs must be erected at all sites during construction, and where the Federal allocation is greater than $100,000, they must be left in place for a period of two (2) years. These signs are usually available through the local RTA Regional Office. Payments to Council on completion of work will be based on the approved allocation, or the cost of work, whichever is the lesser. Enquiries for National Black Spot Program Manager, Black Spot Programs Phone: (02) Road Safety Strategy Fax: (02) Attachment 2 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006 Page 2 (2 pages)

15 Attachment 3 National Black Spot Program Nomination form Nominee Details 1. Title: Dr/Mr/Mrs/ etc: Nominee Reference No: (DOTARS use only) 2. Surname: 3. First Name: 4. Organisation: 5. Position Title / Occupation: 6. Postal Address: 7. State: 8. Postcode: 9. Telephone Number: 10. Fax Number: 11. address 12. Date of Submission: 13. Is this your first nomination to the Black Spot Programme? (Y/N) Site Nomination 13. Shire or Council area in which site nomination is located Nominee Reference No: (DOTARS use only) 14. Suburb/Town etc. 15. Postcode (of site) 16. Site Description: (eg intersection, 5km road length, 20kms west of Smithsville) 17. Road Name(s): Primary Road Intersecting Road (if any) 18. Nature of Concern Please forward nomination form to local or state road authority for site assessment and treatment proposal Attachment 3 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006 Page 1 (4 pages)

16 (This page intentionally left blank) Page 2 (4 pages) Attachment 3 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006

17 Only to be completed by state or local government road authorities Site Assessment State Reference No: (STA use only) 1. National highway (Y/N) If yes, no further assessment is required as nomination is ineligible under this programme 2. Is this a state or local road? 3. Is this an urban or rural project? 4. Geographic location (Geocode) 5. Problem diagnosis (eg. right turn crashes, rear end crashes) 1: X: Y: 2: X: Y: 6. AADT at location 7. Primary crash-type code (DCA), if available 8. Crash history * 9. Crash history * To be completed for a SPOT and for a To be completed only for a LENGTH proposal LENGTH proposal Fatal crashes Fatal crashes per km Injury crashes Total casualty crashes Measurement period: from to No. of Years Injury crashes per km Total casualty crashes per km What is the calculated crash rate per kilometre per annum for this site? Has this road length been assessed among the top 10% of lengths identified within the State with a demonstrably higher crash rate than other roads in the State? (Y/N) If YES, what is the State calculated crash rate per kilometre per annum at the 10% level? * For all crash history based proposals 8. must be completed; for a proposal based on a road length 9. is also to be completed. ** Optional, liaison with the state road authority may be required. Road Safety Audit 10. Is the proposal supported by a Road Safety Audit? (Y/N) If no crash history has been specified above, the proposal must be supported by a Road Safety Audit. (For report format refer to AUSTROADS Publication No. AP-30/94 or AP-G30/02, Road Safety Audit ) Is a copy of the relevant report (or section of the report) attached? (Y/N) Attachment 3 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006 Page 3 (4 pages)

18 Only to be completed by state or local government road authorities Treatment Proposal 11. Proposed Treatment: (eg install signs, modify signals, install roundabout) 12. Treatment Code: (If applicable) * See Appendix 1 of Notes on Administration 13. Estimated Cost to Black Spot Programme $ 14. Net Preset Value $ 15. Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) Not required if nomination is a Road Safety Audit project 16. Other contributions to this project $ Source: 17. Environmental clearances: Are there any environmental or heritage concerns with this project: (Y/N) If YES, have clearances been obtained? (Y/N) (please attach) 18. Expected start date (physical construction) 19. Expected completion date (physical construction) Contact Details Contact Person Organisation Telephone Number Facsimile Number address Signature Page 4 (4 pages) Attachment 3 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006

19 Attachment 4 Black Spot Consultative Panels All nominations are to be referred to the Black Spot Consultative Panel in your state: State Road And Transport Agency Addresses New South Wales South Wales Wales Victoria The Black Spot Consultative Panel c/- Roads and Traffic Authority PO Box K198 HAYMARKET NSW 2000 The Black Spot Consultative Panel c/- Road Safety Department VICROADS 60 Denmark Street KEW VIC 3101 Queensland The Black Spot Consultative Panel c/- Roads Programs Division Queensland Main Roads GPO Box 2595 BRISBANE QLD 4001 Western Australia The Black Spot Consultative Panel c/- Main Roads Western Australia PO Box 6202 EAST PERTH WA 6892 South Australia The Black Spot Consultative Panel c/- Transport SA PO Box 1 WALKERVILLE SA 5081 Tasmania The Black Spot Consultative Panel c/- Land Transport Safety Division Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources GPO Box 936 HOBART TAS 7001 Northern Territory The Black Spot Consultative Panel c/- Transport and Infrastructure Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment PO Box 2520 DARWIN NT 0801 Australian Capital Territory The Black Spot Consultative Panel c/- Roads ACT Department of Urban Services Locked Bag 2000 CIVIC SQUARE ACT 2608 Attachment 4 / Road Environment Safety Update / No 26 / February 2006 Page 1 (1 page)