ROAD SAFETY PERFORMANCE REVIEW Capacity Building Workshop for Uganda irap METHODOLOGY Racheal M. N. Nganwa AfricaRAP Lead 1 & 2 March 2018
About irap: Registered charity Vision: a world free of high risk roads Assessed over 900,000km in over 80 Countries world wide Mission: maximizing travel on 3 star or better roads for all road users
RAP IN AFRICA Egypt 3,273km assessed + SRIPs Senegal 391km assessed + SRIPs Nigeria Demonstration project Ivory Coast 50km assessed + SRIPs Accra 120km assessed + SRIPs + capacity building South Africa SARAP assessments and capacity building Star rating schools project + SRIPs Uganda 2,657km assessed + SRIPs + capacity building Addis Ababa 150km assessed + SRIPs + capacity building Kenya irap assessment + SRIPs ($US100m to cut KSI by 25%) Tanzania 3,116km assessed + SRIPs +capacity building. National project in procurement Botswana 50km demonstration assessment + SRIPs + ViDA workshop (proposal)
IRAP IN UGANDA Assessed 2,472km in 2010 Developed Star Ratings & Safer Roads Investment Plan for implementation Road safety improvements proposed across the network Some improvements implemented in 2011 during construction on the Masaka Mbarara road. Recommendations informed the Gulu Atiak, Vurra Oraba & Rukungiri Ishasha designs
KAMPALA AND SURROUNDING AREAS Assessed 185 km in 2017 Developed Star Ratings & Safer Roads Investment Plan for implementation Road safety improvements proposed across the network
Road safety engineering Role of the Road Safety Engineer to ensure that road infrastructure is designed and built to minimise the likelihood of road crashes and to reduce the severity of those crashes that do occur. Road deaths are not inevitable. We know the causes and we have the answers
UN Decade of Action (2011-2020) Supported by 90+ countries To reduce global road FSI by 50%
The need for a system-based, strategic, perspective For the first 50 years of motorization in the United States, Australia and Europe, the almost exclusive emphasis was on trying to prevent crashed by changing the behaviour of individual drivers. This delayed for decades the recognition and application of possible prevention measures in other components of the causal chain leading to injury. (Williams, 2000, p.1)
Safe System: interaction between road users, vehicles and road infrastructure Road Education Engineering Enforcement Emergency Care Vehicle Behaviour A shared responsibility
The Safe Road System Aims to develop a road transport system that is better able to accommodate human error Acknowledges that humans are fallible and that crashes will happen Takes into account the vulnerability of the human body Mistakes made on the highway need not have fatal and serious outcomes System relies on multi-disciplined approach
How irap work Inspections Geo-reference video data of the road collected. Record 50 road features that influence serious casualty risk.. Implementation Recommendations built into road designs and projects Risk assessment Infrastructure features that influence road user risk recorded for car occupants, pedestrians, bicyclists and motorcyclists Training Risk assessment and countermeasures for local engineers Star Ratings Car occupants, pedestrians, bicyclists and motorcyclists Life-Saving Countermeasures Recommendations for simple, affordable improvements
SURVEY -> STAR RATING -> SRIPS -> ACTION
Star Ratings Developed by world-leading road safety research agencies Simple and objective measure of the level of safety provided by road infrastructure Ability to set minimum safety levels for each road user type Use as a performance indicator to demonstrate reduction in risk
Proactive assessment of risk for 4 major road users 50 road attributes assessed every 100m Record features that are known to effect the likelihood and severity of a crash Based on crash studies from around the world Objective performance scores (Star Ratings) Operating Speed irap Star Rating Intersection type Median type Lane width Number of lanes Road condition Roadside hazards Horizontal alignment Delineation Paved shoulders
STAR RATINGS KSI cost / vkt www.irap.org
Safer Roads Investment Plan How can we improve the safety in an affordable way? What is feasible in terms of engineering and what would it cost? How many deaths and serious injuries would we prevent?
Example Countermeasure Before Road section 1 X SRS = 6 X AADT = 1,000 X Length = 0.1 = 600 Fatality factor = 0.08 Apply countermeasures new SRS After Road section 1 X SRS = 1.0 X AADT = 1,000 X Length = 0.1 = 100 Fatality factor = 0.08 Deaths = 50 6 * 1000 * 0.1 * 0.08 Deaths = 8 1.0 * 1000 * 0.1 * 0.08
Safer Roads Investment Plan SRIP provides a list of economically viable road safety countermeasures Designed to reduce numbers of deaths and serious injuries on the surveyed road network Based on Crash Modification Factors (CMFs) from latest research used in the irap methodology to relate attributes and risk of death and serious injury
SRIP overview Countermeasure generation Considers 90 different treatments every 100m segment Triggers: prerequisite conditions must be met based on star rating, road condition/attribute and traffic volume Application rules apply: minimum separation of point treatments and minimum length of linear treatments Hierarchy of treatments: high effectiveness treatments (i.e. grade separation) will take precedent over less effective treatments
SRIP overview Economic analysis of proposed countermeasures Estimate of the number of deaths and serious injuries likely to be prevented Compare cost of treatments with predicted savings from crashes prevented (the benefit) Countermeasures must exceed BCR of 1 (that is the benefits must be greater than the costs) to be included in list of recommended treatments
Countermeasure Details in SRIP
Examples of applying treatments
MNR:9.800km Remove roadside hazards Improve delineation Motorcycle lane?
MNR:10.500km Central hatching Regulate commercial roadside activity
MRN:13.700km Paved shoulder/ bicycle lane Improve delineation at intersection Signalise 3-leg intersection
Manila South Road Central hatching Roadside safety barrier Paved shoulder
The solutions are known
Road Safety Toolkit toolkit.irap.org
Road Safety Toolkit toolkit.irap.org Provides free information on the causes and prevention of serious road crashes. Building on decades of road safety research, the Toolkit helps engineers, planners and policy makers develop safety plans for all road users. For each crash type you are given a range of countermeasures related to the road infrastructure with their estimated costs and their capacity to reduce FSIs. You are also given information on the vehicle countermeasures as well as how to effect the road users themselves to reduce the FSIs for that crash type. Provides some case studies and some pictures of where the various countermeasures have been implemented Benefits and implementation issues for each countermeasure Road Safety Management guidance crash costing, Data systems, Road safety plans etc.
When is irap used? Policy National Transport / Road Safety Strategy Introduce safety management systems for identifying and mitigating risk Setting targets, such as roads of national importance must at least 4 stars Network planning Mass action treatment of hazardous locations Large scale risk assessments of existing road networks Guide investment and track risk over time Feasibility / concept Detailed design Assessing safety benefits of road projects (new roads and road upgrades) Developing targeted safety projects Assessing risk for design iterations and standard cross sections Guidance on countermeasure options and economic assessments Evaluation Post construction evaluations Before and after studies Performance tracking
Example: Class II Highway Level terrain, speed 80km/h, AADT=10,000 vpd, 1 curve/km, 1 intersection/km Star Rating Scores Relative risk of death and serious injury XX.XX Star Rating Score, (XX%) Reduction in risk Baseline + delineation + paved shoulder + rumble strips + sight distance + roadside clearzone/barriers + median treatment + intersection lighting + int. protected turn lanes + int. chanelization + traffic calming 30.92 26.13 (16%) 21.72 (17%) 18.76 (14%) 16.71 (11%) 11.98 (28%) 7.26 (39%) 6.62 (9%) 5.32 (20%) 5.08 (5%) 3.20 (31%) 1star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars
Example: Class II Highway Level terrain, speed 80km/h, AADT=10,000 vpd, 1 curve/km, 1 intersection/km Star Rating Scores Relative risk of death and serious injury XX.XX Star Rating Score, (XX%) Reduction in risk Baseline + delineation + paved shoulder + rumble strips + sight distance + roadside clearzone/barriers + median treatment + intersection lighting + int. protected turn lanes + int. chanelization + traffic calming 30.92 26.13 (16%) 21.72 (17%) 18.76 (14%) 16.71 (11%) 11.98 (28%) 7.26 (39%) 6.62 (9%) 5.32 (20%) 5.08 (5%) 3.20 (31%) 1star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars
Example: Class II Highway Level terrain, speed 80km/h, AADT=10,000 vpd, 1 curve/km, 1 intersection/km Star Rating Scores Relative risk of death and serious injury XX.XX Star Rating Score, (XX%) Reduction in risk Baseline + delineation + paved shoulder + rumble strips + sight distance + roadside clearzone/barriers + median treatment + intersection lighting + int. protected turn lanes + int. chanelization + traffic calming 30.92 26.13 (16%) 21.72 (17%) 18.76 (14%) 16.71 (11%) 11.98 (28%) 7.26 (39%) 6.62 (9%) 5.32 (20%) 5.08 (5%) 3.20 (31%) 1star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars
Example: Class II Highway Level terrain, speed 80km/h, AADT=10,000 vpd, 1 curve/km, 1 intersection/km Star Rating Scores Relative risk of death and serious injury XX.XX Star Rating Score, (XX%) Reduction in risk Baseline + delineation + paved shoulder + rumble strips + sight distance + roadside clearzone/barriers + median treatment + intersection lighting + int. protected turn lanes + int. chanelization + traffic calming 30.92 26.13 (16%) 21.72 (17%) 18.76 (14%) 16.71 (11%) 11.98 (28%) 7.26 (39%) 6.62 (9%) 5.32 (20%) 5.08 (5%) 3.20 (31%) 1star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars
Example: Class II Highway Level terrain, speed 80km/h, AADT=10,000 vpd, 1 curve/km, 1 intersection/km Star Rating Scores Relative risk of death and serious injury XX.XX Star Rating Score, (XX%) Reduction in risk Baseline + delineation + paved shoulder + rumble strips + sight distance + roadside clearzone/barriers + median treatment + intersection lighting + int. protected turn lanes + int. chanelization + traffic calming 30.92 26.13 (16%) 21.72 (17%) 18.76 (14%) 16.71 (11%) 11.98 (28%) 7.26 (39%) 6.62 (9%) 5.32 (20%) 5.08 (5%) 3.20 (31%) 1star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars
Example: Class II Highway Level terrain, speed 80km/h, AADT=10,000 vpd, 1 curve/km, 1 intersection/km Star Rating Scores Relative risk of death and serious injury XX.XX Star Rating Score, (XX%) Reduction in risk Baseline + delineation + paved shoulder + rumble strips + sight distance + roadside clearzone/barriers + median treatment + intersection lighting + int. protected turn lanes + int. chanelization + traffic calming 30.92 26.13 (16%) 21.72 (17%) 18.76 (14%) 16.71 (11%) 11.98 (28%) 7.26 (39%) 6.62 (9%) 5.32 (20%) 5.08 (5%) 3.20 (31%) 1star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars
Example: Class II Highway Level terrain, speed 80km/h, AADT=10,000 vpd, 1 curve/km, 1 intersection/km Star Rating Scores Relative risk of death and serious injury XX.XX Star Rating Score, (XX%) Reduction in risk Baseline + delineation + paved shoulder + rumble strips + sight distance + roadside clearzone/barriers + median treatment + intersection lighting + int. protected turn lanes + int. chanelization + traffic calming 30.92 26.13 (16%) 21.72 (17%) 18.76 (14%) 16.71 (11%) 11.98 (28%) 7.26 (39%) 6.62 (9%) 5.32 (20%) 5.08 (5%) 3.20 (31%) 1star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars
Example: Class II Highway Level terrain, speed 80km/h, AADT=10,000 vpd, 1 curve/km, 1 intersection/km Star Rating Scores Relative risk of death and serious injury XX.XX Star Rating Score, (XX%) Reduction in risk Baseline + delineation + paved shoulder + rumble strips + sight distance + roadside clearzone/barriers + median treatment + intersection lighting + int. protected turn lanes + int. chanelization + traffic calming 30.92 26.13 (16%) 21.72 (17%) 18.76 (14%) 16.71 (11%) 11.98 (28%) 7.26 (39%) 6.62 (9%) 5.32 (20%) 5.08 (5%) 3.20 (31%) 1star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars
Example: Class II Highway Level terrain, speed 80km/h, AADT=10,000 vpd, 1 curve/km, 1 intersection/km Star Rating Scores Relative risk of death and serious injury XX.XX Star Rating Score, (XX%) Reduction in risk Baseline + delineation + paved shoulder + rumble strips + sight distance + roadside clearzone/barriers + median treatment + intersection lighting + int. protected turn lanes + int. chanelization + traffic calming 30.92 26.13 (16%) 21.72 (17%) 18.76 (14%) 16.71 (11%) 11.98 (28%) 7.26 (39%) 6.62 (9%) 5.32 (20%) 5.08 (5%) 3.20 (31%) 1star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars
Example: Class II Highway Level terrain, speed 80km/h, AADT=10,000 vpd, 1 curve/km, 1 intersection/km Star Rating Scores Relative risk of death and serious injury XX.XX Star Rating Score, (XX%) Reduction in risk Baseline + delineation + paved shoulder + rumble strips + sight distance + roadside clearzone/barriers + median treatment + intersection lighting + int. protected turn lanes + int. chanelization + traffic calming 30.92 26.13 (16%) 21.72 (17%) 18.76 (14%) 16.71 (11%) 11.98 (28%) 7.26 (39%) 6.62 (9%) 5.32 (20%) 5.08 (5%) 3.20 (31%) 1star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars
Example: Class II Highway Level terrain, speed 80km/h, AADT=10,000 vpd, 1 curve/km, 1 intersection/km Star Rating Scores Relative risk of death and serious injury XX.XX Star Rating Score, (XX%) Reduction in risk Baseline + delineation + paved shoulder + rumble strips + sight distance + roadside clearzone/barriers + median treatment + intersection lighting + int. protected turn lanes + int. chanelization + traffic calming 30.92 26.13 (16%) 21.72 (17%) 18.76 (14%) 16.71 (11%) 11.98 (28%) 7.26 (39%) 6.62 (9%) 5.32 (20%) 5.08 (5%) 3.20 (31%) 1star 2 stars 3 stars 4 stars
For more information Racheal Nganwa, AfricaRAP Lead: racheal.nganwa@irap.org Website: http://www.irap.org Road Safety Toolkit: http://toolkit.irap.org irap online software: http://vida.irap.org
Thank you www.irap.org