Road Safety Audits (2004)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

6 CHAPTER TWO ROAD SAFETY AUDIT PROCESS WHAT IS A ROAD SAFETY AUDIT? An RSA as applied in the United States is a formal exami- nation of a future roadway plan (or project plan) by an in- dependent, qualified audit team, which then reports on safety issues. The key elements of this definition are that the RSA • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Is a formal examination with a structured process and not a cursory review; Is conducted independently, by professionals who are not currently involved in the project; Is completed by a team of qualified professionals representing appropriate disciplines; and Focuses solely on safety issues. The RSA is proactive, done before a crash history indi- cates a problem exists. It considers all road users—for ex- ample, drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists—and it consid- ers all environmental conditions, including daylight, nighttime, and inclement weather. The RSA is not a means to rank or rate a project, nor is it a check of compliance with standards. In addition, the RSA does not attempt to redesign a project; it results in recommendations or findings that should be considered when a project is reviewed. Audits conducted early in the life of a project—in the planning or initial design stages— have been shown to be the most beneficial and the easiest to integrate with an agency’s existing safety program. WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF ROAD SAFETY AUDITS? The safety benefits of RSAs have been documented pri- marily in international applications, which are summarized in chapter four. International assessments focus on the value added by proactively implementing the RSA find- ings. Several studies compared benefits of similar projects where RSAs were conducted with projects in which RSAs were not conducted. In the United States, where RSA tools have only recently been introduced, the quantitative bene- fits of RSAs have been difficult to document because the RSA is a proactive rather than a reactive safety tool. An analogy can be made to the medical field. It may be diffi- cult to prove the benefits of preventive medicine, yet it is generally accepted that exercise, proper diet, and other measures can help reduce long-term medical costs. Nevertheless, in an unpublished study of RSA pilot studies assessed in 1997 by the FHWA, a number of impor- tant benefits were identified. Audits were found to Provide safety beyond established standards; Identify additional improvements that can be incor- porated into the projects; Create consistency among all projects; Encourage personnel to think about safety in the course of their normal activities, throughout all stages of a project; Invite interdisciplinary input; Enhance the quality of field reviews; Provide learning experiences for the audit team and design team members; Provide feedback to highway designers that they can apply to other projects as appropriate; Provide feedback that helps to affirm actions taken and to work through outstanding issues; and Ensure that high quality is maintained throughout a project’s life cycle. WHAT ARE THE STAGES OF A ROAD SAFETY AUDIT? RSAs can be performed at one or more stages of a new roadway project (3): Planning, Draft design, Detail design, Traffic control device (TCD) construction planning, and Construction. The different emphasis at each stage principally relates the level of detail addressed. Each stage is described in the following sections. Planning RSAs conducted during the planning stage occur early in a project and generally evaluate the basic project scope, route location and layouts, intersection types, access con- trol, interchange locations and types, and impacts on the existing infrastructure. Some of those items also receive at- tention during audits conducted during other stages. As

7 more details of the project become available, safety con- siderations become more focused. Draft Design During the draft—or preliminary—design stage, the audit team evaluates general design standards. Some factors that the team might consider include horizontal and vertical alignment; intersection and interchange type and layout; sight distances; lane and shoulder widths; superelevation; and provisions for pedestrians, including children, the eld- erly, the disabled, and bicyclists. Detail Design All elements of the final design should be in place during the detail design stage. During this stage, the audit team reviews the final geometric design features; traffic signing and pavement marking plans; lighting plans; landscaping; and intersection and interchange details such as tapers, lengths of acceleration and deceleration lanes, and turning radii. The team also reviews provisions for special users such as elderly pedestrians, children, the disabled, and bi- cyclists; drainage, guardrails, and other roadside objects; and constructability. TCD Construction Planning An RSA conducted during this stage focuses on the devel- opment and implementation of the traffic control plan. It evaluates the implications of alternative TCDs, use of vari- ous types of devices, impact of temporary geometric changes, and implementation of changes that might occur as the project progresses. Construction During this stage, the audit team focuses on safety issues during construction and looks at how a new construction project interacts with utilities, railroads, businesses, main- tenance, and other parts of the existing infrastructure. The team also considers the safety impacts of alternative stag- ing plans. HOW IS A ROAD SAFETY AUDIT CONDUCTED? Conducting an RSA requires that a formalized, systematic process be followed. However, each agency may tailor the process to satisfy specific organizational and safety goals. Generally, the following steps are followed in conducting an audit. Select the RSA Team The RSA team consists of trained and experienced trans- portation professionals and others with special skills. The team members also should be chosen independent of the project being audited and therefore able to look at the project without bias. A team leader who has experience in conducting audits is identified. A core team compris- ing a highway and traffic safety specialist, highway de- signer, and traffic engineer is usually used effectively on most projects. To that core team others may be added as needed to provide expertise pertinent to the project being audited. Specific disciplines that can be added include ex- perts in planning, enforcement, pedestrians and bicyclists, and human factors, as well as local residents. Diverse per- spectives of the team members foster the exchange of ideas that can enrich the audit. Of utmost importance, the audit team members should have the time and desire to conduct the audit. Provide Relevant Data and Documentation The project designer or an appropriate internal client who is requesting the audit provides all available relevant data and documents to the audit team, as well as a statement of the scope of the audit. The individual supplying the infor- mation reflects the type of project being audited, the stage of the audit, and the organization of the audit process within each agency. Relevant data and documentation include, but are not limited to the following: • • • • • • • Plans and drawings; Design standards used; Traffic volume data; Crash records, if applicable (only on a redesign or an RSAR); Public input; Videotapes; and Data concerning utilities, railroads, schools, and businesses, among others. Hold Kick-Off Meeting The project designer or internal client calls the kick-off meeting to launch the audit. The audit team members, de- signer or internal client, and any others who have knowl- edge of the project that the audit team needs should attend. During this meeting, the designer or client turns over the relevant data and documents. The participants discuss the purpose and conduct of the audit, scope, roles, and respon- sibilities, as well as the desired presentation format for the audit report.

8 Assess Data and Documents After the kick-off meeting, the audit team reviews the data and documentation, records its initial impressions, and plans the site inspection(s). Team members consider ap- propriate checklists and prompt lists to refer to during the site visit. From these data and documents, the team begins to identify safety-related issues and concerns. Inspect Site After reviewing the relevant data and documentation, the RSA team inspects the site. Team members bring the data and documentation with them and review the site from all possible perspectives (e.g., planning, design, construction, and maintenance), considering all possible road conditions (e.g., sunshine, darkness, rain, snow, sleet, and hail), and users (e.g., motorists, both elderly and inexperienced driv- ers, motorcyclists, bicyclists, children, and elderly pedes- trians). Any checklists or prompt lists selected are used during the site visit to assist in evaluating safety issues. The team also considers factors such as glare from headlights and the sun, external lighting, and existing infrastructure (e.g., railroad crossings, industry, schools, businesses, parks, and recreation). The team looks at adjacent road- ways that transition into the site as well. More than one visit might be necessary, with both nighttime and daytime visits beneficial. Discuss Audit Safety Issues with the Designer or Internal Client There are two alternative formats to presenting the audit report. First, before writing the report, the audit team and designer or internal client meet to discuss the issues and concerns raised during the audit. Doing so establishes an atmosphere of cooperation and encourages the sharing of knowledge and perspectives on the project being audited. This gives everyone an opportunity to brainstorm conclusions, solutions, and recommendations and have input into the audit report. The second approach is to write the report and then to present the audit report findings. Whatever format is used should be defined in the initial meeting with the client. Write RSA Report The audit report documents the results of the RSA. Several examples of RSA and RSAR reports are included in Ap- pendix C. These are actual reports that have been edited to eliminate references to specific agencies or locations. In general, the RSA report • • • • • • • • • Identifies all safety issues and deficiencies, noting those that require immediate attention; and Draws conclusions in the form of recommendations or suggestions for possible corrective actions if requested. An audit report has no set format, but at a minimum it should include the following sections: Project description—Describe the project being au- dited, summarize its background, and state why the audit is being performed. Audit team members—Identify each team member by name and title. If consultants are used, describe their credentials. Data and documentation—Identify all data and list all documentation reviewed. If appropriate, indicate the usefulness of each. Assumptions—List any assumptions relied on, if ap- plicable. Site visits—Identify the dates and times when visits have been conducted. Also, identify any conditions present at the time of the visit (e.g., bright sunshine versus clouds and heavy versus light traffic flow). Describe the site’s layout and physical characteristics. Identify anything that the site inspection reveals that the data and documentation do not. Identify any checklists or prompt lists that were used. Findings—Clearly state safety-related observations, identifying in detail all safety issues and concerns. Conclusions—State the recommendations, sugges- tions, alternatives, implementation strategies, etc., that relate to the scope of the audit. Present the con- tent in a format established by the agency. Some agencies prefer to include recommendations, whereas others prefer findings. Hold Completion Meeting During the completion meeting, the audit team presents its findings orally and answers any questions that the stake- holders might have. To get the most from the meeting, the report should be distributed in advance so that it can be re- viewed by the attendees who can then formulate their ques- tions and comments. The meeting should be an open, posi- tive, and constructive discourse that is free of criticism. All parties should work together to be proactive, not adversar- ial, in their approach to safety. Respond to Report The project designer, internal client, or other stakeholder responds to the audit report. Audit reports generally in- clude corrective actions; for example, recommendations or suggested safety improvements. A written documented re- sponse indicates which corrective actions are accepted and which are rejected, as well as reasons associated with the

9 decisions made. Including an implementation plan may also be of value. An official with authority to make deci- sions should sign the report. Implement Agreed-on Changes Because the whole point of conducting an RSA is to im- prove safety, an important step is to actually implement the changes that the audit team and stakeholders agree to im- plement. That implementation also should be documented and made part of the total audit file. Share Lessons Learned The final step of an RSA is to share the lessons learned with all the stakeholders and with the planning, design, construction, operations, and maintenance teams. Those lessons then can be applied to all future projects as appro- priate. A project that has been audited also should be moni- tored to determine if the audit and implementation of find- ings have been successful. The agency that requested the audit maintains the audit records KEY ISSUES TO CONSIDER IN AUDIT REPORTS Because the audit report is important, it deserves special attention. The audit report should be concise and to the point. It should contain at least the elements that were listed earlier. However, the audit report need not be too long; 2 to 10 pages would be ideal for most projects. Agen- cies appear to be divided on whether the reports should contain findings or recommendations. Recommendations suggest further specific actions or improvements, whereas findings address the results of the audit. It is important that the report’s contents be discussed during the kick-off meet- ing to determine the objectives of the client. Sample audit reports are included in Appendix C. Another consideration is the disposition of the report af- ter the audit has been completed. Each agency should es- tablish procedures for maintaining RSA reports. If the agency has a central RSA coordinator, that person should maintain the records. Another option is to house the reports at a district office. In all cases, a copy of the audit report should be included with the documentation of the specific project that is audited. USING CHECKLISTS AND PROMPT LISTS One tool that has been a key component in conducting RSAs is a checklist. Checklists have been developed to aid auditors in reviewing projects to ensure that all issues that can affect safety are addressed. Both Road Safety Audit from Austroads (5) and Guidelines for the Safety Audit of Highways from IHT (6) contain extensive checklists that can be used for each audit stage. In the United States, Pennsylvania has developed checklists for use in its audit process. These checklists can be viewed at the previously mentioned website, www.roadwaysafetyaudits.org. Checklists should not be used so rigidly that the audit team allows the checklist to dictate the audit. Instead, the checklists should be flexible guidelines and reminders of things to look for in steering the team to a comprehensive evaluation of the project. Checklists should be viewed as only one tool available to the audit team, just as the project data and documentation are tools. Many international agencies are now using prompt lists. Those tools are less prescriptive than checklists and iden- tify broader areas for the audit team to examine during the field review. The Canadian Road Safety Audit Guide (2) contains an example of a prompt list. It is recommended that an audit team develop a check- list or prompt list tailored to the specific project and stage of the audit being conducted. This should be accomplished during the kick-off meeting and the list then taken to the site inspection. The team can use an existing list and mod- ify it to fit the project. Appendix D contains samples of audit checklists. Checklists have been developed for spe- cific audit stages and for specific types of projects. The ap- pendix provides several different RSA checklist styles. Essen- tial to using a checklist or prompt list is to include relevant local safety concerns and issues. Tailoring a checklist to spe- cific facility types or project types may have benefits in advancing the application of RSAs and RSARs. WHAT IS A ROAD SAFETY AUDIT REVIEW? An RSAR is a safety assessment of an existing street or roadway section or a newly completed section before open- ing. An independent, qualified audit team reports, in an RSAR, on the safety issues of these road or street sections. The RSAR is a practical safety tool for local rural road agencies with typically limited resources, whose primary responsibilities are the maintenance and operation of exist- ing roadway networks. The RSAR can also be used as part of an agency’s overall safety program or in conjunction with other ongoing activities such as a 3R/4R program. The RSAR differs from the conventional safety analysis and scoping study because it is proactive and not dependent solely on crash statistics. The RSAR concentrates on a spe- cific roadway section to address safety issues and therefore is different from traditional U.S. and Canadian scoping studies. RSARs may be used as planning tools to identify safety issues to be considered in improvement projects.

10 • • • State DOTs and local agencies are continuously faced with the need to consider how the safety of an existing road or street may be enhanced. Because the uses of a roadway change over time, roads that fully complied with all safety standards at the time they were built may no longer provide a high degree of safety for the traveling public. Typical ap- proaches used by most DOTs include an analysis of crash data, generally focusing on high-crash locations. Applying proactive evaluations through the use of the RSAR is an- other method. The RSAR may be performed During the preopening stage of a new project to en- sure that the safety concerns of all road users have been addressed, On a road section just opened to traffic, and On an existing road to identify safety deficiencies. The concept of the RSAR is based on an analysis tech- nique that formalizes documentation of safety issues. Pro- actively considering safety is the value of the RSAR tool. Iowa, New York, and South Dakota have integrated RSARs into their safety programs. In Michigan, an RSAR ap- proach is being used to evaluate safety issues in regard to urban intersections. The use of the RSAR by rural local agencies was identi- fied in Arizona, South Dakota, and Wyoming in surveys used to develop an NCHRP synthesis on safety tools for local agencies (4). The RSAR concept is being used by more local agencies each year. Depending on resources, there are a number of different ways to use the RSAR con- cept to develop a local safety program. An important subject in the low-volume rural road envi- ronment is that improving so many miles of roadway to current standards would be neither economical nor practi- cal. For rural local governments, a proactive program in- volving a functional classification of their rural roadway system and the use of an independent peer group of audi- tors is both practical and affordable. The classification system helps to guide the improve- ments of the identified safety issues into alternatives by considering the use of the roadway section being evaluated and the ability to apply the improvements incrementally. Such decisions are made in light of the classification and the safety issue involved, as well as by applying a value judgment to the urgency of the improvement and the re- sources available. Because there are several key elements to the RSAR that provide value beyond an unstructured safety review, locally needed modifications to the concept are encour- aged. The RSAR results in a formal written report that is short, simple, and proactive. Orally communicating the re- port is also important, as is the local agency’s formal writ- ten response to the report. Independence is another key to the RSAR. The local agency becomes the client for the RSAR report and provides the review team with the roads and streets to be audited, plus information on their func- tional classification. The review team reflects a blend of background and ex- pertise. Core knowledge is generally considered to be knowledge of local road safety and maintenance skills. Other skills of team members may vary depending on the issues associated with the road users and/or the complexity of the facility. Review team member’s skills could include traffic engineering, human factors, construction, design, and operations. Team members may also have knowledge about pedestrians, bicyclists, and trucks. There are a number of different ways to undertake an RSAR and to develop a team. One suggested methodology is that one county audit another county’s network. A system to classify existing roads, examine their current usage, identify deficiencies, and prioritize needed safety im- provements is the goal of an RSAR program. The premise is that local agencies can best achieve needed safety im- provements by prioritizing activities and chipping away at problems as resources allow.