Trainers Road Safety Manual

Chapter 5

ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

Trainers Road Safety Manual

5. ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

Overview
The topic is discussed in Chapter 6 of the “Manual for Safety in Road Design-A Guide for Highway
Engineers”. This topic discusses the importance and need of Road Safety Audits.
Every year, a large number of people are killed and injured on roads in developed and developing
countries. Every year, considerable amount of resources are used on trying to reduce crashes by
reconstructing and improving the roads. This work of crash reduction is still necessary and should
continue to be of high priority. However, these activities are reactive.
New roads must incorporate design and operational safety elements from the start. Roadway safety in
new projects can be improved by having independent road safety specialists systematically examining
and commenting on the projects, while they still only exist on paper. This is called a Road Safety
Audit (RSA). RSAs are in essence, crash prevention. The purpose is to make new roads as safe as
possible much before the projects are implemented, and before any crash happen.
In order to appreciate the topic, it is subdivided into following headings in the Trainers Road Safety
Manual:
• Development of Road Safety Audit
• Why Accidents Occur Despite the Use of Current Design Standards?
• Concepts of Road Safety Audit
• Road Safety Auditors & Key Personnel in RSA
• Organising and Conducting a Road Safety Audit
• Road Safety and Exception Audit Report
• Example and Commonly Identified Issues During RSA

5.1
Road Safety Audit

5.1 Development of Road Safety Audit

Traffic engineers in U.K. developed the idea of Road Safety Audit as a safety check for new
and improved road projects and schemes in the early 1980s. The Road Safety Audit (RSA)
process in the U.K. started to gather pace when safety engineers realised that they were
carrying out accident remedial schemes on relatively new roads. Common mistakes in
carriageway layout, positioning and type of street furniture, poor signing and marking,
inappropriate surfacing materials, lack of facilities for vulnerable road users such as
pedestrians and cyclists were being repeated over and over.
Adopting the principle of ‘prevention is better than cure’, they decided to use some of the
safety experience they had gained from the remedial work and design safety into new road
schemes. The widespread growth in the use of road safety audits has been helped by two facts
viz., the concern of improving road safety and the application of quality assurance principles
to road projects. Many countries have formulated comprehensive strategies to reduce crash
toll, which in turn have identified safety audits as a part of overall strategic approach.

The Designer The Auditor

Steps in Developing a Project Possible Audit Input

Concept

Feasibility Stage
Audit

Draft

PPR Stage Audit

Details

DPR Stage Audit

Build (Traffic Management Schemes for Road Construction Works)

Pre-opening Audit

Open to
Traffic
Existing Road Audit

Figure 5.1.1: How Audits Fit into Planning, Design and Development Process

5.2
Trainers Road Safety Manual

What is the Basic Philosophy of Road Safety Audit?

Road Safety Audit is an important tool of Road Safety Engineering, which has the potential to make a
significant contribution to highway safety. The formal audit process involves looking at schemes
throughout the various stages of design, and trying to identify road safety problems and to recommend
solutions to problems that have been identified. Road Safety Audit is a systematic process for
checking the safety of new schemes on roads. In the process, Safety Audit Team attempts to identify
genuine safety problems of features within the design which, if left unaltered would lead to accidents.
The Auditor must be able to recommend solutions that will work based on experience of similar
treatments elsewhere.
Difference between RSA and RSAR
Road safety audit, when applied to existing or in-service roads, is commonly referred as Road Safety
Audit Review (RSAR). There is a reason as to why there are two different terms for road safety audit
when applied either to a new scheme or to an existing road. It is basically because when safety audit is
applied to a new road scheme or a rehabilitation project we are doing an accident prevention exercise.
On the other hand safety audit when applied to an existing road becomes an accident reduction
exercise.
Accident reduction schemes utilise Accident Investigation Programme (AIP) as the basis for their
planning. As accident investigation is carried out on existing roads and in order to treat safety
problems it is a reactive measure. The Road Safety Audit, on the other hand, is a pro-active measure
based on the principle of “prevention is better than cure”. It attempts to predict accident and road
safety problems in new designs and recommend modifications to minimize these problems. The
objective is to prevent future accidents.

Road Testing of Road Safety Audit by PennDOT

The safety audit process has produced dramatic improvements in road safety in Australia, Canada, New
Zealand and the United Kingdom. It is designed to help project directors and designers anticipate
potential safety problems and provide them with recommendations to address them.
The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, USA (PennDOT) began “road testing” the safety audit
process on a wide range of projects in April 1997. Over an eighteen month period, PennDOT audited
new construction, reconstruction, safety and bridge projects. It also tested the impact of safety audits at
different stages of project development from feasibility and preliminary engineering to final design and
pre-opening. A multi-disciplinary safety audit team was set up for each project, consisting of experts in
traffic, construction, design, maintenance, risk management and human factors.
The results were very positive. Approximately 50% of the safety concerns raised in the audits resulted in
additional improvements. Safety improvements were also integrated into other projects that were not
formally audited. The concerns of a wider range of road users, pedestrians, heavy trucks, emergency
vehicles, bicyclists, motorcyclists and the elderly people were considered in designing projects. A wide
variety of improvements resulted from the audits. They included the removal of earth banks to improve
sight distance, the addition of right-turn lanes, the redesign of an interchange to eliminate right turns and
permit safer left turns, the removal or relocation of fixed objects, and better access management by
relocating or eliminating driveways. The most significant project additions occurred at intersections.
Audits provide a way to evaluate the safety impact of eliminating or changing design features. For
example, according to PennDOT, drainage features may be costly but they are one of the most important
safety items in a construction project and among the most expensive to correct after a project is
completed. Safety audits in the construction phase could be helpful in preserving appropriate drainage
features that might otherwise be eliminated or changed.

5.3
Road Safety Audit

5.2 Why Accidents Occur Despite the use of Current Design

Standards?
Another belief the highway engineers usually
have with them is that while designing roads as
per design standards, they have incorporated
safety into the system. Strict adherence to design
standards does not always necessarily avoid
safety problems; in fact, safety is not an absolute
but a continuum as may be seen from Figure
5.2.1.
It is understandable that some practitioners think
‘standards equal safety’, given that we spend so Figure 5.2.1: Conceptual relationship between
much of our design time using standard values. available sight distance and safety at crest of
Unfortunately this view is a fallacy as: vertical curves

• Safety needs may conflict with capacity and environmental requirements. In many
countries there is no longer any reluctance to reduce capacity and level of service in order
to improve road safety (OECD, 1997).
• Design standards often lag behind the application of the latest international and national
research findings. Operational safety of an existing road can change overtime as volumes,
types of users or nearby land uses change. In view of such issues, a structured safety audit
can usually identify potential problems and make practical recommendations for
alleviating them. As such, a safety audit is an aid to optimum design.
• On roads passing through built-up area in towns and cities, it is not always possible to
maintain the design standards, while at the same time upgrading roads within existing
Right of Way (ROW) keeping in mind the constraints of budget and available land.
• ‘Real World’ accidents are not always covered by standards. Standards usually cover
general or common situations, not all situations. For example, the standard on crash
barriers recommend that impact protections should be installed if an embankment exceeds
three meter high. Many accidents involving serious injury occur when vehicles descend
embankments of lesser height.
• The definition of safety often understood within the standards relates to how engineers
design roads as opposed to how individuals use them. Visibility splays, size and location
of signs, and protection of street furniture all relate to design speed on a new road. But if
road users perceive the road to be faster, they will drive as such, sometimes leading to
accident.
• A designer may be using an inappropriate standard or an outdated standard. Also
standards may not be available for some safety parameters e.g., in India safety at
construction zones was first published only in 1998, pedestrian safety standards only in
1988 and that too not exhaustive.

The Road Safety Section of Vic Roads, which is responsible for management of road safety
audits, gives the following reasons for conducting road safety audits:
• "We keep building blackspots."
• Poor safety treatments observed at roadwork sites.
• Poor maintenance of safety features (e.g., delineation, safety barriers, etc.).
• Safety constraints from planning decisions.

5.4
Trainers Road Safety Manual

(a) A good horizontal sight distance from side road (b) A deceleration lane reducing risk of nose-to-tail
accidents

(d) Intersection places the waiting vehicle in a

(c) Combining elements in (a) & (b) restrict sight position from which the driver can clearly see all
distance with a potential for right-angle the approaching vehicles
accidents

Figure 5.2.2: Interaction of design elements can sometimes lead to hazardous situations

Applicability of RSA in India

The Institute of Transport Engineers (ITE), a multinational organisation based in US noted in one of its reports
in 1994 that there was great scope for implementing road safety audits in developing countries, especially if they
were linked to the infrastructure investments being made by funding agencies such as the World Bank and Asian
Development Bank. This would appear to be an ideal area for technology transfer programmes to operate, since
safety audit is as applicable to small-scale local-build schemes as it is to massive, outside funded highway
developments. In countries like India where complete and accurate road accident data is not normally available,
development of black-spot improvement programmes becomes more difficult. Road Safety Audits can be easily
applied under such situations, if we can develop a pool of safety auditors in the country.

5.5
Road Safety Audit

5.3 Concepts of Road Safety Audit

Objectives of Road Safety Audit
• The main objective of the Road Safety Audit (RSA) is to address the safe operation of a
roadway and to ensure a high level of safety for all road users. A road safety audit can be
defined as a process consisting of a formal examination of an existing or future roadway
by an independent team of qualified engineering, enforcement, and human factors
professionals.
Main Objectives
• The main road safety principles on which the road safety audit process stands are:
- Minimising the likelihood of crashes occurring through safety-conscious planning
and design;
- Creating safe roadsides and conditions at places where there is highest likelihood of
crashes like intersections where road cross-sections change etc.;
- Ensuring that, if a crash occurs, then the likelihood of the injury is minimised (such as
provision of anti-skid surfacing and crash barriers);
- Ensuring that safety related design criteria (e.g. critical sight-distances) have been
met;
- Managing risks, such that the risk of major safety problems occurring is less than the
risk of minor problems occurring.
Secondary Objectives
• While the main objective of a road safety audit is to ensure a high level of safety for all
new highways designs, there are other secondary objectives:
- Reducing the whole-life costs of a design (unsatisfactory designs are expensive to
correct after they are built)
- Minimising the risk of crashes on the adjacent road network (particularly at
intersections) as well as on the new road scheme
- Enhancing the importance and relevance of road safety engineering in highway
design work and to enhance consideration of the safety of all road users in all new
and existing schemes.
Various Issues to be looked for in RSA
• Examples of various issues to look for during Road Safety Audit are tabulated in Table
5.3.1. A Safety Auditor should look for genuine ‘safety problems’, which if unaltered
would actually lead to safety hazards and possibly accidents. The Auditor should be able
to identify mistakes and lack of attention to details that arise out of the lack of
appreciation for safety issues.
• Auditor also looks for poor or misleading design as well for poor facilities for vulnerable
road users. The Safety Auditor has to imagine how it would be to walk, cycle and drive
through the scheme. Driving should include cars, vans, trucks, motorcycles and buses.
‘Walking’ should be considered from the perspective of the elderly, the child, the wheel
chair user and those with visual impairment. For some schemes, even the equestrian
viewpoint should be considered. For roads already built and in operation, it is necessary
to inspect the facility both during day and night so as to bring out relevant safety issues.

5.6
Trainers Road Safety Manual

Table 5.3.1: Some Important Safety Issues to “LOOK FOR” in RSA

S.No. Roadway Elements Issues to “Look For”

1 Roadside Features Hazards in clear zones? Whether non-conforming and
dangerous obstructions properly shielded?
2 Road Surface-Pavement Condition Pavement defects that could lead to safety problems poor
transitions; Inadequate skid resistance; Areas where water
may cause ponding /sheet flow, loose gravel/aggregate;
Drop offs
3 Road Surface Markings Locations with inadequate marking causing safety
hazardous? Old markings affecting safety? Non-effective
markings? Conspicuity aspects?
4 Signing & Delineation Locations needing improved signing? Conspicuity of
regulatory, warning and directional signs? Unnecessary/
misleading signage-affecting safety? Location at safe
distances? Effectiveness?
5 Intersections & Approaches Locations with improper/unsuitable delineation (Post
delineators, chevrons, objects markers)? Free of sight
restrictions leading to safety problems? Any abrupt
changes in elevation/surface condition? Advance warning
sign when intersection is not visible from a safe distance?
6 Vulnerable Road Users Proper marking and/or signing of travel paths and crossing
of pedestrians / cyclists? Proper provision of walkways
crossing facilities?
7 Bus Stops & Refuge Areas Are bus stops and other essential objects safely located
with adequate clearance and visibility from traffic lane?
Appropriate advance signing for bus stops and refuge
areas?
8 Rail-road Crossings Proper advance warning signs used at railroad crossing
approaches (manned & unmanned)? Approaches free of
vegetations and other growth, which has potential to
restrict sight distance? Approach flat grade to prevent
vehicle snagging?
9 Consistency Road section free of inconsistencies that could result in
safety problems?

Figure 5.3.1: Broken Parapet Wall of a Bridge which Figure 5.3.2: Safety Audit should be Conducted
could Lead an Errant Vehicle to end up in the Water both During Day Light Conditions and During
Body Dark Hours

5.7
Road Safety Audit

5.4 Road Safety Auditors & Key Personnel in RSA

Auditor’s Qualifications and Background
• A road safety audit is performed by an individual or team with expertise in one or more
areas of road safety. Typical backgrounds include traffic or transportation engineering,
highway design and construction, crash investigation and analysis, and human
factors/road-user behavior.
• While it is not always feasible or practical to use a team in conducting audits, it is very
important that auditors possess an understanding of traffic engineering and road design
techniques and have some experience in crash investigation. An understanding of human
factors is also important, because of the strong interaction between road users and road
environment.
• The most appropriate size of an audit team depends on the size of the audit task; there is
no optimum number of members in a team. Teams of more than four persons, at times,
can be unmanageable. Significant projects require at least two people. Experienced
auditors often discourage one-man teams.
• Training in the audit process must be recognised, as vital, if the road safety audit is to
retain credibility as a powerful road safety-engineering tool. Training of Road Safety
Auditors is very essential and any Audit Team member should have attended recognised
road safety engineering and Safety Audit training courses. The problem in India, at
present, is that there is no formal qualification in Safety Audit or Road Safety
Engineering. It is possible for staff with very little safety engineering experience to
produce audits that are at best a check on design standards. In the initial stages of
introduction of safety audit for road projects, the safety audit inputs may be provided by a
research institute.
• Expertise in safety engineering is recognised as combination of competence in techniques
of accident investigation and remedial design, and underpinning knowledge of safety
principles and relevant practice. In this context, safety specialists need to familiarise
themselves with the wealth of information available and keep abreast of new
developments which will aid safe design. This competence is largely the result of
handsome experience, “for safety engineering has to be learnt – it cannot be taught”
(Bulpitt, 1998).
• The independence of the RSA Team is vital to ensure that the design team does not
influence the recommendations of the Safety Audit and, therefore, compromise safety at
the expense of other issues. This, however, does not mean that there should not be any
interaction between the Design Team and the Safety Auditors. A meeting between Safety
Auditors at the start and end of the audit process would be useful, and Safety Auditors
could be asked to provide advice on safety issues during the design.
Contents for a Training Course for Road Auditors
The minimum requirements of road safety audit training course could be (Simons, 2001):
• The definition of an RSA and why it is needed?
• How road safety audit is applied and managed?
• How to present an audit report, and how to respond to an audit report?
• At least one real-life case study, preferably a design stage audit or a pre-opening stage audit.
Other associated and preferable training in the following topics should be encouraged for road
safety professionals, in general, and for road safety auditors, in particular.
• Road safety engineering
• Black-spot investigations
• Roadside hazards and the use of crash barrier
• Road work sites
• Risk assessment / management
• The preparation of response action reports

5.8
Trainers Road Safety Manual

Table 5.4.1: Selecting the Team for Various Stages

Stage Team Expertise

• Accident investigation
Road Safety • Safety management
Expert • Applying safety engineering principles
Stage 1 • Ability to assess potential user risks
(Preliminary • Road design standards
Design) Road Design Engineer • Ability to visualise 3-dimensional layouts and 2-
dimensional plans
Person with Safety Audit • Specialist knowledge of any unusual aspect of the
Experience proposal
• Accident investigation
Road Safety • Safety management
Stage 2
Expert • Applying safety engineering principles
(Detailed Design)
• Ability to assess potential user risks
Other Specialists • Depending on type of scheme
• Accident investigation
Road Safety • Safety management
Expert • Applying safety engineering principles
Stage 3 • Ability to assess potential user risks
(Pre-Opening) Police Officer • Traffic and safety
• Management of the scheme with experience in
Engineer
similar roads
Road User Expert • Schemes for vulnerable road users

Accreditation Scheme for Auditors in Australia

In response to continued calls for a nationally accepted accreditation scheme for auditors, the following
model for accreditation has been adopted by Australian state road authorities:
1) Five years (minimum) of relevant experience in road design, traffic engineering, road safety
engineering or other closely related road-safety discipline;
2) Successful completion of an approved RSA training workshop;
3) Participation in at least five RSAs under the leadership of a senior auditor (at least three of which are
design-stage audits); and
4) Certify maintenance of knowledge and experience by participating in at least one audit/year.
To be listed as a road-safety auditor, person is required to satisfy 1and 2 above. To be listed as a senior
road safety auditor, a person is required to satisfy 1, 2 and 3 above. Both levels auditor are required to
satisfy item 4 to remain on the list of accredited auditors. A nationally or regionally maintained register of
qualified road-safety auditors is a useful aid to guide clients in the selection of trained and experienced
practitioners. The development of a simple but effective registration or accreditation scheme is a
recommended early action for any jurisdiction where the RSA is being implemented. Transit New
Zealand also has a training process whereby a potential auditor is first an observer on an audit team, then a
team member in a group led by an experienced auditor and eventually moves to a team leader position.
This is interpreted as an informal accreditation process.

5.9
Road Safety Audit

5.5 Organising & Conducting a Road Safety Audit

• There are three distinct ways of organising a road safety audit:
- Audit by a specialist auditor or a team
- Audit by other road designers
- Audit within the original design team
• The first arrangement is preferred. By selecting an outside individual or team, two of the
key elements of a road safety audit-independence and the use of experienced and
educated auditors can be ensured. An audit completed by other road designers has the
disadvantage of restricting the review to individuals who may not have the breadth of
experience to evaluate the project from the perspective of the road user. Having personnel
from the original design team to conduct the audit has the disadvantage of possible bias.
• Schemes that should be audited cover a wide range of types and sizes, on different classes
of roads, in urban and rural areas.
• Mostly Road Safety Audit could be used beneficially for:
- Major new rehabilitation schemes,
- Minor improvements,
- Traffic management schemes,
- Development schemes,
- Maintenance works, and
- Existing roads
• It may be argued that Safety Audits should be mandatory for all road schemes. However,
there is clearly a cost and personal resources implication. It is suggested that initially
safety audit procedures be applied only to all new roads and all rehabilitation road
schemes on National, State and municipal roads.
• For some schemes it may be possible to omit or combine stages. For example, PPR and
DPR stages can be combined for smaller improvements, or for traffic management,
feasibility and PPR stages can be combined. On the various highway upgradation
programmes being carried out in India, it is suggested that road safety audit be carried out
at least at DPR and Pre-opening stages which are critical.
• A road safety audit is relatively straight forward process as shown in Fig 5.5.1. For
smaller projects some of the steps shown may be brief, but the sequence of the steps will
still apply. The flow chart should be adopted to suit the scheme, may involve a phone call
rather than a commencement meeting and documentation may be a few pages of
information and a single plan, with a one page report if there are no significant problems.

Data & Background Information Requirements

The database for conducting an audit should include plans and drawings; site information,
such as detailed crash history and traffic volumes; design standards that have been used;
environmental effects; and on-site evaluations, which examines a location from the
perspective of the road users (motorists, pedestrians, or bicyclists). This last element is
particularly important and should encompass a review of all types of movements, special
needs of the elderly or disabled, and weather and environmental problems.

5.10
Trainers Road Safety Manual

Select the Auditor

Audit Team with appropriate skills and independence Client/ Designer

Provide the Background Information

Plan and site information, project reports and objectives Designer

Hold a Commencement Meeting

Client/ Designer &
Hand over necessary information to Audit Team, Client/ Auditor
Designer to express special concern, if any

Assess the Documents Inspect the Site

Use checklists, Day/ Night, all types

drawings, data and of road users and Auditor
field notes, and project likely conditions,
reports project’s surroundings
and nearby road, take
photo

Write the Audit Report

Document identified safety deficiencies and Auditor

recommendations

Hold a Completion Meeting

Discussing recommendations for corrective actions Client/ Designer &

Auditor

Follow up

Considering each recommendation, Reasons for

accepting or rejecting and documenting the same in Client/ Designer &
Acceptance and Exception Reports Auditor

Figure 5.5.1: Flow Chart of Procedure for Carrying Out Road Safety Audit and Responsibility for
Different Steps

Checklists for Various Stages

The core process of the road safety audit is focused on a series of standard checklists. Checklists are
developed by individual agencies for use by auditors in evaluating safety at each stage of the audit
process. It is generally emphasised that checklists should be used to prompt the auditors in their
evaluations. However, it is advisable that road safety auditors are not restricted by items on the
checklists. Auditors indicate the areas that should be investigated and where further analyses are
needed. Checklists for five different stages of the projects are given in Appendices 5.1 to 5.5.

5.11
Road Safety Audit

5.6 Road Safety and Exception Audit Report

Safety Audit Report
• The main commission of the report is to define the features of the project, which involve
hazards and make recommendations on the corrective actions required. The
recommendations on remedial action should provide a clear indication of what needs to
be done, but it will not normally be appropriate to provide a detailed design, which is the
job of the highway designers. In some cases there may be no obvious solution to the
problem, but the problem should still be identified in the report. Table 5.6.1 details the
safety issues that need to be focused at different stages of the project.
• The road safety audit report should be concise, brief document setting out a summary of
measures to be taken and the items identified that require remedial treatment from road
safety point of view. The audit report does not give an overall assessment of the design,
so there is no need to refer to the good points of the design.
Contents of RSA Report
• Broadly the contents of the audit report should be:
- Project Information: Stating the name and extent of the audited road and the design
stage of the audit. It should also have a brief description of the project, its objectives
and any special users aspects.
- Background Information: Containing audit team members name, qualifications and
the clients name, it should also provide an overall plan of the project, also stating that
both day-time and night-time inspection were held with dates included. Provide a list
of documents used during the audit and photos of significant issues.
- A Series of Findings: All safety deficiencies which were identified with
recommendations directly after each finding.
- A Concluding Statement: Signed by all the audit team members advising they have
undertaken the audit.
Exception Report
• Recipient of the road safety audit report will have to decide whether to accept or not the
recommendations contained in it. The most formal way of responding to the safety audit
will be through ‘exception report’. If the designers do not agree with the Audit Team, the
exception report should validate, with some evidence, as to why the problem does not
exist as conceived by auditors. Exception report should provide alternative measures to be
implemented, preferable as result of the discussion between auditors and designer. It is
desirable that a copy of the exception report or feedback form is given to the safety audit
team so that it helps to improve their audits over time.
• Responsibility for the construction of the project always remains with the client as it is
not the role of the auditor to take over or redesign the project. The auditor is there to
provide independent advice in the project.

5.12
Trainers Road Safety Manual

Table 5.6.1: Safety Focused in Different Stages of the Project

Stage of the Project Focus of the Audit

Feasibility Safety issues associated with options such as route locations, design speed and
standards, impact on adjacent network, provision of intersections and
interchanges, access control, no. of lanes, traffic control, functionality, future
needs

Preliminary Planning Evaluation of general design standards, alignment, sight distance and lines of
Report (PPR) sight, intersection layout, lanes and shoulder widths, cross-slopes, provision for
buses, cycles, pedestrians, emergency vehicles, rest areas, parking etc., safety
during construction

Detailed Planning Report Examining safety issues of specific geometric design features, traffic control
(DPR) devices, delineation, roadside clear zones, intersection details, glare screens and
lightning, safety issues related to landscaping, provision for special road users
like elderly, school children, buses, equestrian, rail roads, heavy trucks etc

Pre-opening Final check prior to opening the facility to ensure that the safety concerns of all
road users have been addressed and that the hazardous conditions have been
eliminated. Should include day/night checks; evaluation considering dry/wet
weather; & driving/riding and walking

Final Stage An audit of existing roadway to determine, if the safety needs of all road users
are currently being served. It recognizes that a roadway may change over time.
Changes may have resulted from changing road use, encroachments, design
inconsistency, aging infrastructure and inadequate maintenance. Points to be
emphasised are adequacy of roadway, roadside and intersections, location of
bus stops, interaction of VRUs, access management

Safety Audit – ‘Control Data’

It is important for safety auditors to base their comments on sound safety experience, and where possible
to have the means to back up the recommendations from documented sources. The safety audit standard
requires the auditor to be able to produce ‘background reasoning’ for safety audits. This will not only
avoid road safety myths and certain ‘gut feelings’ about safety but also properly equip road safety audit
team members to substantiate their case with client or internal arbitration if the audit problem and/or
recommendation has been rejected. The ideal situation would be one in which one could turn to a
published source to answer all of pertinent safety questions, However, this is not always the case.
Ideally, the background reasoning or ‘control data’ would provide safety background reasoning or
‘control data would provide safety potential of the countermeasure being considered. Control data should
be used to assist safety auditors with both the identification of problems, and with the recommendations
for improvement. In the first part, the auditor is trying to determine who is most at risk in the new layout.
In the second part, the auditor tries to suggest an improvement that has been previously demonstrated to
mitigate that risk. Local control data is very important, as accident performance varies from one part of
the country to another. It would not be appropriate to use metropolitan city data as a basis for comparison
with rural surroundings. The main sources of data are publications and databases. Safety auditors can
obtain information from a variety of web site sources on the Internet.

5.13
Road Safety Audit

5.7 Examples of Commonly Identified Issues During RSA

Example of NH-66
The nominated road safety expert(s) shall provide a comprehensive road safety audit for the
new extension to NH-66 from km 257 at Bagepally to km 299 at Robisuri in accordance with
the Indian Standards listed below. Special attention should be paid to facilities for pedestrians
and the safety of all functions with NH-66 particularly at night time.
The audit report should clearly identify the scheme, the audit stage and audit team members.
Each identified potential problem location should provide a standard problem /
recommendation format as suggested in the example in Figure 5.7.1.

Figure 5.7.1: NH-66 through Bangapori Halli

Table 5.7.1: Identified problems and Recommendations for stretch of NH-66

S.No. Problem Recommendation

1 The location of the pedestrian • The pedestrian crossing could be
crossing immediately outside the moved to the east side of the junction.
bar may encourage pedestrians • Alternatively the crossing could be
under the influence of alcohol to moved away from the bar entrance /
step into the path of moving traffic. exit to the west of its current position
Children crossing to the school and guard rails could be installed on
from the houses on the north side of the north side of the road to
the road are unlikely to use the encourage school children to use the
crossing. Traffic turning left from crossing.
the side road turns straight into the
crossing.
2 Pedestrians, particularly the elderly, The crossing should be narrowed down
are vulnerable when crossing wide by building cut the kerbs or installing a
roads. raised refuge.
3 Buses stopped at the bus stop to the The bus stop should be moved to the
west of the crossing could mask east side of the crossing.
pedestrians stepping onto the
crossing for drivers travelling
eastbound.
4 High speed traffic approaching the Improve the road surface texture on each
crossing may have difficulty in approach.
stopping when the road is wet. This
could lead to nose-to-tail accidents
or pedestrians struck on the
crossing.

5.14
Trainers Road Safety Manual

Table 5.7.2: Examples of Issues Most Commonly Identified During RSA

S.No. Stage of RSA Examples of Issues

1 Preliminary Design (PPR) • Horizontal alignment too severe

• Forward visibility restricted
• Inadequate provision for VRUs
• Poor design of bus stops
• Junctions / features too close

2 Detailed Design (DPR) • Absence or unsafe pedestrian crossing points

• Poor design or absence of refuge island
• Footway obstructed by poorly cited road furniture
• Parking problem
• Dropped crossing absent or not flush

3 Pre-opening • Inadequate safety fences

• Visibility to traffic control devices restricted
• Obsolete road signs / markings
• Inadequate road signs
• Drainage problems and location of gullies
• Speed

4 During Construction • The likelihood of mud or dust obscuring devices.

• Absence of advance warning signs & speed limits.
• Conflict between permanent and temporary features.
• Inadequate traffic barrier.
5 Existing Road • Inadequacy of road signs and markings.
• Inadequacy of pedestrian facilities.
• Lack of visibility at roads and junctions.
• Poor design.
• On-street parking problems.

Figure 5.7.2: Crashed Guard-rails on Roads not Figure 5.7.3: Sharp Curve without any Warning
Repaired in Time could Lead to Further Accidents Sign, with Trees on Bend and Steep Slopes

5.15
Road Safety Audit

5.8 Some Typical Issues Identified During Road Safety Audit

Figure 5.8.1: Combination of Bad Road Surface &

Figure 5.8.2: Electric Transformer on NH-8
Poorly Maintained Shoulder leads to Hazardous
without Adequate Guard
Situation, Particularly in Wet Weather

Figure 5.8.3: Roadside Accidents with Inadequate Figure 5.8.4: Steep Median Drainwithout any
Protection made through Stones on the Barrier Protection Leaving No Room for Recovery
Carriageway can be Dangerous for Vehicles

Figure 5.8.5: Trees Removed to Make way for Up-

gradation of Existing Road, Left on Shoulder and Figure 5.8.6: Access Created Without Proper
Road Edge, Pose Serious Road Safety Hazards Warning Signs and Speed Control Devices
especially at Night

5.16
Trainers Road Safety Manual

Appendix 5.1
Checklists
The use of checklists is highly recommended as they provide a useful "aide memoire" for the audit
team to check that no important safety aspects are being overlooked. They also give to the project
manager and the design engineer a sense of understanding of the importance of safety audit in the
design process. The following lists have been drawn up based on the experience of undertaking
systematic safety audit procedures overseas. This experience indicates that extensive lists of technical
details has encouraged their use as "tick" sheets without sufficient thought being given to the
processes behind the actions. Accordingly, the checklists provide guidelines on the principal issues
that need to be examined during the course of the safety audits.
Stage 1 - During Feasibility Study
1 The audit team should review the proposed design from a road safety perspective and check the
following aspects:
CONTENTS ITEMS
Aspects to be Checked • Safety and operational implications of proposed alignment and junction
strategy with particular references to expected road users and vehicle
types likely to use the road.
• Width options considered for various sections.
• Departures from standards and action taken.
• Provision for pedestrians, cyclists and intermediate transport
• Safety implications of the scheme beyond its physical limits i.e. how the
scheme fits into its environs and road hierarchy
A1 : General • Departures from standards
• Cross-sectional variation
• Drainage
• Climatic conditions
• Landscaping
• Services apparatus
• Lay-byes
• Footpaths
• Pedestrian crossings
• Access (minimise number of private accesses)
• Emergency vehicles
• Public transport
• Future widening
• Staging of contracts
• Adjacent development
A2 : Local Alignment • Visibility
• New / existing road interface
• Safety aids on steep hills.
A3 : Junctions • Minimise potential conflicts
• Layout
• Visibility
A4 : Non-motorised Road • Adjacent land
Users Provision • Pedestrians
• Cyclists
• Non-motorised vehicles
A5 : Signs and Lighting • Lighting
• Signs / markings
A6 : Construction and • Buildability
Operation • Operational
• Network management

5.17
Road Safety Audit

Appendix 5.2

Stage 2 - Completion of Preliminary Design

1 The audit team should review the proposed design from a road safety perspective and check the
following aspects:
CONTENTS ITEMS
Aspects to be Checked • Safety and operational implications of proposed alignment and
junction strategy with particular references to expected road users
and vehicle types likely to use the road.
• Width options considered for various sections.
• Departures from standards and action taken.
• Provision for pedestrians, cyclists and intermediate transport.
• Safety implications of the scheme beyond its physical limits; i.e.
how the scheme fits into its environs and road hierarchy.
B1 : General • Departures from standards
• Cross-sectional variation
• Drainage
• Climatic conditions
• Landscaping
• Services apparatus
• Lay-byes
• Footpaths
• Pedestrian crossings
• Access (minimise number of private accesses)
• Emergency vehicles
• Public transport
• Future widening
• Staging of contracts
• Adjacent development

B2 : Local Alignment • Visibility

• New / existing road interface
• Safety aids on steep hills

B3 : Junctions • Minimise potential conflicts

• Layout
• Visibility

B4 : Non-motorised Road • Adjacent land

Users Provision • Pedestrians
• Cyclists
• Non-motorised vehicles

B5 : Signs and Lighting • Lighting

• Signs / markings

B6 : Construction and • Buildability

Operation • Operational
• Network management

5.18
Trainers Road Safety Manual

Appendix 5.3

Stage 3 - Completion of Detailed Design

1. The audit team should satisfy itself that all issues raised at Stage 1 have been resolved. Items
may require further consideration where significant design changes have occurred.
2. If a scheme has not been subject to a Stage 1 audit, the items listed in Checklists B1 to B6
should be considered together with the items listed below:
CONTENTS ITEMS
Aspects to be Checked • Any design changes since Stage 1.
• The detailed design from a road safety viewpoint, including the road safety
implications of future maintenance (speed limits; road signs and markings;
visibility; maintenance of street lighting and central reserves).
C1 : General • Departures from standards
• Drainage
• Climatic conditions
• Landscaping
• Services apparatus
• Lay-byes
• Access
• Skid-resistance
• Agriculture
• Safety fences
• Adjacent development
C2 : Local Alignment • Visibility
• New/Existing road interface
C3 : Junctions • Layout
• Visibility
• Signing
• Lighting
• Road markings
• T, X, Y- junctions
• All roundabouts
• Mini roundabouts
• Traffic signals
C4 : Non-motorised • Adjacent land
Road Users • Pedestrians
Provision • Cyclists
• Non-motorised vehicles
C5 : Signs and Lighting • Advanced direction signs
• Local traffic signs
• Variable message signs
• Other traffic signs
• Lighting
C6 : Construction and • Buildabiliry
Operation • Operation
• Network management

5.19
Road Safety Audit

Appendix 5.4

Stage 4 - Completion of Construction (Prior to opening)

1. The audit team should check that the design drawings have been accurately translated into the
scheme as constructed and that no inherent safety defect has been incorporated into the works.
2. Particular attention should be paid to design changes which have occurred during construction.
CONTENTS ITEMS
Aspects to be Checked • That previously agreed recommendations have been incorporated.
• That there are no previously unidentified problems, as far as
possible (signs obscuring visibility, misleading information
conveyed to motorists / pedestrians etc).
• Check to be carried out in daylight and at night.

Dl : General • Departures from standards

• Drainage
• Climatic conditions
• Services apparatus
• Access
• Skid resistance
• Safety fences
• Adjacent development
• Bridge parapets

D2 : Local Alignment • Visibility

• New/Existing road interface

D3 : Junctions • Visibility
• Road markings
• Mini roundabouts
• Traffic signals

D4 : Non-motorised Road Users • Adjacent land

Provision • Pedestrians
• Cyclists
• Non-motorised vehicles

D5 : Signs and Lighting • Signs

• Variable message signs

D6 : Operation • Maintenance
• Network management

5.20
Trainers Road Safety Manual

Appendix 5.5

Stage 5- Existing Roads

1. The audit team should check the existing road from a road safety perspective and check the
following aspects:
CONTENTS ITEMS
Aspects to be Checked • Safety and operational implications of alignment and junctions,
with particular reference to road users and vehicle types currently
using road.
• Departures from current standards.
• Provision for pedestrians, cyclists and intermediate transport.
• Road safety implication on maintenance.
• Check to be carried out in daylight and at night.
E1 : General • Departures from standards
• Drainage
• Climatic conditions
• Landscaping (maturity)
• Services apparatus
• Access
• Skid resistance
• Safety fences
• Adjacent development
• Bridge parapets

E2 : Local Alignment • Visibility

• New / existing road interface
• Safety Aids on steep hills

E3 : Junctions • Layout
• Visibility
• Road signs markings
• T, X, Y-junctions
• All roundabouts
• Mini-roundabouts
• Traffic signals

E4 : Non-motorised Road Users • Adjacent land

Provision • Pedestrians
• Cyclists
• Non-motorised vehicles

E5 : Signs and Lighting • Lighting

• Signs
• Variable message signs

E6 : Operation • Maintenance
• Network management

5.21
Road Safety Audit

References:

1 Austroads- Australia (1994). Road Safety Audit.

2 Bulpitt, M. (1998). Safety Audit- An Overview, Proceedings Austroads International Road Safety
Audit Forum, Melbourne, May 11-12.

3 Danish Road Directorate (DRD) (1997). Manual of Road Safety Audit, Ministry of Transport,
Denmark.

4 Department of Transport- UK (1990). Standard for Road Safety Audits HD 19/90.

5 Department of Transport- UK (1990). Advice Note for Road Safety Audits HA 42/90.

6 Institution of Highways & Transportation (IHT)- UK (1996). Guidelines for the Safety Audit of
Highways, London.

7 Kamboj Rajeev & Jhansi Rani (2000) “Road Safety Audit: Case Study Delhi”, Paper selected for
presentation in International conference, Budapest, Hungary.

8 Ministry of Road Transport and Highways GOI, TRL, Ross Silcock, CRRI (1998). Manual for
Safety in Road Design - A Guide for Highway Engineers.

9 OECD (1997). Integrated Strategies for Safety and Environment, Road Transport Research.

10 Ross Silcock, TRL, Asian Development Bank (1997). Road Safety Guidelines for Asia Pacific
Region.

11 Sarin S.M. and Mittal Nishi. (2005). “Road Safety Audit? Frequently Asked Questions”, IRC
Volume 33 No.3, Indian Highways.

12 Simons, Paul. (2001). Road Safety Summit- Summary and Australasian Status Report, July.

13 TRL, Ross Silcock, ODA (1991, reprinted 1994). Towards Safer Roads in Developing Countries, A
Guide for Planners & Engineers.

5.22