1. Ruben Hovanesian June 27, 2012

2.  Public Agencies?  Private Agencies? 2

3.  Road Safety Assessments  What  How  When  Who  Why  Example 3

4. 4

5.  Road Safety Assessment (RSA)  Road Safety Audit…but who likes an “audit”?? 5

6.  Qualitative safety assessment of a roadway  The Why and the How  Not just What, When, and Where 6

7.  Identifies current and potential road safety issues  Identifies opportunities for improvements in safety for all road users 7

8.  Reduce crash risk from road elements 8

9.  What roadway elements may present a safety concern?  To what extent  To which road users  Under what circumstances 9

10.  What opportunities exist to eliminate or mitigate identified safety concerns? 10

11. 11

12. 1 Start-up meeting & information exchange 2 Problem identification & site visit 3 Risk analysis & countermeasure identification 4 Prepare RSA summary presentation 5 RSA summary presentation 6 Final report development 7 Response letter 12

13.  Introductions  Chain of command  Expectations  Knowledge exchange  Documents and previous studies 13

14.  Desk study  Identify possible trends  Do not attempt to identify solutions  Team visit to site  Time determined by crash statistics  Drive (walk) the site 14

15.  Workshop setting  Crash reports reviewed along with site visit notes  Hazard identification  Crash Risk 15

16. Crash Risk = f (E, P, C) Exposure How many road users are exposed to the specific risk being assessed Probability The likelihood of a crash occurring Consequence The severity of a crash once it happens FrequencySeverity 16

17. ≥4 crashes a year Frequent 1 to 3 crashes a year Occasional 1 crash every 4 years Infrequent <1 crash every 4 years Rare 17

18. K Involve high speeds or heavy vehicles, pedestrians, or bicycles Severe A Involve medium to high speed, head-on, crossing, or off-road crashes High B Involve medium to low speeds, left-turn and right-turn crashes Medium C or PDO Involve low to medium speeds; rear-end or sideswipe crashes Low 18

19. AMinimalDSignificant BLowEHigh CModerateFExtreme Risk Assessment Scale RISK CATEGORY Expected Severity LowMediumHighSevere Expected Crash Frequency Frequent CDEF Occasional BCDE Infrequent ABCD Rare AABC 19

20.  Crash statistics and analysis  Site visit observations 20

21.  Presented to owner/designer  No mandate to open to public  Feedback 21

22. Extra signage, not appropriate for the situation Remove unnecessary chevron FrequencySeverityRisk Rating RareLowMinimal A $ $

23.  Made without the influence of owner/designer  Or politics  Submitted to owner/designer 23

24.  Response from owner/designer  Notes reasons for situations  Budget  Crew  Community 24

25. 25

26. Pre-constructionTo identify potential problems During ConstructionTo perform work-zone assessments Post-constructionTo identify current crash hazards 26 WeatherSimilar situation as the noteworthy crashes or clusters TimeDuring the same times as the most significant crashes

27.  Does not necessarily need “X” amount of crashes at “Y” severity 27

28. 28

29. 29  3 to 5 person RSA team  Interdisciplinary ▪ Traffic operations ▪ Geometric design ▪ Enforcement ▪ Road safety  Additional specialty skills are needed

30. 30  Owner of roadway  Design team

31. 31

32. Traditional Safety Review (SR)Road Safety Assessment (RSA) Reactive onlyProactive and reactive In –house team familiar with projectInterdisciplinary and independent team of law enforcement, specialists, and engineers unfamiliar with the project Standards complianceInteraction between roadway elements and users Desk study onlySite visit and observation required 32

33.  Politically good  Good Engineering practice  Solves the problem, before it’s a problem 33

34.  Brings a range of experience and background  Lack of familiarity  Provides impartial judgment  Owner/designer complacency 34

35.  How users act and respond  Roadway elements and users  Not just compliance 35

36. 36  Crash locations  No obvious pattern  Serious roll over and road departure crashes  Drinking not a problem  Site visit  Poor maintenance of road sides and signage  Low visibility  Crash reports  Proximity of drivers’ residence

37. 37