1. Black Spot Programs in South Australia
Jim Psyridis
Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
Good morning and welcome everyone.
Thank you to you & AITPM for inviting me to outline our South Australian Black Spot programs.
I am JP from DPTI.
In Planning Division, - includes transport policy, planning and infrastructure program development.
My team coordinates the BS Pgm development and administration,
in liaison with the Safety people in DPTI.

2. Overview Context Funding Programs Programs Overview Typical treatments
Objectives/ Timing
Nomination / Eligibility Criteria/ Assessment
Typical treatments
Effectiveness
Outcomes
Today’s focus is on:
An overview of SA’s BS Pgms
How they operate and are run
Types of treatments & improvement types
Benefits
Overview

3. National and State Road Safety Targets
National Road Safety Strategy
South Australia’s Strategic Plan - target T22
By 2020, reduce annual numbers of road fatalities & serious injuries by at least 30% Road Safety
South Australia’s Road Safety Strategy 2020 – Towards Zero Together
By 2020, annual fatalities < 80, annual serious injury < 800
A clear focus
BS pgms works towards tackling these targets
Many of us in this room play a role in helping work towards this outcome in our communities.
National and State Road Safety Targets

4. What is a Black Spot Black spots - road locations with
Large numbers of recorded fatal and injury crashes over recent years or
High potential for crash risk
Often common problems at these sites which can be treated with engineering methods.
Road agencies, councils, public, organisations identify from
Crash records & trends
Concerns
Road safety audits
What is a BS ?
General term used to describe high crash locations or high potential risk locations
Not ‘formal’ list
What is a Black Spot

5. Program Objectives Two Black Spot Programs in SA:
Aligned to Safety Strategies
Safer Roads - infrastructure improvements
Reduce social & economic costs of road trauma by :
treat locations with a casualty (fatal & injury) crash history
treat locations with a potential for serious casualty crashes
Complements other road safety and infrastructure & non-infrastructure programs/projects
This BS program contributes to both National and State strategic objectives
BS fits under “Safer roads & Roadsides” focus
Ie make our roads safer and more forgiving
Black Spot infrastructure improvements are only 1 vital element of the approach to tackling road safety.
Evidence based interventions
Safer Vehicles / Safer People are other elements.
Other strategies are: Education / Encouragement / Enforcement
Program Objectives

6. Two Programs Nation Building Black Spot Australian Government funding
Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Act 2009
program life 2008/09 to 2013/14
administered by Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure & Transport (DoIT)
State Black Spot
South Australian Government funding
Annual ongoing funding
administered by DPTI
2 BS Programs are part of the commitment to reduce crashes and trauma on our roads.
Road crashes are a major cost to Australians every year.
Two Programs

7. Directly target low-cost safety improvements to roads with proven crash history or high-risk locations
Effective crash risk reduction
Save community many times the cost of the minor road improvements.
Supports other programs in a suite of road safety actions
Eg education, enforcement
Targeted treatments at problem locations
Focussed on fatal and injury crashes – not property damage
b/c Alignment to targets & outcomes
By funding measures such as traffic signals and roundabouts at dangerous locations, the program reduces the risk of crashes.
Programs of this sort are very effective, saving the community many times the cost of the relatively minor road improvements that are implemented.
Benefits of programs

8. Benefits of programs Spread across city and rural areas
National, state and local commitment
Funding avenue for local government
(Safer Local Roads sub-program & cycling & level crossings)
Benefits of programs

9. General Process Nation Building StateBlack Spot Black Spot
Reactive Projects
(eligible)
SA Black Spot
Consultative
Panel
DPTI
assessment
Rank by BCR
Panel
recommend
to C/Wth DoIT
Approval by
C/Wth Minister for
Infrastructure &
Transport
Recommendation
to &
Approval by
State Minister for
Road Safety
Proactive Projects
(eligible) If
eligible
for
SBS
Rank by
Risk Reduction Score
RRCR
3 stage process
Within an annual funding and budge cycle
General Process

10. Funding trends SBS SA NBBS C/Wth $8.9m pa ave $7.7mpa ave $6.7m pa ave
$ ? tba
Annual budgets– may fluctuate between years
– due to overspend/underspends across years & funding rules
State BS – boosted by $1m from 2010/11 State budget
In the Budget, the Australian Government announced that it will provide $300 million ($60 million per annum) to extend the Black Spot Program for a further five years from to
1996
2002
2008/09
2013/14
2018/19
Funding trends

11. Timetable Sept 2012 Call for Nominations 15 Nov 2012 Nominations Close
Dec 2012 / Jan 2013
Assess & prioritise nominations
1st March 2013
SA Black Spot Consultative Panel Meeting – recommended Commonwealth NBBS program
March 2013
Submit NBBS program for Australian Govt. approval
April/May 2013
Submit State BS program for SA Govt. approval
Mid (*)
Approved final programs by (*)
(*) Indicative date only
Timetable

12. Nation Building Black Spot
State Black Spot
State Roads
Local Roads
Cycling Projects
Program Funding
Overall Funding Split (*)
Australian Government
100%
$4.7m annual (approx)
State Government
60% of State Black Spot Program
State and Local Government
30% of the State Black Spot Program
10% of the State Black Spot Program
Contributions to Project Cost
Yes – encouraged
N/A
Yes 33% Mandatory from Councils,
Up to 50% optional
Yes 33% Mandatory from Councils
Funding Distribution
 Metro / Rural
50% - 50%
60% - 40%
80% - 20%
Reactive Projects
Proactive Projects
Up to 100%
Up to 30%
Up to 20%
Maximum Project Cost
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$100,000
Minimum Project Cost
$20,000
METRO & RURAL
CRASH BASED & POTENTIAL RISK
Indicative splits - Dependent of available funding for new works, nominations mix, projects meeting eligibility criteria
Are a guide
Varies according to mix of project nominations & relative merits
(*) depends on nomination mix, eligibility met, available budget
Program Criteria

13. Program Criteria Reactive projects
Minimum crash history criteria &
Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) at least 2 ( SBS >=1)
Eligible projects ranked by BCR
Address identified hazards / crash types
3 or more casualty crashes over 5-year period
or 0.2 casualty crash / km / year over 5-year period
Include only those crash types addressed by the proposed treatment
BCR sheet
Proactive projects (not meeting crash history criteria)
supported by Road Safety Audit Report
Treatment must address safety audit issues
Ranked by Risk Reduction Cost Ratio (RRCR)
Compares safety risk level both before & after treatment
Road Safety Risk Manager Software
REACTIVE
Eligible projects ranked by BCR (Benefit-Cost-Ratio )
Simple consistent method for measuring the value for money
ie $ crash reduction benefits compared to construction $ costs
Completeness & accuracy
Meet eligibility criteria.
Address identified hazards / crash types
PROACTIVE
Formal Road Safety Audit (RSA) report
Approach used when crash criteria unable to be met
Treatment must address safety audit issues
Ranked by Risk Reduction Cost Ratio (RRCR)
Use Road Safety Risk Manager software
also used in other states
Assess relative risk benefit of project
Compares safety risk level both before & after treatment
Program Criteria

14. Nominations for funding
Annual program based on nominations received
Nominations may address some crash concerns and road user needs
Encourage Safe Systems philosophy for nominations:
Different users and crash types, more forgiving environments, ongoing whole of life costs & benefits
Scope up before nominations received
Is balance between
Level of site safety improvement - scope - cost effectiveness - eligibility criteria – benefits
Nominations from parties are encouraged
Still need to meet criteria
We assist pre-nomination queries –
aim to ensure well-scoped & well-costed projects before nominations submitted.
project
We work with nominees if need to seek clarification during assessments where needed.
Eligible costs - Road works and traffic control devices including traffic signals
Work on adjacent road environment
Ineligible works - Purchase of road building plant and equipment
Purchase of law enforcing equipment such as speed and red light cameras
Operating and maintaining activities
Nominations for funding

15. Typical Treatments - Rural
Roadside protective barrier
Sturt Hwy East of Waikerie
Shoulder sealing
Naracoorte-Konetta
Typical Treatments - Rural

16. Shoulder sealing & Safety barrier
Mt Pleasant – Sedan
Mt Pleasant – Sedan – Shoulder sealing & Safety barrier – NBESP
$ 210,000
Reduce run-off road crashes & reduce severity of such crashes
Typical of rural road projects
Shoulder material to achieve shoulder pavement strength and correct slope
Then spray seal bitumen and stone
W-beam safety barrier installed
Typical Treatments - Rural

17. Typical Treatments - Urban
Traffic Signal/Junction Upgrades – eg mast arms, lanterns, lane mods
Typical of urban traffic signal treatments – often low cost, high benefit
Costs dependent on related civil works – eg turn lane extensions, underground service relocations etc
Typical Treatments - Urban

18. Typical Treatments - Urban
Roundabouts
19th St, Gawler
Median closures/traffic mgt schemes
Sudholz Rd/Palmerston St
Typical Treatments - Urban

19. Typical Treatments – Urban/Rural
Urban Intersection
Rural Intersection
Typical Treatments – Urban/Rural

20. Crash based nominations
Funding priority – by BCR
BCR ranking
Reduction in crash costs / treatment cost
BCR Calculation tool
MS excel based – accessible, simple to use, supporting info
BCR – safety based – relative benefit of a project
Assists ranking & priority for funding consideration
The benefit‑cost ratio (BCR) is the ratio of the expected present value of project benefits to the expected present value of project costs.
Assessment –
Crash based nominations

21. Crash based nomination
Crash based projects - Used for Reactive projects
Example of calculation worksheet for Benefit Cost Ratio Analysis
Aim = simple & consistent approach
Simple and consistent method to compare on equal basis
Purpose – To check eligibility & prioritise
Use last 5 years of crash data - to determine the average number of crashes or crash rate per annum.
Only those crash types addressed by the proposed treatment should be included in the analysis.
Assessment –
Crash based nomination

22. Crash based nominations
Crash Reduction Factors & Crash Costs
Use Nation Building Program factors & costs
Crash reduction factors % per crash type
Adopted for State BS
Refer to other/ interstate crash reduction factors if not available
Costs by Metro/Rural/Crash type
Crash Costs (by type) used – amalgam of fatal/injury costs
Why
National basis
Consistent & simple - across nominations & assessment
Fair ranking
Assessment –
Crash based nominations

23. Proactive nominations
Funding priority for non-crash based nominations
By RRCR ranking (Risk Reduction Cost Score)
Supported by relevant Road Safety audit
Treatment must address safety audit issues
ARRB Road Safety Risk Manager software
RRCR – compares safety risk level before & after treatment
MS excel based – accessible, simple to use, supporting info
Assessment factors include:
Exposure Traffic Volume
Road Section Type Eg. Intersections, roundabout, divided/undivided roads
Relative Risk ie relative safety of hazard or proposed treatment
Influencing factors Other site issues/ conditions that influence risk (eg weather, pavement condition, etc)
Relative Severity assuming a crash occurs - how severe will it be
Risk Reduction = Risk Score (before) – Risk Score (after)
Risk Reduction Cost Ratio = Discounted Risk Reduction
Discounted Costs
Assessment –
Proactive nominations

24. Road Safety Risk Manager
Road Safety Risk Manager ARRB
Used for relative priority for Proactive nominations
a consistent & logical approach to assessing potential projects
Is a means to work out relative risk improvement of a nomination (before treatment & after treatment)
•Allows the comparison of some 60 different safety deficiencies on an equal basis
Enables assessment of different road risk factors – eg poor sight distance, proximity of roadside hazards, likely crash types etc)
Provides a Road Safety Risk Crash Reduction (RSCR) Score
This score is then used to compare & rank relative merits of nominations

26. Delivery Delivery within timeframe & cost Funding deed with Councils
Regular Status reporting required
All variations to scope or cost need to be approved.
Claims to be supported with evidence
DPTI monthly claim & progress report with NBBS
Recognition & Signs
Completion reports to close out project & funding
Delivery

27. BITRE Evaluation of (C/Wth)Black Spot programs1996-2003 (May 2012)
BITRE Evaluation of (C/Wth)Black Spot programs (May 2012) ** identifies
Australia-wide program estimated to reduce crashes in total at treated sites
fatal and casualty by 30%
reported PDO by 26%.
Most effective urban treatments
Roundabouts - casualty crashes reduced by over 70% & PDO crashes 50%.
New signals during the day and altering the traffic flow direction – over 50% reduction
Crash reduction factors –mostly 20% to 50% range - for treatment types with statistically significant effects
No treatment types systematically increased crashes.
1.7 crashes = average number of reported crashes avoided per project .
BITRE = Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport & Regional Economics
Commonwealth DoIT
This Report is very wide ranging and comprehensive
Latest update includes 2005 data
Acknowledge old project information
But is robust in analysis & Australia wide program focus.
By extrapolation, projects funded in State Black Spot programs may return slightly lower benefits due to lower BCR’s compared to national funded projects.
Internal DPTI reviews
Effectiveness

28. Outcomes Reduce crash risk & trauma in our communities
Black Spot Programs - effective programs - sound safety outcomes
Reduce crash risk & trauma in our communities
Safer and more forgiving road environments
Good value for money.
Black Spot programs continue as key element in road safety strategy
Outcomes

29. Other safety initiatives (eg enforcement, education) & variables may influence outcomes
Acknowledge nominee effort in identifying, investigating and submitting their nominations
Outcomes

30. Conclusion For more information, SA Government websiteO
Australian Government Black Spot website
Contact DPTI – Road Asset Policy and Programs
Jim Psyridis – ph
Eugene Rogalewicz – ph
Conclusion

31. Thank you
Thank you
Any questions ?