tackling high-risk regional roads - rac foundation · i tackling high-risk regional roads –...

Mobility • Safety • Economy • Environment

ATION

FOU

ND

Tackling High-Risk Regional Roads Implementation Guidelines

Dr Suzy Charman Road Safety FoundationOctober 2017

The Royal Automobile Club Foundation for Motoring Ltd is a transport policy and research

organisation which explores the economic, mobility, safety and environmental issues

relating to roads and their users. The Foundation publishes independent and authoritative

research with which it promotes informed debate and advocates policy in the interest of the

responsible motorist.

RAC Foundation

89–91 Pall Mall

London

SW1Y 5HS

Tel no: 020 7747 3445

www.racfoundation.org

Registered Charity No. 1002705

October 2017 © Copyright Royal Automobile Club Foundation for Motoring Ltd


Dr Suzy Charman Road Safety FoundationOctober 2017


ATION

FOU

ND

Tackling High-Risk Regional Roads Implementation Guidelines

ATION

FOU

ND

i Tackling High-Risk Regional Roads – Implementation Guidelines iiwww.racfoundation.org

About these Guidelines

About the Road Safety Foundation

These guidelines have been commissioned by the RAC Foundation and are part-funded

by the Department for Transport (DfT). The guidelines are written by Dr Suzy Charman,

Research Director of the Road Safety Foundation and are published by the RAC Foundation.

The Road Safety Foundation is a UK charity advocating road casualty

reduction through simultaneous action on all three components of the safe

road system: roads, vehicles and behaviour. The charity has enabled work

across each of these components and published several reports which

have provided the basis of new legislation, government policy or practice.

For the last decade, the charity has focused on developing the Safe Systems approach,

and in particular leading the establishment of the European Road Assessment Programme

(EuroRAP) in the UK and, through EuroRAP, the global UK-based charity, iRAP (the

International Road Assessment Programme).

Since the inception of EuroRAP in 1999, the Foundation has been the UK member

responsible for managing the programme in the UK (and, more recently, Ireland), ensuring

that the UK provides a global model of what can be achieved.

The Foundation plays a pivotal role in raising awareness and understanding of the

importance of road infrastructure at all levels, through:

• annual publication of EuroRAP Risk Mapping and Performance Tracking in a form

which can be understood by the general public, policymakers and professionals

alike;

• supporting use of the iRAP and EuroRAP protocols at an operational level by

road authorities, in order to support engineers in improving the safety of the road

infrastructure for which they are responsible; and

• proposing the strategies and goals that the government should set in order to

prevent tens of thousands of fatalities and disabling injuries.

The Road Safety Foundation was a founder member of the FIA Foundation (established

as an independent UK registered charity in 2001 by the Fédération Internationale de

l'Automobile, FIA) and frequently works with FIA members and other organisations both

in Britain and abroad, including the RAC Foundation, the AA, IAM RoadSmart, RoadSafe,

i Tackling High-Risk Regional Roads – Implementation Guidelines iiwww.racfoundation.org

PACTS (The Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety) and professional bodies

such as ADEPT (the Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning and

Transport).

The formal objectives of the charity, which was founded in the 1980s, are to:

• carry out, or procure, research into all factors affecting the safe use of public roads;

• promote and encourage the safe use of public roads by all classes of road users

through the circulation of advice, information and knowledge gained from research;

and

• conceive, develop and implement programmes and courses of action designed

to improve road safety, which are to include the undertaking of any projects or

programmes intended to educate young children or others in the safe use of

public roads.

The library of the Road Safety Foundation’s published work is at

www.roadsafetyfoundation.org

http://www.roadsafetyfoundation.org

iii Tackling High-Risk Regional Roads – Implementation Guidelines ivwww.racfoundation.org

About the Author

Disclaimer

Acknowledgements

Dr Suzy Charman is the Road Safety Foundation’s Research Director. She has international

expertise in road safety management, particularly in the prioritisation of road safety

engineering interventions.

Any errors or omissions are the author’s sole responsibility. The report content reflects the

views of the author and not necessarily those of the RAC Foundation, the Department for

Transport or supporters of the Road Safety Foundation.

The Road Safety Foundation (RSF) is grateful for the financial support of the RAC

Foundation and Department for Transport (DfT). The RSF would like to thank the pathfinder

group of local authorities for their enthusiasm and participation.

The initial pathfinder project was led by Luke Rogers and Alaster Barlow, with later support

from James Bradford, Dr Suzy Charman, John Barrell and Tim Sterling.

iii Tackling High-Risk Regional Roads – Implementation Guidelines ivwww.racfoundation.org

ContentsForeword ............................................................................................................................. vi

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ vii

Background ......................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Risk Mapping and Performance Tracking ....................................................................... 1

1.2 Star Rating and Safer Roads Investment Plans .............................................................. 3

The Process ........................................................................................................................ 7

2.1 Identifying priority sections ............................................................................................. 8

2.2 Survey, coding and supporting data .............................................................................. 9

2.3 Preliminary generation of a Safer Roads Investment Plan ............................................. 13

2.4 Development of a User-Defined Investment Plan.......................................................... 13

2.5 Monitoring and evaluation ............................................................................................ 16

Case Studies ..................................................................................................................... 17

3.1 A1303 – Cambridgeshire ............................................................................................. 18

3.2 A285 – West Sussex ................................................................................................... 23

Appendix A: Updating the Core Data File ........................................................................... 27

1

2

3

v Tackling High-Risk Regional Roads – Implementation Guidelines viwww.racfoundation.org

Figures listFigure 1.1: Excerpt of 2016 Great Britain Risk Map ............................................................. 2

Figure 1.2: Example of a risk worm ...................................................................................... 4

Figure 1.3: Example of a Safer Roads Investment Plan ........................................................ 5

Figure 1.4: Map showing the location of recommendation for shoulder rumble strips ........... 6

Figure 2.1: Overview of process ........................................................................................... 8

Figure 2.2: ViDA screen where casualty percentage distribution can be entered ................ 11

Figure 2.3: ViDA screen that allows tailoring of economic appraisal values ......................... 12

Figure 2.4: ViDA screen that allows tailoring of countermeasure costs ............................... 13

Figure 2.5: Countermeasure download file ......................................................................... 14

Figure 2.6: Spreadsheet for road authorities to record intended countermeasure

plans for ViDA modelling .................................................................................................... 15

Figure 3.1: A1303 Star Rating map (vehicle occupant) ....................................................... 19

Figure 3.2: Snapshot of A1303 Star Ratings by road user group ........................................ 19

Figure 3.3: A285 Star Rating map (vehicle occupant) ......................................................... 24

Figure 3.4: Snapshot of A285 Star Ratings by road user group .......................................... 25

Figure A.1: Selecting a project in ViDA ............................................................................... 27

Figure A.2: Download screen in ViDA ................................................................................. 28

Figure A.3: Editing the Core Data spreadsheet in ViDA ...................................................... 29

Tables listTable 3.1: Case study 1 – A1303 in Cambridgeshire: key facts .......................................... 18

Table 3.2: UDIP as submitted for A1303 ............................................................................ 21

Table 3.3: Case study 2 – A285 in West Sussex: key facts ................................................ 23

Table 3.4: Safer Roads Investment Plan as submitted for A285 ......................................... 25

v Tackling High-Risk Regional Roads – Implementation Guidelines viwww.racfoundation.org

ForewordEvery year, the Road Safety Foundation publishes risk maps showing the rates of death

and serious injury on Britain’s roads. That analysis also tracks how risk has changed across

thousands of road sections in two consecutive three-year data periods. Over that six-year

period, more than 10,000 people are killed on our roads, yet deaths on rail and in the air

during the same period can be as low as zero.

The government’s road safety strategy has adopted the systematic so-called ‘Safe Systems’

approach to risk. Highways England is leading the way in seeking to move levels of death

and trauma towards zero on its network by 2040.

The rail and aviation industries, like other sectors from mining to medicine, take proactive

steps to manage known risks. The safety of road workers is managed in the same way.

Risks are eliminated before people are killed or hurt. We do not wait.

The contrast between the risks the public face on the roads and elsewhere in their daily lives

is stark. Annual deaths in road crashes, for example, are more than ten times greater in the

same period than for all work place accident deaths combined.

I am genuinely grateful to the RAC Foundation for their work and support in enabling local

authorities to apply the new proactive approach to the local road networks, which is where

the vast majority of road deaths take place.

I would like to thank the pathfinding local authorities who first applied this innovative

approach, in particular for their willingness to share what they have learnt with others. My

thanks to the Department for Transport for enabling the publication of the learning in these

guidelines on how to tackle high-risk regional roads.

Lord Whitty

Chairman, Road Safety Foundation

Part of our mission here at the RAC Foundation is to seek out the highest standards in

motoring policy and practice, and to ensure that these are widely disseminated. Nowhere

is this more important than in the field of road safety, when money for making road

improvements is tight and so the need to get best value from every penny is imperative.

That is why we were keen to seize the opportunity to work with the Road Safety Foundation

and the Department for Transport to sponsor the application of the risk-mapping and

treatment-planning approach to the highest-risk roads as identified by EuroRAP, and to

sponsor the production of these guidelines, which we hope will be taken up more widely by

all those charged with ensuring that our roads are safe to use.

Steve Gooding

Director, RAC Foundation

vii Tackling High-Risk Regional Roads – Implementation Guidelines viiiwww.racfoundation.org

Executive SummaryRoad traffic crashes claimed the lives of 1,732 people in Great Britain in 2015, and a further

22,137 were reported as being seriously injured1. Although we have witnessed a steady

decline in road traffic casualties in recent years, this is still a large number, and represents a

significant burden on the economy, not to mention the unimaginable pain, grief and suffering

caused for the victims and their families.

Countries across the world are now adopting a Safe Systems approach, which means that

they no longer simply blame road users for crashes, but instead are seeking to design a

system that will protect the road user from death or serious injury when crashes occur. This

is a fundamental change in philosophy, which recognises that humans are, by their very

nature, frail and error prone, and that we should ensure that vehicles and roads are designed

such that when crashes occur, the resulting crash forces can be tolerated.

Central to the concept of Safe Systems is the notion of shared responsibility. There are

actions to be taken by a wide variety of public and private entities in order to produce

results, working across various disciplines to ensure that a robust system is put in place.

One key discipline is road safety engineering, where road authorities seek to provide roads

that are safe and fit for use. There are a variety of road safety management tools and

methods that can be adopted to determine priorities for improving the safety of roads,

including proven and established processes such as Road Safety Audits (for new roads and

schemes) and Accident Investigation and Prevention (AIP) (for existing roads).

When AIP is undertaken, historical data is analysed to identify crash cluster sites where

there is a clear deficit in road safety and remedial treatment can be applied. As the number

of crashes becomes sparse across the road network, it can be beneficial to also bring into

play proactive methods that seek to identify and manage risks which are real, but which

nevertheless may not yet have resulted in crashes. The approach outlined in these guidelines

is not intended to replace traditional AIP, but to provide a complementary approach for use

alongside it.

In the Autumn of 2016, the RSF embarked on a project to inspect, Star-Rate and generate

Safer Roads Investment Plans (SRIPs) for 11 high-risk A-road sections in England. Shortly

after this project commenced, DfT announced the establishment of a ‘Safer Roads Fund’

of £175 million for the top 50 high-risk local A-road sections in England as identified in the

RSF analysis of 2012–14 crash data. The RSF has provided assistance to the authorities

responsible for the original 11 high-risk sections, and is presently supporting authorities in

generating their applications to the fund for the next 39 high-risk sections.

1 Reported road casualties in Great Britain: main results 2015. DfT June 2016 Statistical Release.

vii Tackling High-Risk Regional Roads – Implementation Guidelines viiiwww.racfoundation.org

These guidelines have been written to help road authorities manage road crash risk on busy

regional roads. This document provides a step-by-step guide on how to use Risk Mapping

and Star Rating to identify high-risk roads and then develop treatment plans that will reduce

their risk.

The first section provides some background information on Risk Mapping, Performance

Tracking, Star Rating and SRIPs. This is followed by a step-by-step overview of how each of

these approaches can be applied to manage risk on busy regional roads. In the final section, two

case studies are presented to illustrate the process, and the outcome of using this approach.

1 Tackling High-Risk Regional Roads – Implementation Guidelines 2www.racfoundation.org

This section provides background information about the approach, in particular

Risk Mapping, Performance Tracking, Star Rating and the development of

Safer Roads Investment Plans (SRIPs).

Risk Mapping and Performance Tracking

1.1.1 Risk Mapping

Risk maps provide an objective view of where fatal and serious crashes have

occurred on a road network. Such maps can provide a visual representation of

various measures, including:

• crash density (crashes per kilometre – commonly called ‘collective

risk’ – note that this is influenced by how busy the road is); and

• crash risk (fatal and serious crashes per billion vehicle-kilometres

driven – ‘individual risk – which allows for how busy the road is to give

more of an idea of how inherently un-safe the road is’).

For crash density or crash risk maps, data from at least three consecutive

years is used in order to ensure that the results are robust. Road sections are

allocated into colour-coded categories from high-density (or high-risk), to low-

density (or low-risk).

The EuroRAP maps most often used show individual risk, and are colour-

coded into five categories as shown in Figure 1.1.

1.1

1. Background


Figure 1.1: Excerpt of 2016 Great Britain Risk Map

Source: Road Safety Foundation

M20

M25M25

M40

M6

M11

M57

M62

M8

A1(M)

M53

M1

M25

M77

M40

M6

M62

M25

M2M3

M27

M4M4

M5

M50

M5

M4

M1 M11

M42

M6

M1M54

M56

M6

M65

M55

M6

M6

M60M62 M18

M1

A1(M)

A74(M)

M90

M90

M9

M9

M3

M6

M73

M1

A1(M)

M66

M40

M61

M1

M56

A1(M)

M4

A3(M)

A74(M)

M4

M23

M18

M74

M62

M5

M20

M58

M8

A1(M)

M1

M6

M60

M1

M5

M25

M4

M180

M56

M6 Toll

M69

M49 M4

M61

M62

M32

M26

M4

M62

M65

M42

A631A631

A683

A481

A6088

A684

A18A537

A819

A684386A

A6

86

A97

A833

A3072

A4215

A718

A621

A529

A533A533

A480

A820

A54

A86

A86

A530

A 681

A675

A581

A5004

A407

5

A255

A646A646

A607

0

A625

A821

A817

A6108

A371

A264

A588

A107

7

A451

A835

A940

A70

A716

A702

A508

7

A4120

A488

A855

A706

A490

A58

A824

A372

A894

A3030

A7

01

A591

A610

8

A645

A482

A603

3

A6033

A161

A6105

A372

A338

A422

A682

A533

A634A634

A425

A99

A23 3

A61

A909A909

A77

A712

A689

A855

A891

A701

A7 2

A6105

A482

A82

A62

A9

9

A827

A57

A890

A755

A84

A40

A54

A683

A161

A3123

A5132

A3400

A5086

A427

A4110

A438

A9 39

A710

A 6 4 4

A534

A1084

A488

A8

22

A932A848

A1062

A173

A286

A262

A559

A113

A890

A875

A675

A712

A72

A285

A32

A488

A5199

A948

A54

A6

A92 8

A689

A616

A827

A714

A478

A1101

A259

A930

A1167

A1039

A528

A4111

A6075

A53

A534

A18

A816

A166

A5

A21

A631A1101

A82

A628

A44

A59

A40

A685

A45

A110

4

A510

5

A470

A470

A477

A43

A44

A403

A68

A685

A19A570

A62 3

A483

A487

A251

A866

A182

A6

90

A5074

A286

A283 A268

A265

A168

A3066

A6

A63 5

A920

A1 0 31A631

A638 A52

A53 1

A539

A612

1

A528

A1101

A510

A134

A4104

A40

A935

A9 4

A94

A832

A838

A81

A814

A905

A714

A489

A39

A131

A570

A458

A629

A614

A11 73

A58

A353

A268

A630

A157

A616

A1092

A95

A375

A803

A458

A525

A134

A60

A410

9

A30

A5

93

A3 0A259

A50

A4 1 7

A128

A39

A106

5

A3 8 6

A272

A65

A169

A592

A1075

A8 1

A702

A470

A407

6

A41

A692

A165A59

A487

A51

A30

A93

A1086

A258

A30

A 6 32

A137

A490

A811

A361

A46

A52

A1071

A371

A371A371

A388

A923

A713

A85

A350

A59

A658

A619

A6

A635

A619

A274

A659

A49

A3 0

A838

A815

A4046

A4139 A4107

A134

A68

A46

A9

3

A361

A409

5

A355

A926

A917

A859

A815

A388

A130

A438

A16

A267

A267

A676

A636

A4095

A472

A343

A6112

A911

A6094

A762

A4080

A428

A605

A41

A470

A815

A32

A275

A359

A659

A1017A3

61

A474

A39

A438

A639

A3055

A60

A632

A6121

A1060A4136

A414

A933

A858

A923

A165

A6A65

A51 4

A487

A82

A85

A65

A6

A39

A271

A167A

167

A356

A1 8

A615

A345

A713

A357

A520

A483

A470

A352

A1123

A822

A71

A478

A345

A593A36

7

A29

A3054

A525

A426 A14 5

A839

A924

A94

A541

A612

A645

A614

A151

A1123

A814

A428

A83

A61

A470

A534

A540

A584

A4117

A466

A129

A941

A93A93

A3079

A515

A44

A4103A28

A165

A6068

A360

A684

A259

A42 2

A226

A340

A747

A495

A859

A10

A49

A61

A6

A359

A272

A29

A638

A1122

A128

A476

A59

A1041

A342

A698

A514

7

A577

A480

A46

A916

A93

A374

A926

A711

A5

9

A483

A85

A43

A828

A259

A59

A585

A515

A2 5

A415

A329

A307

5

A984

A5

48

A6003

A631

A858

A834

A3

9

A162

A522

A93

A839

A4054

A417

A82

A259

A1079

A638

A44

A26

A356

A1124

A20

A838

A406

9

A536

A49

A515

A83

A229

A171

A59

A 1071

A32

A1034

A361

A361

A709

A548

A417

A61

A5

A367

A149

A6006

A4155

A198

A912

A711

A423 3

A361

A51

A596

A60

A46 4

A144

A426

A1081

A980

A611

2

A726

A85

A16 7

A371

A29

A616

A489

A913

A6116

A427

A91

A49

A149

A81

A5

A699

A684

A1077

A4110

A3400

A1198

A10

A286

A390

A611

A272

A456

A429

A610

A629

A68

A77

A697

A697

A83

A15

A985

A44

A133

A259

A41

A696

A5

A489A470

A16

A494

A4

83

A52

A354

A6

A487

A495

A614

A64

A418

A470

A76

A131

A470A377

A16

A64

A350

A458

A48

A388

A85

A19

A595

A82

A487

A518

A595

A140

A83

A61

A479

A47 0

A28

A57

A518

A41

A483

A617

A49

A6 5

A454

A6

A511

A 1 71

A159

A688

A170

A4

65

A1068

A458

A134

A4

A520

A8 7

A71

A56

A272

A8 2

A5151

A5026

A1307

A389

A3059

A3071

A12 0

A63

A1 6

A142

A6 6 A19

A168

A64

A56

A50

A11

A45

A12

A299

A40A40

A10

A3

1

A303

A23

A19

A453

A477

A442

A835

A9

A39

A143

A508

A30

A92

A142

A737

A78

A78

A428

A449

A46

A414

A420

A433 A429

A36

A350

A35

A6

A91

A77

A59

A483

A156

A15

A494

A413

A53 9

A3

8

A548

A498

A484

A48

A6

94

A174

A290

A246

A30

A337

A149

A1101

A1067

A603

A413A436

A600

A4146

A4135

A420

A4 A32 1

A97

A6093

A98

A699

A3058

A3072

A3052

A390

A836

A85 0

A836

A863

A914A82 3

A836

A721

A73

A543

A525

A497 A497

A405

9

A4059

A303

A9

A507

A8

A174

A580

A38

A12

A1

A465

A5

A505A44

A24

A283

A914

A600

A257

A152

A426

0

A404

A955

A3

94

A63

A47

A446

A414

A49

A9

A38

A1

A343

A35

A626

A15 1

A4074

A944

A92

A1 4 6

A3072

A857

A915

A399

A385

A16

A1122

A1066

A22

A90

A342

A339

A378

A155

A4304

A4112

A4189

A310

2

A698

A98

A837

A594

A4067

A435A435

A43

A47

A9

A4042

A832

A404

A944

A5104

A4063

A606

A689

A689

A444

A24

A92

A47

A9

A26

A689

A638A5199

A1094

A957

A915

A379

A83 6

A486

A485

A661

A1

A2 1

A48

A52

A106

5

A449

A31

A614

416A

A338

A861

A287

82A

A527

A436

1

A228

A1107

A836

A846

A496

A477

A399

A3072

A69

A46A24

A38

A413

A6 9 1

A30

A1088

A3090

A425

A338

A381

A31 21

A5025

A5104

A331

A24

A20

A47

A509

A95

A637

A57A47 0

A92

A366

A512

A465

A4129

A73

A499

A38

A3

A4

A338

A1

A66

A63

A487

A67

A25

A351

A58

A107

3

A920

A3052

A939

A7 1

A841

A556

A12

A12

A8

A17

A702

A5

A595

A629

A470

A496

A857

062A

A157

A365

A837

A861

A760

A721

A4085

A499

A475 A5

A51

01A

A701

A10

A346

A38

A22

A167

A442

A862

3311A

A447

A1120

A48

A4

A846

A591

A1

A702

A37

A5

A4

A287

A358

A1141

A849

A4048

A493

A473

A382

A390

A508

A14

A4042

A9

A52A46

A361

A92

A91

A91

A421

A429

A30

A338

A1

A523

A28

A607

A327

A851

A358

A164

A33

A303

A40

A9

A134

A36

A494

A51

A695

A607

6

A281

A20

A259

A3400

A415

A432

A393

A719

A525

A485

A617

A1

A50

A45

A14

A14

A3 0

A606

A39

A3

8

A3 1

A26

A44

A1035

A75

A631

A57

A57

A18

A6 8 9

A281

A217

A6

A586

79A

A513

A5

A417

A92

A389

A823

A735

A723

A468

A38

A2

A249

A9

A52

A148

A607

A49

A44A489

A37A37

A75

A614

A61

A832

A1033

A326

A336

A50

A153

A14 3

A422

A227

A199

A9

A736

A429

A4 3

A46

A13

A47

A39

A26

A66

A592

A950

A4113

A443

A442

1

A416

A3

61

A921

A896

A484

A484

A6

1

A3 9

A53

A354

A35

A96

A96

A15

A228

A305

7

A163

A18

A153

A5183

A417

A952

A952

A4212

A396

A1

A414

A406

A303

A27A27

A9 6

A78

A17

A703

A40

A46

A39

A273

A51

A435

A419A97

A896

A761

A736

A73

A379

A30

A507

A690

A180

944A

A23

A34

A1

A90

A1079

A629

A89

A846

A513A60

3

A436

A38

214A

A199

A861

A467

A475

A513

A127

A27

A465

A442

A11

A361

A35

A57

A467

A8

A4066

A370

A947

A380A3

81

A52

A189

A30

A148

A6

A37

A75

A934

A4086

A6071

A362

A361

A950

A370

A837

A836

A7 2

A3083

A606

A87

A6

A40

A339

A68

A595

A56

A530

A614

A483

A505

A844

A406 1

A517

A4304

534A

A947

A832

A907

A71

A746

A14

A1 9

A422

A441A441

A90

A64

A40

A41

A40

A6 9

A579

A15

A981

A1500

A424

A698

A379

A944

A904

A66

A4

A38

A14

A3

A3

A27

A428

A69

A16

A34

A30

A272

A4

A8 3 2

A67A67

A368

A360

A961

A60

A369

A872

A89

A606

A10

A16

A40

A39

A12

A413

A96

A849

A325

A153

A51 9

A422

A975A920

A6089

A3124

A939

A4118

A396

A373

A977

A1198

A580

A50A2

17

A264

A361

A701

A628

A422

A177

A30 A27

A2 8 3

A443

A363

A98

A83 2

A719

A65

A54

A106

5

A1064

A466

A44

A25

A197

A392

A30

A256

A20

A24 9

A21

A322A3

A3

A36

A31

A36

A338

A40

A438

A143

A14

A120

A47

A146

A5

A449

A38

A5A5

A49

A19

A75A75

A78

A7

A7

A7

A90

A509

A69

A34

A12

A127

A9

0

A303

A52

A39

A6

A442

A140

A120A41

A420

A354

A172

A6

28

A46

A882

A87

A14 1

A449

A591

A158

A19

A4010

A693

A46

A 120

A47

A6135

A505

A55

A9

A448

A1

41

A40

A22

A40

A72 6

A394

A52

A830

A2070

A15

A35

A5

A10

A6A151

A63

A2

A15

A3 8

A1

A17

A49

A45

A5

A590

A590

A40

A27

A9

A82

A303

A523

A17

A38 0

A143

A27

A419

A140

A423

A12

A82

A47

A4

7

A41

A66

A68

A5 2

A607

A1

A605

A9

A120A602

A11

A82

A9

A63

A71

A429

A68

A68

A90

A361

A158

A46A4

21

A2

A3

A47

A7

7

A47

A31

A456

A5 1

A444

A418

A5 3

A47

A428

A941

A70

A272

A386

A537

A4

6

A5025

A42

A45

A417

A4173A4173

A34

A986A5084

A897

A38

A460

A719

A483

A938

A164

A3078

A38

A8 0A80

A35 8

A3

4

A30

A66

A525

A46

A886

A884

A1121

A6 6

A19

A5

A86 5

A725

A960

A34

A55

A949

A873

A965

A847

A1

A14

A967

A72 0

384A

A1

A449

A964

A3

87

A966

A34

A30

A424

A831

A54 4

A941

A95

A7 2

A1

A4104

A14

A30

A865

A867

A395

A14

A1

A55

A889

A4

2

A3

8

A887

A470

A31

A11

A5

A616

A34

A8

A50

A55

A40

A55

A48

A5

A1

A1

A888

A826

A70

A708

A5091

A686

A937

A5012

A542

A41

A809

A565

A252

St Austell

PaigntonTorquay

Weymouth

Crawley

RochesterDartfordMargate

MaidstoneSevenoaks

Basildon

Fareham

Maidenhead

Guildford

WokingDorking

BracknellNewbury

Petersfield

WinchesterSalisbury

Ringwood

Warminster

Bridgend

Bridport

Bideford

Launceston

Milford Haven

Haverfordwest

BuckinghamBanbury

Cheltenham

Rugby

Watford

Milton Keynes

St Albans Harlow

KetteringThetford Diss

Bury StEdmunds

Stamford

Stafford

Leek

Hinckley

Newport

Wrexham

ChesterBangor

Dolgellau

Holyhead

Preston

Clitheroe

Skipton

BlackburnBurnley

Huddersfield

DoncasterBarnsley

ImminghamScunthorpe

Grimsby

Darlington

Durham

Harrogate

Stranraer

CairnryanNewtonStewart

CampbeltownAyr

Whitburn

Haddington

St Andrews

Arbroath

Montrose

Stirling

Oban

Ballachulish

Kyle ofLochalsh

Stonehaven

Thurso

Latheron

Wick

Hexham

Carlisle

Consett

HartlepoolBishop AucklandPenrith

BarnardCastle

Guisborough Whitby

WindermereKendal

ScarboroughThirsk

Kirkby Lonsdale

MaltonRipon

BridlingtonLancaster

Selby

Goole

GainsboroughWarringtonLouth

WorksopBuxton

Chesterfield Lincoln

SkegnessMansfieldCrewe

Newark-on-Trent

AshbourneSleaford

Boston Cromer

GranthamUttoxeter

Fakenham

Burtonupon Trent

SpaldingMeltonMowbray

King’sLynnShrewsbury

LichfieldTelford Wisbech Great

Yarmouth

Bridgnorth Lowestoft

Ely

Huntingdon

Redditch Warwick

Daventry NewmarketLeominster StNeots

Stratford-upon-Avon

WorcesterBedford

EveshamHerefordRoyston Sudbury

FelixstoweHarwichStevenage

Bicester ColchesterLuton

Braintree

AylesburyClacton-on-Sea

ChelmsfordCirencester

High WycombeRomford

Chippenham

Sheerness

BathWeston-super-Mare Ramsgate

CanterburyBasingstoke

FarnhamAndoverShepton Mallet Ashford

RoyalTunbridge Wells

DoverStreet FolkestoneHorsham

Yeovil

LewesBlandford

ForumHastings

BognorRegis

Dorchester

Fraserburgh

Peterhead

Huntly

Berwick-upon-Tweed

ColdstreamGalashiels

JedburghHawick Alnwick

MorpethLangholm

Tynemouth

Forfar

Workington

Whitehaven

Barrow-in-Furness

Fleetwood

Southport

Llandudno ColwynBay

Mold

Porthmadog

Oswestry

Welshpool

Machynlleth

NewtownAberystwyth

Llangurig

BuilthWells

Cardigan

Fishguard

Carmarthen

AbergavennyMerthyrTydfil

Pembroke DockLlanelli

Neath

Pontypridd

BridgwaterBarnstaple

Taunton

Tiverton

Exeter

ExmouthTavistock

BodminNewquay

Truro

FalmouthPenzance

Llandovery

Ullapool

ElginUig

Portree

InvermoristonAviemore

KingussieInvergarryMallaig

Dalwhinnie

Fort William

Pitlochry

TyndrumPerth

Crianlarich Lochearnhead

Glenrothes

Lochgilphead

AlexandriaCumbernauld

PenicuikLargs

CarlukePeebles

Irvine Kilmarnock

Cumnock

Girvan

Dumfries

Gourock

Brough

MarketWeighton

Rhayader

Kidderminster

Bala

Betws-y-coed

Keswick

Tarbet

BoltonBury

Macclesfield

Plymouth

Southend-on-Sea

Southampton

ReadingNewport

Coventry

Norwich

Peterborough

Stoke-on-Trent

Aberdeen

Newcastle upon TyneSunderland

Middlesbrough

York

Sheffield

NottinghamDerby

LeicesterWolverhampton

NorthamptonCambridge

Ipswich

Gloucester

Oxford

Swindon

Bristol

BrightonPortsmouth

BournemouthPoole

Dundee

Blackpool

Swansea

Inverness

Kingstonupon Hull

BIRMINGHAM

BRADFORD

LEEDS

LIVERPOOL

LONDONCARDIFF

EDINBURGH

GLASGOW

MANCHESTER

St Austell

PaigntonTorquay

Weymouth

Crawley

RochesterDartfordMargate

MaidstoneSevenoaks

Basildon

Fareham

Maidenhead

Guildford

WokingDorking

BracknellNewbury

Petersfield

WinchesterSalisbury

Ringwood

Warminster

Bridgend

Bridport

Bideford

Launceston

Milford Haven

Haverfordwest

BuckinghamBanbury

Cheltenham

Rugby

Watford

Milton Keynes

St Albans Harlow

KetteringThetford Diss

Bury StEdmunds

Stamford

Stafford

Leek

Hinckley

Newport

Wrexham

ChesterBangor

Dolgellau

Holyhead

Preston

Clitheroe

Skipton

BlackburnBurnley

Huddersfield

DoncasterBarnsley

ImminghamScunthorpe

Grimsby

Darlington

Durham

Harrogate

Stranraer

CairnryanNewtonStewart

CampbeltownAyr

Whitburn

Haddington

St Andrews

Arbroath

Montrose

Stirling

Oban

Ballachulish

Kyle ofLochalsh

Stonehaven

Thurso

Latheron

Wick

Hexham

Carlisle

Consett

HartlepoolBishop AucklandPenrith

BarnardCastle

Guisborough Whitby

WindermereKendal

ScarboroughThirsk

Kirkby Lonsdale

MaltonRipon

BridlingtonLancaster

Selby

Goole

GainsboroughWarringtonLouth

WorksopBuxton

Chesterfield Lincoln

SkegnessMansfieldCrewe

Newark-on-Trent

AshbourneSleaford

Boston Cromer

GranthamUttoxeter

Fakenham

Burtonupon Trent

SpaldingMeltonMowbray

King’sLynnShrewsbury

LichfieldTelford Wisbech Great

Yarmouth

Bridgnorth Lowestoft

Ely

Huntingdon

Redditch Warwick

Daventry NewmarketLeominster StNeots

Stratford-upon-Avon

WorcesterBedford

EveshamHerefordRoyston Sudbury

FelixstoweHarwichStevenage

Bicester ColchesterLuton

Braintree

AylesburyClacton-on-Sea

ChelmsfordCirencester

High WycombeRomford

Chippenham

Sheerness

BathWeston-super-Mare Ramsgate

CanterburyBasingstoke

FarnhamAndoverShepton Mallet Ashford

RoyalTunbridge Wells

DoverStreet FolkestoneHorsham

Yeovil

LewesBlandford

ForumHastings

BognorRegis

Dorchester

Fraserburgh

Peterhead

Huntly

Berwick-upon-Tweed

ColdstreamGalashiels

JedburghHawick Alnwick

MorpethLangholm

Tynemouth

Forfar

Workington

Whitehaven

Barrow-in-Furness

Fleetwood

Southport

Llandudno ColwynBay

Mold

Porthmadog

Oswestry

Welshpool

Machynlleth

NewtownAberystwyth

Llangurig

BuilthWells

Cardigan

Fishguard

Carmarthen

AbergavennyMerthyrTydfil

Pembroke DockLlanelli

Neath

Pontypridd

BridgwaterBarnstaple

Taunton

Tiverton

Exeter

ExmouthTavistock

BodminNewquay

Truro

FalmouthPenzance

Llandovery

Ullapool

ElginUig

Portree

InvermoristonAviemore

KingussieInvergarryMallaig

Dalwhinnie

Fort William

Pitlochry

TyndrumPerth

Crianlarich Lochearnhead

Glenrothes

Lochgilphead

AlexandriaCumbernauld

PenicuikLargs

CarlukePeebles

Irvine Kilmarnock

Cumnock

Girvan

Dumfries

Gourock

Brough

MarketWeighton

Rhayader

Kidderminster

Bala

Betws-y-coed

Keswick

Tarbet

BoltonBury

Macclesfield

Plymouth

Southend-on-Sea

Southampton

ReadingNewport

Coventry

Norwich

Peterborough

Stoke-on-Trent

Aberdeen

Newcastle upon TyneSunderland

Middlesbrough

York

Sheffield

NottinghamDerby

LeicesterWolverhampton

NorthamptonCambridge

Ipswich

Gloucester

Oxford

Swindon

Bristol

BrightonPortsmouth

BournemouthPoole

Dundee

Blackpool

Swansea

Inverness

Kingstonupon Hull

BIRMINGHAM

BRADFORD

LEEDS

LIVERPOOL

LONDONCARDIFF

EDINBURGH

GLASGOW

MANCHESTER

OrkneyIslands

I nn

er

He

br

id

es

Ou

te

rH

eb

ri

de

s

Mull

Skye

Islay

Jura

Arran

Isleof Man

Isles of Scilly

Isle of Wight

Anglesey

Risk Rating of Britain’sMotorways and A Roads

This map shows the statistical risk of death or serious injuryoccurring on Britain’s motorway and A road network for2012-2014. Covering 44,500km in total, the British EuroRAPnetwork represents just 10% of Britain's road network but

The risk is calculated by comparing the frequency of roadcrashes resulting in death and serious injury on every

For example, if there are 20 crashes on a road carrying10,000 vehicles a day, the risk is 10 times higher than if theroad has the same number of crashes but carries 100,000vehicles.

Some of the roads shown have had improvements made tothem recently, but during the survey period the risk of afatal or serious injury crash on the black road sectionswas 23 times higher than on the safest (green) roads.

For more information on the Road Safety Foundation go towww.roadsafetyfoundation.org.

For more information on the statistical background to thisresearch, visit the EuroRAP website at www.eurorap.org.

Road Assessment Programme Risk Rating

Low risk (safest) roads

Low-medium risk roads

Medium risk roads

Medium-high risk roads

High risk roads

Motorway

Scale

Single and dual carriageway

Unrated roads

0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 80 kms70

10 3020 40 50 miles

Sponsored byAgeas

High risk

Medium-high risk

Medium risk

Low-medium risk

Low risk

© Road Safety Foundation 2016. Digital Map Data © Collins Bartholomew Ltd 2016. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2016. The Foundation is indebted to the Department for Transport (DfT) for allowing use of data in creating the map. This work has been financially supported by Ageas. Prepared under licence from EuroRAP AISBL using Risk Bands 2020 protocols © Copyright EuroRAP AISBL.This map may not be reproduced without the consent of the Road Safety Foundation.

ATION

FOU

ND

Supported by Ageas


Great Britain’s latest Risk Mapping results can be found here:

http://www.roadsafetyfoundation.org/media/33779/britisheurorapresults2016.pdf. The

annual British Risk Maps include the Strategic Road Network (Motorways and Trunk

Roads) and busy regional roads outside major conurbations. The network accounts for

approximately 10% of Britain’s road length, and is the collective location of half of all UK

road deaths.

1.1.2 Performance Tracking

Performance Tracking uses the data compiled for consecutive risk maps to assess how

risk on the network (or individual sections) has changed over time. This can highlight

where roads are persistently high-risk (i.e. remain high- or medium-high- risk over two

Risk Mapping periods), or where significant improvements have been made. Capturing the

reason behind significant improvements can highlight successful interventions.

Star Rating and Safer Roads Investment Plans

In this approach, roads are video-surveyed, and then more than 50 road features that are

known to influence crash likelihood and severity are coded every 100 m along the route.

The data is combined with supporting data such as speed surveys, road user flows, crash

distributions and is uploaded into ViDA, which is iRAP’s online analysis tool (see vida.irap.org).

ViDA provides Star Ratings and SRIPs.

1.2.1 A proactive risk management approach

This method allows road authorities to take a ‘proactive’ risk assessment approach to

identifying potential treatments to reduce risk, in the same way as is applied in other

industries such as medicine, mining, aviation, and even road worker safety. A proactive

approach can mean taking action to remove risks before people are killed or hurt. Rather

than focusing on historical crash cluster sites alone, where chance can often be the main

explanation of clusters and ‘regression to the mean’ effects can flatter the effectiveness of

action, a proactive approach seeks to focus on real, known high risks.

1.2.2 Star Ratings and risk

Star Ratings are based on road attribute data (information about the geometry and layout of

the road such as lane width, junction type, presence and distance to roadside obstacles),

and provide a simple and objective measure of the level of safety built in to the roads, for

each of four types of road user: vehicle occupants, motorcyclists, pedestrians and cyclists.

The Star Ratings reflect risk contributed by each of the road attributes that are coded – the

higher the risk, the lower the rating. The risk is calculated on the basis of research evidence

on crash modification factors that describes relationships between road attributes and crash

risk. More about the model can be found at: http://irap.org/en/about-irap-3/methodology.

Star Rating information can be viewed using charts, tables and maps.

1.2

http://www.roadsafetyfoundation.org/media/33779/britisheurorapresults2016.pdf

https://vida.irap.org/en-gb/home

http://irap.org/en/about-irap-3/methodology


Star Rating maps provide a powerful visual for describing how risk changes along a

route. These can be viewed for the type of road user mentioned above: vehicle occupants,

motorcyclists, pedestrians and cyclists. The safest categorisation is 5-star roads (green),

and 1-star (black) are the least safe.

The risk worm is a line chart that displays the Star Rating Score (SRS) along the route. An

example is shown in Figure 1.2. The SRS is the numerical score that underpins the Star

Ratings. The risk worm is able to show the SRS for each of the road user types. This helps a

road authority to identify locations that are particularly high-risk along a given route.

Figure 1.2: Example of a risk worm

Source: iRAP

Star Ratings can also be applied to designs. This can motivate designers of new and

improved roads to think about risk management in a fresh way.

Increasing numbers of road authorities around the world are using Star Ratings as policy

targets. This approach can be attractive to senior officers and elected members of local

authorities and other government bodies who are accountable for ensuring that policies are

being effective at the macro level, and that funds are well allocated. International experience

is that officials in high positions are more likely to support road safety action if what is being

delivered can be expressed in clear objective terms alongside an evaluated business case.

For example, Highways England has a delivery plan commitment to ensure that 90% of

travel on the Strategic Road Network occurs on 3-star roads or above by 2020. More about

Risk WormVehicle Occupant SRS (Smoothed) - Before countermeasure implementation

?

1 Star

Vehi

cle

Occ

upan

ts S

RS

(Sm

ooth

ed)

2 Stars 3 Stars 4 Stars 5 Stars

40302010 3525

Distance

Not applicable

15500

4

8

12

16

2

6

10

14

18


this can be found in the iRAP Star Rating Policy Targets: Discussion Paper available at

http://irap.org/en/about-irap-3/research-and-technical-papers.

1.2.3 Safer Roads Investment Plans

SRIPs identify ways in which fatal and serious injuries (FSIs) can be prevented in a

cost-effective way. ViDA calculates the casualty reduction expected from around 90

countermeasures (treatments designed to improve safety such as crash barriers, central cross

hatching and shoulder rumble strips also known as raised rib line), and does so every 100 m

along an inspected road, comparing this against the cost of implementing the treatment,

to produce an economic appraisal. Greater value can be achieved through implementing

treatments along a whole section, rather than individual site treatments. The output is a

SRIP, which can be interrogated at the individual section, regional or national (portfolio) level

to assess the appropriateness and effectiveness of individual options for improvement.

These can be refined to allow economic appraisal of a locally acceptable treatment

programme. The appraisal period is normally 20 years, allowing the cost of implementing

each measure to be evaluated against the expected casualty savings over the same time

period. ViDA provides Present Values (PVs) and Benefit Cost Ratios (BCRs) for appraisal of

each proposed countermeasure. The information presented in ViDA is shown in Figure 1.3.

Figure 1.3: Example of a Safer Roads Investment Plan

Source: iRAP

Clicking on one of the treatments in the SRIP in ViDA identifies the location where the

treatment is suggested (Figure 1.4), and provides the economic details of the treatment at

each 100 m segment. This assists engineers to determine appropriate countermeasures

along a route.

Safer Roads Investment PlanCurrency: £ GBP - Analysis Period: 20 years

?

Countermeasures

Total FSIs Saved Total PV of Safety Benefits Estimated Cost Cost per FSI saved

Length / Sites FSIs saved PV of safety benefit Cost per FSI saved Program BCR

Program BCR

Estimates Cost

Delineation and signing (intersection) 7 sites

11 890,392 83,338 32,281,171

3 93,294 31,896 7624,514

Shoulder rumble strips 6.60 km 3 95,498 37,851 6538,685

Roadside barriers - driver side 2.40 km 2 304,819 172,080 1378,208

Roadside barriers - passenger side 2.00 km 1 254,016 169,644 1319,661

Street lighting (mid-block) 0.30 km 1 40,643 55,760 4155,625

Improve curve delineation 0.10 km 0 2,665 62,014 39,176

Shoulder sealing passenger side (>1m) 0.30 km 0 21,083 201,160 122,378

Shoulder sealing driver side (>1m) 0.30 km 0 21,083 205,024 121,956

Wide centreline 5.40 km 0 30,634 99,046 266,037

11 890,392 83,338 32,281,171

Improve Delineation 1.00 km 1 26,655 39,269 5144,930

http://irap.org/en/about-irap-3/research-and-technical-papers


Figure 1.4: Map showing the location of recommendation for shoulder rumble strips

Source: iRAP

1.2.4 User-Defined Investment Plans

Once an engineer has reviewed the initial SRIP, they will consider the proposals and will

start to formulate a final user-defined set of treatments for implementation that are called a

User-Defined Investment Plan, or UDIP. Although very sophisticated, the SRIPs are simply

based on logical models and, as with all models, an expert engineer will be able to ensure

that an optimised plan is developed that takes into account the local environment and other

nuances.

Safer Roads Investment PlanCurrency: £ GBP - Analysis Period: 20 years

?

Countermeasures

Total FSIs Saved Total PV of Safety Benefits Estimated Cost Cost per FSI saved

Length / Sites FSIs saved PV of safety benefit Cost per FSI saved Program BCR

Program BCR

Estimates Cost

Delineation and signing (intersection) 7 sites

11 890,392 83,338 32,281,171

3 93,294 31,896 7624,514

Shoulder rumble strips 6.60 km 3 95,498 37,851 6538,685

Roadside barriers - driver side 2.40 km 2 304,819 172,080 1378,208

Roadside barriers - passenger side 2.00 km 1 254,016 169,644 1319,661

Street lighting (mid-block) 0.30 km 1 40,643 55,760 4155,625

Improve curve delineation 0.10 km 0 2,665 62,014 39,176

Shoulder sealing passenger side (>1m) 0.30 km 0 21,083 201,160 122,378

Shoulder sealing driver side (>1m) 0.30 km 0 21,083 205,024 121,956

Wide centreline 5.40 km 0 30,634 99,046 266,037

11 890,392 83,338 32,281,171

Improve Delineation 1.00 km 1 26,655 39,269 5144,930

SatelliteMap

Shoulder rumble strips More info x

Lode

Anglesey AbbeySwaffham Bulbeck

Little Wilbraham

Great Wilbraham

Stow cum Quy Bottisham


2. The Process

The iRAP methodology was originally developed to enable network-wide

assessments utilised by investors or national authorities, to assess levels of

investment for large-scale national programmes. Although regional roads

have been assessed before, the pathfinder project and subsequent project

to inspect the top 50 high-risk A-roads in England is novel, since smaller

individual sections have been selected using the Risk Mapping approach,

and then SRIPs have been generated and refined for use in an application

process to DfT’s Safer Roads Fund. This requires greater refinement and

localisation of SRIPs than has previously been necessary. When this refinement

is undertaken, a UDIP is developed.

This section outlines a process for local authorities to apply the Risk Mapping

and Star Rating methodologies, from the selection of priority sections, through

to survey and coding, SRIP generation, UDIP development, and finally

evaluation. An overview is shown in Figure 2.1.


Figure 2.1: Overview of process

Identifying priority sections

The first step in the process is to identify the roads to which the Star Rating and SRIP

methodology is to be applied.

A number of options are possible, each with their advantages and disadvantages. The

approach could be applied to:

• The whole road network: this has the advantage of enabling you to manage risk

across the network in a prioritised manner. In addition, you can set strategic goals

– for example ensuring that 90% of travel is on roads which are 3-star or above by

2025. Star-Rating a whole road network would provide a baseline from which to

monitor improvement and a roadmap detailing how a goal may be achieved, the

investment required, and the overall benefit (in terms of fatalities and serious injuries

prevented) to the economy.

• A subset of the road network: although there are economies of scale that can

be achieved – and other benefits – by surveying a whole road network, this might

not be possible owing to funding or other constraints. Rather than surveying the

whole road network, you could identify a subset of the network to be surveyed.

You could identify these roads by road type, e.g. all rural roads, all A-roads, or all

roads with an annual average daily traffic (AADT) figure greater than a given value.

These could be used in combination with each other, e.g. all rural A-roads with

an AADT greater than x. Alternatively, they could be used in combination with a

threshold for given crash density (fatal and serious crashes per mile) or for crash

risk (fatal and serious crashes per billion vehicle kilometres travelled).

If a crash density or crash risk threshold approach is taken, the network will

need to be divided into sections long enough for a statistically reliable result to

be obtained. Several years (at least three) of crash data should be used, ideally

more, to ensure that a road is persistently high-risk and has not been subject to a

randomly high number of crashes in one data period.

It is possible to find roads that are particularly worthy of consideration for further

investigation through a combination of selection criteria, for example, rural A-roads

that have an AADT above x, a crash density of above y, and where the individual

risk is greater than z crashes per billion vehicle-kilometres driven.

2.1

Identifying priority

sections

Survey, coding and supporting

data

Preliminary SRIP

generation

UDIP development

Monitoring and

evaluation


• Individual sections: individual sections can be surveyed as and when they

are identified as a priority, when funding opportunities specific to that road

emerge, or where major rehabilitation works are planned, meaning that additional

improvements can be made at marginal cost. Using this approach means that it

will not be possible to prioritise investment across a portfolio of roads; the greatest

possible impact may thus not be achieved.

Survey, coding and supporting data

2.2.1 Survey

Once a road section, or subset of road sections, has been identified, the first step is to

undertake the survey. During the survey, GPS-referenced videos are collected along the

route. It is possible for road authorities to capture their own videos of the network, which

they would then need to upload for coding. If an external supplier is preferred, the RSF will

be able to assist with procurement. There is a standard Terms of Reference available at

http://www.irap.net/en/about-irap-3/specifications.

This does not require expensive, high-tech equipment, as sufficient quality can be achieved

using readily available equipment. Alternatively, existing images can be used – such as

those available in Google Street View. Further information can be found in Star Rating

and Investment Plans: Roads Survey and Coding Specification available at:

http://downloads.irap.org/docs/RAP-SR-2-1_Road_survey_and_coding_specification.pdf.

Some consideration should be given to compatibility of video and GPS files with the coding

software that will be used in the next stage of the project.

2.2.2 Coding

In the coding process, 50 attributes that are relevant to road safety outcomes are coded

every 100 m along the road section. Coding is an intricate and time-consuming task

and needs to be undertaken by accredited personnel who are adequately trained and

experienced. It is possible to do this in-house; however, there are also accredited coding

teams available in several countries should an authority prefer to procure this activity. Various

documents describing the coding process are available, including a coding manual (in two

versions, according to which side of the road traffic drives), at http://irap.org/en/about-

irap-3/specifications.

iRAP requires all coding to be scrutinised through a quality assurance (QA) process,

whereby 10% of the network is recoded and any problems or inaccuracies are identified.

The QA process runs throughout the project, and it is important that the first sample is

reviewed early in the coding task. More information about QA in the coding process is

available in the document Star Ratings and Investment Plans: Quality Assurance Guide at

http://irap.org/en/about-irap-3/specifications.

2.2

http://www.irap.net/en/about-irap-3/specifications

http://downloads.irap.org/docs/RAP-SR-2-1_Road_survey_and_coding_specification.pdf

http://irap.org/en/about-irap-3/specifications




2.2.3 Coding review

An important step in the process is for engineers to review and update the coded data

using their local knowledge. In order to interrogate the coded data, the process outlined

in Appendix A: Updating the Core Data File can be followed. Some coding systems allow

the videos to be reviewed alongside the coded features, which makes this task relatively

straightforward.

In particular, road authorities will have a more accurate feel for the number of pedestrians

and cyclists using the route than a remote coding team would, and may have access to

quantitative survey data that provides AADTs for the through road and intersecting roads,

and observed vehicle speeds through the route. These data items can be found in the core

data file under the following columns (column numbers in brackets):

• AL (38) Intersecting road volume

• BK (63) Vehicle flow (AADT)

• BL (64) Motorcycle %

• BM (65) Pedestrian peak hour flow across the road

• BN (66) Pedestrian peak hour flow along the road driver-side

• BO (67) Pedestrian peak hour flow along the road passenger-side

• BP (68) Bicycle peak hour flow

• BQ (69) Operating Speed (85th percentile)

• BR (70) Operating Speed (mean)

2.2.4 Supporting data

At an overall project level, three sets of information are required: crash data, economic

parameters, and countermeasure costs.

Supporting data can be edited through selecting ‘Project Setup & Access’ in the ViDA

dashboard and then selecting the dataset that you are working with and using the ‘edit’

function. In the ‘edit dataset’ screen you will see eight steps. Road authorities will need

to update the information in Stages 5 and 6. All updates will need to be saved and then,

in order to ensure that changes are reflected in the results, the dataset will need to be

reprocessed in Stage 7.

The overall model is calibrated to the total number of fatalities occurring on the inspection

route. In ‘Stage 5: Fatality Estimation’ you can enter the total number of fatalities in a

specified time period. If no fatalities have occurred during the time period, then you can

divide the number of serious injuries by the overall network’s ‘serious injury to fatality’ ratio.

This will be in the region of 10 to 12.

Further down the screen, the percentage of crashes by road user and crash type can be

seen (see Figure 2.2). For a large inspection network it is possible to enter actual numbers

of casualties here; however, for individual sections data will be too sparse to provide robust

distributions. Therefore for a single section it will be necessary to build a crash distribution

for several roads with a similar traffic mix and environment.


Figure 2.2: ViDA screen where casualty percentage distribution can be entered

Source: iRAP

In ViDA it is possible to set various economic parameters to be used for the SRIP. These are:

• cost of a fatality;

• cost of a serious injury;

• appraisal period (typically we use 20 years although this can be adjusted);

• discount rate;

• ‘serious injury to fatality’ ratio; and

• a BCR qualification criteria.

These can be edited in ‘Stage 6: Investment Plan’ as shown in Figure 2.3.

Assigned total: 1.1

Calibration total: 1.1Vehicle occupant Motorcyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist

Percentage (%) Percentage (%) Percentage (%) Percentage (%)

User group distribution 40 25 25 10

Run-off LOC driver-side 30 30 10

Run-off LOC passenger-side 30 30

Head-on LOC 10 10

Head-on overtaking 10 10

Intersection 10 10 10

Property access 5 2

Along 3 80 80

Crossing intersected road 10

Crossing inspected road 10

Other 5 5 0 0

Percentages and Annual Fatalities Percentages Fatalities


Figure 2.3: ViDA screen that allows tailoring of economic appraisal values

Source: iRAP

The SRIP uses a lookup table of costs when calculating the cost of implementing triggered

countermeasures – these can be edited further down the screen in Stage 6. The best way to

review and edit these is by downloading the costs to a .csv file using the button on the right

of the table, and then re-uploading the file once edited, using the button on the left.

For each countermeasure, the downloaded .csv file shows the unit of cost (which is either

per km or per site, depending on the treatment), the service life, and six costs. A low,

medium and high cost for each countermeasure in urban and rural environments is included

to allow the system to take account of areas where cost to upgrade is high (e.g. where there

are buildings adjacent to the road, or utilities to move), medium or low (e.g. where there

are open fields adjacent to the road). These costs can be based on previous projects, and

then amended to suit local procurement conditions. These can also be edited in the ‘Project

Setup & Access’ screens, ‘Stage 6: Investment Plan’, as shown in Figure 2.4.

Quality assurer

Analysis period (years)

Multiple countermeasure adjustment

Basis for economics values

Discount rate

GDP per capita (current)

Value of life multiplier

Value of serious injury multiplier

Value of serious injury

Serious injury to fatality ratio

Qualification value

Qualification criteria

Multiple countermeasure multiplier

Value of life

Minimum attractive rate of return

Road Assessment Services Ltd

20

Advanced

DfT requirements

3.5

1

70

0.25

174878

12

0.75

bcr

1

1556245

0.04

Stage 6 - Investment Plan QA Required

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

Action

Action

>=

Action


Figure 2.4: ViDA screen that allows tailoring of countermeasure costs

Source: iRAP

The more accurate this supporting data is, the better the SRIP outputs will be. Refining this

background data with local intelligence is a necessary activity. Further information about

supporting data can be found in Star Ratings and Investment Plans: Supporting Data

Template available at: http://irap.org/en/about-irap-3/specifications.

Preliminary generation of a Safer Roads Investment Plan

Once the coding and supporting data are entered into ViDA, the analysis can be run, the

final core data file can be uploaded, and the data reprocessed in ‘Stage 7: Processing’.

The next step is a sense check of the initial results to determine if there are any further areas

in the coding that need to be amended to reflect true local conditions. This stage is best

undertaken by an experienced road safety engineer, who will check the risk worm output and

countermeasure proposals as they review the video of the surveyed section. They will then

assess the credibility of the risk values and countermeasures using their expert judgement.

There may be situations where the road safety engineer detects anomalies in the coding or

background data. This provides an opportunity to update these to accurately reflect the local

environment. The process for downloading, amending and re-uploading the core data file is

described in Appendix A: Updating the Core Data File.

Development of a User-Defined Investment Plan

Once the initial sense checking has been undertaken, the outputs should be logical. The

next step is to refine the SRIP and formulate a UDIP. Not every countermeasure proposed

by the model will be a preferred solution locally, and it is likely that not every countermeasure

will be affordable. The countermeasure options that are proposed are only a guide to

highlight where treatments may be beneficial to address an identified risk.

2.3

2.4

Run-off LOC passenger-side Service Life Rural / open areas Urban / rural town of village Ignore Edit

Low Medium High Low Medium High All:

Improve Delineation 5 4234 4704 5174 5504 6115 6727

Bicycle Lane (on-road) 20 16934 18816 20698 22015 24461 26907

Bicycle Lane (off-road) 20 123621 137357 151092 160707 178564 196420

Motorcycle Lane (Painted logos on-road) 5 7620 8467 9314 9907 11007 12108

Motorcycle Lane (Construct on-road) 20 8467 9408 10349 11007 12230 13453

Motorcycle Lane (Segregated) 20 127008 141120 155232 165110 183456 201802

Upload costs Download costs

Countermeasure costs

Review Countermeasure Triggers

Countermeasure cost upload file requirements

RestorexSave stage



For example, a countermeasure such as constructing a crash barrier in the median of a

single carriageway road may be suggested. While this may not be a preferred solution

locally, the SRIP is indicating that there is a head-on crash risk that may be usefully and

economically addressed by quite an extreme measure. Instead, a road authority may choose

to introduce central hatching, along with a reduced speed limit. Further information about

road safety countermeasures can be found at http://toolkit.irap.org/.

A road authority can use the SRIP suggestions, coupled with road safety engineering

experience, to develop a UDIP. The RSF will then model a proposed UDIP that combines

local knowledge with the SRIP, by creating a post-implementation scenario for a programme

of proposed treatments.

The RSF has developed a spreadsheet ‘iRAP Star Rating – UDIP’ to help road authorities

describe what treatments they would like to implement, and where.

The first task is to upload the data in the preliminary SRIP for each road section into the

spreadsheet. From the dashboard, select results (for a single section of road). Then select

‘Downloads’ from the menu at the top of the page. Once you are in the download screen,

select the countermeasure file on the right-hand side (see Figure 2.5). Just as with the core

data file, this will then be requested, and a message will then pop up in your message inbox

so you can download the file.

Figure 2.5: Countermeasure download file

Source: iRAP

Open the countermeasure file and select the contents, and copy and paste this into the

‘countermeasure_download_file’ tab in the ‘iRAP Star Rating – UDIP’ spreadsheet. Go to

the first tab and press the ‘Create UDIP plan’ button. This will allow the countermeasure

suggestions generated in ViDA to be entered into the ‘UDIP_plan’ tab. Chainage (distance)

along the route in kilometres is shown across the top, and all of the possible countermeasures

?

?

CountermeasuresFatality EstimationsCore Data

Downloads

Delimiter is currently set to “,” and Decimal mark is currently set to “.”

Please note: this file does not include the outcome of multiple-countermeasure adjustments.

Change settings

Core Data - Before (zip)

Vehicle Occupant Star Rating Smoothed (kml) Vehicle Occupant Star Rating Smoothed (kml)Pedestrian Star Rating Smoothed (kml) Pedestrian Star Rating Smoothed (kml)Motorcyclist Star Rating Smoothed (kml) Motorcyclist Star Rating Smoothed (kml)Bicyclist Star Rating Smoothed (kml) Bicyclist Star Rating Smoothed (kml)

Fatality Estimations - Before (zip) Countermeasures (zip)

Filtered download files

Dataset download files

Star Ratings – Before Star Ratings – After

Cambridgeshire CC, DfT 2017 , PFI A1303 FINAL TRAINING

Core Data - After (zip) Fatality Estimations - After (zip)

http://toolkit.irap.org/


are shown down the left-hand side. Green cells denote where ViDA has recommended

a countermeasure, orange cells are where ViDA suggested a countermeasure but it was

overridden (see Figure 2.6). Countermeasures can be overridden in ViDA if the BCR does not

meet a specified threshold, or if a more effective countermeasure was triggered.

Figure 2.6: Spreadsheet for road authorities to record intended countermeasure

plans for ViDA modelling

Source: iRAP

Road authorities can then review this spreadsheet and add an F (for final) to denote where

they would like to install a treatment (once F is added, the cell will automatically turn red).

This allows the authority to select locally suitable treatments.

Once the RSF receives the completed ‘iRAP Star Rating – UDIP’ spreadsheet, we will

process this information in order to model a new scenario in ViDA. This will allow the RSF to

provide you with a ‘finalised UDIP’ as a Microsoft Excel file. For each countermeasure in the

plan, this will provide:

• the name of the countermeasure and length along which, or sites where, it will be

applied;

• the estimated number of fatalities saved and serious injuries prevented over the

appraisal period;

• the PV of the crash cost savings over the appraisal period;

• the cost of implementing the countermeasure, discounted to the baseline year;

• the cost per FSI saved; and

• the BCR over the appraisal period.

The RSF will also be able to provide an ‘after implementation’ Star Rating for comparison

with the original Star Rating results.

Countermeasure Distance (km)ID Name 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.929 Duplicate - 10-20m median30 Duplicate - >20m median31 Service road32 Additional lane (2 + 1 road with barrier) R R R R R R R R R R R S S S S S S S S33 Implement one way network34 Upgrade pedestrian facility quality35 Refuge Island F F36 Unsignalised crossing S S S S37 Signalised crossing38 Grade separated pedestrian facility40 Road surface rehabilitation41 Clear roadside hazards - passenger side S R S S S S S R42 Clear roadside hazards - driver side S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S R S43 Sideslope improvement - passenger side44 Sideslope improvement - driver side45 Roadside barriers - passenger side F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F46 Roadside barriers - driver side F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F47 Shoulder sealing passenger side (<1m) S S S S R R S S S S S S S S S S S F F F48 Shoulder sealing passenger side (>1m) F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F52 Restrict/combine direct access points S S54 Footpath provision passenger side (adjacent to road)55 Footpath provision passenger side (>3m from road)56 Speed management reviews57 Traffic calming59 Vertical realignment (major)60 Overtaking lane S S S S S S S S S S S R R R R R S S S S61 Median crossing upgrade62 Clear roadside hazards (bike lane)


Monitoring and evaluation

2.5.1 Shorter-term monitoring and evaluation

In the first instance, new scheme designs will often require an independent Road Safety

Audit at various stages, which should include monitoring of crash data once the scheme is

open. New schemes may not always improve the section’s road safety record, so it is vital to

identify any emerging trends quickly and rectify any problems that have been identified.

Once a scheme has been implemented, it is possible to Star-Rate the new scheme either

from design or by resurveying the road section. This allows an immediate comparison with

the original Star Rating results.

2.5.2 Longer-term evaluation

Once a proposed scheme has been agreed, it is important to collate baseline data against

which performance can be evaluated. This should be data from a period before any work

commences. It is recommended that fatal, serious and slight crash numbers are recorded

by crash type and road user. Formal evaluation may only be achieved once sufficient

crash numbers have occurred. It is suggested that a two- to three-year period will need to

pass following completion of the scheme before sufficient data will be available for formal

evaluation.

2.5


These case studies have been developed from a project where the RSF

supported local authorities in their applications to DfT’s Safer Roads Fund.

In 2017, local authorities with one of England’s top 50 high-risk local A-road

sections were invited to apply for funding under DfT’s Safer Roads Fund which

has a budget of £175 million over four financial years, from 2017/18. The

top 50 high-risk road sections were identified through the RSF’s annual Risk

Mapping analysis. The two case studies reported in the sections that follow

have come from a pathfinder local authority group which was supported by the

RSF in submitting proposals by April 2017 for funding commencing in financial

year 2017/18. The pathfinder project was sponsored by the RAC Foundation.

In the pathfinder project, the RSF surveyed and coded 11 road sections from

eight pathfinder local authorities. The RSF team worked with engineers from

the local authorities to refine their SRIPs for submission to DfT.

3. Case Studies


3. Case Studies A1303 – Cambridgeshire

The first case study relates to a section of the A1303 in Cambridgeshire. Table 3.1 gives a

description of the route and key facts relevant to road safety on the section in question.

Table 3.1: Case study 1 – A1303 in Cambridgeshire: key facts

Description of route This section is east of Cambridge, running from Stow cum Quy to the Newmarket Bypass. The road runs mainly through agricultural land, with a small number of residential and commercial frontages. This stretch of road is the main signed route for Newmarket from the west, and also provides access to the local villages of Bottisham and Great Wilbraham.

Length 4.4 miles (7.1 km)

Speed limit The majority of the road (87%) has a posted speed limit of 60 mph, with the remainder being 50 mph. It is a rural single carriageway road.

AADT 4,851 vehicles (2015)

Fatal and serious crashes, 2012–14

Seven serious crashes from 2012–14. Two of these serious crashes involved vulnerable road users, three were at junctions, one was a run-off-road crash and one was a head-on crash.

Link to application form https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/transport-funding-bids-and-studies/transport-funding-bids/

Source: Cambridgeshire County Council

3.1.1 Main features

83% of the road has a centreline in the median, 13% has hatching or a wide centreline, and

there is a small amount of physical median.

There are roadside objects within 5 m of the roadside along 42% of the road.

Nearly all of the route has a narrow-paved shoulder of 0–1 m.

75% of the road is straight or gently curving, the rest having moderate bends.

Most of the route (83%) has adequate delineation, 17% was poor.

Intersections comprise:

• 1 roundabout;

• 3 three-leg un-signalised intersections with protected turn lane;

• 4 three-leg un-signalised intersections with no protected turn lane; and

• 1 three-leg signalised intersection with no protected turn lane.

There was limited evidence of pedestrian and cyclist flow.

37% of the route had a shared use cycle path.

3.1

https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/transport-funding-bids-and-studies/transport-funding-bids/

https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/transport-funding-bids-and-studies/transport-funding-bids/


3.1.2 Star Rating results

The vehicle occupant Star Rating for the entire route is 2 stars, as shown in Figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1: A1303 Star Rating map (vehicle occupant)

Source: iRAP

Figure 3.2 shows the Star Ratings by road user group.

Figure 3.2: Snapshot of A1303 Star Ratings by road user group

Source: iRAP

Lark Hall

LittleWilbraham

Great WilbrahamSix Mile Bottom

Fulbourn

CommercialEnd

BottishamStow cum Quy

SwaffhamPrior

Lode

Lark Hall

LittleWilbraham

Great WilbrahamSix Mile Bottom

Fulbourn

CommercialEnd

BottishamStow cum Quy

SwaffhamPrior

LodeSwaffhamBulbeck

SwaffhamBulbeck

A14

A14

B110

2

B1102

A11

A130

4

A11

A14 A14

A14

B110

2

B1102

A11

A130

4

A11

A14

Star Ratings

Ratings on dual carriageway roadsshow the lowest rated carriageway

Scale

© Copyright Road Safety Foundation 2017Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2017

A1303A1303A1303A1303

0

0 0.50.25 0.75 km

0.5 ml0.25

SatelliteMap

Not applicable 1 Star 2 Stars 3 Stars 4 Stars 5 Stars

Star Ratings By Distance

Vehicle Occupant Motorcyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist

Star Ratings Length (kms) Percent Length (kms) Percent Length (kms) Percent Length (kms) Percent

5 Stars 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00%

4 Stars 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 3.70 52.11% 0.00 0.00%

3 Stars 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 3.00 42.25%

2 Stars 7.10 100.00% 4.10 57.75% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00%

1 Stars 0.00 0.00% 3.00 42.25% 0.00 0.00% 4.10 57.75%

Not applicable 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 3.40 47.89% 0.00 0.00%

Totals 7.10 100% 7.10 100% 7.10 100% 7.10 100%


3.1.3 Key considerations in developing the User-Defined Investment Plan

The first step undertaken in refining the SRIP was to review the coded data and make any

amendments required before uploading it to ViDA. The countermeasures generated by the

SRIP were then reviewed by experienced highways engineers to assess the feasibility and

affordability of each proposed measure along the route.

The original SRIP recommended central hatching and median barrier for much of the route.

There was insufficient carriageway/verge width available for this, so these measures were

switched off, and a wide centreline was instead included in the final proposal to manage

head-on risk.

One of the most challenging risks to mitigate related to the existence of roadside hazards

that were highlighted by the model. ViDA suggested that these should be protected with

roadside barrier, based on the optimum BCR. Whilst the benefits of this are clear, applying

this remedy to a rural road network can be challenging for local authorities in terms of

maintenance and aesthetics. Consideration was therefore given as to whether any of these

hazards could be removed, relocated, or – as was established with the street lighting

columns – replaced with passively safe infrastructure. Ultimately a mixed approach was

selected, to balance the removal of trees with their protection, with the proposed use of

wooden clad safety barrier to mitigate visual impact on the rural environment.

All of the proposed countermeasures were brought together and illustrated in one general

layout plan by the highway design team and used as the base document for the feasibility

and costing exercise. The cost information in the final UDIP was then manually corrected

to reflect local cost data provided by our Highway Services Contractor, incorporating risk,

design and project management costs.

3.1.4 Submitted User-Defined Investment Plan

Table 3.2 provides a summary of the proposed countermeasures included in the proposal

for A1303. It includes the ViDA-generated 20-year economic appraisal information, along

with 2017 capital investment costs. The scheme is estimated to save 11 FSIs, and the

overall programme BCR is 2.54, meaning that for every £1 spent, it is expected that the

economy will benefit from a return of £2.54.


Tab

le 3

.2: U

DIP

as

sub

mit

ted

fo

r A

1303

Co

unte

rmea

sure

Leng

th/

No

. o

f si

tes

Uni

tFS

Is s

aved

aP

V o

f b

enefi

ts (£

)bC

ost

(201

0 p

rice

s) (£

)C

ost

per

FS

I sa

ved

(£)

BC

Rc

2017

cap

ital

co

st/u

nit

(£)

Tota

l co

st

(£)

Del

inea

tion

and

sign

ing

(inte

rsec

tion)

7si

tes

2.8

805,

416

43,0

3515

,194

18.7

27,

289

51,0

26

Roa

dsid

e ba

rrie

rs –

pas

seng

er-s

ide

1.05

1km

0.6

182,

343

112,

084

174,

795

1.63

126,

447

132,

896

Roa

dsid

e ba

rrie

rs –

driv

er-s

ide

1.39

4km

0.9

244,

755

109,

869

127,

649

2.23

93,4

5113

0,27

0

Sho

ulde

r ru

mbl

e st

rips

6.6

km2.

365

3,88

164

,355

27,9

8710

.16

11,5

6176

,304

Impr

ove

delin

eatio

n1.

1km

0.7

187,

126

6,78

810

,315

27.5

77,

316

8,04

8

Pro

tect

ed tu

rn la

ne (u

n-si

gnal

ised

3-le

g)2

site

s1.

131

1,57

718

3,99

616

7,92

51.

6910

9,08

121

8,16

1

Sho

ulde

r se

alin

g pa

ssen

ger-

side

(>1m

)2.

1km

0.5

152,

355

310,

987

580,

440

0.49

175,

586

368,

731

Str

eet l

ight

ing

(mid

-blo

ck)

0.9

km0.

925

0,67

251

,557

58,4

864.

8667

,922

61,1

30

Impr

ove

curv

e de

linea

tion

0.75

km0.

390

,630

10,1

4231

,823

8.94

16,0

3412

,026

Sho

ulde

r se

alin

g dr

iver

-sid

e (>

1m)

1.79

6km

0.5

139,

171

286,

858

586,

125

0.49

189,

378

304,

122

Wid

e ce

ntre

line

5.64

km0.

387

,585

41,1

4113

3,57

22.

138,

649

48,7

80

Tota

l10

.93,

105,

511

1,22

0,81

211

1,78

62.

541,

447,

496

Not

es:

(a) F

atal

inju

ries

estim

ated

to b

e sa

ved

and

serio

us in

jurie

s es

timat

ed to

be

prev

ente

d, o

ver

a 20

-yea

r pe

riod

(b) T

he p

rese

nt v

alue

of t

he c

rash

cos

t sav

ings

ove

r a

20-y

ear

perio

d th

at c

ould

be

real

ised

if th

e co

unte

rmea

sure

s ar

e bu

ilt

(c) T

he B

enefi

t Cos

t Rat

io (B

CR

) is

the

econ

omic

ben

efit (

the

PV

) div

ided

by

the

cost

ove

r th

e 20

-yea

r pe

riod

in 2

010

pric

es.

Sou

rce:

Cam

brid

gesh

ire C

ount

y C

ounc

il


3.1.5 Cambridgeshire County Council’s experience

“As chairman of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Strategic Road Safety

Partnership, I was keen for Cambridgeshire to be involved in the DfT Safer Roads

Scheme. The County Council is committed to reducing road casualties and fully

intends to use this opportunity to improve safety on the A1303 between Stow

cum Quy and Newmarket. We also hope to apply the learning from this project, to

improve other roads within Cambridgeshire.”

County Councillor Steve Criswell.

“Increasing the safety and reducing the number of road casualties on the public

highway network across Cambridgeshire is a key objective of the County Council.

Part of encouraging growth and vitality of an area is the Local Highway Authority’s

ability to provide a safe road environment within which communities are able

to go about their day-to-day business. As a key route, the A1303 is of regional

importance, and the opportunity to make meaningful and sustainable safety

improvements is positively welcomed.”

Richard Lumley, Head of Highways, Cambridgeshire County Council

A285 – West Sussex

The second case study relates to a section of the A285 in West Sussex. Table 3.3 includes a

description of the route and gives key facts relevant to road safety on the section studied.

Table 3.3: Case study 2 – A285 in West Sussex: key facts

Description of route This section is north-east of Chichester, running from Tangmere to Petworth. The road runs mainly through the South Downs National Park.

Length 11.7 miles (18.8 km)

Speed limit The majority of the road (71%) has a posted speed limit of 60 mph, with the remainder having speed limits of 40 mph and 30 mph. It is a rural single carriageway road.

AADT Approximately 5,500 vehicles

Fatal and serious crashes, 2012–14

Three fatal and 21 serious crashes from 2012–14. Two fatal crashes were at junctions, the other was a run-off-road. Half of the serious crashes were run-off-road crashes.

Link to application form https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/roads-and-travel/roadworks-and-projects/road-projects/a285-safer-roads-investment-plan/

Source: West Sussex County Council

3.2

https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/roads-and-travel/roadworks-and-projects/road-projects/a285-safer-roads-investment-plan/

https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/roads-and-travel/roadworks-and-projects/road-projects/a285-safer-roads-investment-plan/


3.2.1 Main features

99% of the road has a centreline or wide centreline in the median.

There are roadside objects within 5 m of the roadside along 76% of the road.

97% of the route has no paved shoulder, 3% has a narrow-paved shoulder of 0–1 m.

72% of the road is straight or gently curving, 22% has moderate bends, 4% has sharp

bends, and 1% is very sharp.

Most of the route (93%) has adequate delineation, 7% was poor.

Intersections comprise:

• 1 roundabout, 2 mini-roundabouts;

• 1 three-leg un-signalised intersection with protected turn lane;

• 25 three-leg un-signalised intersections with no protected turn lane; and

• 3 four-leg un-signalised intersections with no protected turn lane.

There was limited evidence of pedestrian and cyclist flow.

3.2.2 Star Rating results

The majority of the route (68%) achieves a vehicle occupant Star Rating of only 1 star, as

shown in Figure 3.3.


Figure 3.3: A285 Star Rating map (vehicle occupant)

Source: iRAP

Figure 3.4 shows the Star Ratings by road user group.

Strettington

Westhampnett

Heyshott

Charlton

Cocking

Singleton

WestLavington

Easebourne

Halnaker

Eartham

Tangmere

Fontwell

Walberton

Slindon

Aldingbourne

Boxgrove

Norton

Nyton

CoultershawBridge

Upwaltham

Barlavington

Duncton

BignorWest

Burton

EastDean

Graffham

Sutton

Madehurst

ByworthSouthAmbersham

EastLavington

Selham

Tillington

Lodsworth Upperton

Strettington

Westhampnett

Heyshott

Charlton

Cocking

Singleton

WestLavington

Easebourne

Halnaker

Eartham

Tangmere

Fontwell

Walberton

Slindon

Aldingbourne

Boxgrove

Norton

Nyton

CoultershawBridge

Upwaltham

Barlavington

Duncton

BignorWest

Burton

EastDean

Graffham

Sutton

Madehurst

ByworthSouthAmbersham

EastLavington

Selham

Tillington

Lodsworth Upperton

PetworthPetworth

MIDHURSTMIDHURST

A27

A27

A286

A286

A272A272

A283 A272

A283

A29

A27

A29

A27

A286

A286

A272A272

A283 A272

A283

A285

A285A285

SatelliteMap

Not applicable 1 Star 2 Stars 3 Stars 4 Stars 5 Stars


Figure 3.4: Snapshot of A285 Star Ratings by road user group

Source: iRAP

3.2.3 Key Considerations in developing the User-Defined Investment Plan

West Sussex CC followed a slightly different process to some of the pathfinder authorities

because, as the A285 was identified by the RSF as being the most persistently high-risk

road in England, they were offered the opportunity to bid early for £1million. The first step

was to review the initial SRIP because the countermeasures proposed were far in excess of

the available funds. They selected 1-star subsections to treat first, and two countermeasures

that had a reasonable BCR that would work together to reduce the risk of run-off-road

crashes. Their subsequent proposal extended these treatments along the rest of the route.

3.2.4 Submitted User-Defined Investment Plan

West Sussex County Council has submitted two proposals for the treatment of A285, and a

summary of this information is presented in Table 3.4. The first proposal was to provide sealed

shoulders (<1 m) and shoulder rumble strips along a 5 km portion of the route. The second

proposal extended the shoulder sealing and rumble strips along the remainder of the route.

Table 3.4: Safer Roads Investment Plan as submitted for A285

Proposal FSIs saveda

PV of benefits (£)b

Cost (2010 prices) (£)

Cost per FSI saved (£) BCRc

2017 capital cost (£)

1 11 1,875,500 644,500 58,590 2.91 926,300

2 13 2,134,600 1,091,700 83,977 1.96 1,532,400

Notes:

(a) Fatal injuries estimated to be saved and serious injuries estimated to be prevented, over a 20-year period (b) The present value of the crash cost savings over a 20-year period that could be realised if the countermeasures are built. (c) The Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) is the economic benefit (the PV) divided by the cost over the 20-year period in 2010 prices. Source: West Sussex County Council

Star Ratings By Distance

Vehicle Occupant Motorcyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist

Star Ratings Length (kms) Percent Length (kms) Percent Length (kms) Percent Length (kms) Percent

5 Stars 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00%

4 Stars 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 1.80 9.57% 0.00 0.00%

3 Stars 2.60 13.83% 2.60 13.83% 0.70 3.72% 2.60 13.83%

2 Stars 8.40 44.68% 0.00 0.00% 0.10 0.53% 0.00 0.00%

1 Stars 7.80 41.49% 16.20 86.17% 0.30 1.60% 16.20 86.17%

Not applicable 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 15.50 84.57% 0.00 0.00%

Totals 18.80 100% 18.80 100% 18.80 100% 18.80 100%


The first scheme is estimated to save 11 FSIs, and the overall programme BCR is 2.91,

meaning that for every £1 spent, it is expected that the economy will benefit from a return of

£2.91.

The second scheme is estimated to save 13 FSIs, and the overall programme BCR is 1.96,

meaning that for every £1 spent, it is expected that the economy will benefit from a return of

£1.96.


Appendix A: Updating the Core Data FileIn order to update the core data file, several steps are needed:

1. Log in to ViDA and select ‘Results’ in the dashboard.

2. Select your project in ‘Project Filters’ and use the checkboxes to select all of

the datasets that you wish to download. Press ‘Apply Filters & Options’ (see

Figure A.1).

Figure A.1: Selecting a project in ViDA

Source: iRAP

3. Select ‘Downloads’ at the top of the screen and the screen shown in Figure A.2

should appear.

Dashboard / Results / Star Rating / Map

Road Data

Project filters

Downloads

Support Demonstration Language

Investment PlansStar Rating

RAPs

Roads

Sandbox

Buckinghamshire CC - A40 - TS - LA Training

FPZ DfT 2017 39 Roads v3.02 Toggle allSelect a different RAP

FPZ DfT 2017 39 Roads

All sections

Projects Datasets

Sections

Apply filters & optionsHide

Reporting options Apply filters & options

Buckinghamshire CC - A40 - TS - LA Training Working

Cornwall CC - A3058 - TS - LA Training Working

Cornwall CC - A3071 - TS - LA Training Working

Devon CC - A3121 - TS - LA Training Working

Devon CC - A3123 - TS - LA Training Working

Gloucestershire CC - A4173 - TS - LA Training Working

Kent CC - A252 - TS - LA Training Working

Kent CC - A290 - TS - LA Training Working

North Somerset CC - A371 - TS - LA Training Working

Slough CC - A4 - TS - LA Training Working

Surrey CC - A217 - TS - LA Training Working

Thurrock CC - A126 - TS - LA Training Working

Show

AllA40

FPZ DfT2017 39 Roads

Show Total length: 9km


Figure A.2: Download screen in ViDA

Source: iRAP

4. Here you can download the current core data file (.csv file) for the dataset. This

contains all of the coding information.

a. Click on ‘Core Data – Before (zip)’ and select ‘Request’.

b. Wait for a few seconds, and a new message should appear in your messages

at the top right.

c. Click on the ‘Activity Feed’ and select the prepared dataset to start the

download.

5. Save the core data file on your computer as a .csv file using a new name.

6. Open the downloaded .csv file:

a. Go to column number 79 (or column CA) where the Smoothed Section ID is

recorded, and then delete all the columns starting with this column and those

to the right (only the columns from 1 to 78 or A to BZ should remain in your

csv. file). See Figure A.3.

Dashboard / Results / Star Rating / Map

Road Data

Project filters

Downloads

Support Demonstration Language

Investment PlansStar Rating

Apply filters & optionsHide

Reporting options Apply filters & optionsShow

FPZ DfT2017 39 Roads

Show Total length: 9km

?

?

CountermeasuresFatality EstimationsCore Data

Downloads

Delimiter is currently set to “,” and Decimal mark is currently set to “.”

Please note: this file does not include the outcome of multiple-countermeasure adjustments.

Change settings

Core Data - Before (zip)

Vehicle Occupant Star Rating Smoothed (kml) Vehicle Occupant Star Rating Smoothed (kml)Pedestrian Star Rating Smoothed (kml) Pedestrian Star Rating Smoothed (kml)Motorcyclist Star Rating Smoothed (kml) Motorcyclist Star Rating Smoothed (kml)Bicyclist Star Rating Smoothed (kml) Bicyclist Star Rating Smoothed (kml)

Fatality Estimations - Before (zip) Countermeasures (zip)

Filtered download files

Dataset download files

Star Ratings – Before Star Ratings – After

FPZ, DfT 2017 39 Roads, Barnsley CC - A628

Core Data - After (zip) Fatality Estimations - After (zip)


Figure A.3: Editing the Core Data spreadsheet in ViDA

Source: iRAP

7. Once the columns are deleted you can save the file and start editing the columns

that you need to update. You need to take care to do this accurately. For

information on the coding values and what they mean, please:

a. Go to the ViDA homepage where you can see your dashboard and select

‘Upload Coding Data’.

b. Click on ‘view upload specification’.

If you are not sure how to amend the coding file, please ask a member of

the RSF team.

8. The next stage is to upload the coding data again into ViDA:

a. Go to the ViDA homepage where you can see your dashboard and select

‘Upload Coding Data’.

b. Select your project using the dropdown menus.

c. Browse to find the file you wish to upload on your computer.

d. Click on ‘Upload Files’.

e. If there are no errors in the .csv file, ViDA will open a new page with message

‘validation successful’.

f. Click on the ‘Proceed’ button and this will start the re-upload process.

g. When the upload is complete, there will be a new message in your ViDA

activity feed.

76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87

1 Annual Fatality School zone School zone Smoothed Section ID Vehicle SRS Vehicle SRS Vehicle SRS Vehicle SRS Vehicle SRS Vehicle SRS Vehicle SRS Vehicle SRS

2 1 4 3 1 1.5935775 1.5935775 0.9858 0.159 5.565 0 9.896955 5.818764

3 1 4 3 1 1.274862 1.274862 0.9858 0.159 0.2862 0.0795 4.060224 5.818764

4 1 4 3 1 1.274862 1.274862 0.818214 0.131175 0 0 3.499113 5.818764

5 1 4 3 2 2.718102 2.718102 2.1018 0.339 6.2469225 0.093225 14.2171515 21.714655

6 1 4 3 2 3.2617224 3.2617224 2.0933928 0.279675 7.496307 0 16.3928196 21.714655

7 1 4 3 2 3.2617224 3.2617224 2.0933928 0.279675 0 0 8.8965126 21.714655

8 1 4 3 2 3.2107579875 3.2107579875 5.391117 0.339 0 0.1695 12.321132975 21.714655

9 1 4 3 2 3.2617224 3.2617224 2.396052 0.339 0 0 9.2584968 21.714655

10 1 4 3 2 9.7851672 9.7851672 7.188156 1.017 0 0 27.7754904 21.714655

11 1 4 3 2 9.7851672 9.7851672 7.188156 1.017 0 0.279675 28.0551654 21.714655

12 1 4 3 2 9.7851672 9.7851672 7.56648 1.017 0 0 28.1538144 21.714655

13 1 4 3 2 8.58348 8.58348 6.3054 1.017 0 0.279675 24.769035 21.714655

14 1 4 3 2 10.300176 4.506327 7.56648 1.017 0 0 23.389983 21.714655

15 1 4 3 2 10.300176 4.506327 7.56648 1.017 0 0.279675 23.669658 21.714655

16 1 4 3 2 3.567508875 8.154306 6.3054 1.017 0 0.279675 19.323889875 21.714655

17 1 4 3 2 8.154306 8.154306 6.3054 1.017 17.161875 0.5085 41.301387 21.714655

18 1 4 3 2 8.154306 8.154306 5.99013 1.017 0 0.5085 23.824242 21.714655

19 1 4 3 2 9.7851672 4.28101065 7.188156 1.017 0 0 22.27133385 21.714655

20 1 4 3 2 4.28101065 4.28101065 7.188156 1.017 0 0 16.7671773 21.714655

21 1 4 3 2 9.7851672 1.2231459 7.188156 1.017 31.8304728 0.279675 51.3236169 21.714655

22 1 4 3 2 4.28101065 4.28101065 7.188156 1.017 0 0 16.7671773 21.714655

23 1 4 3 2 4.28101065 4.28101065 7.188156 1.017 0 0.279675 17.0468523 21.714655

24 1 4 3 2 9.7851672 4.28101065 7.188156 1.017 0 0 22.27133385 21.714655

25 1 4 3 2 4.28101065 4.28101065 7.188156 1.017 0 0.279675 17.0468523 21.714655

26 1 4 3 2 9.7851672 9.7851672 7.188156 1.017 0 0.279675 28.0551654 21.714655

27 1 4 3 2 4.28101065 4.28101065 7.188156 1.017 0 0 16.7671773 21.714655

28 1 4 3 2 4.28101065 4.28101065 7.188156 1.017 0 0.279675 17.0468523 21.714655

DELETE ALL THE COLUMNS FROM COLUMN 79 TO THE LAST EXISTING COLUMN IN THE CSV FILE


Notes


The Royal Automobile Club Foundation for Motoring Ltd is a transport policy

and research organisation which explores the economic, mobility, safety and

environmental issues relating to roads and their users. The Foundation publishes

independent and authoritative research with which it promotes informed debate

and advocates policy in the interest of the responsible motorist.

RAC Foundation

89–91 Pall Mall

London

SW1Y 5HS

Tel no: 020 7747 3445


Registered Charity No. 1002705

October 2017 © Copyright Royal Automobile Club Foundation for Motoring Ltd

Designed and printed by The Javelin Partnership Ltd

Tel: 0118 907 3494

Produced on paper from a managed sustainable source which is FSC certified

as containing 50% recycled waste.

Main proofreader: Beneficial Proofreading Services

Tel: 07979 763116


tackling high-risk regional roads - rac foundation · i tackling high-risk regional roads –...

Documents