Manual RSI PDF

SEETO Road Safety Inspection Manual (Revised Version 2016)
The purpose of this revised SEETO Road Safety Inspection Manual is to help SEETO
regional countries establish/update a systematic approach to the RSI of existing
roads based on PIARC guidelines and the first SEETO RSI Manual. This manual is
expected to be used as a base document in their continued work, which will raise
awareness and improve the quality of road safety inspections.
Document properties
Document Type: Report
Originator: South East Europe Transport Observatory (SEETO) &
World Bank
Security (Distribution Level): Public
Release Date: 15/06/2016
Status: Final
Number of Pages: 52
Change History:
Status and version Date Author Action

Name Surname
Final Revised Version June 2016 Mr. Hans-Joachim Vollpracht

Mr. Dejan Jovanov Prepared
Mr. Rajko Branković
Mr. Said Dahdah
Checked /
Ms. Liljana Sekerinska
approved
Ms. Liljana Cela
www.seetoint.org Page 1 of 88
Contents
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................... 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................................................... 3
FOREWORD ...................................................................................................................................... 4
1 BASICS ABOUT ROAD SAFETY INSPECTION ............................................................................ 5
1.1 ROAD SAFETY INSPECTION .............................................................................................................. 5
1.2 RSI AS PART OF THE SAFE SYSTEM APPROACH ...................................................................................... 8
1.3 BENEFITS AND COSTS OF A ROAD SAFETY INSPECTION ............................................................................ 9
1.4 ROAD SAFETY INSPECTION AND ACCIDENT DATA .................................................................................. 10
1.5 INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE .................................................................................................... 10
1.6 INSPECTIONS AND HUMAN FACTORS ................................................................................................. 11
2 WHAT SHOULD BE INSPECTED? ............................................................................................. 12
2.1 AREA OF APPLICATION .................................................................................................................. 12
2.2 THE BASIC TOPICS OF RSI ............................................................................................................ 12
3 WHEN SHOULD A ROAD SAFETY INSPECTION BE CARRIED OUT? ........................................ 13
3.1 KEY REASONS TO START AN RSI ..................................................................................................... 13
3.2 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................................................. 13
3.3 FREQUENCY ............................................................................................................................... 14
4 THE INSPECTION PROCESS – HOW TO PERFORM AN RSI ..................................................... 15
4.1 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................ 15
4.2 THE PARTNERS IN THE RSI PROCESS AND THEIR ROLES......................................................................... 16
4.3 PREPARATORY WORK IN THE OFFICE ................................................................................................ 17
4.4 FIELD STUDY ............................................................................................................................. 18
4.5 RSI FINDINGS AND REPORT ........................................................................................................... 20
4.6 COMPLETION OF THE RSI ............................................................................................................. 21
4.7 REMEDIAL MEASURES AND FOLLOW-UP ............................................................................................. 21
5 TYPICAL ROAD SAFETY DEFICIENCIES .................................................................................. 22
5.1 GENERAL .................................................................................................................................. 22
5.2 TYPICAL ROAD SAFETY DEFICIENCIES................................................................................................ 23
6 LEGAL ASPECTS AND TRAINING OF INSPECTORS ................................................................. 46
6.1 LEGAL ASPECTS .......................................................................................................................... 46
6.2 EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING OF INSPECTORS ....................................................................................... 48
7 REFERENCES ............................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
Annexe 1: Checklists ................................................................................................................... 50
Annexe 2: Investigation form ....................................................................................................... 70
Annexe 3: Example of RSI report ................................................................................................. 74
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AADT Annual average daily traffic

BSM Black spot management
CADaS Common Accident Database Set in use in the EU
EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
EIB European Investment Bank
ERAP European Road Assessment Programme
EU European Union
EU Directive on Road Infrastructure Safety Management (2008/96/EC) of the
EU Directive
European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008
IFI International financial institutions
iRAP International Road Assessment Programme
MDB Multilateral Development Bank
MoT Ministry of Transport
NSM Network Safety Management
PIARC World Road Association
RAP Road Assessment Programme
RSA Road Safety Audit
RSI Road Safety Inspection
RSIA Road Safety Impact Assessment
SEETO South East Europe Transport Observatory
TA Traffic accident
TC Training course
TERN Trans-European Road Network
TRACECA Transport Corridor Europe-Caucasus-Asia
TS Traffic safety
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The SEETO Road Safety Inspection Manual (Revised version – 2016) builds to a large extent on
international best practice based on World Road Association (PIARC) manuals/handbooks; the
existing SEETO Road Safety Inspection Manual prepared within the project ‘Support for
implementing measures for the South East Europe Core Regional Transport Network Multi Annual
Plan (MAP) 2008–2012’ and implemented in 2008–2009 by the consortium WYG, Trademco, VV
and TRL; and on the direct experience of the authors in SEETO Participants.
FOREWORD
After almost two decades of experience with the Road Safety Audit (RSA) and the Road Safety
Inspection (RSI) worldwide, these procedures are now recognised as being among the most efficient
engineering tools. RSA/RSI are highly efficient and cost-effective engineering tools for improving
safety on roads. It is much cheaper to identify road safety deficiencies during the design process
rather than later after construction is completed. RSAs are among the most cost-effective investments
a road authority can undertake. Similarly with RSIs, where the prevention of accidents on existing
roads (roads in use) is a much better investment than financing the consequences of accidents. RSIs
are essential for the reconstruction and rehabilitation of roads as well as for their regular maintenance,
because there are much more existing roads than new roads being built.
With its EU Directive No. 2008/96 on road infrastructure safety management, published in October
2008, the European Union (EU) made a clear decision that the RSA/RSI will be mandatory for the
Trans-European Road Network (TERN) in future.
Unfortunately, in reality there is currently little systematic application of RSI in SEETO Participants.
RSIs that are implemented are mostly pushed by IFIs, implemented by foreign consulting companies
and based on different approaches. The latest EU and IFI-funded project has tried to develop capacity
for RSI implementation in each of the SEETO Participants so some steps towards RSI implementation
have been taken: each Participant now has several trained auditors/inspectors; a SEETO RSI Manual
(based on PIARC – the World Road Association) was produced in 2008/2009; and certain pilot road
sections have been inspected. In some of the SEETO Participants RSI has been introduced into the
legislation as a mandatory procedure. However, progress towards the systematic implementation of
RSI in SEETO Participants remains slow to date.
Therefore, this revision of the SEETO RSI Manual tries to establish/update a systematic approach to
the RSI of existing roads based on PIARC guidelines and the first SEETO RSI Manual
Special attention has been given to make the manual more user friendly. There are plenty of
illustrations from SEETO Participants which will help users to easily understand typical road safety
deficiencies and the associated road safety risks to all road users.
The manual was extended in the fields which provide readers with information about types of
accidents (based on CADaS – Common Accident Database Set in use in EU) and the expected
reduction of accidents (based on international best practice).
1 BASICS ABOUT ROAD SAFETY INSPECTION
1.1 Road safety inspection
A road safety inspection (RSI) is a systematic field study, conducted by road safety expert(s), of an
existing road or section of road to identify any hazards, faults and deficiencies that may lead to serious
accidents. Following the principle ‘Prevention is better than cure’ the RSI makes it possible to evaluate
existing road traffic facilities and to improve the road safety performance.
It is important to note that:

 An RSI is systematic, meaning it will be carried out in a methodical way following a formal
procedure.
 An RSI is proactive, trying to prevent accidents through the identification of safety deficiencies
for remedial action rather than reacting after accidents happen.
 An RSI relates to an existing road (not roads being constructed, because they are subject to
a road safety audit (RSA)).
 An RSI should be carried out by an independent person or team with experience in road safety
work, accident analysis, traffic engineering, road user behaviour and/or road design. The
persons should not be involved in the regular maintenance of the road or road section.
Road safety inspections are a safety management tool that can be implemented by road authorities
as part of an overall road safety management.
The aim of an RSI is to find out potential problems and to propose sufficient countermeasures to
reduce the number of accidents or minimise their severity. This in turn will lead to reduced social and
economic costs associated with accidents, to individuals, families and society.
After years of experience with road safety inspection in most EU countries and all over the world, this
procedure is systematised and approved by the World Road Association (PIARC) as one of the most
important and effective engineering tools available to us to improve road safety.
In its Directive No. 2008/96 on Road Infrastructure Safety Management – published in October 2008
– the European Union made a clear decision that road safety inspection will be mandatory for the
trans-European Road Network. In this directive the RSI is part of a package of road safety measures
including:
 Road safety impact assessment (RSIA),
 Road safety audit for the design stages of roads (RSA),
 Safety ranking and management of the road network in operation (including management of
high-risk road sections) (RAP, BSM and NSM),
 Road safety inspections for existing roads (RSI) and
 In-depth accident analysis (IDS).
The introduced measures are an integrated part of road safety management:
ROAD ROAD ROAD ROAD BLACK IN-DEPTH NETWORK

SAFETY SAFETY ASSESS- SAFETY SPOT STUDIES SAFETY
IMPACT AUDIT MENT INSPEC- MANAGE- of TA with MANAGE-
ASSESS- PROG. TION MENT fatalities MENT
MENT (IDS)
(ERAP- (NSM)
(RIA) (RSA) iRAP) (RSI) (BSM)
PRO-ACTIVE (PREVENTION) RE-ACTIVE (CURE)
NEW DESIGN EXISTING ROADS
Figure 1.1-1 Road safety inspection as part of road safety management
As part of road safety engineering, a road safety inspection is closely linked to and has many
similarities with the last two stages of a road safety audit.
The similarities and differences of both procedures is explained in Figure 1.1-2:
RIA RSI
Process RSA
Feasibi- Draft Detailed Pre- Early Road

lity Design Design opening opera- in
Stage
Study of the tion of opera-
road road tion
Road Safety Auditors
Road Safety
Inspectors
Figure 1.1-2 RIA, RSA and RSI – stages and responsibilities
Road safety inspection provides a supplementary, proactive approach to safety countermeasures in

road engineering. Figure 1.1-3 explains the interaction between RSA and RSI procedures.
NEW ROAD EXISTING ROAD

SCHEMES SCHEMES
Road Road
Safety Safety
Audit Inspection
(RSA) (RSI)
RSA Problems and RSI

checklist countermeasures checklist
s s
IMPROVED ROAD SAFETY
Figure 1.1-3 Interaction between the RSA and RSI procedures
Whereas Directive 2008/96 was quite clear and straightforward in its explanation of the RSA approach
and methodology used, it was less precise with regard to RSI. The given definition: ‘Safety
inspection means an ordinary periodic verification of the characteristics and defects that
require maintenance work for reasons of safety’ allows for different approaches and has
somehow been understood by readers as routine checking of signalling and visible roadside hazards
along roads. The directive definition of RSI was followed by the additional explanation:
1. Member States shall ensure that safety inspections are undertaken in respect of roads in
operation in order to identify road safety-related features and to prevent accidents.
2. Safety inspections shall comprise periodic inspections of the road network and surveys on the
possible impact of roadworks on traffic flow safety.
3. Member States shall ensure that periodic inspections are undertaken by a competent body.
Such inspections shall be sufficiently frequent to safeguard adequate safety levels for the
road infrastructure in question.
4. Without prejudice to the guidelines adopted pursuant to Article 8, Member States shall adopt
guidelines on temporary safety measures applying to roadworks. They shall also implement
an appropriate inspection scheme to ensure that these guidelines are properly applied.
This additional explanation still does not utilise the full road safety potential of a systematic and in-
depth analysis of road safety deficiencies which can be eliminated with quality RSI (RSI with a broader
perspective than merely policing or maintaining).
The expected, essential principles of the RSI are based on:

 An interdisciplinary and detailed analysis of the road and the road environment from the
perspective of all road users in daylight and at night, as well as in different road conditions
(rain, snow, fog, etc.);
 The identification of possible road safety deficiencies and the associated accident risks;
 If possible, a recommendation of possible measures for improving road safety, presented as
an official report.
The outcome of an RSI is a formal report which identifies any road safety deficiency and, if
appropriate, makes recommendations aimed at removing or reducing the deficiencies.
A variety of different traffic facilities can be inspected: motorways, inter-urban highways and urban
roads as well as facilities for pedestrians and cyclists, etc.
1.2 RSI as part of the Safe System approach
The number of severe accidents in the SEETO region is unacceptably high. One reason for this is that
parts of the existing network are not suitable regarding road safety performance. Often the roads
were designed and constructed some decades ago for less traffic going at slower speeds. In addition,
in rehabilitated road sections the number of accidents continues to be high because improving road
safety was in most cases not the priority of the project while the new asphalt layers allowed for
increased speed resulting in an increase in the number and severity of accidents as well.
A common misconception is that driver error or bad behaviour is the single cause of road traffic
accidents. However, various international research points to the whole system – drivers, the road and
its environment, and the vehicles – usually called the Safe System approach).
Driver failure:
bad behaviour
‘System’ failure
driver / road / vehicle
Driver failure:
inexperience
Relative contribution to crashes (Source: PIARC, Road Safety Manual)
Within the Safe System approach, which aims for a more forgiving road system that takes human
error and vulnerability into account, RSI is an approved tool for improving roads and their
environment. With the inspection expertise and the systematic implementation of RSI proposals, it is
possible to significantly reduce the number and severity of traffic accidents by improving the road
safety performance of existing roads.
1.3 Benefits and costs of a road safety inspection
The purpose of an RSI is to proactively manage safety by identifying and addressing risks associated
with road safety deficiencies.
The benefits of an RSI can be summarised as follows:

 To identify potential road or traffic safety concerns for all road users;
 To minimise the risk and severity of road accidents that may result from an existing situation
on a road section;
 To minimise unsustainable losses to health and the economy.
To be effective, solutions must be identified and implemented as a result of the RSI. Research by
well-known Norwegian scientist Rune Elvik shows significant expected accident reductions as a result
of a road safety inspection and the associated remedial works. Examples include:
 Correcting incorrect signs: 5–10% reduction
 Adding guard rails along embankments: 40–50% reduction
 Providing clear recovery zones: 10–40% reduction
 Removing obstacles obscuring view: 0–5% reduction
The above constitute ‘low-cost measures’ which are typically included in an RSI report for short- and
medium-term implementation.
Although it is not always easy to quantify precisely the economic benefits of RSI, there is strong
evidence that such inspections are highly cost-effective. With the introduction of some typical
measures like those mentioned above, it is possible to save lives. Obviously, even if only one human
life were saved per year in an inspected road section, the benefit of the RSI would be much greater
than the relevant cost.
1.4 Road safety inspection and accident data
An RSI does not require accident data, which is a big advantage in cases with no reliable accident
data. An RSI is a systematic review of a selected road or a relatively long section of a road, regardless
of the number of accidents. The traditional road engineering approach to safety has very often taken
the form of ‘wait and see’, i.e. safety countermeasures are not considered until the number of
accidents becomes unacceptable. Only after the identification of a high-risk road section and the
analysis of the accident situation are countermeasures designed and implemented.
But the RSI process is systematic and not just focused on particular high-risk road sections identified
by accident data or sometimes only by anecdotal accident or incident information from local police or
residents. An RSI draws on the experience of experts during the field study and is supported by
detailed checklists. The RSI output is a detailed analysis of the problems and a proposal for sufficient
countermeasures. RSIs aim to identify any risks that may lead to accidents in the future, so that
remedial measures may be implemented before accidents happen.
Road accident data can provide some additional guidance in terms of prioritising which roads should
be inspected. Knowledge of the number and types of accidents can help to organise the RSI in an
effective way. For example, when the road authority introduces an RSI, it is recommended to start
the RSI along the road sections of highest risk with bad accident records. On the other hand, if data
shows that one type of accident occurs very often, the RSI could focus on the circumstances leading
to that type of accident. For example, a high number of accidents with pedestrians in built-up areas
could be due to a lack of pavements and crossing facilities as well as speeding motorists. The RSI
team should also focus on local conditions. In the case of run-off accidents, a typical accident that
happens along curves, the RSI should pay particular attention to the super-elevation, skid resistance
and warning signs. The information from Road Safety Network Management tools or a previous first
investigation with computerised assessment programmes like the International Road Assessment
Program (iRAP) can also provide valuable information in terms of selecting roads for inspection.
1.5 Inspections and maintenance
In every SEETO Participant a road maintenance system is installed. In some cases, a special Road
Inspectorate is responsible for a periodic check of the roads in the network. The inspectorate may
also include traffic police. The RSI should not just be about routine maintenance, however. The task
of maintenance units and the Road Inspectorate is to ensure key infrastructure issues such as
overhanging branches, the road surface, potholes and poor quality signage are reviewed and
remedied. Regular maintenance can be carried out by people who do not necessarily have road safety
experience but are simply following a regular planned process.
The RSI will help to increase the efficiency of maintenance work. RSIs can identify safety deficiencies
that are sometimes a result of poor maintenance, for example poor signage and line marking or
visibility issues caused by vegetation, but can also go beyond the scope of maintenance. As RSI is a
formal and systematic field study focusing on road safety, it covers more than the work of the Road
Inspectorate and maintenance units. However, it is possible for there to be cooperation with the Road
Inspectorate and maintenance units, for example to invite them to RSI as guests or to have an
exchange of basic information. In addition, everything is very dependent on the capacity building of
Road Inspectorates and therefore it may be necessary that they just focus on their existing tasks.
1.6 Inspections and human factors
All inspections should take into account a range of human factors which relate to driver errors that
are caused by the road. Over the last few decades traffic psychologists have carried out a lot of basic
research which we are using in our design guidelines and accident investigations. For example, typical
issues that should be investigated include strain or workload issues (either a very low or very high
level of ‘workload’ leads to a poor quality of driving, e.g. a changing landscape rather than a
monotonous landscape could assist in keeping drivers awake, or multiple signals/signs and events at
one location can overwhelm the driver and lead to confusion), perception (illusions can lead to the
incorrect estimation of speed, direction or curves) and choice of speed (this is mostly an automatic
process that depends on different factors including the road geometry and surrounds). Some
questions in our checklists are particularly related to human factors.
The World Road Association (PIARC) has been working on a special guide on Human Factors in Road
Design and Operation, which is planned to be published in 2016.
2 WHAT SHOULD BE INSPECTED?
2.1 Area of application
This Manual for Road Safety Inspection of existing roads applies to roads, motorways and other road
traffic facilities inside and outside built-up areas.
Any road can be inspected, but a road authority may wish to prioritise roads for some reason,
including funding restrictions. Prioritising could be based on the function of the road, its location,
traffic volume, network management tools or accident data.
2.2 The basic topics of RSI
The following key areas relating to the road should be investigated during an RSI:
 Function
Is the road suitable for its function in the network? (Does it have mixed functions? Are speeds limits
appropriate? Are there any impacts from land development? Are there any problems with access to
private properties?)
 Cross section
Is the road wide enough and is the number of lanes sufficient for the traffic using it? Is the marking
sufficient? What are the surface conditions? Are the shoulders adequate but not too wide? Is drainage
from the road adequate? Is the pavement in a suitable condition? Does it adequately separate
vulnerable road users?
 Alignment
How many horizontal curves are there? Ensure none begin just over a hill. What about vertical curves?
Is there consistency in curve design? Are viewing distances adequate?
 Intersections
Are intersections appropriate for the traffic volumes? Are there traffic signals and are they sufficient?
Local accesses to private properties and railway crossings need to be examined.
 Public and private services, service and rest areas, public transport
Is there sufficient space and acceleration/deceleration lanes into the service and rest areas? How is
access controlled to other services such as schools, hospitals, supermarkets, restaurants, etc.?
Parking and loading facilities and public transport facilities, e.g. bus stops, need to be looked at. Is
there sufficient space that is safe for waiting passengers?
 Vulnerable road user needs
This topic includes the needs of pedestrians, cyclists and powered two-wheelers. These issues are
important because of the often serious consequences of accidents with this type of road user.
Furthermore, it is expected that the number of cyclists and powered two-wheelers will increase in the
coming years.
 Traffic signage, marking and lighting
Is the signage and marking appropriate and clear? Is lighting adequate or is it needed?
 Roadside features and passive safety installations
What structures, steep slopes and embankments, planting, trees and other obstacles are near the
roadside that could pose a problem? Are there gaps in the passive safety system and/or is it an
obstacle itself?
3 WHEN SHOULD ROAD SAFETY INSPECTION BE CARRIED OUT?
3.1 Key reasons to start an RSI
An RSI can be started when:
 A road section or intersection is already identified as a high risk road section, e.g. according
to the accident database, or iRAP;
 There is other information about serious safety problems given by the police, the maintenance
unit, the courts or local administration such as city hall, etc.;
 A reconstruction or rehabilitation project is planned by the road authority – the RSI should
identify the specific needs regarding road safety;
 It can be started also as a periodic task according to the ‘RSI time schedule’ for a road section.
3.2 Other considerations
The following issues need to be considered as part of the inspection process:
 Time of inspection – it is recommended that inspections take place both during the day and
at night. This is important so that the inspector(s) can focus on issues specific to night, such
as checking if traffic signs and line markings are still visible at night-time. An analysis of the
lighting along a road or at an intersection should be undertaken to make sure it is suitable for
all road users. The night inspection is very important, especially in cases of a high percentage
of accidents occurring during the night. When the RSI is undertaken as a team the night-time
inspection can be carried out by one qualified team member alone.
 Seasonal variation – it is also suggested that consideration be given to inspections in

different seasons if the seasons are vastly different, for example snow in winter and very dry
and hot in summer, or wet conditions to check the dewatering skid resistance of the road
surface. It is possible to use information about the seasonal variation of accidents to decide
the best times for RSI.
 Site specific matters should be taken into consideration. If the road passes a school for
example, the inspection should take place partly when school children are arriving at or leaving
the school.
3.3 Frequency
This Manual calls for the RSI to become a routine process, carried out at regular intervals. This
regulation follows article 6 of the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council No.
2006/0182 on Road Infrastructure Safety Management in which a sufficient frequency of RSI is
demanded. While no exact timing is recommended, the frequency at which RSIs should be carried
out for different classes of road are proposed in Chapter 6. Design features such as cross sections
and alignment may not change for many years but may have to be adapted to changing functions,
traffic volume and composition.
We should bear in mind, however, that other road elements can change more often. If road conditions
are known to have changed, for example new signage and/or markings, lighting and surface
conditions, a focused or specific road safety inspection limited to these topics can be carried out by
the road authority. If a road safety audit for these measures is not done (perhaps because they were
a part of maintenance activities), additional RSIs are essential to check the work undertaken to ensure
no errors that could lead to accidents were made. Examples could include incorrectly installed traffic
signs and markings. These specific road safety inspections would occur at additional irregular intervals
depending on how conditions have changed.
Inspections could also be conducted if a one-off project such as a new motorway with new link roads
or the building of a new shopping centre occurs. Such a project could affect road safety in terms of
issues like a marked increase in traffic volumes, an increased number of pedestrians and vehicles,
parking and an increased presence of trucks.
4 THE INSPECTION PROCESS – HOW TO PERFORM AN RSI
4.1 Overview
As it is mentioned above, the RSI can be instigated as part of the overall safety management of the
road network. The first decision is to determine the extent of the inspection by defining the start and
end points of the inspection. Generally, this will be a road from start to finish (i.e. between well-
defined major intersections) but it could also be a section of a road, of a reasonable length). This will
be outlined in an agreement between the parties involved in the inspection, usually the road authority
(owner) and the inspector or inspection team. The written agreement will describe what to inspect,
who is paying for what, timelines and deadlines, what the local agency should contribute and so on.
START OF THE RSI

Client awards RSI to the inspector
Ordering
Client hands over all documents/data to the inspector
Independent RSI report prepared by the inspector Undertaking
Client decides whether to implement

RSI report
Client
RSI considers:
report shows proposed
no safety measures not
problems accepted
Client
considers:
proposed
measures Completion
accepted
Client explains the

reasons for rejecting
proposed measures
END OF THE RSI
Figure 4.1-1 The RSI workflow (main steps)
The following FOUR steps outline the procedure of the inspector’s work:
STEP 1 Preparatory work in the office
STEP 2 On-site field study
STEP 3 RSI report
STEP 4 Remedial measures and follow-up
It should be noted that Step 4 may be considered as two separate processes – the first is the
implementation of remedial measures, while the follow-up is likely to be some time later to evaluate
the impact of the countermeasures.
4.2 The partners in the RSI process and their roles
The client (usually the road authority or private road operating company) and the inspector (or team
of Inspectors) participate in the inspection process.
The Client is the institution (typically the road authority) which is responsible for the road safety of
the network in its jurisdiction. It is the client’s full responsibility to ensure that inspection demands
are obeyed and begin the proposed improvements as soon as possible. It is also the task of the client
to organise the necessary investments for the implementation of the RSI results.
The Inspector is the independent road safety expert, or a team or organisation, who will conduct
the RSI. The expert is responsible for conducting the RSI carefully. With a formal written report, the
inspector shall present the findings, the deficiencies and references.
The inspector will use his/her expert knowledge regarding best practice in the evaluation of the
existing situation. It is crucial that the inspector is highly experienced in road design and construction
as well as road safety engineering and accident analysis. To ensure the quality of the RSI, inspectors
shall undergo initial training to obtain a certificate of competence and should take part in periodic
further training courses. Where RSIs are undertaken by teams, at least one member of the team shall
hold a certificate of competence.
Order the RSI

Usually, the decision to order an inspection is taken by the client (road authority). However, it may
be regulated by a Ministry decision or by law as well as by the financing donor.
Selecting the team

The client commissions the inspector, who can either be an individual or a team. Ideally, it should be
a team with different skills appropriate to the project. One person in the team should be appointed
as the team leader to manage the team and the process. A list of potential inspectors compiled by
the client can be helpful for the selection process.
It is important to consider including members with experience regarding all aspects of facility
maintenance including signage, traffic lighting control, vegetation, snow removal, etc. It may be
useful to include a police officer who is experienced in road safety and accident investigation.
4.3 Preparatory work in the office
Background information about the road, the function of the road, the standard of the road and traffic
volumes should be obtained as a first step. Information from local residents might prove useful and
can be obtained through face-to-face discussions or a questionnaire. The list below provides
information about the sort of questions that should be asked and the answers recorded during the
preparatory work:
Road function
 Describe the function of the road: is it a national or regional road?

 Is the road a school bus route?
 Does the road pass through any towns or villages?
 What kind of vehicles use this road?
 Is it long-distance or short-distance traffic, or perhaps there is a mix of different kinds?
 What about heavy vehicle traffic? Is the proportion more or less than other similar roads?
 Is the road a part of a special freight route (e.g. dangerous goods)?
 Do vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians, cyclists or powered two-wheelers, use the
road?
 If the road passes through agricultural areas, are there slow-moving vehicles along the road?
Traffic situation
Important information for the RSI includes:

 The traffic volume (AADT if possible for the last 3–5 years)
 Traffic composition (trucks, buses, vulnerable road users)
 Any traffic volume prediction for the road
Road standard
 Describe the road standard in general and how it relates to the road function, traffic volume,
types of junctions and intersections, speed limits, etc.
 Analyse the speed limits. Are they reasonable for built-up areas, the presence of vulnerable
road users, especially children, the elderly and disabled persons, the alignment of the road,
etc.?
The relevant guidelines and regulations need to be available for the preparatory office work at least.
If possible, reasonably detailed maps or drawings or the use of satellite maps (e.g. Google Earth) or
any aerial views could be helpful. Printouts of this documents should be used as an instrument during
the field study but also as a support for presenting the results of the inspection. One of the most
important parts of an RSI is to accurately indicate where particular problems are located along the
road to give the right recommendation for remedial measures. The method of identifying concrete
locations has to be determined at an early stage. Different methods can be used:
 The coordinates measured by GPS equipment and registered in a GPS device or hand-held
computer.
 The mileage from any kilometre posts.
 The odometer of the car used during the field study.
 The distance of the coordinates measured on the map or the drawing.
 Easily identified landmarks or reference to video footage.
The first method was tested during the RSI pilots and is recommended as the most convenient and
accurate when the equipment is available. In addition, some sketches, digital pictures and videos are
helpful in the report and for discussions with the client.
The following personal and technical equipment should be organised for the RSI:
 Maps and any drawings from previous projects

 Water level to check the cross fall and super-elevation, especially at curves
 Tape measure/measuring wheel
 Digital camera (for pictures and, on request, short film sequences)
 Aerosol can for marking specific spots
 Some form of recording, e.g. laptop computer, tape recorder
 Paper and pencil
 Stopwatch to record vehicle speeds, headway gaps and traffic flows
 Optical distance measuring tool
 A handheld speed gun (radar pistol) may be helpful
 Checklist
 Warning/safety vest or jacket – to be worn during the inspection so that inspectors are visible
to road users
 Yellow blinking light for cars and blinking torches for night inspections
 Suitable clothing for the weather conditions (hats, boots, etc.)
 A letter of comfort is recommended, in case officials or residents ask
Furthermore, the following data should be organised:
 Traffic data for all types of road user

 Accident data
 Data from traffic police about typical traffic offences in the road section
 Information about investments in the adjacent area, e.g. for a through road section a planned
shopping centre, a new hospital, etc.
4.4 Field Study
Before conducting the field study, the inspectors should clear with the client and the traffic police the
necessary safety equipment. This of course depends on the type of road; higher safety standards are
necessary for an RSI on a motorway. The vehicle used to transport the inspector or inspection team
to the site and which is used during the inspection should preferably have flashing/warning lights. If
team members are from the road directorate or traffic police it may be helpful to use an official car.
Inspectors need to take care, not only by wearing a safety vest, but also by ensuring they take all
necessary precautions such as standing behind a guard rail if it is provided or standing as far away
from traffic as possible.
Additional safety equipment is usually necessary on motorways and similar high-speed roads. There
may be a need to temporarily close one lane depending on regulations governing temporary working
zones in the SEETO Participant. Some sort of warning signage should be placed on the road being
inspected and on roads that intersect this road. For a reliable inspection report the inspection should
be made both by car and on foot where needed and both sides of the road and roadsides inspected.
The road should be driven a number of times if possible and photographs taken of specific issues.
Figure 4.4-1 Croatia – Wearing warning vests and Figure 4.4-2 BiH (Republic of Srpska) – Field study
being supported by traffic police of the RSI team
When an intersection is included in the road to be inspected it is necessary to inspect part of the
intersecting road as well (at least the approaches), both by vehicle and on foot. Site inspections
should be undertaken over a range of traffic and environmental conditions likely to be encountered.
As mentioned before both night-time and daytime inspections are essential to appreciate the situation.
It may also be necessary to view the location at other times of the day (e.g. when school finishes,
during peak hours or the weekly market).
When conducting the RSI, the inspectors must place themselves in the position of the various road
users (motorist, cyclist and pedestrian) so that traffic safety from the viewpoint of all road users can
be judged. The on-site field study should start with the description of the surrounding area. It is
necessary to describe the local situation (rural, urban or suburban and a description of what surrounds
the road – forest, agricultural area, built-up area, etc.).
The road safety inspectors should observe the traffic flow and document traffic incidents which could
easily lead to accidents in specific traffic compositions. If there is obviously a problem with speeding
the team could measure the average speed (e.g. with speed guns).
In the core part of the RSI deficiencies on the road that may cause accidents or could have an
influence on the severity of accidents should be detected.
The checklists in Annexe 1 will help to detect deficiencies in a systematic way. Some typical
deficiencies from the pilot phase of the preparation of this manual have been collected and illustrated
in Chapter 5.
4.5 RSI findings and report
The RSI team or expert should note in the report the problems detected. It is useful to sort the
findings by importance, relevance and kind. The report is delivered to the client and should clearly
describe general information such as the inspected road section and the inspection team members.
The road safety deficiencies should be explained and the Inspector should make recommendations
about stepwise measures to improve the situation.
It is very important to write down findings on any working documents and these notes must be kept
as evidence. The checklists can be helpful: in the Comments line the inspector could write explanatory
notes in case the client needs something to be explained at a later stage. Also, in the case of findings
which turn out not to be relevant and not part of the formal report, it would be helpful to indicate
them there.
The RSI report should be made up of an introduction, parts A, B and C, and appendices with maps,
pictures and illustrations as necessary.
The introduction should include details of the road or section of road being inspected, the
composition of the inspection team, the date, times and conditions at the time of the inspection.
Part A should outline the background data obtained during the preparatory work in the office and a
description of the activities undertaken.
Part B should describe the shortcomings or deficiencies which were found and an assessment of
these deficiencies. It should contain the completed investigation form and the documentation with
pictures. Part B should finish with a conclusion about the findings (‘Assessment of deficits’).
Part C should contain proposals for countermeasures, from short to long term.
A typical table of contents in an RSI report would be:
1. Introduction including details about the road being inspected.

2. Part A. Project data (road function, traffic situation, road standards, surroundings).
3. Part B. Investigation results with the deficiencies. The content be sorted in formal way and
in accordance with rubrics in the checklist.
4. Part C. Proposals and options for countermeasures – short term (e.g. low-cost measures
which could be done as maintenance), medium term (e.g. small investments like adding guard
rails) and long term (larger investments).
5. Appendix to include maps and illustrations (in order to clarify the results, different kinds of
illustrations may be used, including photos and sketches of countermeasures, and locations
need to be specified) as a separate annexe or they could be included in Part B.
The Road Safety Inspection report should propose and discuss a range of countermeasures. The
safety effects of the different measures should be taken into consideration. The inspector should
conduct an internal check to see if the proposed measures could cause any negative effects.
It is helpful to estimate costs for the different countermeasures. In this way a ranking of remedial
measures could be made for example on the basis of a cost-effectiveness ratio. Also, the time that is
needed to realise the measures should be taken into consideration in order to prepare challenging
but realistic proposals. The inspector should use his/her personal expert knowledge and experience
about best practice and local circumstances.
The proposed measures will help the road authority to prepare an investment plan for the necessary
stepwise investments to improve the situation.
4.6 Completion of the RSI
Upon receipt of the report, the client must consider the indicated problems and proposals and make
a decision on how or if the proposed measures will be implemented.
Completion meeting
A meeting between the client and the inspectors could be helpful to discuss and clarify the inspection
result. It is important that the inspection team leader and representatives from the road authority
(client) are present so that both parties can clearly understand the issues raised. It can also be helpful
to invite officers from the traffic police to the meeting.
Response to the inspection report
The client reviews the formal RSI report and considers the indicated problems and proposals. The
client finally decides whether or not recommendations are to be adopted.
All recommendations must be given due consideration. Those that are accepted should be
implemented stepwise and the road authority should provide an investment plan for the measure.
Problems identified that are considered to be insignificant, outside the terms of reference or whose
recommended solutions are not considered suitable, must be addressed by means of a formal
response. It is important that this formal response gives reasons why the recommendations are not
accepted. This response acts as an evidence trail through the decision-making process.
The written response to the audit report will become part of the project documentation.
4.7 Remedial measures and follow-up
Very important and sufficient will be the foreseen periodic RSI in the core network. That will guarantee
an effective way for a serious follow up.
In addition, it could be helpful to conduct some studies at a later time to evaluate the effects of the
remedial measures. The road authority could organise such studies for example with the support of
universities. Behavioural studies should be carried out in the same way and in the same locations as
during the investigation. Traffic volumes and speeds should be checked, as well as the traffic
environment.
5 TYPICAL ROAD SAFETY DEFICIENCIES
5.1 General
Much valuable information can be gained from studying the crash patterns on different types of roads.
In the last decades much scientific research has been carried out worldwide, the results of which are
being used as the basis for better design standards and guidelines of roads to improve safety.
Furthermore, ongoing research can also be a source of information on potential safety deficiencies
and improvements, even when this research has not yet been introduced into the relevant technical
standards and specifications. We use the results of road safety research to propose effective measures
to rectify the identified safety problems.
This chapter cannot attempt to describe all the factors of a crash that are directly related to design
issues but focuses on the primary characteristics of a crash that are particularly applicable to a specific
road type and high-risk sections (‘black spots’). Important deficiencies that can have a critical effect
on both the number and severity of crashes are also included.
As for the road safety audit the most important proposition for the RSI is:
Humans make mistakes: minimise the opportunities for errors in road traffic!
If mistakes are still made, minimise the consequences!
The RSI should be conducted taking into consideration the point of view of every kind of road user.
As outlined in Chapter 1.2, road users and their behaviour are a contributing factor in a large
proportion of accidents.
Traffic facilities, road design, signs, markings, etc., must give drivers a clear picture and should assist
them to make the right decisions and take appropriate action at the right moment. This means the
so-called ‘human factors’ should be taken into account in the design and audit process to ease the
demands on the drivers and to avoid ‘overloading’ when using the road.
Therefore, we should always avoid:
 Excessive speed differentials,

 High absolute speed,
 Differences in direction,
 Unpredictable situations, etc.
To improve road safety, we should try to warn drivers of unusual situations, inform them of changes
in the road conditions and give the driver guidance in the case of conflict points or sections. To
minimise the consequences of accidents we should follow the principle of the error-forgiving roadside
(obstacle-free zone, etc.).
We should try to avoid surprises and confusion, which means the road must follow the expectations
and experience of an average driver. This includes harmonising signage in the network and employing
similar solutions for similar situations. It is of course often difficult to improve a highway that was
constructed a long time ago and, in the main, situations cannot be compared with modern highways.
An overall improvement would lead to a completely new highway, incurring high costs and taking a
long time. As this is not a realistic solution, the existing traffic facilities should be improved.
5.2 Typical road safety deficiencies
This chapter does not replace a comprehensive analysis of road safety within the framework of the
safety inspection, but it does provide some structure for using the checklists, with all necessary
questions for an RSI contained in Annexe 1.
In the following sections some typical examples of road safety problems observed in SEETO
Participants that are linked with typical accident risks (in accordance with CADaS recommendations)
are presented.
ROAD FUNCTION
Introduction:
A typical deficiency of existing roads is the conflicting function of the road in the network with high
traffic volumes and its existing usage with mixed traffic. This situation can be found in through road
sections of linear villages, towns and also in urban main roads and leads to safety issues with
vulnerable road users. The interest of the long-distance traffic is to pass a road section as fast as
possible. On the other hand, there are often large numbers of pedestrians on these sections which
have insufficient or disorganised crossing facilities and a lack of pedestrian walkways. These
deficiencies will lead to accidents involving pedestrians.
Sometimes existing speed limits in urbanised areas are too high. In sections with a high number of
crossing pedestrians a legal speed of 50 km/h could lead to accidents.
Speeding is a serious problem because high speed kills. The faster the speed of a vehicle, the greater
the risk of an accident in built up areas. The forces experienced by the human body in a collision
increase exponentially as the speed increases. The problem is that exceeding the speed limit by only
5 km/h in the wrong place can be dangerous for the vulnerable road user; crossing pedestrians can
be killed. If the speed of a car is higher than 45 km/h when hitting a pedestrian, there is almost no
chance of this pedestrian surviving.
As the images on the following pages illustrate, footpaths for pedestrians can be non-existent or
completely occupied by shops, stalls, garages, restaurants, construction materials or parked
motorbikes. Pedestrians are forced to walk on the road itself which can be dangerous where there is
traffic including cars and trucks. This situation is even more dangerous in areas where there are linear
settlements along the major roads and pedestrian fatalities in particular are a major cause for concern.
Typical problems:
A mixture of road functions (usage of the road as a quick distributor of fast longer distance traffic
and as a location of slow local traffic) causes one of the major road safety problems especially in low-
and middle-income countries (LMICs), as are most SEETO Participants. This is a common problem in
almost all countries where expansion of isolated communities along a road can rapidly reduce the
effectiveness of a nationally or regionally important route as a result of local traffic activities
overwhelming the through route function of the road.
In such cases, the role of the road in the road hierarchy becomes compromised. While the road is
passing through settlements (where there is no bypass) can it keep its geometry unchanged? Can it
still be called an international/regional/national road, or does it then become a street? This, simple
planning (designing) error of local administrations can cause tremendous problems in road safety.
Once intense development has been allowed it is very difficult to achieve improvements without major
reconstruction of a new alignment. Often, even when a bypass has been built, the village over time
extends out across to the new road. This is mainly an issue of access and development control and
relevant authorities need to apply such measures.
Examples of unsafe designs:
Figure 5.2-1 Serbia – Intensive mixed function along Figure 5.2-2 BiH (Republic of Srpska) – Four-lane
a through road section of a long- express road without separation and a
distance highway high level of access to adjacent areas
Expected accidents:
- Pedestrian crossing street outside a junction;
- Pedestrian on the road;
- At least two vehicles – same direction – rear-end collision;
- At least two vehicles – head-on collision;
- At least two vehicles – same road, opposite direction – turning left (right) in front of the other
vehicle, etc.
Possible countermeasures:
- Construction of a bypass. This is the best but an expensive solution with a high possibility that
a new bypass will be needed in the future;
- Separation of slow and fast traffic by small distributor roads either between the main road
and houses or behind them;
- Grade separation of long-distance and local traffic;
- Changing the character of the road (from mobility to accessibility) so it acts as a street. The
main aim is to ‘kill’ the speed.
Figure 5.2-3 Example - Entering/exiting an island to/from built-up areas
Entering or exiting an island to/from built-up areas, as shown in Figure 5.2-3, creates a ‘threshold’
effect to show drivers they are ‘entering’ an urban area and that there is a change in the character
of the road and its function which requires lower speeds.
CROSS SECTION
Introduction:
Head-on collisions occur for a variety of reasons, but can sometimes be due to a poor road cross-
section. Head-on collisions on an interurban section often have terrible consequences because the
speed of the vehicles is high. Illustrated below are two cross sections that have an increased potential
to lead to head-on collisions.
Typical problems:
A cross section will normally consist of the carriageway, shoulders or kerbs, drainage features and
earthwork profiles. It may also include facilities for pedestrians, cyclists or other special user groups.
There is some evidence to suggest that widening a lane or carriageway width or widening shoulders
up to a certain extent is beneficial in reducing certain types of accidents. However, beyond a certain
point it can have a negative effect on road safety (drivers will start using the extended width as a
regular lane). Dangerous cross sections of express roads and highways are frequently used in SEETO
Participants. For example, a four-lane road without a crash barrier or a two-lane road with wide hard
shoulders. A two-lane road with wide hard shoulders can sometimes be misused by drivers as a very
narrow four-lane road, with disastrous results and very serious crashes.
Cross sections, particularly on roads through built-up areas, are often not uniform or consistent. Local
developments may encroach onto the carriageway because of a lack of effective planning control. In
rural areas cross sections may be reduced at drainage structures causing sudden changes in width.
Maintenance of the road profile also impacts on safety. If a pavement width reduces due to a lack of
maintenance (water on the pavement, sand, gravel, etc.) or the pavement breaks at the edges
effectively narrowing the road width, head-on collisions or loss of control over a vehicle can occur.
Steep side slopes, introduced for drainage purposes, do not allow a driver to recover in cases where
he/she leaves the carriageway, thereby adding to the likelihood of an accident. Open channel drains
can also increase the probability that driver error will result in an accident.
Figure 5.2-4 Croatia – Two-lane highway with an Figure 5.2-5 BiH (Republic of Srpska) – Four-lane
unsafe road width express road without separation
Figure 5.2-4 shows a two-lane cross section with about 11 m width of carriageway and 2 m wide
emergency lanes/hard shoulders on both sides. Figure 5.2-5 shows a four-lane road cross section
which is used for fast traffic with no separation of vehicles going in different directions. The four-lane
cross section has the potential for head-on collisions and the two-lane cross section with wide hard
shoulders will be misused as a three- or four-lane cross section (with the risk of head-on collisions in
the case of irregular overtaking). Both design solutions were used decades ago in western European
countries but, due to the high number of head-on collisions, they are now constructed differently. For
four-lane interurban roads there should be a median with crash barriers. Other safety problems can
occur when cross sections are too narrow and a high percentage of heavy traffic is present (e.g. side
and head-on collisions).
Expected accidents:
- At least two vehicles – head-on collision in general;
- Hitting parked vehicles on the right (left) side of the road;
- At least two vehicles – same direction – rear-end collisions;
- Pedestrian crossing street outside a junction
- Pedestrian on the road, etc.
- Reconstruction of cross section - change to one of the safest solutions;
- Road improvements (rehabilitation);
- Better signage and marking;
- Maintenance of drainage system.
Figure 5.2-6 Example – Road improvements after rehabilitation
ALIGNMENT
Introduction:
As a result of the RSI we can often identify problems with the alignment of existing roads. Problems
with sight conditions are typical. It is essential to ensure the ‘stopping sight’ for every situation. To
improve road safety the driver should be given enough information about the alignment of the road
and what is going on ahead. This parameter is called ‘orientation sight’. Clearly, sight conditions
depend on the legal and operating speed. For example, for a speed of 100 km/h the stopping sight
should be 170 m (for long fall 0%) and the orientation sight about 300 m.
Reduced visibility can be due to sharp bends, crests or planting. Typical problems regarding the
horizontal alignment are: inconsistent radius sequences with high speed differentials, use of small
radii in high-speed sections and sudden changes of alignment standards without any transition or
regard for the vertical alignment. Deficiencies in the coordination of the horizontal and vertical
alignments are very dangerous. We often find small crest curves with sight restrictions, missing
climbing lanes for trucks in the case of steep gradients on fast roads as well as optical illusions such
as hidden dips or the course of the road suddenly changing direction. The result of these deficiencies
could be head-on collisions or single run-off accidents at curves.
Typical problems:
Unexpectedly tight horizontal curves can lead to accidents as drivers try to drive through them at too
high a speed. A similar situation may occur on horizontal curves in other hazardous situations, such
as a steep gradient or after a long straight section where drivers are encouraged or misled (by the
approach geometry) to think that they can drive at a higher speed than is safe for that location. The
sight distances associated with larger curve radii may also encourage drivers to overtake in unsafe
conditions.
It may be difficult for a driver to estimate the sight distance on a curve crest and he/she may overtake
when there is insufficient length to do so safely. It can be extremely expensive to provide safe
overtaking sight distances on crest curves. However, a complete ban on overtaking can be difficult to
enforce because of the presence of very slow-moving vehicles, the lack of driver discipline in selecting
stopping places, and poor maintenance of road markings and signs.
Poor coordination of the horizontal and vertical alignments can result in visual effects giving a false
impression of the appearance of the road which contribute to accidents. Unsafe combinations of
horizontal and vertical curvatures are likely to be misinterpreted by a driver. An unsafe combination
may result when horizontal and vertical curves of different lengths occur at the same location. These
situations are particularly dangerous and are unfortunately frequently present in SEETO region.
In general, higher class interurban main roads should have a minimum radius of 500 m and the
horizontal alignment of roads of lesser importance should follow the radii tulip. On the other hand, to
take into account human factors, the length of straight road sections should be limited to 1,500 m to
avoid monotony and drivers becoming sleepy as well as to avoid drivers doing speeds far above the
speed limit and to make it easier to judge speeds of oncoming traffic.
Figure 5.2-7 The Former Yugoslav Republic of Figure 5.2-8 Serbia – Curve with bad sight conditions
Macedonia – Curve with bad sight (situation B)
conditions (situation A)
Expected accidents:
- Single vehicle accident in a bend – going either side of the road;
- At least two vehicles – same direction – rear-end collisions; etc.
- Reconstruction of curves;
- Better signage and marking;
- Improving sight distance at curves.
Figure 5.2-9 Example – Incorrect signage and marking
Better signage and marking is needed especially where a combination of vertical and horizontal curves
appear ahead of the driver.
INTERSECTIONS
Introduction:
Intersections should be designed to minimise the risk of collisions, particularly right-angle collisions
(accidents at give way intersections). Some existing intersections are unchanged since the times of
low-speed horse-drawn vehicles and pedestrians while other intersections were designed some
decades ago according to old guidelines. The situation is vastly different now and with today’s speeds
and volumes of traffic, better lay-outs at such locations are essential. The intersection must provide
appropriate information so that every road user can make a safe decision.
Typical problems:
Some layouts at intersections can lead to significant problems. For example, Y-type intersections, as
shown in Figure 5.2-10, can lead to risky decisions being made or misunderstandings regarding right
of way, and subsequent accidents. Others are poorly designed or obscured by vegetation or obstacles,
and hard to detect. These intersections can lead to side collisions. The suggested remedy could range
from clearing vegetation to improving signage, or infrastructure treatments such as converting the
intersection to a roundabout or changing a Y junction to a T junction (i.e. make the smaller road
intersect the major road at right angles), or a staggered T junction if the intersection is a crossroad.
Another problem is a lack of left-turning lanes and sufficient space for bigger trucks. The lack of left-
turning lanes often leads to rear-end collisions because cars have to stop on the driving lane for a
left turn and other drivers behind them can’t stop fast enough. In other cases the intersection itself
is not recognisable early enough for the drivers or there is a lack of sufficient sight conditions,
obstructed visibility by road equipment, bushes, etc. Therefore, it must be checked to see if there is
a need for a redesign or other changes.
In areas with pedestrian crossings, safe crossing facilities should be an integrated part of the technical
solution.
We can often find serious safety problems in the existing network because of the lack of access
control. If we discover this during the RSI, the report should contain proposals for improving the
situation (or at least the question of there being ‘illegal’ accesses could be clarified with the road
authority).
Other typical deficiencies are a lack of sufficient sight conditions, insufficient space for manoeuvres
and problems with sight conditions regarding traffic lights.
Channelling is a useful tool in traffic management. It should be applied to all junctions on high-speed
roads. This may require local widening of the road but the small additional cost of this at the design
stage will be offset by future safety benefits in almost every case. Consideration must be given to the
access needs of emergency and other priority vehicles, especially in the event of an accident or
breakdown. If provision is not made for this, damage to kerbs will quickly occur. Channelling guides
the driver through conflict points, provides safe areas for him/her to stop while making a manoeuvre
and reduces conflict between different flows.
Channelling by means of road markings, raised kerbs, traffic islands and bollards, can be used to
guide vehicles along a specific path on the approach to and/or exit from a junction and to position
them at the safest location to make their manoeuvre. The benefits of this are that movements are
simplified, less confusion arises and the number of conflict points is minimised.
Traffic islands have the added benefit of providing a refuge for pedestrians crossing the road. They
also provide a convenient location for street furniture such as signs, street lighting and drainage
covers. Urban channelling schemes can be relatively complex, dealing with large traffic volumes. In
rural areas the focus is usually to protect turning vehicles from faster moving traffic and to position
vehicles correctly on the road.
Figure 5.2-11 Kosovo* – Unsafe roundabout Figure 5.2-12 Serbia – Unsafe Y intersection
* This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and in line with UNSCR 1244 and the ICJ Opinion on the
Kosovo declaration of independence
Expected accidents:
- At least two vehicles – same road, opposite direction – turning left (right) in front of another
vehicle;
- At least two vehicles – crossing (no turning) – different directions;
- At least two vehicles – same direction – entering traffic;
- At least two vehicles – opposite direction no turning – other types, etc.
- Channelling of traffic flows (construction of raised kerbs, traffic islands);
- Use of markings and traffic equipment;
- Use of ‘ghost’ island;
- Full reconstruction from Y-type to T;
- Construction of ‘fly over’ U-turns (grade separation of traffic streams).
Figure 5.2-13 Example – U-turn road safety improvements after rehabilitation
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SERVICE, REST AREAS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Introduction:
To guarantee a sufficient amount of rest time for drivers (especially for professional drivers) a
satisfactory number of rest places along long-distance roads are necessary. Frequently the number
and size are not sufficient. If they are located on interurban road sections, there should be separate
exit and access lanes to minimise conflict between the ongoing traffic flow and drivers using the rest
or service area. Otherwise rear-end or side collisions can happen.
Public transport stops should be well organised and separating pedestrians from the traffic flow is
necessary. When there is a lack of safe facilities, accidents with pedestrians can occur.
Typical problems:
Roadside facilities (rest places and petrol stations) are necessary to serve long-distance traffic
between regions and towns or villages. Drivers need to rest at least once every two or three hours in
order to maintain their concentration when driving. It is useful to combine rest areas with petrol
and/or service stations at 30–50 km distances. Entrances and exits to and from service and rest areas
can disrupt traffic on the main carriageway if they are not separated well, and special attention should
be given to the design and maintenance of deceleration and acceleration lanes. It is important that
sufficient rest areas are provided at around 10–20 km intervals but there should not be so many that
the main flow of traffic is constantly disrupted by exiting and merging traffic. Such rest areas may be
used by local farmers for selling goods to minimise such activity along the roads. Farmers should
reach the areas from minor roads behind the service area.
In SEETO Participants there are many examples where roads are encroached upon by unacceptable
commercial services or there are unsuitable rest areas. This is dangerous for all road users because
of the huge speed differences (sudden vehicle stops and vehicles entering the traffic stream) and the
mixture of different categories of road user (the presence of unprotected pedestrians on high-speed
roads). Master plans, land usage, urban development and restrictions on access to the public road
network are key elements for preventing these types of accidents. In a good planning system the
potential for these types of crashes could be prevented in the early stages of planning, during the
Road Safety Impact Assessment (RSIA). Effective access and development controls can prevent such
unsafe conditions developing.
Figure 5.2-14 Serbia – Rest area along a link section, Figure 5.2-15 Kosovo* – Unsafe petrol station
no separation or regular exit and access approach
* This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and in line with UNSCR 1244 and the ICJ Opinion on the
Kosovo declaration of independence
Expected accidents:
- At least two vehicles – same direction – entering traffic;
- Hitting parked vehicles right (left) side of the road;
- Pedestrian walking along the road;
- At least two vehicles – U-turn in front of the other vehicle, etc.
- Improving entrance/exit to services along the roadside;
- Improving parking areas;
- Improving signage and marking of services along the roadside;
- Removing bus stops from the main traffic flow;
- Improving bus bay within the existing traffic;
- Improving signage, marking and road furniture of bus stops.
Figure 5.2-16 Example – Improving parking areas
VULNERABLE ROAD USERS (PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS)
Introduction:
It is an important task for the RSI to identify road safety problems regarding vulnerable road users.
Such problems can often be identified in through road sections of villages, towns and along major
urban roads. Sometimes there is pedestrian traffic along interurban road sections as well, due to the
occasional roadside farmhouse.
Absent or unsafe footpaths and pedestrian crossings are typical findings regarding vulnerable road
users. Often, speed limits are not supported by the road design and drivers are encouraged by very
wide cross sections to drive too fast. These deficiencies can lead to accidents with pedestrians.
Typical problems:
Pedestrians should not have to walk at all along interurban roads. Hard shoulders are not intended
for vulnerable road users but for emergency use by vehicles only. With the exception of roundabouts,
pedestrian crossings should ideally be grade separated on major roads if large numbers of vulnerable
road users are expected. At-grade pedestrian crossings on dual carriageways or multi-lane roads
should be forbidden unless traffic signals are provided. To enable pedestrians to cross safely the
crossings facilities should be provided as underpasses or bridges with ramps, not stairs. Any other
solution significantly increases the risk of pedestrian accidents. Even though this is not in accordance
with any road standards/norms in the world, including even old German standards/norms (DIN) which
are updated and still used in SEETO Participants, there are many such examples where pedestrian
crossings are placed at-grade on busy international roads.
In order to provide additional traffic capacity at junctions, local widening is sometimes carried out.
This often increases the crossing distance, again creating increased risk for pedestrians. Heavy
crossing demands may sometimes occur away from junctions where vehicle speeds are very high and
this is often the case in SEETO Participants. The provision of underpasses or bridges, however, may
be too expensive and may not be fully utilised. Designers and the road authority need to provide
crossings which pedestrians will willingly use.
Figure 5.2-17 Unknown location in a SEETO Figure 5.2-18 Albania – Missing footpath; people are
Participant – Recently constructed forced to walk on the carriageway
pedestrian crossing leads nowhere
Expected accidents:
- Pedestrian crossing a street outside a junction;
- Pedestrian a crossing street at a junction;
- Pedestrian on the road;
- Single vehicle accidents – other types, etc.
- Separated pedestrian crossings;
- Narrowing of road and use of refuge islands;
- Connecting pedestrian paths (walking routes) with crossings;
- Separation of motorised traffic and vulnerable road users wherever possible;
- Time separation (usage of traffic lights to separate movements of vehicles and pedestrians in
time);
- Good signage and marking of urban and rural footpaths, footways and cycle lanes.
Figure 5.2-19 Example – Pedestrian crossings placed behind bus stops
TRAFFIC SIGNAGE, MARKING AND LIGHTING

Introduction:
Road signs should give the driver sufficient information about intersections, destinations, hazards,
route numbers, mileage estimates, street names and points of interest. Typical deficiencies include
missing, incomplete or misguiding signs, or an ‘overload’ of information (no more than two different
signs should be placed at one spot). Another common problem is absent or illegible directional signs.
In high-speed road sections like motorways, directional signs should be repeated. Marking should be
clear and visible at night-time. Any contradiction between marking and signage must be avoided.
Lighting is a particular issue in built-up areas. For road safety it is very important to have good
lighting, especially at pedestrian crossings and intersections.
Typical problems:
Warning signs and warning markings are used to give advance notice of a potential hazard ahead or
of any unexpected feature of the road geometry. The signs are used in specific situations when there
is a change in the road, such as a bend on a high-speed road or on the approach to a junction. The
location of signs is very important because they should provide adequate warning or information at
a sufficient distance. However, they should not obscure important road features. Of great importance
for the visibility of the signs is that they be located in positions where overgrown vegetation cannot
obscure them. Signs must be visible at all times, so reflective materials should be used for night-time
visibility and urban signs may require to be lit internally or externally. In some SEETO, and more
specifically in TRACECA countries, it is common practice for signs to be missing (even at potentially
dangerous locations), not properly positioned, without reflectivity, not standardised or even not
uniform in compliance with international UN conventions.
A recurring problem with signs is of them being obscured, either by permanent features such as street
furniture and vegetation or by parked vehicles and, on dual carriageways, by moving vehicles in the
nearside lane (if there is no repeated sign on the other side of the road). Too many signs can detract
from their objective by overloading the driver with too much information too quickly, which leads to
confusion or to a situation where the driver ignores certain signs. Signs may not be visible at night-
time because of poor illumination, lack of routine maintenance, continuity of power supply or
inappropriate positioning (too high, set back from the road or oriented away from the driver). If
reflective signs are not regularly cleaned, they may not retain their design properties and purpose.
Figure 5.2-20 Montenegro – Marking in very bad Figure 5.2-21 The Former Yugoslav Republic of
condition; no guidance for the driver, Macedonia – Directional sign
especially at night completely hidden by a tree
Expected accidents:
- Single vehicle accidents in a bend – going either side of the road;
- Pedestrian on the road; etc.
- Use of high reflectivity materials for traffic signs;
- Use of variable message signs (VMS);
- Maintenance of traffic signs;
- Addition of lighting where needed.
Figure 5.2-22 Example – Use of VMS for speed limit on bus stop
COLLISIONS WITH ROADSIDE OBSTACLES

Introduction:
Roadside hazards can make the consequence of an accident much more dramatic than if the roadside
were clear. Hazards such as poles, drains, walls and trees are not ‘forgiving’ when a driver makes a
mistake by running or sliding off the carriageway. Such a mistake can occur for many reasons,
including sleepiness, trying to avoid a head-on collision caused by another driver or an accident with
animals on the road. Obstacles very close to the carriageway can change incidents into accidents.
Trees along interurban roads pose a particular problem as many people do not want them removed,
despite the clear hazard they create. It is interesting to note that some trees/hazards have been the
scenes of a fatal accident, as illustrated by the flowers or memorials alongside, yet very few call for
their removal. It is of course possible to install barriers in front of hazards as an alternative to removal
but care needs to be taken as some barriers can be a hazard themselves.
Typical problems:
The presence of roadside obstacles, street furniture (for example, road signs and lighting columns)
advertising signs and trees has two safety implications. The first is the potential danger of collision,
and the second is how they can obstruct visibility. Visibility is important not only for the driver, but
also for other road users. Obstructions caused by trees, for example, may result in a pedestrian
making an unwise decision.
Great care should be taken concerning the positioning of roadside features which may either obstruct
visibility, lead to accidents or increase the severity of accidents. Where it is impractical to remove
obstructions which contribute to hazardous situations, consideration should be given to replacing
them with equipment designed to collapse on impact, realigning the road or introducing barriers.
Once a road is completed, care must be taken to ensure that obstacles are not subsequently
introduced by other institutions, such as telephone or electricity authorities. Vegetation should be
trimmed regularly and planning controls should be enforced to prevent stalls and structures being too
close to the road edge. In some SEETO/TRACECA countries, trees are often planted adjacent to roads
in order to provide shade for pedestrians, animals and parked vehicles and in other countries to
prevent the wind from bringing snow onto the road.
Figure 5.2-23 Montenegro – No guard rail on the Figure 5.2-24 Albania – The ‘start’ element of a
bridge (gap in the system) guard rail section made of concrete –
hard obstacle
Expected accidents:
- Single vehicle accidents with obstacles on or above the road;
- Single vehicle accidents with obstacles – other types;
- Single vehicle accident – leaving straight road, either side of the road;
- Pedestrian walking along the road, etc.
- Removing roadside objects to create a ‘clear zone’ without obstacles;
- Relocation of hard roadside objects;
- Altering obstacles to reduce severity or installing barriers in front of roadside hazards;
- Adding the correct type of guard rails where absent;
- Improving the existing guard rail system.
Figure 5.2-25 Example – Removing roadside objects to create a clear zone
TEMPORARY SIGNAGE AND MARKING AT WORK ZONES
Introduction:
A work zone is an area of road or roadside where construction, maintenance or other works are
performed and which may affect the safety and limit the free movement of road users through and
in the vicinity of the work zone.
Typical problems:
Work zones are zones on the road with a higher risk of accidents for both road users (vehicle
occupants and vulnerable categories) and workers. A comprehensive traffic management plan (TMP)
should be prepared and implemented so that all participants in traffic are protected against the risk
of a traffic accident. Such a TMP should cover all aspects, from design, placement and maintenance
to the removal of all elements regulating the road traffic once the work has been completed/after
work hours.
To minimise problems and increase safety, the work zone layout (marking and signage) requires
special consideration for the following reasons:
 A work zone is a section of road where, usually, the geometric characteristics of the road and
traffic conditions become temporarily less safe. The type of work being carried out is often
road construction, rehabilitation and maintenance, but there are other types of work on the
road that need the same treatment, for instance work with cables, pipes, etc., located in the
road area.
 Employees in work zones spend most of their working hours directly exposed to traffic. They
are frequently at as much at risk as the road users and when accidents happen in work zones,
these employees are often the victims.
The growing international transit traffic flow in TRACECA countries necessitates the construction of
main traffic corridors according to international standards, and requires European standards and a
widely recognised and consistent system for road works signage and work zone safety.
Figure 5.2-26 Work zone Figure 5.2-27 Work zone
Figure 5.2-28 Work zone Figure 5.2-29 Work zone
Figures 5.2.9.1-5.2.9.4 show examples of low-performing work zones.
Expected accidents:
- Single vehicle accidents with roadwork materials;
- Hitting parked vehicles right (left) side of the road;
- Pedestrian walking along the road, etc.
- Establishing regular (best practice) working zone;
- Road markings in working areas should be in yellow.
Figure 5.2-30 Example – Recommended work zone layout
5.3 Potential crash savings for using proposed countermeasures
For any kind of countermeasure proposal, it is necessary to know the crash reduction potential.
Therefore, for typical road safety deficiencies, the possible treatment (countermeasures) were
presented as well as the potential crash reduction.
Table 5.3-1 presents typical road safety deficiencies, different proposed countermeasures
(treatments) and their potential crash reductions as a percentage, with minimum and maximum
recorded effects usually given. The last column is collated from the results of different international
research projects (mainly by Rune Elvik) and case studies, and can be used to better understand the
potential crash savings of different countermeasures.
Table 5.3-1 Efficiency (crash reduction) of different countermeasures
Potential
Typical Road Safety Possible Treatment Crash
Deficiency (Countermeasure) Reduction
[%]
Road Standard
Unsafe standard in use Improve to higher standard 19–33
Not enough traffic lanes Increase number of lanes 22–32
Narrow lanes Widen lane 0,3–0,6 m 5–12
Narrow paved shoulder Widen paved shoulder 0,3–1 m 4–12
Missing median strip Add median strip 40
Narrow road at bridge Widen or modify bridge 25
Narrow shoulder Widen shoulder 10
Missing overtaking lane Introduce overtaking lane 20
Missing right turning lane Introduce right turn lane 40
Missing left turning lane Introduce left turn lane 15
Missing pedestrian overpass Introduce pedestrian overpass 10
Sharp side slope Flatten side slope from: 2:1
to 4:1 ... 7:1 or flatter 6 ... 15
Flatten side slope from: 4:1
to 5:1 ... 7:1 or flatter 3 ... 11
Missing service roads Introduce service roads 20–40
Over speeding Introduce traffic calming 12–60
Speed reduction from 70 km/h to 50 km/h 10–30
Speed reduction from 90 km/h to 60 km/h 17–40
Horizontal Alignment
Unsafe road geometry Improve geometry 20–80
Sharp curve Improve radius of curvature 33–50
Vertical Alignment
Existence of crest Introduce gradient / remove crest 12–56
Missing super-elevation in curve Improve / introduce super-elevation 50
Missing passing lane Introduce passing lane 11–43
Missing climbing lane Introduce climbing lane 10–40
Road Structure
Narrow traffic lane/s Widen lane/s 12–47
Low skid resistance Improve skid resistance 18–74
Narrow shoulder Widen shoulder 10–40
Soft shoulder Seal shoulder 22–50

Narrow verge Widen road verge 13–44
Junction Design
Unsafe junction design Staggered (from straight) crossroads 40–95
Unsafe Y junction Change to T junction 15–50
Unsafe right turn Fully controlled right turn phase 45
Unsafe junction (uncontrolled) Change to roundabout 25–81
Unsafe junction with traffic signals Change to roundabout 25–50
Unsafe small junction Change to mini roundabout 40–47
No turning lane Introduce turning lane 10–60
Missing traffic island Introduce traffic island 39
No sheltered turn lane Introduce sheltered turn lane (urban) 30
Introduce sheltered turn lane (rural) 45
Narrow intersection Additional lane at intersection 20
Weak skid resistance Skid-resistant overlay 20
Red light not obeyed Introduce red light camera 10
Weak law-enforcement by police Improve law-enforcement by police 7–25
Traffic Control
Missing signs at junctions Introduce regulatory signs at junctions 22–48
No guidance/directional signs at Introduce guidance/directional signs at 14–58
junction junction
Missing overhead lane signs Introduce overhead lane signs 15
Missing side road signs Introduce side road signs 19–24
Invisible signs and markings Make signs and markings brighter 24–92
Missing signs and delineation Introduce signs and delineation 29–37
Missing bend warning signs Introduce bend warning signs 20–57
Missing stop ahead sign Introduce stop ahead sign 47
No speed advisory sign Introduce speed advisory sign 23–36
No warning/advisory signs Introduce warning/advisory signs 20
Over speeding Lower speed limit and introduce sign 16–19
Missing Yield/Give Way Introduce Yield/Give Way sign 59–80
Missing Stop sign Introduce Stop sign 33–90
Uncontrolled situation Introduce signals 15–32
Inappropriate signals Modify signals 13–85
Junction without channelling Introduce junction channelling 10–51
Parking at roadside Remove roadside parking 10–25
Visibility
Missing lane markings Introduce lane markings 14–19
Missing edge markings Introduce edge markings 8–35
Missing yellow bar markings Introduce yellow bar markings 24–52
No raised reflective pavement Introduce raised reflective pavement 6–18
marking marking
No delineator posts Introduce delineator posts 2–47
No flashing beacons Introduce flashing beacons 5–75
Missing lighting installations Introduce lighting installations 6–75
Sightline distance problems Improve sightline distance 28
Missing channelling medians Introduce channelling medians 22–50
Crash Amelioration
Missing median barrier Introduce median barrier 14–27
Missing side barriers Add side barriers 15–60

Signs with hard structures (poles) Replace with frangible signs 30
Hard objects near road (trees) Remove tree (rural) 10
Poles near road Remove pole (lighting poles, urban) 20
Unstable embankment Embankment treatment 40
Unsafe guard rail Guard rail for bridge end-post 20
Missing impact absorber Introduce impact absorber 20
Pedestrian Facilities
No pedestrian walkways Introduce pedestrian walkways 33–44
No pedestrian zebra crossings Introduce pedestrian zebra crossings 13–34
No raised zebra crossings Raise zebra crossings 5–50
Missing pelican crossings Introduce pelican crossings 21–83
No marking at zebra crossing Add marking at zebra crossing -5–14
No pedestrian refuges Introduce pedestrian refuges 56–87
No footbridges Introduce footbridges 39–90
No pedestrian fencing Add pedestrian fencing 10–35
Cycling Facilities
No cycle lanes Introduce cycle lanes 33–56
No marked cycle crossings Introduce marked cycle crossing at signals 10–15
No advanced stop line for cyclists Introduce advanced stop line at junctions 35
Rail Crossings
Missing flashing signals Introduce flashing signals 73–91
No automatic gates Introduce automatic gates 81–93
Traffic Calming
No low speed zones (30 km/h) Introduce 30 km/h zones (i.e. humps, 10–80
chicanes, etc.)
No rumble strips Introduce rumble strips 27–50
No rumble strips and bumps Introduce rumble strips and bumps 20–80
NOTES:
1. Crash reductions are NOT ADDITIVE; use the highest value if multiple treatments are
proposed for a particular location.
2. Reductions apply to all crashes within a single intersection or a single midblock that contains
the treatment.
6 LEGAL ASPECTS AND TRAINING OF THE INSPECTORS
6.1 Legal aspects
Experience in European countries indicates that use of RSI as a regular procedure can significantly
improve road safety of existing roads. The aim of an RSI is to identify safety issues or concerns that
have the potential to reduce safety levels.
Due to the administrative, regulatory, legal and policy specifications of each country, detailed
procedures for RSIs are usually defined by national road authorities. However, some general items
are presented to give an overall background of good practice to each country’s RSI.
Systematic approach
Road authorities should decide the road types, scope of services and frequency for conducting RSIs
on the national road network. It is important to highlight that RSIs are not technical controls
(inspections) of the existing roads, which are usually conducted through the Ministry of Transport (or
equal), traffic police and maintenance departments. Some European road authorities include a road
safety inspection as a regular activity on the road network. On the other hand, the potential for
liability of the road authority appears to be an important factor for road authorities in deciding to
undertake a RSI or not.
The RSI should be conducted on higher class roads first and more frequently, where possible
improvements could be greater. Among these, the RSI should first be conducted on roads with higher
volumes of traffic before those with lower traffic volumes, in order to get better results in road safety.
Regarding the frequency of conducting an RSI on the road network (mentioned in Chapter 3.3), the
road authority should make a priority list based on the road category, traffic volume and any existing
evidence of accidents on the roads.
A road safety inspection on international main corridors should be conducted most frequently (i.e.
every three years), while on first class roads an RSI should be implemented less frequently (i.e. every
five years). For minor roads in the road hierarchy, RSIs should be conducted least often.
Independence
Even though better results could be attained with independent inspectors, it is not always necessary
for the road safety inspection to be independent from the road authority.
If the inspector is an employee of the road authority, liability is regulated according to the legal
regulation of liability for staff of the road sector. If the RSI is being carried out by a consultant
company, common procedures for insuring the consultant’s work are used.
Regarding road hierarchy, independent inspectors should be employed for international road
corridors, while the road authority could use its own staff for inspections on the lower class roads in
the network.
Methodology
In order to monitor the implementation of the inspection, there must be a logical order. The road
authority is responsible for providing documentation and implementing the process in a logical order.
Ordering the RSI, responding to it and the follow-up process is the responsibility of the road authority,
while undertaking the RSI and reporting is the responsibility of the inspectors.
The client’s response to an RSI report should be detailed and defendable, and the RSI report and the
formal response report must be placed in the project file. The response must provide reasons for not
accepting any of the auditor’s recommendations.
Some details of the liability of the RSI team depend on how the RSI will be organised in the SEETO
participant.
The proposed inspection frequency and independence of the team by type of road network is given
in Table 6.1-1.
Table 6.1-1 Proposed RSI interval and inspection team by road type
Road Network
YEARS Trans European Road Network First Class Road Network Second Class Road Network
(TERN) (FCRN) (SCRN)
3 Consultant
5 Consultant / Road Authority Consultant / Road Authority
7 Consultant / Road Authority Road Authority / Consultant
10 Road Authority / Consultant
15
Note:
Desirable period for inspection
Minimum required period for inspection
Unacceptable period for inspection
6.2 Experience and training of inspectors
Depending on the complexity of the work and road network covered, an inspection may be done by
a single inspector or by a group of inspectors. A team should comprise of a leader, team members,
specialist advisers (for example the traffic police to get information about accidents) and observers
(these could be junior staff gaining experience in RSI). For safety reasons, the number of team
members on site should be limited to five (one car).
This Manual suggests that a multi-member team should be engaged on major roads to ensure there
is more than one pair of eyes doing the inspection, with an exchange of ideas and discussions among
the members of the team. The team should have different skills so that all necessary skills and
backgrounds are covered and more possible accident-reduction measures identified. However, on
certain smaller projects a single inspector may be adequate and a more practical option.
The members or at least the responsible team leader of the RSI should be ‘independent’, i.e. not part
of the road maintenance team or from the road authority. They should have very good specialised
and in-depth knowledge of the region as well as an understanding of potential countermeasures and
what is required for their implementation.
However, it is possible for a person with knowledge of road safety and road engineering to use the
checklists provided to complete an inspection. It is preferable, however, for an inspector to have
specific initial training in audits and/or inspections and it is advantageous if all inspectors have the
same training and certification on safety analyses and solutions, providing a uniform approach to road
safety in the SEETO Participants. As already mentioned, certified auditors are also in a position to
conduct an RSI because the RSA of the pre-opening stage and the early operation stage is in fact a
similar procedure to the RSI.
Training of inspectors could be combined with RSA training. Because of the similarities of the
methodology of the RSI and RSA (stage 3 and 4) the RSI could be done by auditors. Another possibility
is to organise training courses similar to the RSA with the content focused on the needs of the RSI.
Nowadays, there are two principle approaches to the practical RSI work in Europe. One is to engage
the required qualified staff as employees of the road authorities and similar road institutions (e.g.
from a university, institute, ministry, traffic police, etc.). This solution is called an ‘internal inspector’
because it depends on the road authority to the highest extent. The other possibility is to have
contracts with RSI experts engaged as private consultants – ‘external inspectors’.
In both cases the preferred requirements for the road safety inspector should include:
 Professional education in road design, road maintenance and traffic accident investigation.
 Substantial experience in day-to-day road operation and/or road maintenance respectively or
road traffic police work.
 An excellent knowledge of the regulations and guidelines regarding roads and road traffic,
traffic signs, etc.
 Strong communication skills to be able to write a clear and concise report and then convince
various stakeholders of the proposed countermeasures.
For conducting the practical RSI, training should be provided and each team member should refresh
their knowledge of RSI with a minimum 20 hours of training in every two-year period and 80 hours
in every five-year period.
Training should be organised as:

- Short / repeated training for the purpose of updating knowledge, lasting for 2.5–3 days.
- Extended / base training for primary education and refresher courses over five years, lasting
for 10–12 working days.
Different training could be organised for different participants (i.e. decision makers, designers, police,
etc.) and could be combined with the training mentioned above. All training should comprise a mixture
of theory and practice.
In order to provide sufficient level of training, the number of participants on each training course
should not exceed 25 for the theoretical part and eight for the practical part (on site).
There are certain requirements when conducting RSI training:

- Prerequisite for participating: To ensure the quality of future inspectors, the road authority
should require candidates to have prior knowledge of road design, traffic management, road
accident analysis, maintenance or some specific education (transport or road engineering);
- Training programme: The programme should be appropriate to the training level. It should
follow the mentioned eight chapters (described in Chapter 2.2) and also include instruction in
the role of human factors in design and accident statistics;
- Examination – quiz: Participants should be examined to prove their progress in upgrading
knowledge.
In order to follow up participants’ progress in updating their training, participants should be awarded
certificates with clearly stated results of the training. The certification process is necessary in order
to provide an active and permanent upgrading of inspectors’ knowledge.
It is suggested that ongoing inspection training be provided for inspectors to update them on issues
critical to the inspection process.
Annex 1: Checklists
Checklists for ROAD SAFETY INSPECTIONS

- MOTORWAYS -
Yes (√)
Characteristic No. Question Comments
No (X)
Is there any information about previous RSA and its
Previous stage 1
implementation?
1. Road function,
Are there any issues from accident data if
operating elements 1
available?
and surrounding
Is the current situation (design) of the motorway
2
according to its category?
Do we realize the change of characteristics early
enough (orientation sight)?
3
120 km/h about 500 m
100 km/h about 300 m
Is there anywhere accumulation of events such as
4
curves + hilltops + interchanges etc?
Are speed limits required and applied in the best
5
way?
Is stopping sight distance guaranteed along the
6 entire section?
100 km/h about 185 m for trucks
Are all fixed or planted obstacles that can be
7
dangerous placed outside the safety zone?
2. Cross section Does the road surface provide the required grip
1 over the long term where small radii occur (e.g. also
on ramps of interchanges)?
Are there any doubts regarding the surface grip
2 because of excess bleeding or polished
components?
Is the surface even and free from grooves, rutting,
3
and potholes?
4 Is the surface free from short or long waves?
Is there sufficient drainage for the road and its
5
surrounding?
Is there sufficient super elevation in curves, long fall
6 and diagonal fall in the case of change of direction
of the cross fall?
7 Is the cross fall in straight sections constant?
8 What is the medium width of the road shoulders?
Are there stable shoulders (like hard shoulders or
9
gravel shoulders)?
Are the shoulders at the same level as the
10
carriageway?
Have sufficient measures been taken on cutting
11 slopes to prevent falling material (e.g. falling
rocks)?
Is stopping sight obstructed, for example by safety
12
barriers, plants?
Has the median a safe design, e. g. safety barrier
13
or sufficient width to prevent head on collisions?
Does the embankment or obstacles beside the
14
motorway require passive safety installations?
Is the existing speed limit adequate for the
3. Alignment 1
horizontal and vertical elements of the alignment?
Is sight obstructed, for example by safety barriers,
fences, road equipment, parking areas, traffic signs,
2
landscaping/greenery, bridge abutments,
buildings?
3 Is visibility in curves ensured (check esp. the inner
lane in left hand curves – side obstruction by
guardrails, greenery…)?
4 Is the super elevation in curves sufficient?
Has the uphill sections a passing lane for
5
overtaking slow traffic?
6 Has the passing lane a sufficient length in order to

insure that the vehicles can overtake and return
safely?
7 Are arrester beds necessary in downhill sections
(depend on the percentage of heavy trucks and the
gradient)?
8 Is the alignment consistent and easily recognized
by the road users? Or full of „surprises“ for the
drivers?
9 Are changes (surprises) indicated by transitions like
signing, points of fixation?
Are the outside of the curves framed parallel and
10
consistent e.g. with bushes?
Are the insides of curves in ramps of interchanges
11
free from side obstructions?
12 Are there any optical illusions?
4. Intersections Are the movements guided clearly and easy to
1
(Interchanges) understand? Are traffic flows guided by markings?
Are the auxiliary lanes or tapers for turning
2
movements large enough?
Is the interchange fully visible and recognizable in
time from all accesses for different driver eye
3
heights of cars, trucks, motorcycles, bicycles, etc,
and are the required sight triangles clear?
Does the ambient lighting present any special
4
requirements?
5 fences, road equipment, parking areas, traffic signs,
landscaping/greenery, bridge abutments,
buildings?
Is a reduction in speed required in the direction of
6
the interchange?
Is the design helpful to avoid wrong way driving in a
7 sufficient way or confusing for the driver?
ITS measures. Are ITS measures for communication and driver
Telecommunication 1
assistance installed?
Is the information clearly recognizable and
2
understandable?
Is the motorway equipped with a SOS telephone
3
system?
5. Public and
Are there service and rest areas and parking
Private Services
1 facilities in a sufficient number on both sides of the
(rest areas, toll
motorway?
stations, ...)
Are there deceleration and acceleration lanes or
2
tapers at the entrance and exit?
Is the number of parking areas for parking of
3
passenger vehicles, trucks and buses sufficient?
Are the dimensions of the parking areas sufficient
4 for parking of passenger vehicles, trucks and
buses?
Are areas for busses and passenger cars
5
separated from the truck traffic?
Is the layout and cross section of the service or
6 rest area appropriate for the different traffic
movements?
Is the layout in such a way, that vehicles are
7
running at the appropriate speed?
Are the parking areas physically separated from
8
the carriageway (guardrail, kerb, green area etc.)?
Are there safe footpath connection to restaurants,
9
rest rooms etc. (including safe crossings)?
Have measures been taken to ensure safe access
10 for rescue vehicles/maintenance vehicles/fire
service?
Are sufficient parking areas provided to minimize
11 illegal parking on footpaths and on the carriageway
with the corresponding hazards or have
corresponding preventative measures been taken?

Is sight obstructed by parking areas or by illegally
12
parked vehicles?
Public transport
Is Public transport using the motorway (e.g. on
1
urban motorways – in exceptional cases)?
Are bus stops separated from the traffic flow, are
2 there measures to prevent pedestrian traffic on or
along the motorway?
6. Vulnerable Road Are there any pedestrian facilities in the service
Users and rest areas? And if so, are they of a safe
design?
Please see “ rest areas” and “public transport”
7. Traffic Signing, Have appropriate speed limits been signed
Marking, Lighting 1
appropriately (start, end, height, location)?
Signing Is the visibility of the road course assisted by edge
1
delineation?
Is the vertical signing properly placed and
2
complete?
Can the signs be clearly recognized and read (size
3 of signs)? And do the signs conform to the
conventions of Vienna and Geneva?
Are there more than 2 different traffic signs at one
4
place?
5 Are there repeating signs in the median strip?
Is the signing for service and rest areas clear? Is
there sufficient number of repeating signs to
6
announce the rest area in advance (e.g. 1000 m
and 500 m in advance)?
Is the signing for interchanges clear and
understandable?
7
Is the information about destinations sufficient (but
not more than 5 different destinations)?
Does the overhead directional signing correspond
8
with the traffic lanes?
9 Are advance warnings in place for features that
cannot be seen in time?
10 Are signs retro reflecting or are they illuminated at
night? In daylight and darkness, are signs
satisfactory regarding visibility?
Are there ambiguous or misguiding traffic signs or
11
additional information panels?
Is readability ensured at the required distance? Are
12
there background problems?
Where needed, have signs been located above the
13
carriageway?
14 Are the signs provided with protective edges?
Are the signs at a uniform position, compared to the
15
pavement?
Are the sign masts and foundations sufficiently
16
protected against collisions?
Do the traffic signs including their supports have a
sufficient passive safety by: low mass or/and break
17
away structure or/and are they beyond the safety
zone? Passive safety installations?
18 Do delineators have a breakaway structure?
Could greenery lead to safety problems if the
19 vegetation grows (e.g. as a result of obscured road
signs)?
Markings Do all signs and markings correspond without any
1
contradictions?
2 Are the road markings clear and recognizable?
Are the markings in a parallel line to the edge of the

3
road surface?
Are the markings appropriate for the function and
4
category of the road?
Are the markings likely to be effective under all

5 expected conditions (day, night, wet, dry, fog, rising
and setting sun)?
Is there profiled markings in use e.g. as warning for
6
drivers in the case of running off the carriageway
Lighting 1 Is the road sufficiently illuminated?
2 Is the stationary lighting appropriate?
3 Is the lighting of special situations (transition zones,
changes in cross section) suitably designed?
4 Is contrast lighting required at the interchanges?

5
requirements?
Can the stationary lighting cause problems in
6 recognizing the traffic signs or the alignment of the
road?
Are the lighting masts situated outside of the safety
7
zone or properly protected?
Is stationary lighting at intersections/service and
8
rest areas properly situated?
8. Road side
features and Are there any features within the safety zone?
1
passive safety 100 km/h about 9 m
installations
Are antidazzle screens (e.g. in the median strip)
2
provided as required?
Other road Has suitable road equipment (fog warning signs,
equipment 1 automatic sprinklers for de-icing agents, snow
fences etc.) been installed and is it fully functional?
Are there game fences? Is the beginning and end
2
of game fencing correctly marked?
Is there a mileage system and will it be clearly
3
signposted?
Plantings 1 Is there any vegetation along the motorway?
2 Are there trees within the safety zone?
Does the greenery cause or will the growth of
3
greenery lead to future safety problems?
Does the greenery and type of planting preclude
4
irritations to the road users (e.g. alignment)?
Does vegetation protect the road from natural
5
disasters like landslides etc?
Is the vegetation along the motorway old and could
6
lead to safety problems?
Does road side vegetation guide the drivers in
7
curves continuously?
8 Is the vegetation monotonous? Or does it help to
avoid a monotonous character of the road?
Civil engineering 1 Are passive safety installations set up at the
structures required locations?
2 Are parapets and overpasses at a safe distance
from the road?
3 Have masts, abutments, supporting walls, bridge
railings etc. been safeguarded?
4 Are lighting poles appropriately placed?
5 Are there at bridges sufficient passive safety
installations, are these properly connected with the
guardrails along the motorway?
6 Is the drainage system a linear obstacle with deep
ditches in the safety zone?
7 Are the constructions of culverts obstacle like?
8 Are there tunnels in the road section?
9 Are the tunnels safe, are there emergency ways,
sufficient illumination etc. (the use of the demands
of EU – Tunnel directive 2004/54/EC is
recommended)?
10 Is the vertical clearance under overpasses

sufficient?
1 What is the distance of the road directional signing
Other obstacles to the pavement? Is there a need for passive safety
installation?
2 Are there unprotected supports for other cables
than lighting in the obstacle-free zone?
3 Are traffic signs (other than road directional signs)
to be considered as dangerous obstacles?
4 Are there unprotected advertisement boards or
other fixed obstacles outside the safety zone, are
they avoidable or safeguarded?
Passive safety 1 Are fixed obstacles avoidable, set up at sufficient
installations distances or safeguarded (masts, abutments,
supporting walls, bridge railings, trees etc.)?
2 Have passive safety installations been set up at
the required locations?
3 Are all road safety barriers in place and safely
located so that they are not obstacles themselves?
4 Is the length of any guardrail adequate?

Is the guardrail correctly installed, regarding: - end
5 treatments: - anchorages, - post spacing, - post
depth, - rail overlap?
Are dangerous windows of guardrails avoided
6 (comment: windows shorter than 50 m should be
avoided)?
Are all necessary median barriers in place and
7
properly designed?
Are barriers placed so, that they don’t restrict
8
visibility (e.g. the safety barriers in the median)?
Checklists for ROAD SAFETY INSPECTIONS

- INTERURBAN ROADS AND HIGHWAYS -
Yes (√ )
No (X)
Previous stage Is there any information about previous RSA and its
1
implementation?
1. Road function,
operating elements 1 Are there any issues from accident data if available?
and surrounding
Are there specific traffic composition characteristics to
2 be taken into consideration (e.g. pedestrians in
through road sections)?
Are special measures required for particular groups
e.g. for young people, older people, sick people,
3
physically handicapped, hearing-impaired or blind
people (through road section)?
4 Is the design of the road according to its function and
hierarchy in the network?
5 Are there built-up areas with mixed traffic?
6 Is access to abutting properties and agriculture
appropriate for road safety along the interurban
section, are they safe?
Are there any parallel roads to be used by carts and
7
farm equipment?
Can we realize the change of functions and
characteristics early enough?
8
for a speed limit of 100 km/h about 300 m ahead
for a speed limit of 80 km/h about 200 m ahead
9
curves + hilltops + intersections etc?
Are transitions installed between different functions
10
and road characteristics?
11 Are speed limits required and applied in the best way?
12 Is stopping sight distance guaranteed along the entire
section?
13 Is overtaking sight distance in an acceptable
percentage (about at least 20%) of the road section
ensured?
Are all fixed or planted obstacles that can be
dangerous placed outside the safety zone?
14
for 100 km/h about 9 m
Is the transition from a built-up to a rural road or from
15 an illuminated to a not illuminated road appropriately
designed (village/town outskirts)?
2. Cross section 1 Does the road surface provide the required grip over
the long term where small radii occur?
2 Are there any doubts regarding the surface grip
because of excess bleeding or polished components?
Is the surface even and free from grooves, ruttings,
3
and potholes?
5
surrounding?
Is there sufficient super elevation in curves, long fall
6 and diagonal fall in the case of change of direction of
the cross fall?
7 Is the cross fall in straight sections constant?
8 What is the medium width of the road shoulders?
Are there stable shoulders (like hard shoulders or
9
gravel shoulders)?
Are the shoulders and the carriageway at the same
10
level?
11 Have sufficient measures been taken on cutting
slopes to prevent falling material (e.g. falling rocks)?

12 Is stopping sight obstructed by curves?
Is narrowing of the carriageway required and, if so,
13
designed in such a way to ensure traffic safety?
Have suitable measures been taken to ensure that
14
speed limits are obeyed?
Have the needs of public transport and its users been
15
taken into consideration?
Is slow and non motorized traffic separated from fast
16
and heavy traffic (e.g. separate facilities)?
Is there a median? Does it have a safe design, e. g.
17 safety barrier or sufficient width to prevent head on
collisions?
Are there any bottlenecks? If so, are they properly
18
signed?
Do curves with small radii have an enlarged width of
19
the pavement?
Does the embankment or obstacles beside the road
20
require passive safety installations?
Is the existing speed limit adequate for the horizontal
3. Alignment 1
and vertical elements of the alignment?
2 fences, road equipment, parking areas, traffic signs,
landscaping/greenery, bridge abutments, buildings?
3 Is visibility in curves ensured?
4 Are there sufficient overtaking possibilities?
Has the uphill sections a passing lane for overtaking
5
slow traffic?
6 Has the passing lane a sufficient length in order to
ensure that the vehicles can overtake and return
safely?
7 Are arrester beds necessary in downhill sections
(depend on the percentage of heavy trucks and the
gradient)?
8 Are there hidden dips in the vertical alignment?
9 Is the alignment consistent and easily recognized by
the road users? Or full of „surprises“ for the drivers?
Are changes (surprises) indicated by transitions like
10
signing, points of fixation?
Is the outside of the curves framed parallel and
11
consistent?
Are the insides of curves free from side obstructions
12
(lateral clearance)?
13 Are there optical illusions?
4. Intersections 1 Are the intersections perpendicular?
Is the main direction clearly recognizable? And if so,
2
is the right of way clearly recognizable?
Are the movements guided clearly and easy to
3
understand? Are traffic flows guided by markings?
Are the auxiliary lanes or tapers for left, right and U-
4
turning movements large enough?
Is the intersection fully visible and recognizable in
5 time from all accesses for different driver eye heights
of: cars, trucks, motorcycles, bicycles, etc, and are the
required sight triangles clear?
6
requirements (e.g. for traffic signals)?
Is sight obstructed at intersections, for example by

safety barriers, fences, road equipment, parking
7
areas, traffic signs, landscaping/greenery, bridge
abutments, buildings?
8 Are type and design of the intersections suitable for

the function and traffic volume of the intersecting
roads? (Separate answers for each intersection!)
9 Is pedestrian/cyclist routing at intersections adapted

to the actual conditions and clearly marked and
signposted?
Are all accesses equipped with pedestrian and
10
bicycle crossings?
Is the transition safely designed if footpaths and cycle
11 paths end on an intersection or road or are directed
across the road?
12
Is a reduction in speed required in the direction of the
13 intersection? And are there transitions for speed
reductions on the minor road?
Does the obligation to yield right of way need to be
14
reinforced (e.g. by using repetition)?
Are pedestrian crossings clearly marked? Is each
15 section equipped with signals (including railway
structures)?
Are the crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists
16
provided with low curbs?
Are the type and spacing of different crossing
17 installations coordinated (e.g. railway crossings,
traffic signals, zebra crossings)?
Are refuges large and wide enough for crossing
18
pedestrians and bicyclists to stand and wait?
Are the islands above the level of the carriageway
19
(curbed islands)? Or only made by markings?
20 Is there a danger of underestimating speed and
overestimating distance of crossing vehicles?
Are the islands clearly visible and of a suitable
21
design?
Roundabouts Are all accesses to roundabouts radial to the centre
1 (perpendicular)? Is the design suitable to ensure a
low speed level and support the right of way?
Is there a sufficient deflection to ensure an
2
appropriate speed when passing the roundabout?
Is the central island of the roundabout shaped as a
3
hill?
Is the through-visibility effectively stopped by the
4
roundabout and the hill?
Is the central island of the roundabout free of fixed
5
obstacles which could be reached by vehicles?
In the case of a high number of powered two
6 wheelers: does the road surface ensure a sufficient
grip?
Is a low speed level supported by constructional
7
measures and by way of markings?
Traffic signals Is the stopping line correlated with the traffic signal so
1
that the signal can be seen?
Have any turning movements been excluded from

2
signal control? If so, is traffic management safe?
Are traffic signals easily recognizable, are there
3
repeating/doubled signals?
In areas with bicyclists: Have bicyclists' requirements

4
been considered (e.g. route through the intersection)?
In areas with bicyclists: Are stop lines for motorists set

5
back for the benefit of bicyclists?
In areas with pedestrian traffic: Are all accesses
6
equipped with pedestrian and cycle crossings?
7 In areas with pedestrian traffic: Are pedestrian
crossings clearly constructed? Is each section
equipped with signals?
Are exclusive green phases provided for pedestrians
8
and bicyclists where necessary?
In areas with pedestrian traffic: Can pedestrians cross

9
the road in one go? Is the green time sufficient?
In areas with pedestrian traffic: Are phase offsets
10 required for pedestrians and bicyclists within the
running cycle?
Are the signals affected at dawn/dusk by direct
12
sunlight?
Are advance warnings provided for traffic signals that
13
Have the locations for the signals been selected
14
correctly (additional signals, overhead signals, etc.)?
Does the existing road lighting lead to conflicts in
15 recognizing the yellow indication (sodium discharge
lamps)?
Is access from abutting properties affected and, if
16
necessary, included in signal control?
Is it possible to highlight less visible signals by using
17
the appropriate background?
Are the traffic signals properly situated so that they
18
can be distinguished by each particular traffic flow?
Are there any additional signs correlated with the
19 traffic signals to show the direction to which that traffic
signal is referring to?
Is the visibility of the traffic signal ensured on a sunny
20
day?
Is the stopping line correlated with the traffic signal so
21
Are signals covered/ obstructed (e.g. by traffic signs,
22
lighting masts, plants, traffic jams)?
Railway crossings Are there passive safety devices at the required
1
locations?
Are the traffic signs correlated with the type of railway
2
crossing (traffic volume)?
If the railway crossing is situated in a curve, are the
3
traffic signs doubled on the other side of the road?
Are traffic control devices required and optimally set
4
up with regard to future traffic developments?
Is the perception from a sufficient distance
5
guaranteed?
6 Is good visibility guaranteed?
7 Is lighting required and appropriately installed?
8
requirements?
Are prohibition of overtaking and speed limits in place
9
as necessary?
5. Public and Are service and rest areas and parking
Private Services, 1 facilities on both sides of the road?
Access Control In case not, are there left turn lanes?
Are there deceleration and acceleration lanes or
2
tapers at the entrance and exit?
Is the number of the parking areas for parking of
3
passenger vehicles, trucks and buses sufficient?
Are the dimensions of the parking areas sufficient for
4
parking of passenger vehicles, trucks and buses?
Are areas for busses and passenger cars separated
5 from the truck traffic (in the case of large rest
areas)?
Are the layout and cross section of the service or
rest area appropriate for the different traffic
6
movements? And if so, is layout suitable in access
areas to and from the property?
Is the layout in such a way, that vehicles are running
7
at the appropriate speed?
Are the parking areas physically separated from the

8
carriageway (guardrail, curb, green area etc.)?
Are there safe footpath connection to restaurants,
9
rest rooms etc. (including safe crossings)?
10 for rescue vehicles/maintenance vehicles/fire
service?
Are sufficient parking areas provided to minimize
illegal parking on footpaths and on the carriageway
11
with the corresponding hazards or have
corresponding preventative measures been taken?
12 Is sight obstructed by parking areas or by illegally
parked vehicles?
6. Vulnerable Road 1
Are stops easily and safely accessible to pedestrians
Users
(combination with pedestrian crossings, crossing
At Public transport
help, footpaths connection etc.)?
stops
2 Are the bus stops signposted and detectable by the
drivers? Is reconcilability from a longer distance
guaranteed?
3 Are the bus stops situated outside of the carriageway
where appropriate?
4 Are the queuing areas for waiting passengers
sufficient?
5 Is sight obstructed, for example by safety barriers,
6 In the case of bicycle paths: Is cyclist routing safely
designed in the area near public transport stops?
7 Is lighting required? And if so, is it appropriately
designed?
Other needs of 1 Are the pedestrian crossings located where most
Pedestrians required by pedestrian traffic?
2 Have pedestrian crossings been located in such a
way that collective use is guaranteed and the road will
not be crossed at other points?
3 Is there a risk of pedestrian underpasses and bridges
being bypassed? Are suitable countermeasures in
place?
4 Are further crossing aids required?
5 Are areas for waiting pedestrians and cyclists
sufficient?
6 Are refuges large and wide enough for crossing
7 Are crossings over special railway structures of a safe
design?
8 Is two-way visual contact ensured between
pedestrians and motorists?
9 Are the pedestrian ways physically separated by
curbstones, barriers or greenery?
10 Are the pedestrian crossings signposted and
detectable by the drivers?
11 Are the islands clearly visible and properly placed?
12 Is lighting provided where necessary?
Bicyclists 1 Are there separate bicycle facilities?
2
Are dimensions and pavement suitable?
3 Have cyclists' requirements been considered (e.g.
route across central refuges, bottlenecks)?
4 Is the visibility for motorized traffic adequate to see
cyclists along the road?
Are parked vehicles obstructing the visibility of the
5
road users regarding cyclists?
Are points where cyclists cross intersecting roads
6
provided with low curbstones?
7 Is right of way clearly defined at points where cyclists

come into contact with each other or with motorized
traffic?
Is it clear to the motorist whether he is crossing a one-
8
way or two-way cycle path?
Are advance warnings in place for features that
9
Needs of 1 Are motorbikes a considerable percentage of the
motorcyclists traffic?
2 Have devices or objects that might destabilize a

motorcycle been avoided on the road surface?
3 Is the road side clear of obstructions where
motorcyclists may lean into curves?
4 Will warning or delineation be adequate for
motorbikes?
5 Have barrier curbs been avoided in high speed
areas?
6 In areas more likely to have motorcyclists run off the
road, is the roadside forgiving or safety shielded?
7. Traffic Signing,
Marking, Lighting Have appropriate speed limits been signed
1
Signing adequately (start, end, height, location)?
Are there speed limitations ahead of intersections

2
and built-up areas and in through road sections?
Is the visibility of the road course assisted by edge

3
delineation?
4 Is sight obstructed by the traffic or by signs?

Is prohibition of overtaking for trucks, buses, etc.
appropriately designed and located? Are there
5
warning signs ahead of the intersection prohibiting
overtaking?
Can the signs be clearly recognized and read (size of
6 signs)? And do the signs conform to the conventions
of Vienna and Geneva?
7
place?
Is a reduction in speed when accessing the
8 intersection assigned to the correct place and
properly designed?
Is signing logical and consistent? Does it show the
9
right of way clearly?
10 Is signing for service and rest areas clear?
11 vegetation grows (e.g. as a result of obscured road
signs)?
Are signs located in such a way as to avoid
12 restricting visibility from accesses or intersecting
roads?
Is the roundabout fully visible and recognizable from
13 all accesses and are the markings and signs clear
and unambiguous?
Are signs retro reflecting or are they illuminated at
14 night? In daylight and darkness, are signs
satisfactory regarding visibility?
15 Are the additional information panels uniform?
16
17
Where needed have signs been located above the
18
carriageway?
Do the signs have a dimension according to the type
19
of road?

21
pavement?
Are the sign masts and foundations sufficiently
22
protected against collisions?
Do the traffic signs including their supports have a
sufficient passive safety by: low mass or/and break
23
away structure or/and are they beyond the safety
zone? Passive safety installations?
24 Do delineators have a breakaway structure?
Markings 1 Do all signs and markings correspond without any
contradictions?
3 Have old markings/signs been completely removed
(phantom markings)?
4 Are the markings in a parallel line to the edge of the
road surface?
5 Are the markings appropriate for the function and
6 Are the markings likely to be effective under all
expected conditions (day, night, wet, dry, fog, rising
and setting sun)?
7 Is the obligation to yield right of way enforced by
markings according to the one enforced by signing?
1 Is the road sufficiently illuminated? Is there a need to
Lighting
have illumination?
3 Is the lighting of special situations (transition zones,
4 Does the existing road lighting lead to conflicts in
recognizing the yellow indication (sodium discharge
lamps)?
5 Does lighting need to be changed so that crossing
pedestrians are clearly visible?
6
Is contrast lighting required at the intersection?
7 Does the ambient lighting present any special
requirements?
8 Can the stationary lighting cause problems in
recognizing the traffic signs or the alignment of the
road?
9 Are the lighting masts situated outside of the safety
10 Is stationary lighting at intersections/service and rest
areas properly situated?
8. Road side 1
Are there any features within the safety zone?
features and
Passive Safety
installations
Other road 1
equipment Are antidazzle screens provided as required?
2 Has suitable road equipment (fog warning signs,
automatic sprinklers for de-icing agents, snow fences
etc.) been installed and is it fully functional?
3 Are there game fences? Is the beginning and end of
game fencing correctly marked?
4 Is there a mileage system and is it properly
signposted?
Plantings 1 Is there any vegetation along the road?
2 Are there trees?
3 Are tree trunks free of scars from accidents?
4 Does the greenery cause or will the growth of
5 Does the greenery and type of planting preclude
6 Is sight obstructed by the planting? Is good visibility

ensured at the intersections?
7 Is visual contact motorist-pedestrian-bicyclist
restricted by greenery?
8 Does vegetation protect the road from natural
disasters like landslides etc?
9 Is the vegetation along the road old and could lead to
safety problems?
10 Does road side vegetation guide the drivers in curves
continuously?
11 Does it obstruct the visibility on the road course
(lateral clearance)?
12 Is the vegetation monotonous? Or does it help to
avoid a monotonous character of the road?
Civil engineering 1 Are passive safety installations set up at the required
structures locations?
2 Are parapets and overpasses at a safe distance from
the road?
3 Have masts, abutments, supporting walls, bridge
railings etc. been safeguarded?
4 Are there at bridges sufficient passive safety
installations, are these properly connected with the
guardrails along the road?
5 Have cyclists' requirements been considered (e.g.
separate cycle facilities)?
6 Is the drainage system a linear obstacle with deep
ditches in the safety zone?
7 Are the constructions of culverts obstacle like?
8 Are there tunnels in the road section?
9 Are the tunnels safe, are there emergency ways,
sufficient illumination etc. (the use of the demands of
EU – Tunnel directive 2004/54/EC is recommended)?

guaranteed?
1 What is the distance of the road directional signing to
Other obstacles the pavement?
2 Are the light poles to be considered as an obstacle
(steel, concrete construction)?
3 Are there unprotected supports for other cables than
lighting in the obstacle-free zone?
4 Are traffic signs (other than road directional signs) to
be considered as dangerous obstacles?
5 Are there unprotected advertisement boards or other
fixed obstacles outside the safety zone, are they
avoidable or safeguarded?
Passive safety 1 Are fixed obstacles avoidable, set up at sufficient
installations distances or safeguarded (masts, abutments,
supporting walls, bridge railings, trees etc.)?
2 Have passive safety installations been set up at the
required locations?
3 Are all road safety barriers in place and safely located
so that they are not obstacles themselves?
4
Is the length of any guardrail adequate?
5 Is the guardrail correctly installed, regarding: - end
treatments, - anchorages, - post spacing, - post
6 Are dangerous windows of guardrails avoided
(comment: windows shorter than 50 m should to be
avoided)?
7
Are barriers placed so that they don’t restrict visibility?
Checklists for ROAD SAFETY INSPECTONS

- URBAN MAIN ROADS -
Yes (√ )
No (X)
Have any final audit results from previous RSA been
Previous stage 1
taken into consideration and implemented?
1. Road function,
operating elements 1 Are there any issues from accident data if available?
and surrounding
Are there specific traffic composition characteristics to
2
be taken into consideration?
Are special measures required for particular groups
e.g. for young people, older people, sick people,
3
physically handicapped, hearing-impaired or blind
people?
Is the design of the road according to its function and
4
hierarchy in the network?
Is access to abutting properties appropriate for road
5
safety (number, design, location)?
6
curves + intersections etc?
Are transitions installed between different functions
7
and road characteristics?
Are there traffic islands and lane shifts
8
at the entrance of the town?
Is stopping sight distance guaranteed along the entire
9
section?
Is the transition from a built-up to a rural road or from
10 an illuminated to a not illuminated road appropriately
designed (village/town outskirts)?
11 Does the road “communicate” well with the driver so
that he realizes the situation without any surprises?
2. Cross section Does the road surface provide the required grip over
1 the long term where cars have to stop (e.g. at
pedestrian crossings, signalized intersections)?
Are there any doubts regarding the surface grip
2
because of excess bleeding or polished components?
Is the surface even and free from grooves, rutting, and
3
potholes?
5
surrounding?
6 Is there sufficient cross / diagonal fall?
Is stopping sight obstructed, for example by safety
7
barriers, plants?
Is narrowing of the carriageway required and, if so,
8
designed in such a way to ensure traffic safety?
9
10 Have the needs of public transport and its users been
taken into consideration?
Is slow and non motorized traffic separated from fast
11
and heavy traffic?
12 Is there a median?
Is a separating strip required between cycle path and
13
parking strip?
Are there any bottlenecks? If so, are they properly
14
signed?
Do curves with small radii have an enlarged width of
15
the pavement?
Does the embankment require passive safety
16
installations (only in special cases)?
3. Alignment Is sight obstructed, for example by safety barriers,
1

Does the alignment guide the drivers well without any
2
irritations about the main direction of the road course?
4. Intersections 1 Are the intersections perpendicular?
Is the main direction clearly recognizable? And if so,
2
is the right of way clearly recognizable?
Are the movements guided clearly and easy to
3
understand? Are traffic flows guided by markings?
Are the auxiliary lanes or tapers for left, right and U-
4
turning movements large enough?
Is the intersection fully visible and recognizable in
5 time from all accesses for different driver eye heights
of: cars, trucks, motorcycles, bicycles, etc, and are the
required sight triangles clear?
Is sight obstructed at the intersection, for example by
safety barriers, fences, road equipment, parking
7
areas, traffic signs, landscaping/greenery, bridge
abutments, buildings?
Are types and design of the intersections suitable for
8 the function and traffic volume of the intersecting
roads? (Separate answers for each intersection!)
Is pedestrian/bicyclist routing at intersections adapted
9 to the actual conditions and clearly marked and
signposted?
10 Are all accesses equipped with pedestrian crossings?
11
Is there wild and unorganized parking within the
12
intersections?
Are the pedestrian crossings as narrow as possible
13
(short ways for pedestrian)?
Does the obligation to yield right of way need to be
14
reinforced (e.g.by using repetition)?
Are pedestrian crossings clearly marked? Is each
structures)?
Are the crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists
16
provided with low curbs?
17 Should turns be prohibited (block diversion)?
19
pedestrians and cyclists to stand and wait?
Roundabouts Are the islands clearly visible and of a suitable
1
design?
Is there a sufficient deflection to ensure an
2
appropriate speed when passing the roundabout?
Are all accesses to roundabouts perpendicular and
3
radial to the centre?
Is the central island of the roundabout shaped as a
4
hill?
Is the through-visibility effectively stopped by the
5
roundabout and the hill?
Is the central island of the roundabout free of fixed
6
obstacles which could be reached by vehicles?
In the case of a high number of powered two
7 wheelers: does the road surface ensure a sufficient
grip?
Is a low speed level supported by constructional
8
measures and by way of markings?
Traffic signals Is the stopping line correlated with the traffic signal so
1
Have any turning movements been excluded from
2
signal control? If so, is traffic management safe?
Are traffic signals easily recognizable, are there
3
repeating signals?
Have bicyclists' requirements been considered (e.g.

4
route through the intersection)?
Are stop lines for motorists set back for the benefit of
5
bicyclists?
Are all accesses equipped with pedestrian and cycle
6
crossings?
Are pedestrian crossings clearly constructed? Is each
structures)?
Are exclusive green phases provided for pedestrians
8
and bicyclists where necessary?
Can pedestrians cross the road in one go? Is the
9
green time sufficient?
Are phase offsets required for pedestrians and
10
cyclists within the cycle?
Is the maximum delay reasonable for cyclists? Are
11 cyclists partially or totally removed from signal
control?
Are the signals affected at dawn/dusk by direct
13
sunlight?
Are advance warnings provided for traffic signals that
14
Have the locations for the signals been selected
15
correctly (additional signals, overhead signals, etc.)?
lamps)?
Is access from abutting properties affected and, if
17
necessary, included in signal control?
Is it possible to highlight less visible signals by using
18
the appropriate background?
Are the traffic signals properly situated so that they
19
can be distinguished by each particular traffic flow?
Are there any additional signs correlated with the
20 traffic signals to show the direction to which that traffic
signal is referring?
Is the visibility of the traffic signal ensured on a sunny
21
day?
Is the stopping line correlated with the traffic signal so
22
Are signals covered/ obstructed (e.g. by traffic signs,
23
lighting masts, plants, traffic jams)?
Railway crossings Are there passive safety devices at the required
locations?
1
Are the traffic signs correlated with the type of railway
crossing?
If the railway crossing is situated in a curve are the
2
traffic signs doubled on the other side of the road?
Are traffic control devices required and optimally set
3
up with regard to future traffic developments?
Are safeguards in place if required as a result of
4
seasonal use of the railway crossing?
Is reconcilability from a sufficient distance
5
guaranteed?
6 Is good visibility guaranteed?
7 Is lighting required and appropriately installed?
8
requirements?
Are prohibition of overtaking and speed limits in place
9
as necessary?
5. Public and Are major traffic generators such as city hall,

Private Services, churches and cemeteries, hospitals, housing or
Access control 1
shopping centers, petrol stations and tourist
attractions taken into account?
2 Are the accesses suitable for the amount of traffic?
Are the dimensions of the parking areas sufficient for
3
parking of passenger vehicles, trucks and buses?
Are parking areas easily accessible and do they
4
provide sufficient maneuvering space?
5
for rescue vehicles at hospitals from all directions?
Is the arrangement of parking (parallel, diagonal or
6
perpendicular) along the road sides safe?
Are loading areas provided next to the road at shops
7
and restaurants?
8 Are tram lines separated from the vehicle traffic?
If not, is the course of the tram lines clearly
9
recognizable for the other road users?
6. Vulnerable Road
Are stops easily and safely accessible to pedestrians
Users
1 (combination with pedestrian crossings, crossing help
At Public transport
etc.)?
stops
Are the bus stops signposted and detectable by the
2 drivers? Is reconcilability from a longer distance
guaranteed?
Are the bus stops situated outside of the carriageway
3
where appropriate?
Are the queuing areas for waiting passengers
4
sufficient?
In the case of bicycle paths: Is cyclist routing safely
5
designed in the area near public transport stops?
Is lighting required? And if so, is it appropriately
6
designed?
Other needs of Are the pedestrian crossings located where most
Pedestrians 1
required by pedestrian traffic?
Have pedestrian crossings been located in such a
2 way that collective use is guaranteed and the road will
not be crossed at other points?
Is there a risk of pedestrian underpasses and bridges
3 being bypassed? Are suitable countermeasures in
place?
4 Are further crossing aids required?
Are areas for waiting pedestrians and cyclists
5
sufficient?
6
Are crossings over special railway structures of a safe
7
design?
Is two-way visual contact ensured between
8
pedestrians and motorists?
Are the pedestrian ways physically separated by
9
curbstones, barriers or greenery?
10 Are the pedestrian crossings signposted and
detectable by the drivers?
11 Are the islands clearly visible and properly placed?
12 Is lighting provided where necessary?
Bicyclists 1 Are there separate bicycle facilities?
2 Are dimensions and pavement suitable?
Have cyclists' requirements been considered (e.g.
3
route across central refuges, bottlenecks)?
Is the visibility for motorized traffic adequate to see
4
cyclists along the road?
Are parked vehicles obstructing the visibility of the
5
road users regarding cyclists?
Are points where cyclists cross intersecting roads
6
provided with low curbstones?
Is right of way clearly defined at points where cyclists

7 come into contact with each other or with motorized
traffic?
Is it clear to the motorist whether he is crossing a one-
8
way or two-way cycle path?
Are advanced warnings in place for features that
9
Motorcyclists’ Are motorbikes a considerable percentage of the
1
requirements traffic?
Have devices or objects that might destabilize a
2
motorcycle been avoided on the road surface?
Have barrier curbs been avoided in high speed
3
areas?
In areas more likely to have motorcyclists run off the
4
road is the roadside forgiving or safety shielded?
7. Traffic Signing, Have appropriate speed limits been signed
Marking, Lighting 1 adequately (start, end, height, location, usually 50
Signing km/h)?
2 Is sight obstructed by the traffic or by signs?
Is prohibition of overtaking for trucks, buses, etc.
appropriately designed and located? Are there
2
warning signs ahead of the intersection prohibiting
overtaking?
Can the signs be clearly recognized and read (size of
4 signs)? And do the signs conform to the conventions
of Vienna and Geneva?
5
place?
Is signing logical and consistent? Does it show the
6
right of way clearly?
Is pedestrian/bicyclist routing at intersections adapted
7
to the actual conditions and clearly signposted?
Are advance warnings in place for features that
8
9 vegetation grows (e.g. as a result of obstructed road
signs)?
Are signs located in such a way as to avoid restricting
10
visibility from accesses or intersecting roads?
Are signs retro reflecting or are they illuminated at
11 night? In daylight and darkness, are signs satisfactory
regarding visibility?
12 Are the additional information panels uniform?
13
14
Where needed have signs been located above the
15
carriageway?
Do the signs have a dimension according to the type
16
of road?
18
pavement?
Markings Do all signs and markings correspond without any
1
contradictions?
Are the markings appropriate for the function and
3
Are the markings likely to be effective under all
4 expected conditions (day, night, wet, dry, fog, rising
and setting sun)?
Is the obligation to yield right of way enforced by
5
markings according to the one enforced by signing?
Lighting 1 Is the road sufficiently illuminated?
Is the lighting of special situations (transition zones,

3
lamps)?
Does lighting need to be changed so that crossing
5
pedestrians are clearly visible?
6 Is contrast lighting required at the intersection?
7
requirements?
Can the stationary lighting cause problems in
8 recognizing the traffic signs or the alignment of the
road?
Are the lighting masts situated outside of the safety
9
Is stationary lighting at intersections/service and rest
10
areas properly situated?
In the areas where there is no stationary lighting, are
11
there any potential dangers?
8. Road side 1 Are handrails or fences necessary to ensure the
features and safety of the pedestrians?
Passive Safety
installations
Other road
equipment
Plantings 2 Is there any vegetation along the road?
Does it obstruct the visibility of the traffic signs or the
3
intersections and pedestrian crossings?
Does the greenery and type of planting preclude
4
Does the greenery cause or will the growth of
5
Is visual contact motorist-pedestrian-bicyclist
6
restricted by greenery?
Is the vegetation along the road old and could lead to
7
safety problems?
Does road side vegetation guide the drivers in curves
8
continuously?
Civil engineering 1 Have cyclists' requirements been considered (e.g.
structures separate cycle facilities)?
guaranteed?
Passive safety Have passive safety installations been set up at the
1
installations required locations?
2 Are all road safety barriers in place and safely located
so that they are not obstacles themselves?
3 Is the length of any guardrail adequate?
4 Is the guardrail correctly installed, regarding: - end
treatments, - anchorages, - post spacing, - post
5 Are dangerous windows of guardrails avoided?
6 Are barriers placed so that they don’t restrict visibility?
Annex 2: Investigation Form
Results of Road Safety Inspection Road Number ………….….... Date/Time ………………..
between ….…………….. and ….…………….. Inspector …………………………..
Length About ………… km
Max Speed ………. km/h outside, ………. km/h inside towns and villages
- Road Function
Is the road suitable for the role it plays,

does it have mixed functions, are
speeds limit appropriate, are there any
impacts from land development?
- Cross section
Is the road wide enough for the traffic

using it, is the marking sufficient, what
are the surface conditions, are the
shoulders adequate but not too wide, is
the road designed so water does not
pool on the surface i.e. is drainage from
the road adequate, is the pavement in
a suitable condition?
-Alignment
How many horizontal curves are there,

make sure none commence just over a
hill, what about vertical curves, is there
consistency of curve design, are sight
distances adequate?
- Intersections
Is the intersection appropriate for the

traffic volumes, are there traffic signals
and are they sufficient (e.g. are turning
arrows needed)? It is also necessary to
look at local accesses and railway
crossings.
- Services
Is there sufficient space and

acceleration/deceleration lanes into the
Service and Rest Areas? How is access
controlled to other services such as
schools, hospitals, supermarkets,
restaurants, etc? Parking and loading
facilities and Public Transport facilities
such as tramlines, bus stops and their
position relative to traffic lights should
also be examined. Are they adequately
protected including the needs of their
passengers?
- Needs of vulnerable road

users
Have the needs of pedestrians, cyclists

and scooter/moped or motorbike riders
been taken into account?
- Traffic signing, marking

and lighting
Is the signing and marking appropriate

and clear, is lighting adequate or is it
needed?
- Road side features and

passive safety Installations
What structures, steep slopes and

embankments, plantings, trees and
other obstacles are near the roadside
that could pose a problem? Are there
open windows in the passive safety
system and/or is it an obstacle itself?
Annex 3: Example of RSI report
Road Safety Inspection Report
(for confidentiality reasons

the specifics of the project are not presented)
Road: ..............
Section from .................... to .................... (about .... km).
(GPS: from My Loc. ... to My Loc. ...)
Photograph or site map of location or section
Date:
ddd/mmm/yyyy
A: GENERAL PROJECT DATA:
The National Highway M ... (E ...) is the road which connects the ............... and ............... (total
length of the road from ............... to ............... is about ............... km).
The inspected road section starts from GPS dot My loc. ...* (...............) and ends at GPS dot My loc.
... (...............).
The section is a one carriageway 2-lane road.
There are plans to build up new motorway from ............... to ............... (new road is foreseen in
next 5 years).
Inspected by:
Inspection Team Leader: Dipl.-Eng. Lutz Pfeiffer, Road Safety Auditor ........................
Assisted by: PhD Dejan Jovanov
Inspection Team Members: ...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
* Note: GPS locations are in detail described in Annex 1.
Detailed project data:
Municipality (Commune): ...............
Road category: National Highway (“magistralni put”)
Road Number/section: M ... (E ...), section from ............... to ...............
Location: inspected section (location) starts from GPS dot My loc. ... (...............)
and ends at GPS dot My loc. ... (...............).
Length: about ... km
Cross section: 2-lane (7.0 m paved carriageway)
Traffic volume: n.a.
Legal speed: ... km/h and ... km/h
Information about accidents: n.a.
B: RESULTS OF THE INSPECTION
1. Road  Design of road is not suitable for its today function (it was built in
function and ‘60).
surrounding  Too many small accesses without appropriate design and signs
(access to private properties and farmland). GPS: My loc. 02, 08, 10,
12 and 15. The possibility of usage access to the farmland from
backwards should be checked.
 Orientation sight is partly not guaranteed, because of the sight

obstruction by the vegetation. GPS: My loc. 13.
 Speed limits and their location should be checked. Speed limit sign 60
km/h (GPS: My loc. 13) should be moved up to ............... for about
300 m. Speed limits should be repeated after intersection (road to
“truck terminal”) GPS: My loc. 14.
 All access roads should be checked (closed or legalized with
appropriate signalization).
 Problems in curves, stopping sight distance are obstructed by the
vegetation.
 Obstacles: Trees and direction signs are in road safety zone.
2. Cross  2 traffic lanes.

sections  Paved carriageway about 7.0 m, between longitudinal markings or
edge of asphalt, fully additional stabilized shoulder of about 1.0 m.
 Problems with existing pavement, road surface have ruttings, asphalt
bleeding and pot holes.
 Bleeding or polished components at some curves (GPS: My loc. 13).

 At some places there are no ditches or/and connection with the
ditches is blocked with soil, leads to inadequate drainage in the case
of heavy rainfalls.
 Cross fall and superelevation looks sufficient for 60 km/h.
 The traffic of horse carts and cyclist is forbidden by signs.
 Part of drivers are speeding – Lack of Police speed control or
stationary cameras.
3. Alignment  Sight is obstructed by vegetation
4.  There are few small (agriculture) intersection (at some of them right
Intersections of way was not signed - stop signs are missing).
 One bigger intersection with the road to the truck terminal has some
curbed islands. There is space for a left turning lane and a taper for
right turning but no clear guidance by marking and signing as well as
no direction signs. Pot holes are present at secondary road.
 Intersection (road to truck terminal) is in an acceptable way visible
and recognizable.
 In the most cases no sufficient sight conditions for the agricultures

and plant roads (sight was obstructed by) vegetation, pls see below
example for a “driver view”.
 Some connection to old road area should be demolished to avoid

illegal use (see picture at page 9)
 The connection point with the old road and an agriculture way at the
left hand side at the beginning of the inspected section should be
reorganized (clear organization as a single access, missing signing).
5. Service and  At the end of inspected section (near by gasoline station, GPS: My
rest areas loc. 15) service and rest areas are at one side of road and parking
facilities are on the other sides of the road. There is no left lane for
the gasoline station (but the asphalted width would be sufficient for
this). No clear definition of organization in gasoline station and
parking.
 Deceleration and acceleration lanes at the entrance and exit are not
defined (right of way was not defined).
 The sight at parking and gasoline station can be obstructed by parked
vehicles.
6. Needs of  No facilities, no comments
vulnerable
Road users
7. Traffic  Visibility of the road esp. at night should be improved by adding the
signing, delineators.
marking  Some stop signs are missing at access roads, and some speed limit
and lighting signs (signs and markings should be the same for the both direction).
 There are no information signs for gasoline station and parking area.
 Vegetation causes the problems to the sign visibility.
 Signs retro reflective function should be checked.
 There are problems with big directional signs (solid obstacle-like
structure of poles).
 Markings should be renewed through regular maintenance (once per

year). Edge line should be marked.
 There are some phantom markings at old by pass roads.
 Horizontal and vertical signalization must be correspondent
(contradictions with overtaking are found).
8. Road side  There are some dangerous features within the safety zone (direction
features and sign and tree).
passive safety
installations
 Vegetation along the road can cause the visibility problems. Sight is
obstructed by the planting (vegetation) in curves and at intersection
(agriculture) roads.
 At the small bridge is a concrete barrier installed, but some extension
with steel guard rail before and after the bridge
 At the two culverts (GPS: My loc. 09) guard rail should be installed.
 Some guard rail poles are considered as obstacles (GPS: My loc. 05

and 07).
 Guard rail should be added at the bridges area, culverts protection
and big direction sign.
 Guardrail start and end treatment are not according the safe
standards (should be improved towards EU norms EN 1317). One
beam was welded, it is dangerous, bolted connection are insufficient,
in a case of a hit the function can not be guaranteed
Assessment of the deficits:
The most critical deficits in respect of road safety are:
 Number of small and illegal intersection and accesses to the private properties is in the
contradiction with the foreseen function and operation,
 Bad sight conditions along the road and at access points (regular maintenance of the road),
 Improving of the road signing and marking (including the intersection, for marking the
usage of modern cold plastic materials with better retroreflection and better sustainability is
recommended),
 Problems regarding the pavement of the carriageway (rutting, pot holes)
 Drainage system should be improved (re-profiling of ditches),
 Few fixed hard obstacles near by road (directional signs and tree),
 No left turning lanes on gasoline station (it should be checked).
 Existing guardrail system is partly incomplete
PART C: PROPOSALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Short term proposals:
The following measures should be done immediately:
 Speed limit concept should be revised (speed limit should be 60 km/h on bought side),
 Regular maintenance (clearing of vegetation along the road and at small intersection,
repairment of road surface, improvements of signing and markings)
 Improvements of the guardrails system (general remark: For future projects it is
recommended to use consequently the European Guideline EN 1317)
2. Medium term proposals for the project
The following measures will be proposed:
 Changing of the signs (with EU standards),

 Concept of closing the illegal access to the road, organizing of access backwards
 Rehabilitation of the road section (new pavement),
3. Long term measures
 Construction of new motorway will attract traffic from M ... road, and it will be alternative
solution for drivers.
Remark: For the purpose of RSI we used GPS equipment for precise definition of some
location (GPS location from 01 to 15. Please see Annex 1.).
Annex 1: GPS locations with description
GPS dot name: Coordinate (N E) Short description of place

My Location 01 N ... E ... Beginning of RSI
My Location 02 N ... E ... Unsigned intersection
Direction sign to close the carriageway and with hard (solid)
My Location 03 N ... E ... structure. Tree is too close to carriageway
My Location 04 N ... E ... Sign to close the carriageway and with hard (solid) structure
My Location 05 N ... E ... Deviation for construction road (pots only)
My Location 06 N ... E ... Bridge
My Location 07 N ... E ... Drainage problems and deviation for construction road (pots only)
My Location 08 N ... E ... Stone factory
My Location 09 N ... E ... Unprotected culvert
My Location 10 N ... E ... Illegal access road
My Location 11 N ... E ... Missing signs
My Location 12 N ... E ... Unprotected culvert
My Location 13 N ... E ... Sign at the wrong position
My Location 14 N ... E ... Missing signs at intersection
My Location 15 N ... E ... End of RSI (gasoline station)

Manual RSI PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Manual RSI PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SEETO Road Safety Inspection Manual (Revised Version 2016)

Status and version Date Author Action

Final Revised Version June 2016 Mr. Hans-Joachim Vollpracht

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AADT Annual average daily traffic

1 BASICS ABOUT ROAD SAFETY INSPECTION

1.1 Road safety inspection

It is important to note that:

The introduced measures are an integrated part of road safety management:

ROAD ROAD ROAD ROAD BLACK IN-DEPTH NETWORK

PRO-ACTIVE (PREVENTION) RE-ACTIVE (CURE)

NEW DESIGN EXISTING ROADS

Figure 1.1-1 Road safety inspection as part of road safety management

The similarities and differences of both procedures is explained in Figure 1.1-2:

Feasibi- Draft Detailed Pre- Early Road

Road Safety Auditors

Figure 1.1-2 RIA, RSA and RSI – stages and responsibilities

Road safety inspection provides a supplementary, proactive approach to safety countermeasures in

NEW ROAD EXISTING ROAD

RSA Problems and RSI

IMPROVED ROAD SAFETY

Figure 1.1-3 Interaction between the RSA and RSI procedures

The expected, essential principles of the RSI are based on:

1.2 RSI as part of the Safe System approach

Relative contribution to crashes (Source: PIARC, Road Safety Manual)

1.3 Benefits and costs of a road safety inspection

The benefits of an RSI can be summarised as follows:

1.4 Road safety inspection and accident data

1.5 Inspections and maintenance

1.6 Inspections and human factors

2 WHAT SHOULD BE INSPECTED?

2.1 Area of application

2.2 The basic topics of RSI

3 WHEN SHOULD ROAD SAFETY INSPECTION BE CARRIED OUT?

3.1 Key reasons to start an RSI

An RSI can be started when:

3.2 Other considerations

The following issues need to be considered as part of the inspection process:

 Seasonal variation – it is also suggested that consideration be given to inspections in

4 THE INSPECTION PROCESS – HOW TO PERFORM AN RSI

START OF THE RSI

Client hands over all documents/data to the inspector

Independent RSI report prepared by the inspector Undertaking

Client decides whether to implement

Client explains the

END OF THE RSI

Figure 4.1-1 The RSI workflow (main steps)

4.2 The partners in the RSI process and their roles

Order the RSI

Selecting the team

4.3 Preparatory work in the office

 Describe the function of the road: is it a national or regional road?

Important information for the RSI includes:

 Maps and any drawings from previous projects

Furthermore, the following data should be organised:

 Traffic data for all types of road user

4.4 Field Study

4.5 RSI findings and report

A typical table of contents in an RSI report would be:

1. Introduction including details about the road being inspected.

4.6 Completion of the RSI

Response to the inspection report