Road Safety Audit Guidelines

Massachusetts Department of Transportation Highway Division

10 Park Plaza, Boston, Ma 02116-3973

November 1, 2015
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction .........................................................................3

1.1 Definition......................................................................................................................3

1.2 When Is A Road Safety Audit Required? ....................................................................3

1.3 Who Facilitates The Road Safety Audit? .....................................................................4

2.0 Road Safety Audit Procedure..............................................5

2.1 Preparing Background Materials ..................................................................................5

2.2 Assembling An Audit Team .........................................................................................6

2.3 Conducting The Road Safety Audit Meeting ...............................................................6

2.3.1 Pre-Audit Meeting ........................................................................................................ 7

2.3.2 Perform Field Visit ....................................................................................................... 7

2.3.3 Post-Audit Meeting ....................................................................................................... 7

2.4 Preparing The Road Safety Audit Report.....................................................................8

Appendicies
Appendix A. Recommended Email Invite
Appendix B. Sample Agenda
Appendix C. Safety Review Prompt List
Appendix D. Agency Contact Information
Appendix E. RSA Report Template
Appendix F. Sample Crash Data Summary
Appendix G. References

Page | 2
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Definition
In an effort to reduce the number of crash-related fatalities and incapacitating injuries, Massachusetts
Department of Transportation has developed a Strategic Highway Safety Plan. The mission of the Safety
Plan is to Develop, promote, implement, and evaluate data-driven, multidisciplinary strategies to
maximize safety for users of the roadway system. One of the many strategies noted in the current Safety
Plan is to conduct Road Safety Audits (RSA) at high-crash locations throughout the
Commonwealth. A Road Safety Audit, as defined by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is a
formal safety performance examination of an existing or future road or intersection by an independent
audit team. Simply stated, an RSA is a relatively quick process that identifies safety improvements
focused on decreasing the number and severity of roadway crashes. The safety improvements
recommended typically vary from low cost measures to significant improvement projects. Many States
that have employed the RSA technique and implemented the recommendations, have seen measurable
decreases in the number of incapacitating and fatal crashes as a result.

1.2 When is a Road Safety Audit Required?

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) Highway Division has fully embraced the
RSA process and has incorporated it into its safety programs. MassDOT has provided RSA training for
the District Traffic Engineers and Regional Planning Agencies, and conducted audits for locations
experiencing lane departure crashes, cross-median crashes, intersections, bicycle and pedestrian,
accessibility, and other high crash locations. MassDOT has incorporated the RSA process as a
requirement under any of the following conditions:

1. Projects that include roadway or traffic signal improvements located within a High Crash Cluster
(Vehicle, Bicycle, or Pedestrian) of the most recent available years.
2. Projects that include improvements adjacent to a High Crash Cluster or are anticipated to impact
the operations of a High Crash Cluster. (ex. Increasing the traffic volumes to a high crash cluster)
3. Projects securing federal funding through the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) or
are anticipated to utilize HSIP funding.

Knowing the success of an RSA, the MassDOT Safety Management Unit is encouraging MassDOT
Districts and communities to conduct RSAs at the initial stage of the design process so as to help guide
the design and reduce fatalities and injury crashes for locations in which safety has been noted to be a
factor in determining needs for improvement.

Tips: To determine if your project is located within a high crash cluster (vehicle, bicycle, or
pedestrian) visit the MassDOT Top Crash Location Mapping service. High crash clusters within the
most recent posted year will require an RSA. The designer should also check previous years crash
clusters to verify that the location has never been classified as a high crash location.
http://services.massdot.state.ma.us/maptemplate/TopCrashLocations
The designer should also verify that the location does not exceed the threshold of a high crash cluster
by comparing the calculated Equivalent Property Damage Only (EPDO) to the regional maximum
located in the latest Massachusetts HSIP Guidelines.
https://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Portals/8/docs/traffic/HSIP/HSIP%20Criteria%20Updates.pdf

Page | 3
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

1.3 Who Facilitates the Road Safety Audit?

The RSA should be incorporated into a project designers scope of work for a roadway
improvement project that has identified safety concerns as one of the reasons for the improvement needs
or qualifies for one of the listed conditions in Section 1.2. The intention is to have the designer of the
improvement project facilitate the RSA and prepare the RSA report. As an RSA must be facilitated by an
Independent organization, it is critical that the process be conducted early in the project stages prior to
any preliminary design. Therefore it shall be required that an RSA be conducted at the following stages:

1. In relation to a MassDOT project scope, prior to the development of the 25% Design Submission
documents.
2. In relation to a Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) filing, prior to the
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) filing and prior to the Transportation Impact Assessment
(TIA) report. Note that the RSA may be conducted following the Traffic Scoping Letter.

In the case where an RSA is being conducted after either of the listed stages have been completed, or
MassDOT has determined that the project designer cannot be considered an independent organization, an
outside consultant shall be retained to facilitate the RSA and prepare the RSA report in accordance with
these guidelines.

The necessary steps to prepare, conduct and finalize a RSA are described in Section 2.0. Generally, RSAs
last approximately three hours and include a pre-meeting, a field visit, and a post-field visit meeting so
that an audit report can be prepared. During the pre-meeting, the team gathers to discuss the location and
project, review materials and discuss general concerns of the location. The team, as a group, visits the
project site and walks / drives through the area. The team then reconvenes to discuss the safety issues that
were noted and to develop short and long term recommendations to ameliorate the safety concerns.

Page | 4
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

2.0 Road Safety Audit Procedure

As described in the sections below, the RSA should follow a specific procedure to obtain the most useful
information possible and hold a successful RSA. The figure below illustrates the steps to completing an
RSA.

Prepare
Assemble the Conduct the Prepare the
Background
Audit Team RSA Meeting RSA Report
Materials

2.1 Preparing Background Materials

The designer shall obtain, review and summarize the most recent pertinent available information
regarding safety. This may include the following:

Crash Data
Traffic Volumes
Traffic Speed Data (including regulatory speeds)
Other Safety Concerns

Note that the crash data summaries obtained from the MassDOT Statewide database (Crash Portal) are
not adequate and that the actual crash reports (including narratives and diagrams), from the police
department reporting the crash data, are critical to a successful audit. The designer shall submit a request
to the police department(s) within the study area (State, Local, or other). Such request should encompass
an area larger than the study intersection or project limits to have more accurate data for analysis (as an
example, requesting crash reports for the entire length of local roadways intersecting the study corridor).
The designer shall incorporate all crashes that occur in the study or are a result of the design of the study
area (for example, crashes occurring within the limit of the queue storage of an intersection).

The designer should cross-reference the provided crash reports with the Crash Portal using both a
mapping method and AdHoc Query tool separately (to compile located and non-located crashes). This
cross-reference will help determine that the police department has provided all relevant crash reports for
the study area.

The actual crash reports shall be used to prepare collision diagrams and summaries (See Appendix F).

Details of the crash analyses must be concise since they will be used as the before information when an
evaluation is performed on the effectiveness of the countermeasures. Other relevant information regarding
the location may include, but is not limited to: traffic volumes (including pedestrians and bicycles if
available), speed/citation data, available roadway plans, traffic reports, and/or signal timings and
phasing information (if appropriate).

Tips: All information provided in the Collision Data Summary Table must match the Motor Vehicle
Crash Police Report. The consultant should include pertinent information in the comments section
for each crash to assist the audit team in identifying the specific cause for the crash. The MassDOT
crash portal can be found at the following location: http://mhd-arcgis/crashportal/

Page | 5
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

2.2 Assembling an Audit Team

With input and assistance from the community and/or MassDOT, the designer will select the
multidisciplinary RSA team, date, time and location. The team should include (but not limited to) the
following:

Engineering (Municipal Engineering, MassDOT District Traffic and Projects)

Enforcement (local and/or state police, depending upon jurisdiction)
Emergency response (Police, fire, and ambulance whom respond to crashes in the project area)
MassDOT Safety Management Unit
Transit (MBTA, RTA, and other transit providers)
Regional Planning Agency (RPA)
Federal Highway Administration (Safety Engineer)
Maintenance (Local Public Works and/or MassDOT maintenance depending upon jurisdiction)

At a minimum, the RSA team requires a representative from Engineering, Enforcement, Emergency
Response and the MassDOTs SMU (as shown in bold above). Additional members and interested parties
may include the following:

Municipal Planning Department

MassDOT Project Manager (if applicable)
Local Public Health Professionals
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advocacy Groups

The designer shall contact the MassDOT Safety Management unit initially for availability. It shall be the
responsibility of the designer to ensure that all required interested parties are available to attend the
scheduled RSA. An email invitation should be sent to all RSA team participants and include an
attachment with the RSA agenda, background materials, and prompt list. (See Appendix A for suggested
text of email invite and Appendix B for a copy of a sample agenda).

Tips: It is best for the meetings to take place in close proximity to the project location for meeting
efficiency. The designer should discuss with the City/Town officials those parties that would be
appropriate to attend the meeting. The designer should also conduct research to determine if
applicable advocacy groups should be invited to the RSA. This can include such groups as
MassBike, WalkBoston, Mass-in-Motion, etc.

2.3 Conducting the Road Safety Audit Meeting

The RSA meeting shall be conducted in three (3) stages:

Pre-Audit Field Visit Post-Audit

Meeting (Audit) Meeting

Discuss Safety Issues Confirm Safety Issues Confirm List of Issues

Review Crash History Identify Additional Identify Potential
Specific Issues Enhancements and
Responsible Parties

Page | 6
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

2.3.1 Pre-Audit Meeting

During the pre-audit meeting, the designer will provide handouts of all information that was provided in
the invitation email. It will be the responsibility of the designer to facilitate the RSA meeting, take notes
and photos, and then prepare the report in a timely manner. The RSA participants will meet (pre-audit
meeting) to discuss the process and goals for the RSA. The designer will present the existing crash data
and any known related planned projects to the participants in order to provide an introduction to project.
The designer will then begin the conversation of what may be some of the safety issues so that
participants can explain why they may be happening (as an example, if a location exhibits a high number
of rear end locations from one approach, this should be suggested as an observation and solicit ideas as to
why this may be occurring). General comments, safety issues and concerns will also be solicited about the
subject location.

Tips: The intention of the RSA meeting is to solicit thoughts and ideas about issues and solutions;
therefore, the designer should avoid specific design details regarding any proposed project (for
example, that a signal or a re-alignment is being proposed). The designer should prepare visuals such
as overall satellite imagery or mapping to assist in pointing out specific issues. Good practice in
keeping a record of the safety issues discussed in the meeting is the utilization of note boards.

2.3.2 Perform Field Visit

Following the pre-audit meeting, the team will perform a field visit (audit), during which specific issues
and concerns will be pointed out by the RSA team (and/or designer) and recorded by the designer. As a
minimum, the designer should use the safety review prompt list (see Appendix C) as a reference to ensure
that a comprehensive list of safety issues is discussed at the audit site visit. Additionally, the designer
should obtain photographs of key safety issues that may be included in the final report.

Tips: The group should verify the issues discussed during the pre-audit meeting. The designer
should also ensure that the team walks the site as a group so that all members are able to participate
in the conversation. Designers are advised to bring two (2) representatives as one may act as the
facilitator and one as the recorder/photographer to ensure that all information discussed during the
RSA is captured for the final report.

2.3.3 Post-Audit Meeting

Following the field visit, the RSA participants will return to the meeting facility (post-audit
meeting) and the designer will facilitate a group discussion, which would confirm that a complete list
of safety issues had been identified during the RSA. This is followed by a discussion identifying potential
countermeasures. The countermeasures may include short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term
improvements and the entity responsible for each of the safety issues for the improvements will be
identified. It should be noted that recommendations should be comprehensive and may include
engineering, maintenance, enforcement, educational and behavioral countermeasures. In cases where
recommendations are presented that do not meet federal or state guidelines, it should be discussed and
detailed explanation given. If plans are already underway, the plans may be discussed and reviewed to
determine whether or not the existing concerns and issues will be adequately addressed. The designer
should then adjourn the meeting by describing the next steps in the process which includes the draft and
final reports to be reviewed by the group.

Page | 7
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

Tips: During the post-audit meeting, the designer should confirm that each safety issue discussed
previously is presented with one or many possible solutions. The designer should also stress the
importance of the report review process finalizing the meeting as this is critical to ensuring a quality
product.

2.4 Preparing the Road Safety Audit Report

An RSA Report, based on MassDOTs report template (see Appendix E), will be prepared describing the
Safety issues and countermeasures identified during the RSA. Countermeasures which were not discussed
during the RSA may also be included, if they are found to be appropriate. Potential countermeasures
which do not conform to MassDOT or FHWA standards will be noted as such in the report.

The MassDOT RSA Report Template in Microsoft Word Format can be found in Appendix E. It is also
recommended that the designer review past RSA Reports for examples.

The RSA Report preparation and report review will require the following submissions:

Draft 5 Days Final Draft 5 Days Final

RSA Report Review RSA Report Review RSA Report

Submit via email to all Submit to MassDOT and Submit final accessible
participants within five roadway owner via email pdf to all recipients
(5) business days from including all received within five (5)
the RSA date. comments within five (5) business days of
business days approval (4 MB Max)

The final RSA report must be submitted in a fully accessible PDF format with a file size no greater than 4
MB. It is suggested to use the Adobe Acrobat Professional Accessibility Checker tool for verifying that
the document is accessible. This tool will provide guidance for identified issues.

A complete RSA report should clearly state the safety issues related to the subject location and describe in
detail why this poses a risk to this location. An example of how to word a safety issue may be:

The sight distance on Side Street looking north is impeded by many objects including brush,
utility poles, guardrail, and the vertical curvature of the roadway. This poor sight distance
appears to be a contributing factor in the number of angle crashes occurring from this
approach.

The designer should avoid vague language and broad descriptions. An example of a poorly worded safety
issue description may be:

The sight distance looking north from Side Street is inadequate and may be the cause of
crashes.

Each potential safety enhancement should then describe how it will mitigate the safety issue. The
designer should recognize that this stage of the design is intended to suggest possible mitigation
techniques and that multiple enhancements may be applicable to single safety issues. The report should
Page | 8
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

avoiding phrasing such as Install Traffic Signal but rather suggest this as a possible solution by stating
Evaluate the installation of a Traffic Signal.

As shown in Appendix E and below, the final report should be broken out into five (5) main sections.

The background should describe the RSA process and why the audit was
Background conducted. This should describe that the location of the project is within a high
crash cluster in the region (if applicable).

This section should describe the date and location of the audit, as well as names
Project Data and affiliations of the audit team members. It should also describe the process
that took place and materials that were utilized and discussed during the audit.

Project This section should describe the location in detail (required descriptions vary if
Location and project includes isolated intersections or a roadway corridor. It should also
Description include a location map of the area.

Observations This section must include all safety issues discussed during the RSA and
and Potential subsequent potential enhancements. This section may be laid out with each issue
Enhancements described directly followed by the enhancements.

The summary should provide a basic overview of the recommendations

Summary of
including the major key points. It should also include a complete table listing of
Road Safety
all issues and enhancements. The table should provide a general description of
Audit
the enhancement.

Tips: All observed safety issues must have at least one clearly stated enhancement which describes
in detail how it would help to mitigate the safety issue being described. It is also helpful to highlight
the crashes that are occurring due to the safety issue. More Information for preparing the Road
Safety Audit report can be found in the MassDOT RSA Report Template with additional tips on
formatting and editing to create a fully accessible document.

Page | 9
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

Appendix A. Recommended Email Invite

From: DESIGNER
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 11:43 AM
To: Participants
Subject: Road Safety Audit Scheduled: Insert DATE, TIME and LOCATION

The Road Safety Audit for LOCATION is scheduled for DATE/TIME at the LOCATION

COMMUNITY / MassDOT request and appreciate your attendance or the attendance of a

representative from your agency/department. Your involvement in this meeting is important and
will result in specific recommendations to increase the safety at this intersection. An agenda and
background materials are attached for review prior to attending the meeting. The meeting
participants are requested to drive / walk the intersection on their own and to document
comments (on the RSA Prompt List attached) regarding the condition of the location prior to the
meeting DATE. If you have additional historical information and/or reports it would be helpful
for you to bring them to the meeting.

Please note: on the day of the road safety audit, we will meet first at the XXXXX and then go to
the site as a group. Please dress appropriately for safety and weather (i.e. Safety vest, hard hat,
umbrella, etc) as required by your agency for a field visit and as necessary.

Please contact me by phone XXX-XXX-XXXX or email XX@XXX with any questions.

Thank you,
DESIGNER
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

Appendix B. Sample Agenda

 Road Safety Audit
LOCATION
Meeting Location: XXXXXXXX
MEETING LOCATION ADDRESS
DATE
10:00 AM 12:00 noon

Type of meeting: High Crash Location Road Safety Audit

Attendees: Invited Participants to Comprise a Multidisciplinary Team
Please bring: Thoughts and Enthusiasm!!

10:00 AM Welcome and Introductions

10:15 AM Review of Site Specific Material

Crash, Speed & Volume Summaries provided in advance
Existing Geometries and Conditions

11:00 AM Visit the Site

Drive to LOCATION
As a group, identify areas for improvement

11:30 AM Post Visit Discussion / Completion of RSA

Discuss observations and finalize findings
Discuss potential improvements and finalize recommendations

12:00 noon Adjourn for the Day but the RSA has not ended

Instructions for Participants:

Before attending the RSA on DATE, participants are encouraged to drive through
the intersection and complete/consider elements on the RSA Prompt List with a
focus on safety.
All participants will be actively involved in the process throughout. Participants
are encouraged to come with thoughts and ideas, but are reminded that the
synergy that develops and respect for others opinions are key elements to the
success of the overall RSA process.
After the RSA meeting, participants will be asked to comment and respond to the
document materials to assure it is reflective of the RSA completed by the
multidisciplinary team.
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

Appendix C. Safety Review Prompt List

GEOMETRIC DESIGN

Issue Comment

A. Speed (Design Speed; Speed Limit & Zoning; Sight Distance; Overtaking
Are there speed-related issues along the corridor?
Please consider the following elements:
Horizontal and vertical alignment;
Posted and advisory speeds
Driver compliance with speed limits
Approximate sight distance
Safe passing opportunities

B. Road alignment and cross section

With respect to the roadway alignment and cross-
section please consider the appropriateness of the
following elements:
Functional class (Urban Principal Arterial)
Delineation of alignment;
Widths (lanes, shoulders, medians);
Sight distance for access points;
Cross-slopes
Curbs and gutters
Drainage features

C. Intersections
For intersections along the corridor please consider all
potential safety issues. Some specific considerations
should include the following:
Intersections fit alignment (i.e. curvature)
Traffic control devices alert motorists as
necessary
Sight distance and sight lines seem appropriate
Vehicles can safely slow/stop for turns
Conflict point management
Adequate spacing for various vehicle types
Capacity problems that result in safety problems

D. Auxiliary lanes
Do auxiliary lanes appear to be adequate?
Could the taper locations and alignments be
causing safety deficiencies?
Are shoulder widths at merges causing safety
deficiencies?
E. Clear zones and crash barriers
For the roadside the major considerations are clear
zone issues and crash barriers. Consider the following:
Do there appear to be clear zones issues?
Are hazards located too close the road?
Are side slopes acceptable?
Are suitable crash barriers (i.e, guard rails,
curbs, etc.) appropriate for minimizing crash
severity?
Barrier features: end treatments, visibility, etc.

F. Bridges and culverts (if necessary)

Are there specific issues related to bridges and culverts
that may result in safety concerns?

G. Pavement (Defects, Skid Resistance, and Flooding)

Is the pavement free of defects including
excessive roughness or rutting, potholes, loose
material, edge drop-offs, etc.) that could result
in safety problems (for example, loss of
steering control)?
Does the pavement appear to have adequate
skid resistance, particularly on curves, steep
grades and approaches to intersections?
Is the pavement free of areas where flooding or
sheet flow of water could contribute to safety
problems?
In general, is the pavement quality sufficient
for safe travel of heavy and oversized vehicles?

H. Lighting (Lighting and Glare)

It is important to consider to the impacts of lighting.
Some specifics include the following:
Is lighting required and, if so, has it been
adequately provided?
Are there glare issues resulting from headlights
during night time operations or from sunlight?
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES
Issue Comment

I. Signs
Signage is a critical element in providing a safe
roadway environment. Please consider the following:
Are all current signs visible (consider both
night and day)? Are they conspicuous and
clear? Are the correct signs used for each
situation?
Does the retroreflectivity or illumination appear
satisfactory?
Are there any concerns regarding sign
supports?

J. Traffic signals
If present, do the traffic signals appear to be
designed, installed, and operating correctly?
Is the signal processing the traffic efficiently?
Is the controller located in a safe position?
(where it is unlikely to be hit, but maintenance
access is safe)
Is there adequate sight distance to the ends of
possible vehicle queues?

K. Marking and delineation

Is the line marking and delineation:
appropriate for the function of the road?
consistent along the route?
likely to be effective under all expected
conditions? (day, night, wet, dry, fog, rising
and setting sun, oncoming headlights, etc.)
Are centerlines, edgelines, and lane lines
provided? If not, do drivers have adequate
guidance?
ROADWAY ACTIVITY
Issue Comment
With respect to roadway activity please consider safety
elements related to the following:
Pedestrians
Bicycles
Public transportation vehicles and riders
Emergency vehicles
Commercial vehicles
Slow moving vehicles

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
Issue Comment

Weather & Animals

From an environmental perspective it is important to
consider any potential impacts. Most notably is likely
to be the impacts of weather or animals, including:
Possible effects of rain, fog, snow, ice, wind on
design features.
Has snow fall accumulation been considered in
the design (storage, sight distance around
snowbanks, etc.)?
Are there any known animal travel/migration
routes in surrounding areas which could affect
design?
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

Appendix D. Agency Contact Information

Road Safety Audit Contact Information
MassDOT Contacts
MassDOT District 1 MassDOT District 4
270 Main Street 519 Appleton Street
Lenox, MA 01240 Arlington, MA 02476
Phone: (413) 637-5700 Phone: (781) 641-8300
Attn.: District Traffic Engineer or District Projects Attn.: District Traffic Engineer or District Projects
Engineer Engineer

MassDOT District 2 MassDOT District 5

811 North King Street 1000 County Street
Northampton, MA 01060 Taunton, MA 02780
Phone: (413) 582-0599 Phone: (508) 824-6633
Attn.: District Traffic Engineer or District Projects Attn.: District Traffic Engineer or District Projects
Engineer Engineer

MassDOT District 3 MassDOT District 6

403 Belmont Street 185 Kneeland Street
Worcester, MA 01604 Boston, MA 02111
Phone: (508) 929-3800 Phone: (857) 368-6100
Attn.: District Traffic Engineer or District Projects Attn.: District Traffic Engineer or District Projects
Engineer Engineer

MassDOT Safety Management Unit

10 Park Plaza
Boston, MA 02116
Phone: (857) 368-9634
Attn.: Lisa Schletzbaum
E-mail: [email protected]
RPA Contacts
Berkshire Regional Planning Commission Metropolitan Area Planning Council
1 Fenn Street, Suite 201 60 Temple Place
Pittsfield, MA 01201 Boston, MA 02111
Phone: (413) 442-1521 Phone: (617) 451-2770
Attn.: Transportation Manager Attn.: Transportation Manager

Cape Cod Commission Montachusett Regional Planning Commission

3225 Main Street R1427 Water Street
P.O. Box 226 Fitchburg, MA 01420
Barnstable, MA 02630 Phone: (978) 345-7376
Phone: (508) 362-3828 Attn.: Transportation Manager
Attn.: Transportation Manager E-mail: [email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]

Central Massachusetts Nantucket Planning and Economic Development

Regional Planning Commission Commission
nd
2 Washington Square, 2 Floor 2 Fairgrounds Road
Worcester, MA 01604 Nantucket, MA 02554
Phone: (508) 756-7717 Phone: (508) 228-7237
Attn.: Transportation Manager Attn.: Transportation Manager

Franklin Regional Council of Governments Northern Middlesex Council of Governments

425 Main Street 40 Church Street, Suite 200
Greenfield, MA 01301 Lowell, MA 01852
Phone: (413) 774-3167 Phone: (978) 454-8021
Attn.: Transportation Manager Attn.: Transportation Manager
E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]

Marthas Vineyard Commission Old Colony Planning Council

33 New York Avenue 70 School Street
P.O. Box 1447 Brockton, MA 02301
Oak Bluffs, MA 02557 Phone: (508) 583-1833
Phone: (508) 693-3453 Attn.: Transportation Manager
Attn.: Transportation Manager E-mail: [email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]

Merrimack Valley Planning Commission Pioneer Valley Planning Commission

160 Main Street 60 Congress Street, First Floor
Haverhill, MA 01830 Springfield, MA 01104
Phone: (978) 374-0519 Phone: (413) 781-6045
Attn.: Transportation Manager Attn.: Transportation Manager
E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]
RPA Contacts, continued
Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic
Development
88 Broadway
Taunton, MA 02780
Phone: (508) 824-1367
Attn.: Transportation Manager
E-mail: [email protected]
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

Appendix E. RSA Report Template

See the following location for a Microsoft Word Version of this template

https://www.massdot.state.ma.us/highway/Departments/TrafficandSafetyEngineering/HighwaySafety.aspx
ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

Audit Location

Municipality of XX
Date

Prepared For:
MassDOT

On Behalf Of:
Client

Prepared By:
Company
Address
Road Safety AuditSite Location Description
Prepared by company
DRAFT/FINAL

Table of Contents
Contents
Background ................................................................................................................................. 1

Project Data ................................................................................................................................. 1

Project Location and Description .............................................................................................. 1

Audit Observations and Potential Safety Enhancements........................................................ 3

Summary of Road Safety Audit ................................................................................................. 3

List of Appendices
Appendix A. RSA Meeting Agenda
Appendix B. RSA Audit Team Contact List
Appendix C. Detailed Crash Data
Appendix D. Additional Information

List of Figures
Figure 1: Locus Map .................................................................................................................................. 2

List of Tables
Table 1: Participating Audit Team Members ............................................................................................. 1
Table 2: Estimated Time Frame and Costs Breakdown ............................................................................. 3
Table 3: Potential Safety Enhancement Summary ..................................................................................... 4
Road Safety AuditSite Location Description
Prepared by company
DRAFT/FINAL

Background
Briefly describe why the audit was conducted.

Project Data
Provide the date and location of the audit, as well as the names and affiliations of the audit team
members. Briefly describe the RSA process and what background materials were reviewed.

Table 1: Participating Audit Team Members

Audit Team Member Agency/Affiliation

Project Location and Description

Briefly describe the audit site.

For a roadway corridor, include the length of audit roadway corridor, its end points, the jurisdictions and
functional classifications of all roadways, and any regulatory speed limits on the roadways.

For intersections, include the intersecting roadways, the jurisdictions and functional classifications of
each roadway, and the regulatory speed limits on each roadway.

Provide a locus map in the project description section.

Include any historical information or other pertinent information (if conceptual or design plans have been
developed, discuss the circumstances and, if possible, provide a plan in the Appendix) that may be
relevant to safety enhancements or final recommendations.

Page 1
Road Safety AuditSite Location Description
Prepared by company
DRAFT/FINAL

Figure 1: Locus Map

Page 2
Road Safety AuditSite Location Description
Prepared by company
DRAFT/FINAL

Audit Observations and Potential Safety

Enhancements
Identify the different safety issues and possible potential safety
enhancements discussed during the audit . For each safety issue,
state what the issue is, identify the location of the issue, and
provide a complete description of the issue. Provide pictures
and/or figures to illustrate each issue. List in detail the possible
safety enhancements for each issue as discussed.

Summary of Road Safety Audit

Image 1: Write your caption here.
List each safety issue and potential safety enhancement discussed
during the audit. For each safety issue, describe the potential safety
enhancement, its potential safety payoff, the estimated time frame
for completion, the estimated construction cost, and the responsible
agency. If there are conceptual or design plans in progress for this
location, identify the potential safety enhancements that have been
incorporated into the design. If there are issues with the plans, as
designed, this should be noted as well.

Safety payoff estimates are subjective and may be based on the

relative percent of crashes that may be reduced by the enhancement
Image 2: Write your caption here.
based on known and documented crash reduction factors, if
available, or estimated crash reduction based on a stated source.

Table 2: Estimated Time Frame and Costs Breakdown

Time Frame Costs
Short-Term <1 Year Low <$10,000
Mid-Term 1-3 Years Medium $10,001-$50,000
Long-Term >3 Years High >$50,000

Page 3
Road Safety AuditSite Location Description
Prepared by company
DRAFT/FINAL

Table 3: Potential Safety Enhancement Summary

Safety Issue Potential Safety Enhancement Safety Payoff Time Frame Cost Responsible Agency

Page 4
Road Safety AuditSite Location Description
Prepared by company
DRAFT/FINAL

Appendix A. RSA Meeting Agenda

Road Safety AuditSite Location Description
Prepared by company
DRAFT/FINAL

Appendix B. RSA Audit Team Contact List

Road Safety AuditSite Location Description
Prepared by company
DRAFT/FINAL

Participating Audit Team Members

Date: January 1, 2014 Location: Anytown, MA
Audit Team Members Agency/Affiliation Email Address Phone Number
Name Agency Email xxx-xxx-xxxx
Road Safety AuditSite Location Description
Prepared by company
DRAFT/FINAL

Appendix C. Detailed Crash Data

Road Safety AuditSite Location Description
Prepared by company
DRAFT/FINAL

Appendix D. Additional Information

MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

Appendix F. Sample Crash Data Summary

 Crash Data Summary Table
Main Street at Main Road, Municipality, MA
Month YEAR - Month YEAR
Crash
Diagram Crash Weather
Ref # Date Crash Day Time of Day Manner of Collision Light Condition Condition Road Surface Driver Contributing Code Ages Comments
1 1/2/11 Sunday 2:35 PM Angle Daylight Cloudy Wet Failed to yield right of way 60 35 NB Vehicle ran red light and struck vehicle travelling EB
SB Vehicle was unable to stop due to conditions and struck side of other SB
2 1/7/11 Friday 10:30 PM Angle Dawn Snow Dry Unknown 36 60 Vehicle
Operating Vehicle in erratic, reckless,
careless, negligent, or aggressive Vehicle attempted to take illegal right hand turn from left turn only lane and
3 3/16/11 Wednesday 9:18 AM Sideswipe, same direction Daylight Cloudy Wet manner 81 82 stuck vehicle travelling NB
4 6/7/11 Tuesday 11:09 AM Rear-end Daylight Clear Dry Failed to yield right of way 46 28 Vehicle stopped at a red light and was struck from behind
5 8/2/11 Tuesday 7:04 PM Rear-end Daylight Clear Dry Inattention 47 46 Vehicle stopped in traffic on bridge was struck from behind

6 3/1/12 Thursday 7:03 PM Single Vehicle Crash Dark - lighted roadway Snow Snow No Improper Driving 25 NB vehicle lost control and struck bridge barrier and traffic post

7 3/2/12 Friday 3:02 AM Single Vehicle Crash Dark - lighted roadway Snow Ice Unknown unk Hit and Run driver struck Utility Box
WB vehicle turning left failed to clear the right of way and crossed in front of
8 3/25/12 Sunday 5:20 PM Angle Daylight Clear Dry Failed to yield right of way 50 43 vehicle travelling EB
EB vehicle turning left failed to clear the right of way and crossed in front of
9 3/30/12 Friday 3:50 PM Angle Daylight Clear Dry Unknown 28 26 vehicle travelling WB
Emergency Response vehicle travelling EB thru red signal was struck by
vehicle travelling NB thru a green signal failing to yield to emergency vehicle
10 6/14/12 Thursday 5:29 PM Angle Daylight Clear Dry No Improper Driving 39 29 with lights and siren activated
Vehicle travelling WB struck vehicle waiting to turn left from Roosevelt
11 6/23/12 Saturday 9:42 PM Angle Dark - lighted roadway Clear Dry Unknown 33 29 travelling SB
Vehicle travelling EB turned right on red onto Roosevelt and struck vehicle
12 8/14/12 Tuesday 10:39 AM Angle Daylight Cloudy Dry Failed to yield right of way 27 71 travelling WB on green arrow turning left onto Roosevelt

13 8/29/12 Wednesday 2:12 AM Rear-end Dark - lighted roadway Clear Dry Unknown 56 57 Vehicle travelling EB stopped at a red light and was struck from behind
Vehicle travelling WB attempted to turn left SB and struck EB vehicle. Hit
14 8/30/12 Thursday 8:21 PM Angle Dark - lighted roadway Clear Dry Other improper action unk 68 and Run
Vehicle travelling EB stopped at a red light and was struck from behind.
15 9/18/12 Tuesday 1:35 PM Rear-end Daylight Cloudy Wet Operating defective equiptment 20 42 Driver stated failure of braking system
Vehicles were stopped at red light when a third vehicle attempting to change
16 10/27/12 Saturday 9:46 PM Rear-end Dark - lighted roadway Clear Dry Inattention 44 47 56 lanes into outside lane struck the rear causing chain reaction
17 10/30/12 Tuesday 7:38 AM Rear-end Daylight Cloudy Wet Driving too fast for conditions 20 37 Vehicle travelling SB stopped at a red light and was struck from behind
Vehicle travelling EB attempted to turn left NB and stopped for pedestrian
18 2/26/13 Tuesday 3:06 PM Head on Daylight Clear Dry No Improper Driving 21 20 crossing and was then unavoidably struck by vehicle travelling WB
Vehicle travelling NB on Roosevelt stopped for a red light and was struck
19 4/4/14 Friday 4:40 PM Rear-end Daylight Cloudy Dry Inattention 19 51 from behind
Vehicle travelling EB attempted to turn left NB and was struck by vehicle
20 4/21/14 Monday 11:09 PM Angle Dark - lighted roadway Clear Dry No Improper Driving 20 unk travelling WB
Vehicle travelling EB attempted to turn left NB was yielding to WB traffic and
21 4/22/14 Tuesday 6:56 PM Rear-end Daylight Clear Wet No Improper Driving 19 47 was struck from behind
Vehicle travelling EB attempted to turn left NB and was struck by vehicle
22 5/2/14 Friday 12:57 PM Angle Daylight Clear Dry Made an improper turn 26 20 travelling WB
Motorcycle waiting to turn left was passed by a vehicle which attempted to
go around the motorcyle and make the left causing the motorcycle to
23 7/3/14 Thursday 3:52 PM Sideswipe, same direction Daylight Clear Dry Failed to yield right of way 31 83 sideswipe as they both attempted to make the left turn.
Vehicle travelling WB was waiting at red light and began to inch forward
24 7/30/14 Wednesday 4:10 PM Rear-end Daylight Clear Dry No Improper Driving 59 21 when it was struck from behind. Driver stated sun glare issues
Vehicle travelling EB attempted to turn left NB and struck vehicle travelling
25 10/9/14 Thursday 6:58 PM Head on Dark - lighted roadway Clear Dry Failed to yield right of way 19 29 WB failing to clear right of way

*Courtesy Crash - A term used to describe a crash that occurs subsequent to a non-involved mainline driver who gives the right of way, contrary to the rules of the road, to another driver.
 Crash Data Summary Tables and Charts
Roosevelt Avenue at Alden Street, Springfield, MA

CRASH MONTH
25%
20%
20%
16%
15% 12% 12% 12%
10% 8% 8%
4% 4% 4%
5%
0% 0%
0%
J F M A M J J A S O N D

CRASH DAY OF WEEK

30% 28%

25%
20% 20%
20%
15% 12%
10% 8% 8%
4%
5%
0%
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

CRASH TIME OF DAY

18% 16% 16% 16%
16%
14% 12%
12%
10% 8% 8% 8% 8%
8%
6% 4% 4%
4%
2% 0% 0%
0%
6AM- 8AM 8AM- 10AM- 12PM- 2PM- 4PM 4PM- 6PM 6PM- 8PM 8PM- 10PM- 12AM- 2AM- 4AM 4AM- 6AM
10AM 12PM 2PM 10PM 12AM 2AM

CRASH MANNER OF COLLISION

45% 40%
40% 36%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
8% 8% 8%
10%
5% 0% 0% 0%
0%
Single Rear-end Angle Sideswipe, Sideswipe, Head on Rear to Rear Unknown
Vehicle same opposite
Crash direction direction
 Crash Data Summary Tables and Charts
Roosevelt Avenue at Alden Street, Springfield, MA

CRASH LIGHT CONDITION

70% 64%
60%
50%
40% 32%
30%
20%
10% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
0%
Daylight Dawn Dusk Dark - Dark - Dark - Other Unknown
Lighted Roadway not unknown
Roadway lighted roadway
lighting

CRASH WEATHER CONDITION

70% 64%
60%
50%
40%
30% 24%
20% 12%
10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
0%
Clear Cloudy Rain Snow Sleet, Hail, Fog, Smog, Severe Blowing Other Unknown
Freezing Smoke Crosswinds sand, snow
Rain

CRASH ROAD SURFACE

80% 72%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30% 20%
20%
10% 4% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
0%
Dry Wet Snow Ice Sand, mud, Water Slush Other Unknown
dirt, oil, (standing,
gravel moving)

CRASH DRIVER AGES

35% 31%
30%
25%
20% 16% 16%
15% 12% 12%
10% 6% 6%
5% 2%
0%
15-20 21-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+
MassDOT Highway Division Road Safety Audit Guidelines November 2015

Appendix G. References
Massachusetts Traffic Safety Toolbox, Massachusetts Highway Department,
www.mhd.state.ma.us/safetytoolbox.

Road Safety Audits, A Synthesis of Highway Practice. NCHRP Synthesis 336. Transportation Research
Board, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2004.

Road Safety Audits. Institute of Transportation Engineers and U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal
Highway Administration, www.roadwaysafetyaudits.org.

FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, 2006.

Road Safety Audit, 2nd edition. Austroads, 2000.

Road Safety Audits. ITE Technical Council Committee 4S-7. Institute of Transportation Engineers,
February 1995.