Incorporating Road Safety Audit into Development Control
Kevin Nicholson
Principal Consultant
Main topics covered
•Development control and the highway network
•How is Road Safety Audit incorporated?
•A typical process for Auditing a residential development
•When are Audits carried out?
•Issues for Auditors
•Recommended procedures for Highway Authorities
•Road Safety Assessments and Risk Assessments
•Summary
Development control and the highway network
•DC ensures that Highway and Planning Authorities have a significantinfluence over a number of important factors
•New developments often fund new highways or improvements to theexisting network
•That process is usually achieved via Section 38 and 278 agreements(Highways Act 1980) and planning conditions
•Section 38 enables the Highway Authority to ultimately adopt the streets aspublic highway
•Section 278 permits the Developer to fund works in the highway
How is Road Safety Audit incorporated?
•Road Safety Audit applies equally to developments as it does tohighway schemes
•Highway Authorities should have road safety Audit policies andprocedures
•Road Safety Audits can be specified in S38 and 278 agreements
•They can be requested by the DC Officer and fed into a planningcondition
•Developers can be provided with guidance notes and design guidesthat incorporate what is required in terms of Audit
•A note of caution - less control of the Audit process than with in-house schemes but still achievable
A typical process for Auditing a residential development
•Pre planning meeting
•Planning application received
•S38 and 278 drawn up
•Developer commissions Audit
•Developers submit the Audit report to the Highway Authority
•Generally, the Auditor’s recommendations are accepted by the Authority
•Where the Audit recommendations are accepted by the Authority, thedeveloper is obliged to put them in place
•However the Developer’s responses to the Audit might be accepted
•Compliance can be checked at the next Audit stage or by the LHA siterepresentative
When are Audits carried out?
Prior to planning approval
•Decision to be taken on stage 1 (preliminary design) or feasibility Audit
•For small or time-constrained developments a pre-planning meeting couldbe sufficient
•Pre-planning meetings are also helpful for large developments
•For significant development a Stage 1 Audit is usually required as part ofthe submission of an outline planning application
•In deciding if Audits are required pre-planning, DC officers can use policydocuments, guidelines and service procedures
When are Audits carried out?
Following outline planning approval
•Where a Stage 1 has already been submitted, a Stage 2 Audit is usuallyrequired for detailed planning approval
•Sometimes the first Audit is a stage 1/2 at detailed design (and detailedplanning application stage)
•Stage 3 carried out on completion of the works
•Stage 4 carried out 12 months after completion
Issues for Auditors
•Insufficient information to Audit
•Outdated standards or poor quality of design
•Poor provision for vulnerable users
•Scope of the Audit – Transport assessments or Design & Access Statementmight raise remote issues
•Where these problems occur Auditors should be pro-active and advise theHighway Authority or Developer what should be included for Audit
•Where additional information is not forthcoming the Auditor should make itknown to all concerned
Recommended procedures for Highway Authorities
•Establish good working relationships and mutual understanding of theissues
•Include road safety issues in Transport Assessments or Design & AccessStatements
•Put procedures in place to specify stages of Audit
•Clearly identify who is the client for the Audit
•Decide on how to approve the Audit Team
•Ensure that the developer responds to the Audit and that the Authoritymakes a balanced decision
•Consider retaining part of the bond/APC to cover works recommended by aStage 4 Audit
Road Safety Assessments and Risk Assessments
•Road Safety Audit identifies issues likely to generate accidents withoutqualification or quantification
•Road Safety Assessments are comparative assessments
–of the risks associated with different design options or
–to different road user groups within a single design option
•The evaluation of risk uses risk assessment methodology to predict thelikely severity and frequency of accidents
•Auditors might treat risk assessment with caution as it is subjective and notspecified in HD 19/03
Frequency of collision
morethan oneper year
oneevery
1-4years
one every
5-10years
lessthan oneper 10years
Severity
Fatal
Very high
High
High
Medium
Serious
High
High
Medium
Medium
Slight
High
Medium
Medium
Low
Damage
Medium
Medium
Low
Low
Risk Assessment Matrix
Summary
•Audits are an important part of development control
•Authorities should take the lead in making them happen
•Equally, Developers and Auditors should be pro-active
•The processes for all concerned should be clear
•Use Road Safety Assessments and Risk Assessments as appropriate
•Ultimately, casualty reduction is the issue and the Audit process should notbe a triumph of form over content
Thank you for your attention
The Capita Building
Kingmoor Business Park
Carlisle
CA6 4SJ
01228 673065
07900980529