1. SIGNAGE & DELINEATION ROAD SAFETY AUDITING
Transport Infrastructure Ireland
SIGNAGE & DELINEATION ROAD SAFETY AUDITING
Presented by;
Owen Duffy CEng. MIEI MIAT,
Projects Manager, Tramore House RDO
Tullamore Court Hotel, Tuesday 15th May 2018

2. 1) TII Road Safety Audit Standard
Background
Requires that any road marking scheme that “results in a change to the existing road marking layout and/or its meaning”
road safety audit at two stages - stage 1/2 at design, and stage 3 at construction. 
Auditors must be approved by TII &
audit must registered and closed out.
HD15 requires that any road marking scheme that “results in a change to the existing road marking layout and/or its meaning” has road safety audit at two stages - stage 1/2 at design, and stage 3 at construction.  2

3. Road Safety Audit Guidelines
Process
The way in which the road layout influences the road user is crucial. Collisions occur due to road users failing to cope with their road environment. Although this can often be due to carelessness or impairment, their ability to cope and the severity of the outcome can be influenced for good or ill by basic design elements, forgiving roadsides and by the signs and markings that provide information and warning.
A design stage audit has not been done for the N74 delineation scheme, Yes I am aware of this part of the standard, however I feel this is impractical for these scheme’s due to the amount of changes between tender & implementation due to pavement exclusion zones etc. These are seasonal contracts and must be delivered between April and October each year.
When the works are complete the auditor can get a better view of the design changes implemented over a 100km + scheme. 3

4. 1) Signs & Lines Auditing Requirements
Signs and Lines Issues
LAs designing and implementing Signage and Lining modifications.
Inconsistent application of TSM and use of non standard signs and markings as “first port of call”.
Potential implementation/quality issues.
Notification and addition to maintenance databases.
Implementation of features which S&L likely to remove – poor public image!
Conflicting information, an overabundance of road signs or a lack of delineation can cause overload. 4

5. Road Safety Audit –S&L Common Items
1. Insufficient width of lanes due to parking etc.
2. Parking places provided too close to controlled crossings
3. Inappropriate use of markings (Arrows, Yellow bar markings)
4. Inappropriate use of signs (no overtaking clashing with the road marking layout)
5. Bus markings offline parking leading to vehicles overtaking on continuous lines section
6. Change in road width not delineated in urban areas.
7. Provision of a centreline where the narrow road width requires Give/Take
8. Insufficient width parking provided in urban schemes.
9. Conflicting overtaking /No-overtaking signs
10. Visibility obstructed by signs in the mouth of the junction when stop line changes.
11. Positioning of arrows to ensure vehicles stay left of channelizing islands in junctions.
12. No warning marking to highlight presence of a junction on straights
13. Acceleration lanes.
14. Yield lines painted in right turn lanes.
15. Left turn deceleration lane provision rather than offset lanes.
16. Lack of circulating markings on roundabouts where roundabouts have 2 lane entries.
17. Incorrect entry and exit provision on climbing lanes.
18. Excessively wide lane widths on merging areas of overtaking lanes.
19. Parallel merge lanes.
20. Long lengths of inappropriate continuous centre line.
21. Loose road studs. 5

6. Departure from standard required where Stage 2 RSA is omitted
Departure Type: Exemption from carrying out a Road Safety Audit Stage 2
Standard Provided: Internal design review by 2 No. Road safety auditors and revisions made to the design in light of their comments.
Justification: A Road Safety Audit Stage 3 will be undertaken to ensure that the works were carried

7. RSA Stage 1-2, Lane width issues
Problem
The proposed scheme retains the existing ghost island markings for right turn manoeuvres from the N61 into side road L2004; see photo.
On site parking was observed opposite the mouth of the side road junction.
Insufficient width may lead to side swipe collisions between vehicles and/or parked vehicles opening doors into the carriageway or waiting in the ghost island.
N61 7

8. Insufficient width for parking provided
There is an existing kerbed bump out after the overbridge that may result in unauthorised parking leading to rear-end reversing collisions where drivers do not anticipate the presence of parked vehicles. 8

9. Insufficient verge clearance
At locations where there is no hard shoulder present, vehicles drag dirt
from the grass verge onto the road edge studs rendering them ineffective. This may lead to single vehicle loss of control collisions where an errant driver is unaware of the location of the road edge.
Consideration should be given to locating the edge studs on the road side of the yellow edge line particularly on all future delineation schemes. 9

10. Provision of a centreline where the narrow road width requires Give/Take
The provision of centreline markings on this narrow bridge may lead to road users (tourists not familiar with the area) thinking sufficient width is available. This may result in side swipe and material damage collisions. 10

11. Insufficient road space retained
No markings are proposed on the approach to delineate the change in road width, edge layout and utility pole hazard. Non-delineation of the reduced width and stationery hazard may result in collision and/or avoidance manoeuvres resulting in side swipe and/or head-on collisions with vehicles travelling the opposite direction.

12. Restrictions on the driving lane due to parking
Bus stops and Parking forcing illegal manoeuvers
Vehicles attempting to overtake buses picking up passengers at the bus stop may encroach into the proposed ‘no overtaking’ road markings. This may lead to conflicts with vehicles travelling in the opposite direction making a similar overtaking manoeuvre when buses arrive at the same time leading to head on collisions. 12

13. Visibility obstructed by direction signs in the mouth of the junction when stop line locations are modified.
Junction exit visibility from the side road appears to be compromised on both sides by the existing directional signage. This may lead to vehicles edging forward or pulling out leading to side swipe or rear-end collisions between vehicles.
Visibility is a key requirement for all junction types; all road users need to see and be seen by others. Care should be taken with siting street furniture such as signs and vegetation within visibility splays. 13

14. Positioning of arrows to ensure vehicles stay left of channelising islands in junctions.
Problem
The final arrow in right turn lane points to the right hand side of the
side road carriageway. Drivers who are not paying attention may enter
the road on the right hand side of the carriageway leading to head-on
collisions with possible serious injuries.
Recommendation
Relocate the arrow so that it points to the left side of the side road carriageway. 14

15. Yield lines painted in right turn lanes
Problem
There is a yield line painted at the end of right turn lanes. Drivers,
particularly tourists, may think they have to yield to traffic exiting the
side road leading to confusion and possible collisions.
Recommendation
Remove the yield line.

16. Inappropriate use of markings (Arrows, Yellow bar markings)16

17. Lane Provision to narrow
Problem
Deceleration lanes are provided for traffic turning left from the E30 at a
number of side roads. High sided vehicles using these lanes may
block the visibility to the right of drivers exiting the local roads leading to
possible side swipe collisions with a risk of serious injury to vehicle
occupants.
Recommendation
If a left turn deceleration lanes are warranted provide offset lanes,
otherwise remove the existing deceleration lanes. 17

18. Excessively wide lane widths on merging areas of overtaking lanes
Where lane widths are too wide the alignment may encourage excess speed. 18

19. Implementation of remedial measures identified through RSA’s.19

20. THANK YOU