rsa widang lamongan

7/31/2019 Rsa Widang Lamongan

1/44

REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA

MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS

DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HIGHWAYS

DIRECTORATE OF PLANNING

WIDANG LAMONGAN ROAD

ROAD SAFETY AUDIT REPORT

FINAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STAGES

FEBRUARY 2011

THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT

STRATEGIC ROADS INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTUnder IBRD Loan 4834 / 7786 ID


2/44

Strategic Roads Infrastructure Project (SRIP) Road Safety Audit

IBRD Loan No. 4834-IND/7786-ID Widang Lamongan East Java

i

Table of Contents

1. Summary of Problems & Recommendations......................................................... 1

2. Introduction

2.1 Audit Process .............................................................................................. 5

2.2 SRIP .......................................................................................................... 5

2.3 Objectives of the Road Safety Audit Report ............................................... 7

2.4 Project Location Widang - Lamongan East Java ................................... 5

2.5 Project Information ................................................................................... 7

2.6 Plans & Documents ................................................................................... 7

2.7 Members of the Audit Team ....................................................................... 8

2.8 Date of Site Visit ................................................................................... 8

3. Problems and Recommendations - Final Designs

3.1 Speed Limits & Traffic Calming ............................................................ 9

3.2 Tree Planting ................................................................................................ 11

3.3 Junction Design .................................................................................... 14

3.4 School Zones ....................................................................................... 17

3.5 Pedestrian Crossings ..................................................................................... 22

3.6 U Turns / Gaps in Median ......................................................................... 233.7 Guard Rails ................................................................................................. 29

3.8 Bus Stops & Parking Areas ......................................................................... 30

4. Problems & Recommendations - Construction Phase

4.1 Signs, Road Marking & Delineation ............................................................... 32

4.2 Worker Safety .................................................................................................. 38

Appendix A. References ........................................................................................................ 40

Appendix B. Safety Concerns at Roadworks - English ........................................................... 41Appendix C. Safety Concerns at Roadworks Bahasa........................................................... 42

`


3/44



1

1 SUMMARY OF PROBLEMS & RECOMMENDATIONS

The major problems identified in the road safety audit and correspondingrecommendations are summarised below:

Speed Limits & Traffic Calming:

Speed limits and traffic calming measures are common safety features on

highways in Indonesia but missing from design drawings.

Recommendations

Review design drawings and add speed limits and traffic calming

features such as rumble strips and flashers at appropriate locationswhere speed reduction will improve safety, including: junctions,

pedestrian crossings and etc.

Tree Planting:

Small plants grow into big plants and a lack of maintenance budgets or poormaintenance leads to many safety problems including:

blocked footways

hidden signs

ineffective street lights

obscured pedestrians

Recommendations

Review maintenance capabilities before deciding final planting Choose plants that need minimum maintenance Review need to plant in containers to restrict growth Ideally trees should be planted 2.5 m from road edge Plan the planting for future growth that ensures plants will not obscure

signs, signals, lightning or pedestrians

Take particular care at junctions and school zones

Junction Design:

Existing problems that need resolving: too much advertising reducing effectiveness of signing and taking

drivers attention away from junction

blocked footpaths - bushes, weeds and more advertising

There are existing flashers to warn and slow traffic on both mainand side roads but they are missing from Designs.


4/44



2

Junction Design also has other deficiencies, for example;

Island and median are not design for Old, Young, Cyclist andChildren (Type C for curb are properly design)

No Rumble strips in all approaches the intersection and in bothapproaches from the minor roads.

The curbs need to be painted at the Intersection Bus stop locations and designs are not clear

Recommendations

All advertising should be removed or at least greatly reducedin the immediate vicinity of the junction

Maintenance requirements need reviewing to ensure allexisting and future footpaths remain clear of obstructions,(advertising, trees, weeds etc)

All planting should be reviewed to ensure signs and footpathsare not blocked as plants grow

New high intensity flashers should be installed on all threeapproaches

Rumble strips should be installed on all three approachesabout 40 meters before the intersection;

Bus stops and parking bays need careful design

Curbs should be pedestrian friendly at the junction

Curbs should be painted for visibility and to control parking

School Zones:

The design of the three school zones is not clear, particularly with regard to thecrossing, shoulders and the planting of trees could cause significant problems. Thecrossing is only shown in one of the four drawings.

Recommendations

Ensure school zone design is standard, including correct, signs,

markings and rumble strips

Review planting of trees at school zones in light of current and

proposed maintenance capabilities


5/44



3

Pedestrian Crossings:

Pedestrian crossings are an essential road safety component on every nationalhighway and they need to be designed so that they can be used effectively.Only a few pedestrian crossings are proposed in detailed drawings but noneare shown with a footpath or even a sealed shoulder also none have any speedreduction or traffic calming measures.

Recommendations

Review all proposed and other potential crossing sites and add safetyfeatures including;

pedestrian footpaths or improved shoulders

restricted parking Islands and medians at the pedestrian crossings that should be

without obstacle such poles or trees Traffic calming such as rumble strips, speed limits or flashers Pedestrian friendly Islands and medians

U Turns/Gaps in Median

There are several gaps in median that are likely to result in serious accident

patterns. None of the U turns use a taper as all of them are at a narrow median

Recommendations

Improving signing at U turns

Use the road sign with the high mast arms poles is advantageous as

an advance sign for the driver to notice the position of U Turn.

Painting the curb with bright color are particularly advantageous for

road user to avoid crashing the median or islands.

.Additional ramp at U Turn could be considering for better turning

movement for the vehicles. It is attach in detailed engineering designas a standard drawing.

Guard Poles should be installed, besides protecting the road sign

poles also could be an advance warning for the drivers if painting with

the bright colours (Yellow)

All the 5 U Turn at the DED are Narrow U Turns and radius for turning

movement is only suitable for motorcycles and light vehicles. It is

prohibited for truck or bus use the narrow U Turn as long as the road

project.


6/44



4

Guard Rails:

There is a bridge near the beginning of the project, but no guard rails and guidepost are design and proposed at the bridge.

Recommendations

Designs should be reviewed for the need to install guard rails at

bridge and perhaps other locations like box culverts

Guard rails designs should include a strong connection to bridge

parapets

Painting the bridge with bright colours.

Bus Stops & Parking Areas:

Apart from at one junction, there are no bus stops or parking areas designed onWidang Lamongan.

Recommendations

Review need for bus stops, parking and loading areas and designappropriate facilities, particularly at schools factories and junctions

Where possible extend the taper for Bus stops and parking areas.

Traffic Management during Construction:

The contractor has installed many warning and direction signs and delineatorsthroughout the construction zone but there is a great variation in their effectivenessthroughout the site.

Recommendations Better advance warning signs and speed limits should be installed

Ensure all signs, barricades, cones and delineators are cleanedregularly

Additional cable/rope reflector lines would be better installed betweencones especially during night.

Add more signs, barricades, cones or delineators at critical locations Take particular care to ensure safety at locations used by pedestrians

or high volumes of side road or access road traffic


7/44



5

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Audit Process

Road Safety Audit (RSA) can be defined as a formal examination of a highway ortraffic project in which an independent qualified auditor or team of auditors reports onthe road safety problems associated with the designs or construction of the project andmakes recommendations on improvements.

It started in the UK some twenty years ago and is now common practice around theworld. There are several Road Safety Audit Guidelines that are used as standardpractice for Audits around the World, an adapted of the Australian Guidelines are

actually used in IndonesiaAudits can be carried out at various stages and arguably the earlier the better:

Feasibility

Preliminary Design

Final Design Construction

Pre-Opening

Existing RoadThis Audit covers both Final Design and Construction stages

2.2 SRIP

The Strategic Roads Infrastructure Project (SRIP) was developed to meet theincreasing traffic demand and institutional requirements following easing of the 1997financial crisis in 2001. SRIP, which is supported by the World Bank under IBRD Loan4834-IND, is being implemented by the Directorate General of Highways within theMinistry of Public Works over the five-year Loan period following its effectiveness dateof 01 November 2007. Project implementation is expected to continue through to end2012, with a possible extension to 2014 to accommodate implementation of thePerformance Based Contract component of the Project.

SRIP is composed of twenty two (22) Civil Works packages of road bettermentcapacity expansion and new roads / bridges, including a trial Performance BasedContract (PBC), encompassing urban and inter - urban National Roads in 7 provinces (4provinces on Java and 3 provinces on Sumatra). Details for these packages are given inAppendix A. The Implementation Support Component includes two (2) road safetycomponents: Integrated Road Safety Management System (IRSMS) for DirectorateGeneral of Land Transport (DGLT) and Directorate of Traffic Police.

SRIP project implementation will be supported by four key consulting assignments: (i)Core Team Consultants (CTC); (ii) Construction Supervision Consultants for non-


8/44



6

Metropolitan roads (CSC-1); (iii) Construction Supervision Consultants for Metropolitanroads (CSC-2); and (iv) Procurement Advisor.

The Core Team Consultants responsibilities include the following: Widang lamongan(WP-2), the CTC has to ensure this package have been reviewed by qualified RoadSafety Audit.

The Contractor of the above activities is expected to undertake these works inaccordance with the standard specifications of the Directorate General of Highways,Ministry of Public Works and special provisions prepared for this project and estimatescompletion is on October 2011

2.3 Objectives of the Road Safety Audit Report

The objectives of the Road Safety Audit are to conduct among others the systematicreview/checking of the safety aspects of the completed road plans (DED plans), trafficschemes, recommend the modifications of the plans when safety aspects warrants suchchanges, and the safety aspects during road construction.

2.4 Project Location Widang - Lamongan, East Java


9/44



7

2.5 Project Information

Widang - Lamongan Road is situated in the province of East Java. The road is locatedalong the Widang - Lamongan - Gresik - Surabaya Road corridor. It starts at the road to

Widang near a Muslim boarding school. The road project has a total length of 4.75 kms.

And the design road width is 14.00 meters four lanes and two ways, 1.50 meter median

with curb also 2.00 meter unpaved shoulder.

The road passes mostly residential, commercial, institutional, and rice paddy fields from

the starting point up to the end. The road traverses in almost flat terrain.

Widang - Lamongan Road Project is designed to expand its present traffic capacity by

overlaying existing pavements and widening to four-lane divided (with median) road

including structures.

The proposed Widang - Lamongan Road will accommodate increasing number of traffic

from Widang to Lamongan as this road section is one of the main roads approaching to

Surabaya City, the largest City in East Java;

This road is includes 5 bridges and 15 T junctions there is also there a gas pipe line

along the road side.

2.6 Plans and Documents

The plans used in this audit were the contract drawings:

International Competitive Bidding, Package: Widang - Lamongan, Package No.: 02-

28/11-SRIP-WP1/ CE/A/7786(4834)/12-09, Section VI - 3 Drawings, December 2007

The drawings were checked and approved by concerned Bina Marga authorities.


10/44



8

There was no information on previous studies available to the audit team. A traffic studyof the Widang Lamongan Road normally needed as one of the basis for the level of

improvement and justify its construction was not available at the time of the audit.

The existing road section has a high volume of traffic and about one third is consideredas vulnerable road users; motorcycles and non-motorized vehicles.

The high volume of traffic along the area reinforces the need to provide a safe road.

2.7 Members of the Audit Team

The road safety audit team is all members of the Core Team Consultant of SRIP and

composed of the following:

Mike Goodge - Senior Road Safety Audit Engineer

Agus Herudianto - Road Safety Audit Engineer

The team was accompanied by:

Harry Wiryanto - Bridge Engineer

2.8 Date of Site Visit

The project was visited on 10th November 2010 and the length travelled several times in

the dry and during rain and discussions were held with site representatives.

Site Meeting with Site Engineer, Sub Project Manager and GeneralSuperintendent


11/44



9

3 PROBLEMS & RECOMMENDATIONS - FINAL DESIGNS

3.1 Problem: Speed Limits & Traffic Calming

Widang-Lamongan Road Project is designed to expand its present traffic capacity byoverlaying existing pavements and widening to four-lane divided (with median) roadincluding structures. The design drawings indicate a type II, class I Road ways anddesign speed of 60 Kph but no speed limit signs are shown on detail drawing at busyareas such as Moeslim boarding school at Sta. 0+000, Traditional market at Sta. 0+600,Sta. 1+550 and Sta. 1+000, Elementary school at Sta. 0+850 and Sta. 1+200, Clinic atSta. 0+950 and Sta. 4+750 and mostly is rice paddy field. They are only shown as anintegral part of school zones. Speed limits and traffic calming measures are commonsafety features on highways in Indonesia but missing from design drawings. Examples

of standard and enhanced speed limit signs are shown below:

Standard Speed

Limit & PedestrianCrossing Signs

Enhanced Speed

Limit Sign with

Standard

Pedestrian

Crossing Sign


12/44



10

Existing Flashers Near and on Project

Typical Rumble

Strips at

Pedestrian

Crossing near

Project

Existing Rumble

Strips on Project

Typical Enhanced Signs

Used in Many Countries


13/44



11

Recommendations: Speed Limits & Traffic Calming

Review design drawings and add speed limits, (using enhanced signs atsome locations) and traffic calming features such as rumble strips and

flashers at appropriate locations where speed reduction will improve

safety, including: junctions, pedestrian crossings & public area such as

schools, clinics, etc.

3.2 Tree Planting

Planting is extensive along Indonesian roads and greatly enhances the environment. Ithas been shown to assist road safety by creating a pleasant calming effect on road

users and helping to define communities. In many places the planting complements theroad infrastructure, including pedestrian footways. Good examples are shown below:


14/44



12

Planting Problems:

Small plants grow into big plants and a lack of maintenance budgets or poormaintenance leads to many safety problems including:

blocked footways hidden signs

ineffective street lights obscured pedestrians

Examples of existing problems on project highway are shown below:

Poorly Maintained Footpaths

Avoid Placing Tress that Block Footpaths or Hide Signs


15/44

Strategic Roads Infrastructure

IBRD Loan No. 4834-IND/7786

Two Types of New Trees

Trees are proposed at the

roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

13

Planted in Front of Important Sign

ne major junction and the school zones

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java


16/44



14

Planting Recommendations

Review plant maintenance capabilities before deciding final planting Choose plants that need minimum maintenance

Review need to plant in containers to restrict growth Ideally trees should be planted 2.5 m from road edge Plan the planting for future growth that ensures plants will not obscure

signs, signals, lightning or pedestrians Take particular care at junctions and school zones, see below.

All trees planting should refer to:

Pedoman teknis Penanaman Pohon Pada sistem Jaringan Jalan 2010Technical Guidelines for Planting Trees at Road Network System 2010

3.3 Problem: Junction DesignThe existing junction has several unsafe features and the proposed junction design hasdeficiencies.

Existing problems that need resolving: too much advertising reducing effectiveness of signing and taking drivers

attention away from junction

blocked footpaths - bushes, weeds and more advertising

See numerous examples photograph below:


17/44



15


18/44



There are existing flasherthey are missing from Desi

roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

16

to warn and slow traffic on both mainns, see photos & design drawings belo

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java

and side roads but:


19/44



17

Junction Design also has other deficiencies, for example;

Island and median are not design for old, young, cyclists etc

No Rumble strips are shown on the approaches to the intersection

The curbs are not to be painted.

Bus stop locations and designs are not clear

Junction Recommendations

All advertising should be removed or at least greatly reduced in theimmediate vicinity of the junction

Maintenance requirements need reviewing to ensure all existing andfuture footpaths remain clear of obstructions, (advertising, trees,

weeds etc) All planting should be reviewed to ensure signs and footpaths are

not blocked as plants grow New high intensity flashers should be installed on all three

approaches Rumble strips should be installed on all three approaches about 40

meters before the intersection; Bus stops and parking bays need careful design, (including

connecting footpaths and plans for current bus bays).

Curbs should be pedestrian friendly at the junction Curbs should be painted for visibility and to control parking

The LED traffic lamp is

more bright in daily light

The bulb traffic lamp is

dreary in daily light


20/44



3.4 Problem: Schoo

The design of the threepedestrian crossing and thproblems. The crossing is

roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

18

l Zones

school zones is not clear, particularlye shoulders and the planting of trees conly shown in one of the four drawing det

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java

with regard to theuld cause significantails, see below:


21/44



School zones need to be

pupils boarding buses as

school zones. Great care i

School Zone Recom

Safety of school z

period

Ensure school zon

and rumble strips -

Review planting of

maintenance capa

Ensure the should

there is a sound, d

roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

19

esigned for hundreds of cyclists and p

ell. Poorly controlled busses often add

needed during construction.

endations

ones should be addressed througho

e design is standard, including corre

see below:

trees at school zones in light of cur

ilities

rs where pupils wait to cross are at l

y place to wait

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java

destrians and many

to the danger of the

t the construction

ct, signs, markings

rent and proposed

east sealed so that


22/44



20


23/44



roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

21

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java


24/44



5 Problem: Pedes

Pedestrian crossings are aand they need to be design

Only a few pedestrian croswith a footpath or even a s

Pedestrian Crossing

Review all proposed anincluding:

pedestrian footp restricted parkin Island and medi

such poles or tre

Traffic calming s Pedestrian friend

Pedoman Teknis Perekayasa

(Technical Guidelines for Pe

Poorly Designed, Constr

roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

22

rian Crossings:

n essential road safety component on eved so that they can be used effectively.

sings are proposed in detailed drawingsaled shoulder. None have any speed re

ecommendations

d other potential crossing sites and

ths or improved shoulders

n at the pedestrian crossing shoulds

ch as rumble strips, speed limits or flly Islands and medians, see reference

an Fasilitas Pejalan Kaki di Wilayah Kota, S

estrian Facility at City region, SK.43/AJ 007

cted or Maintained Crossings Will No

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java

ery national highway

but none are shownuction measures.

dd safety features

without obstacles

ashersbelow:

.43/AJ 007/DRJD/97.

DRJD/97)

t be Used


25/44



23

3.6 U Turns at Median Gaps

There are 5 five gaps in median that are likely to result in serious accident patterns.None of the U turns use a taper as all of them are at a narrow median. A crossing isshown at one of the gaps.

6d Information Signs are Proposed at gaps


26/44



24

Problems; U Turn at median Gaps

No Traffic Calming and speed limit approaching the U Turn are proposed toreduce the vehicle speed.

The nose of the median is not proposed to be painted with the pavement

marking non thermoplastic type or not clear visibility during night time,

Mostly the median nose are always crash by the vehicle, serious accident

always occurred at this condition see photograph bellows;

The sign is always use a standard traffic sign post. The height of poles is

about 1.75 ~ 2.00 m. It is difficult for driver to see the U Turn sign within 50

meter distance approaching the U turn location.

Homemade - Non Standard Attempts at Improving Safety at Median Gap

Many median gaps inIndonesia are damagedand poorly signed and

defined


27/44



25

Driver have difficulties to see the U Turn sign at distance 25 meter approaching the U

turn.

U Turn Recommendations

Improving signing at U turns

o Use the road sign with the high mast arms poles is advantageous as

an advance sign for the driver to notice the position of U Turn.


28/44



26

The approach nose of median should be conspicuous to approaching

drivers and should be definitely clear of vehicle paths, physically and

visually, so that drivers will not shy away from mounting of median; Painting the curb with bright color are particularly

advantageous for road user to avoid crashing the median or

islands.

Curb painting

Additional ramp at U Turn could be considering for better turningmovement for the vehicles. It is attach in detailed engineering design as a

standard drawing.

Poles with Bright

Colour and

Reflectorized


29/44



Guard Poles shoul

also could be an a

colours (Yellow)

LDS is intended for the li

retro reflection a cross

roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

27

be installed, besides protecting the

vance warning for the drivers if painti

inear reflectorization of concrete barriers & met

very wide range of entrance & observation abgl

The Ligh

another

normal s

installed.

at surab

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java

oad sign poles

ng with the bright

al guardrails. It provides

es

Delineator is

solution where

ign cannot be

It is already installed

ya


30/44



All the 5 U Turn

movement is onl

prohibited for tru

project.

There is a wide U Tur

And all of the heavy v

Wide U Tu

heavy vehi

buse

roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

28

t the DED are Narrow U Turns and

suitable for motorcycles and li

k or bus use the narrow U Turn a

for Truck and Bus nearly the beginni

hicle and buses should use this turni

rn for

les and

s

Be

KECUALI BUS

DAN TRUK

Additio

bannin

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java

radius for turning

ht vehicles. It is

long as the road

ng of the project.

ng movement

gining of

roject

nal plate with

for truck and

busses


31/44



29

3.7 Problem: Guard Rails:

No guard rails are shown in the design drawings but they will be needed to protect atleast one bridge shown below:

Bridge Near the Beginning of Project

Guard Rail Recommendations

Designs should be reviewed for the need to install guard rails at bridge and

perhaps other locations

Guard rails designs should include strong connections to bridge parapet,

similar to examples below, (on Indonesia Tollway and Australia)

Paint bridges bright colour


32/44



30

3.8 Problem: Bus Stops and Parking

Small and Big Buses Waiting for Passengers near the Junction.


33/44



Apart from at one unction,Lamongan. Planned parki

areas and school zones.vehicles such as trucks an

Most of Activities on, orcommercial activities etc.pedestrians and can jeopar

Parked vehicles cau

Parked vehicles cau

Parked vehicles defl

Parked vehicles blo Parked vehicles, bet

Bus Stop Recommen

Review need forappropriate facilitiminimise disruptio

Where possible erequirement (Pedkendaraan penuguidance for Publi

Sample of Bus Stops

roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

31

there are no bus stops or parking areasg is essential for road safety, especiall

Where necessary, parking should bebuses.

near, the kerbside such as car parkican have adverse affects on the freeddize their safety.

sing physical obstructions which are side

sing sudden braking or nose-to-tail shunt

ect oncoming vehicles into adjacent vehi

k visibility for any road user;ween which pedestrians emerge, lead to

ations

bus stops, parking and loadings, particularly at schools factories

n to main road traffic flow.tend the taper for Bus stops and

oman Teknis perekayasaan temppang umum, Dirjen PerhubunganBus Stops, DGLT)

t Intersection

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java

designed on Widangy at markets, public

designed for heavy

ng, local accesses,om of movement to

swiped or run into;

s;

cle paths;

accidents

areas and designnd junctions, that

arking areas. Seeat pemberhentian

darat, Technical


34/44



32

4 PROBLEMS & RECOMMENDATIONS - CONSTRUCTION

PHASE4.1 Problem: Signs, Road Markings & Delineation

The contractor has installed many warning and direction signs and delineatorsthroughout the construction zone, (see good examples below), but there is a greatvariation in their effectiveness throughout the site.

Specific problems include the following:


35/44



33

Advance warning of the construction zone is bad

There are no speed limits signs

Some signs are dirty and lack visibility Others are inadequate at critical locations.

There are two new Indonesian references, published in 2010 by Directorate General of

Bina Marga that provide useful information related to construction zone safety and

other more general areas of road safety engineering:

Practical Guidelines, Road Safety of Construction Zones to Support Einrip Projects

Making Indonesias Roads Safer, Australia-Indonesia Partnership in Road Safety

Engineering

A page on construction safety from the latter reference is appended to the end of thisreport, Appendix B in English and Appendix C in Bahasa

The construction zone changes on a daily basis and has changed significantly since thesite visit so the recommendations are general rather than location specific.

Recommendations

Better advance warning signs and speed limits should be installed, seeexamples below

Example ofSpeed Limit atConstruction

Zone onIndonesiaHighway


36/44



Ensure all signs, b

Additional cable/rcones especially d

Add more signs, bas shown below:

roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

34

rricades, cones and delineators are c

pe reflector lines would be betterring night.

arricades, cones or delineators at crit

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java

leaned regularly

installed between

ical locations such


37/44



35

Confusing Road Markings & Hidden Signs near Start of Project, Sta 0+250

No Delineation of Centre Line near Start of Project Travelling East

Cones or other Delineation Needed for Road Edge

Very unprofessionalsigns,

(but usually hidden seeabove photo)


38/44



36

Temporary Centre Line Markings or Delineation Needed

Temporary Centre Line Markings or Delineation Needed

Need for Good Centre Line Delineation

Take particular care to ensure safety at locations used by pedestrians orhigh volumes of side road or access road traffic - see examples below;


39/44



Traffic Calming, Addition

Special Care Needed at C

roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

37

al Signs and Delineation Needed Near

rossing & Busy Side Road

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java

School

Take special

care to address

needs of

pedestrians at

school

entrances


40/44



38

Traffic Calming, Additional Signs and Delineation Needed Near Fuel Station

4.2 Problem: Poor Worker Safety

Very few road workers wear safety clothing - fluorescent for daytime with reflectivestrips for night. The separation between workers and traffic is often minimal ornegligible. High visibility clothing and separators improve safety for both workers androad users


41/44



Worker Safety Recom

Site Supervisionclothing increases Separation betwee

defined, see table

roject (SRIP)

-ID Widang

39

mendations

taff should ensure that the level ofmonth by monthn workers and traffic needs to be coelow:

Road Safety Audit

Lamongan East Java

wearing of safety

sistent and clearly


42/44



40

Appendix A. References

1. Pedoman Audit Keselamatan Jalan (PD T-17-2005-B), PU Prasarana Transportasi

(Road Safety Guidelines (PDT -17 2005 B). Public Works, Transportation)

2. Pedoman Teknis Perekayasaan Tempat Pemberhentian kendaraan Penumpang

Umum, Dirjen Perhubungan darat No. 271/HK.105/DRJD/96

(Technical guidance for Public Bus Stops, Directorate General land &

transportation No. 271/HK.105/DRJD/96)

3. Pedoman Audit Keselamatan di jalan raya (Austroads Standard) edisi ke 2, 2002

(Road safety Audit Guidelines (Austroads Standards) Second edition 2002)

4. Pedoman Teknis Penanaman Pohon Pada Sistem Jaringan jalan 2010(Technical Guidelines for Planting trees at Road Network System 2010)

5. Pedoman teknis Fasilitas Pejalan Kaki di Perkotaan SK.43/AJ 007/DRJD/1997

Direktorat Jenderal Perhubungan Darat)

(Technical Guidelines for Pedestrian facilities at Cities region, SK.43/AJ

007/DRJD/1997, Directorate General land & transportation)

6. Mewujudkan Jalan Berkeselamatan di Indonesia, Australia Indonesia

bekerjasama dalam teknis keselamatan di Jalan. Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga,

INDIE 2010

(Making Indonesias Roads Safer, Australia- Indonesia Partnership in Road

Safety Engineering, Directorate General of Bina Marga, INDI 2010)See extracts on construction zone safety below.

7. Petunjuk Praktis , Keselamatan Jalan Pada Zona Kerja di Jalan, mendukung Proyek

EINRIP, Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga

(Practical Guidelines, Road Safety of Construction Zone) to Support EINRIP

Projects, Directorate General of Bina Marga


43/44



41

Appendix B Safety Concerns at Roadworks - English


44/44



Appendix C Safety Concerns at Roadworks - Bahasa