Design Stage Road Safety Audit of NH - 26 2

Road Safety Audit -Design stage NH-26(142/620 to KM 159/280)
Contents
1.INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 2
1.1 ACCIDENT STATISTICS IN INDIA ................................................................................................ 2
1.2 SCENARIO IN ODISHA ................................................................................................................... 5
2.OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY .......................................................................................... 8
2.1 NEED OF THE STUDY ..................................................................................................................... 8
2.2 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................ 8
2.3 PROJECT BACKGROUND: ............................................................................................................. 9
2.4 AUDIT STAGES: ............................................................................................................................... 9
STAGE 2: DETAILED DESIGN STAGE: ........................................................................................ 10
3. BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT: .............................................................................................. 11
3.1 BUILT-UP AREAS: ......................................................................................................................... 11
3.2 JUNCTION LIST.............................................................................................................................. 11
3.3 CURVE LIST.................................................................................................................................... 13
4.ROAD SAFETY AUDIT DURING DESIGN STAGE- ......................................................................... 15
4.1METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH- ........................................................................................... 15
4.2 RISK ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY CONCERNS AND PRIORITIZATION OF SUGGESTED
RECOMMENDATIONS-....................................................................................................................... 16
Table:4.1 CRITERIA FOR RISK ASSESSMENT ............................................................................. 16
Table:4.2 ASSIGNING PRIORITY LEVEL FOR SUGGESTED RECOMMENDATIONS ........... 16
4.3 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT OBSERVATIONS &FINDINGS ............................................................ 17
4.4 DESIGN STAGE RSA FINDINGS FOR NH-26 FROM KM 4.900 TO KM.167.900 ................... 18
5 Action plan – ............................................................................................................................................ 35
1
1.INTRODUCTION
Transportation is the backbone for economic development for any country. Road transportation
is the major component of the transport sector in India. It occupied an important place in the
economy because of the unique characteristics and distinct features even connecting interior
places for the movement of people and goods. In the last three decades, India experienced rapid
growth in road network by increasing road length to 3.3 million km. At the same time, the vehicle
population of India has also increased with a growth of 11% per annum. As the growth of vehicles
and other infrastructural facilities are rapidly increasing, road safety situation of India is
worsening day by day. According to WHO statistics of 2002, about 11.8 lakhs people die every
year in road accidents, the world over, of which 84,674 deaths are reported to take place in India.
In 2004 the number of deaths had increased to 92,618. The mortality rate in India is 8.7 per
hundred thousand of population as compared to 5.6 in UK 5.4 in Sweden, 5.0 in The Netherlands
and 6.7 in Japan. In terms of mortality per 10,000 vehicles, the rate in India is as high as 14 as
compared to less than two in developed countries. The cost of road crashes has been assessed
at one to two per cent of GDP in developed countries. A study by the Planning Commission in
2002 estimated the social cost of road accidents in India at Rs. 55, 000 crores annually (2000
prices), which constitutes about 3% of the GDP (Report of the Committee on Road Safety and
Traffic Management, February 2007).
1.1 ACCIDENT STATISTICS IN INDIA

In 2018, there were 4,67,044 road accidents in India, which killed 1,51,417people and injured
4,69,418people. India, as a signatory to the Brasilia declaration on road safety, intends to
reduce road accidents and traffic fatalities by 50% by 2022. The new Motor Vehicles act, 2019
have been enacted to reduce road accident. It seeks to address issues related to road accidents
and road safety measures. In this context, we present some data on road accidents, causes of
accidents.
• Road length in India has increased from about 4 lakh kilometers in the 1950s to about 56
lakh kilometers in 2017. Majority of this growth has been in rural roads and roads
constructed by the Public Works Department (PWD). Rural roads account for 61%, and
PWD roads for 20% of the total road length. In comparison, urban roads have a 9% share
in the road network. The growth in rural roads may be attributed to schemes such as the
Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana, which was launched in 2000 and aimed to improve
road connectivity in rural areas.
• National Highways constitute 2%, and State Highways 3% of the total road length. Project
Roads, account for 7% of the total road length, and include roads built by various state
departments such as forest, irrigation, electricity, public sector undertakings such as Steel
Authority of India, and the Border Roads Organization.
2
Since 2000, while road network in the country has grown by 39%, the number of registered
vehicles has grown by about 158%. While growth in road network will be limited (due to physical
constraints), a constant increase in the number of vehicles on roads may lead to congestion and
road fatalities.
Fig 1.1: Statistics of road accidents in year 2018 in different roads of India
“National Highways comprise 2% of the total road network,

but witness 28% of the road accidents”
• The number of road accidents per lakh population has been increasing since 1970s, with
an 84% increase from 1980 to 1990.
• Across states, Goa had the maximum share in total road accidents/ lakh population in
2015 for the fourth year in a row (222 accidents/ lakh persons). This was followed by
Kerala (110 accidents/ lakh persons), and Tamil Nadu (100 accidents/ lakh persons).
In terms of accident fatalities, Tamil Nadu had the highest share in 2018 (23 fatalities/ lakhs
persons) followed by Haryana (18 fatalities/ lakh persons), and Karnataka (18 fatalities/ lakhs
persons).
3
Fig 1.2: Share of number of road accidents per lakh of population in states of India
“67% road accidents take place between 9AM and 9PM;

18-34 years old are most affected”
In 2018, 17.5% of all road accidents occurred between 15:00 hours and 18:00 hours, followed by
17.3% between 18:00 hours to 21:00 hours. This may be attributed to more vehicles present on
roads during these hours (peak traffic hours).
• In 2018, the maximum number of fatalities were seen in the age group of 18 to 34 (50%),
followed by the age group of 35-64 years (36%).
The World Health Organization has noted that road accidents are a major public health problem
as crashes kill more than 1.25 million people and injure about 50 million people a year, with 90%
of such casualties occurring in developing countries like India.
4
1.2 SCENARIO IN ODISHA
The state of Odisha is ranked the 14thhighest amongst all the 29 states in India in terms of total
number of road crashes numbering 10,542 in 2015 as per the data published by the Ministry of
Road Transport and Highway (MoRT&H) and thereby for 2.1 % of the total road crashes in the
country. Similarly, the state also occupied 14th position in terms of number of road crash
victims/fatalities in the country contributing for about 2.94% in the year 2015. Fig 1.4 and 1.5
depict the share of state as well as Union Territory wise road crashes and fatalities for the year 2015
respectively.
Fig 1.3: Statistics of total number of road accidents in India
5
Fig 1.4: Bar Chart representing number of deaths in year 2017
6
Fig 1.5: Categorisation based on percentage of road accidents
7
2.OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY
2.1 NEED OF THE STUDY
Due to the increment in rate of road accidents day by day, it is highly necessary to access the
safety features on the road networks, then improving the roads by providing appropriate road
safety action plans for the road sections/locations which face frequent road accidents.The EPC
agreement for the project road requires the Road Safety Audit to be carried out for confirming
the Project Highway with Safety Requirements and Good Industry Practice.
A Safety audit was carried out for 2 days along the project corridor to analyze the safety
deficiency for Road Users, Pedestrian and Non-Motorized Transport. The audit covered Day time
as well as Nighttime Visibility of the Road Elements.
2.2 BACKGROUND
National Highway - 26 is an important highway in india connecting Raipur with Visakhapatna,

which runs through many district in odisha which are Bargarh, Bolangir, kalahandi, Nowrangpur
and Koraput.
The existing NH-26 is a two lane bi-directional carriageway with 1.5 m wide paved and 1.5 m
earthen shoulder on either side .
8
2.3 PROJECT BACKGROUND:
The project is Periodic Renewal from km142/620 to km159/280 of NH-26 on EPC Mode. The
Project is started at Kesinga bus stand at CH 142/620 of NH 26 and terminates at near Chancher
at CH 159/280 . Proposed cross section of the entire length is 7.0 mtr Carriageway + 1.5 mtr (both
Side) Paved shoulder + 1.5 mtr (Both Side ) earthen shoulder i.e Total 13.0 Mtr Formation width..
The highway commences in flat urban area and leads to rural area and it was selected for periodic
Renewal by adopting principle of EPC Mode by Odisha works Department. The project corridor
starts at Km. 142/620 to159/280. For the purpose of project execution under the above model,
OWD had appointed M/s. Shivam Condev Pvt.Ltd
Fig 2.1: Stretch of NH 26 (KM 142/620to KM 159/280)
2.4 AUDIT STAGES:

Recently revised IRC SP 88-2019 proposes Five Stages of Auditing a Road Project
Stage 1: Feasibility /preliminary Design Stage
Stage 2: Detailed Design Stage
Stage 3: Construction Stage
Stage 4: Pre-Opening Stage
Stage 5: Existing Stage
9
STAGE 2: DETAILED DESIGN STAGE:
This Audit stage occurs while preparing the plan and profile. Typically considerations include
Geometric Layout, Pavement Making, Signals, Lighting, Road Signs and Intersection Details
Clearance to road side object and provision for Vulnerable roads.
Name of The Project : Detailed Design Stage Audit of “Periodic Renewal From Km-
142/620 to 159/280 Km of NH-26 for the year 2019-2020 in the
state of Odisha on EPC Mode”
EPC Contractor : SHIVAM CONDEV PVT. LTD
RSA Auditor : CRAPTS, Bhubaneswar.
Team Members :
Sl No Team Name Designation
Mr Pradeep Kumar Samantray Executive Engineer
1 Rep Authority
Mr Arun Pandey Asst Executive Engineer
Mr Umakanta Pani Sr RSA-cum- Team Leader
Mr Arun Kumar sethi RSA Team Member
2 RSA Team Mr Ashmeet Pradhan RSA Team Member
Mr Sanjib kumar Mishra RSA Team Member
Mr Sudhanshu Jena GM-ARSS
3 Rep of EPC Contractor
Mr Ratnakar Barik Project Manager
Dates Of Audit :
Sl No Activities Dates Responsibility
- RSA Team
1 Holding of Commencement Meeting 4th Oct 2020 - Rep EPC Contractor
- Rep of Authority
4th Oct 2020- 5th - RSA Team
2 Inspection of Site Oct 2020 (Day - Rep EPC Contractor
& Night Time) - Rep of Authority
- RSA Team
Commencement of Meting after site
3 5th Oct 2020 - Rep EPC Contractor
Visit
- Rep of Authority
7th Oct 2020 to - RSA Team
4 Writing of Audit report
10th Oct 2020
- RSA Team
11th Oct 2020
5 Holding of Completion Meeting - Rep EPC Contractor
- Rep of Authority
Deciding the Way forward and - Rep EPC Contractor
6 -
implementing of recommendations - Rep of Authority
10
3. BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT:
Length of project Road 16.66km

Start Point Start at Kesinga Bus Stand CH-142+620
End point Ends at Chancher CH -159+280
Carriageway Configuration:
Carriageway 2 lane (7mt.)
Paved shoulder 1.5mt Both side
Earthen shoulder 1.5mt. Both side
Formation width 13mt.
3.1 BUILT-UP AREAS:

.
Built-up Area
Sl Chainage
No Starting Ending
1 143/460 3/620
2 4/600 5/000
3 7/780 8/190
4 12/400 13/500
3.2 JUNCTION LIST:
Sl No Chainage Junction Side
1 142.840 x -
2 143.190 x -
3 143.629 Y LHS
4 144.040 Y LHS
11
5 144.100 Y RHS
6 144.240 T LHS
7 144.550 T LHS
8 145.080 Y LHS
9 145.420 X -
10 146.010 X -
11 146.700 X -
12 147.720 X -
13 147.960 X -
14 148.230 X -
15 148.620 Y LHS
16 149.180 X -
17 150.520 Y RHS
18 151.220 Y RHS
19 151.400 T LHS
20 152.520 X -
21 153.300 X -
22 153.570 T LHS
23 154.680 Y RHS
24 155.720 Y RHS
25 157.010 X -
26 158.440 X -
27 158.680 Y LHS
28 159.000 Y LHS
12
3.3 CURVE LIST
Chainage(M)
Design super
Curve Transition
Radius(M) speed elevation
no. Start End length(m)
(kmph) (%)
1 143856.681 143891.773 65 20 20 2.74
2 144010.952 144053.723 90 25 25 3.09
3 144108.957 144161.11 65 20 20 2.54
4 144275.381 144313.26 70 30 25 3.97
5 144464.365 144530.633 2000 0 100 -2.50
6 144596.88 144700.01 1200 40 100 4.44
7 145128.648 145229.895 1000 50 100 4.44
8 145352.135 145407.535 4000 0 100 -2.50
9 145567.058 145615.667 6000 0 100 -2.50
10 145812.075 145821.201 5000 0 100 -2.50
11 146092.755 146189.851 2000 0 100 -2.50
12 146931.329 146964.57 350 60 80 7.00
13 147377.46 147424.615 150 55 50 7.00
14 147788.923 147847.201 125 20 30 3.20
15 148772.21 148804.58 100 45 40 7.00
16 149304.794 149356.487 2000 0 100 -2.50
17 149446.343 149556.638 190 40 50 5.85
18 149696.793 149814.17 5000 0 100 -2.50
19 149962.519 150027.039 1200 50 100 3.70
20 150476.436 150584.266 4000 0 100 -2.50
13
21 151382.627 151446.254 5000 0 100 -2.50
22 151600.963 151634.868 500 45 80 5.69
23 152067.73 152086.517 5000 0 100 -2.50
24 152445.012 152530.864 300 40 65 6.26
25 153116.724 153137.926 5000 0 100 -2.50
26 153739.253 153753.551 5000 0 100 -2.50
27 154182.191 154187.185 250 50 65 7.00
28 154612.302 154627.777 4000 0 100 -2.50
29 156383.267 156390.423 360 60 80 7.00
30 156818.253 156837.466 5000 0 100 -2.50
31 157334.09 157350.575 360 60 80 7.00
32 157603.09 157633.927 150 40 40 4.74
33 158390.064 158465.488 2000 0 100 -2.50
34 158545.849 158601.951 2000 0 100 -2.50
35 158758.856 158792.389 500 45 80 5.69
36 159070.688 159125.534 900 55 100 4.94
14
4.ROAD SAFETY AUDIT DURING DESIGN STAGE-

The detailed design drawings were received from the EPC Contractor in the months of
Oct 2020 by the RSA Team. All the design drawings namely, plan and profile drawings
of the project corridor along Road Furniture Drawing were received both in the form of
soft as well as in hard copy formats. The documents and aspects subjected to Design
Stage RSA encompass the following;
• Plan and Profile of main carriageway
• Super Elevation provided on the project corridor.
• Traffic Control Devices including Road Signs and Road Markings on Plan and Profile
Drawing
4.1METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH-
Road safety audit is a formal examination of a road project or traffic project or any project which
interacts with road users, in which an Authority, qualified team report on the project accident
potential and safety performance.
Road safety is a Multi-sectorial & Multi-dimensional issue. It incorporates the development and
management of road infrastructure, provision for safer vehicles, legislations and law
enforcements etc.
RSA in the process of evaluation of road schemes to identify the potential safety hazards which
may affect any type of road user, before the scheme is opened to traffic, and to suggest the
measures to eliminate or mitigate those problems. The need for RSA is more for accident
prevention (and in certain cases towards lessening the nature and quantum of punishment that
could be fall a user making an error).
In other words, RSA is not a way of rating a project of and is not a check of compliance with
available standards. The theme of RSA is in the ability to check a design for its fitness for purpose.
• Analysis of Vulnerable location, setting guidelines for safety interaction with client
agency, Authority Engineer,
• Check the design adequacy towards meeting the desired safety norms.
• Objectively analyze the observations as gathered in respective checklists and
specify the short comings, if any
• Suggest remedial / mitigation measures so as to finally ensure “safer people, safer
vehicle and safer environment”,
15
To carry out the safety audit of the existing project corridor, the methodology adopted to conduct
RSA is presented by as follows.
• The detailed design drawing taken from the EPC Contractor
• Drawing Analysis
• Data collection from site (During Day time and Night time)
• Data Analysis and Interpretation of the field data
• Assessment of safety situations and comparison with standard.
• Recommendation and remedial measures based on the study.
4.2 RISK ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY CONCERNS AND PRIORITIZATION OF

SUGGESTED RECOMMENDATIONS-
Table:4.1 CRITERIA FOR RISK ASSESSMENT

SEVERITY DESCRIPTION EXAMPLES
High speed, multi-vehicle crashes on
Very High Multiple deaths are high expressways. A bus collision at high speed
with a bridge abutment.
High/ medium speed vehicle collisions.
A death and/or serious injuries High/ medium speed collisions with a
High
are likely fixed roadside object. Pedestrian crashes
on rural highways.
Low speed collisions, such as a three-
wheeler colliding with a bicyclist, a rear
Medium Minor injuries only are likely
end crash in a slip lane, or a pedestrian
struck in a car park.
• Reference Table no 4.2 of IRC SP :88-2019
Table:4.2 ASSIGNING PRIORITY LEVEL FOR SUGGESTED RECOMMENDATIONS

PRIORITY SUGGESTED TREATMENT APPROACH
Where risk is assessed as Very High, the recommendation shall be
Essential
implemented “at any cost”.
Where risk is assessed as High, the recommendation shall be
Highly Desirable implemented unless cost of remedial treatment is prohibitive and risk
can be reduced by an alternative measure.
Where risk is assessed as Medium, the recommendation shall be
implemented if the safety concerns could not be mitigated even after
Desirable the implementation of the recommendations under “essential;” and
“highly desirable” priority levels for the same location and the risk needs
to be reduced further.
16
4.3 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT OBSERVATIONS &FINDINGS

Road safety audit was conducted for entire stretch of project highway, during day time as
well as during night time also to identify the problems and potential hazardous locations
and also to identify safety measures to be adopted for those locations. Report presents the
observations / problems identified during road safety audit of the project highway and
suggests various measures required to enhance safety on project highway for under Design
stage. As per approach and methodology presented in previously in this report, road safety
team has carried out safety audit and all the findings/observations are listed in below:
• During the visit on 4th October 2020, it was observed that various petrol pumps and
school were located adjacent to the project, It is Necessary to provide information
and warning sign board and consider these as vulnerable zone.
• The proposed periodic renewal has 40 mm Bituminous concrete over existing
surface. From site visit it is observed the at few locations approach of cross drainage
is settled. These stretch needs special attention of Pavement corrective course .
• At Built-up areas pedestrian and cattle movement is not uncommon, to guide them
traffic control device is required.
• Parking of large vehicle on existing shoulder have been noticed. Hence, alternative
truck parking arrangements may be provided by District Authority to prevent the
vehicles parking on the highway.
• Top prevent vehicle from run off from high embankment safety barrier are provided.
• At chainage 144+010 Railway crossing needs special attention .
17
4.4 DESIGN STAGE RSA FINDINGS FOR NH-26 FROM KM 4.900 TO KM.167.900
KM-143+560
Risk: High
Description: Junction
Priority: Highly desirable
Recommendation:
Major junction shall develop for smooth flow of traffic, Traffic control devices shall be installed during
construction stage.
18
KM-145+560
Risk: Very High

Description: Lacking of object hazard markers at bridge are potential safety hazard not only during night
hours but also in day time.
Priority: Essential
Recommendation:
Object hazard marker need to be installed at every parapet of CD/bridge on faces of traffic direction with
conforming IRC-67:2012-15.64
19
KM-146+260
Risk: Very High

Description: Unauthorized vehicle are parked along the carriageway is hazardous for user at night and
creating edge drop on the shoulder
Priority: Essential
Recommendation: shoulder shall be repaired for safe flow of traffic and no parking sign board shall
installed to govern the vehicle. .
20
KM-146+620
Risk: High
Description: Tree branches are creating obstruction in the carriageway
Priority: Highly Desirable
Recommendation:
Branches of the tree need to be cut in order to maintain specified height (5mtr ) clearance.
21
KM-147+640
Risk: High
Description: Retro Reflective Sheet were not pasted on tree near to carriageway/ shoulder is hazardous
for user at night
Priority: Desirable
Recommendation:
Tree/ Object near to shoulder shall be pasted Retro Reflective Sheet to increase visibility at night and
enhance safety of the user.
22
KM-148.330
Risk: Very High

Description: Existing super elevation is not enough to counter centrifugal force.
Priority: Essential
Recommendation:
In present design 7% super elevation is provided by EPC Contractor,
Warning and TBM Marking shall be provided for utmost safety of the user,
Over grown bushes on shoulder need to clear for unrestricted traffic flow during construction of surface
layer
23
KM-148+580
Risk: Medium
Description: Excessive growth of vegetation on the shoulder blocking visibility of any form of
traffic/pedestrian
Priority: Desirable
Recommendation:
layer .
24
KM-149+060
Risk:Medium
traffic/pedestrian
Priority: Desirable
Recommendation:
Bush cutting required for clear sight distance
25
KM-152+080
Risk: Very High

Description: Existing super elevation is not enough to counter centrifugal force.
Priority: Essential
Recommendation:
In present design 7% super elevation is provided by EPC Contractor ,
Warning and TBM Marking shall be provided for utmost safety of the user,
layer
.
26
KM-153+160
Risk: Very High

for user at night .
Priority: Essential
Recommendation:
Object near to shoulder shall be pasted Retro Reflective Sheet to increase visibility at night and enhance
safety of the user .
27
KM-153+660
Risk: Medium
traffic/pedestrian
Priority: Desirable
Recommendation:
28
KM-154+960
Risk: Very High

for user at night .
Priority: Essential
Recommendation:
Object near to shoulder shall be pasted Retro Reflective Sheet to increase visibility at night and enhance
safety of the user .
29
KM-155+960
Risk:Medium
traffic/pedestrian
Priority: Desirable
Recommendation:
30
KM-156+160
Risk: High
Description: Settlements of Bridge Approaches.
Recommendation:
Settlement of Bridge approaches shall rectify through Profile Corrective Course
31
KM-148+800
Dotted line shows location where
chevron and warning signboard shall
install.
Risk: High Risk

Description: Curve.
Recommendation:
All curve shall have informatory and warning sign board with conforming IRC: 67-2012
32

install.
KM-149+503
Risk: High Risk

Description: Curve.
Recommendation:
All curve shall have warning and informatory and warning sign board with conforming IRC: 67-2012
33

install.
Risk: High Risk

Description: Curve.
Recommendation:
All curve shall have warning and informatory and warning sign board with conforming IRC: 67-2012
34
5 Action plan –
A team of Road Safety conducted an exhaustive chainage wise Design Stage audit based on the
design drawings supplied by the EPC Contractor. The action plan devised from this audit is
summarized below:
➢ It is observed that at vulnerable stretches like school and health care areas, most of
the sign boards are not installed yet. Warning/ Informatory sign boards (School/
Health care ahead, speed limit, rumbles and no horn), transverse bar marking and
Zebra crossing have to be provided as per IRC 67-2012 and IRC-35-2015 respectively.
➢ From the above cited site visit it is observed that Some of the approaches of culverts
are settled at different, that should be rectified with Profile corrective course.
➢ It is observed that overgrown grass on shoulders making it unusable by any form of

traffic / Pedestrians; Bush cutting shall be employed before commencement of
laying of wearing course to achieve safe traffic operations.
➢ On existing road at few curves super elevation is not maintained properly as per new
plan and profile 7% super elevation is given.
➢ As per EPC agreement and clause 9.5 of IRC:SP:73-2018 stop lines, centre lines and
both edge of the curve shall have 2978 nos. of road studs.
***EoR***
35

Design Stage Road Safety Audit of NH - 26 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Design Stage Road Safety Audit of NH - 26 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Road Safety Audit -Design stage NH-26(142/620 to KM 159/280)

1.1 ACCIDENT STATISTICS IN INDIA

“National Highways comprise 2% of the total road network,

“67% road accidents take place between 9AM and 9PM;

1.2 SCENARIO IN ODISHA

Fig 1.3: Statistics of total number of road accidents in India

Fig 1.4: Bar Chart representing number of deaths in year 2017

Fig 1.5: Categorisation based on percentage of road accidents

2.OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY

2.1 NEED OF THE STUDY

National Highway - 26 is an important highway in india connecting Raipur with Visakhapatna,

2.3 PROJECT BACKGROUND:

Fig 2.1: Stretch of NH 26 (KM 142/620to KM 159/280)

2.4 AUDIT STAGES:

STAGE 2: DETAILED DESIGN STAGE:

3. BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT:

Length of project Road 16.66km

3.1 BUILT-UP AREAS:

3.2 JUNCTION LIST:

Sl No Chainage Junction Side

3.3 CURVE LIST

1 143856.681 143891.773 65 20 20 2.74

2 144010.952 144053.723 90 25 25 3.09

3 144108.957 144161.11 65 20 20 2.54

4 144275.381 144313.26 70 30 25 3.97

5 144464.365 144530.633 2000 0 100 -2.50

6 144596.88 144700.01 1200 40 100 4.44

7 145128.648 145229.895 1000 50 100 4.44

8 145352.135 145407.535 4000 0 100 -2.50

9 145567.058 145615.667 6000 0 100 -2.50

10 145812.075 145821.201 5000 0 100 -2.50

11 146092.755 146189.851 2000 0 100 -2.50

12 146931.329 146964.57 350 60 80 7.00

13 147377.46 147424.615 150 55 50 7.00

14 147788.923 147847.201 125 20 30 3.20

15 148772.21 148804.58 100 45 40 7.00

16 149304.794 149356.487 2000 0 100 -2.50

17 149446.343 149556.638 190 40 50 5.85

18 149696.793 149814.17 5000 0 100 -2.50

19 149962.519 150027.039 1200 50 100 3.70

20 150476.436 150584.266 4000 0 100 -2.50

21 151382.627 151446.254 5000 0 100 -2.50

22 151600.963 151634.868 500 45 80 5.69

23 152067.73 152086.517 5000 0 100 -2.50

24 152445.012 152530.864 300 40 65 6.26

25 153116.724 153137.926 5000 0 100 -2.50

26 153739.253 153753.551 5000 0 100 -2.50

27 154182.191 154187.185 250 50 65 7.00

28 154612.302 154627.777 4000 0 100 -2.50

29 156383.267 156390.423 360 60 80 7.00

30 156818.253 156837.466 5000 0 100 -2.50

31 157334.09 157350.575 360 60 80 7.00

32 157603.09 157633.927 150 40 40 4.74

33 158390.064 158465.488 2000 0 100 -2.50

34 158545.849 158601.951 2000 0 100 -2.50

35 158758.856 158792.389 500 45 80 5.69

36 159070.688 159125.534 900 55 100 4.94

4.ROAD SAFETY AUDIT DURING DESIGN STAGE-

4.1METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH-

4.2 RISK ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY CONCERNS AND PRIORITIZATION OF

Table:4.1 CRITERIA FOR RISK ASSESSMENT

Table:4.2 ASSIGNING PRIORITY LEVEL FOR SUGGESTED RECOMMENDATIONS

4.3 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT OBSERVATIONS &FINDINGS