1.3 Conflict and Risks
Conflicts will arise where different modes of transport share the same space. Junctions by their nature are particularly susceptible to conflict.
The relative speed, direction and mass of cyclists, pedestrians or vehicles will determine the severity of the outcome of an actual conflict.
Awareness of potential conflict and addressing it through a legible design is fundamental in providing cycling facilities. Through legible design, all conflicts will then be obvious to all road users in advance, and the resolution of each conflict will be mutually understood by all road users.
Conflict Management is a form of Risk Management.
The four steps below are adapted from the standard approach to Risk Management. Some or all of these steps will also form part of the Road Safety Audit process.
-
1.3.1 Identify the Potential Conflict
Abrupt transition increases risk of conflict
Review the junction or situation to identify possible conflict areas for all different modes of transport.
Consider in particular:
- What is the “actual” usage pattern of the road as opposed to its Function and Design – especially regarding inappropriate speed, position and direction?
- The individual movements of different modes of transport and how they interact
- Standard hazards such as horizontal and vertical clearances, street furniture etc.
- Possible errors of judgement by cyclists and other vulnerable users
- Database of accidents
- Available traffic information (e.g. An Garda Síochána, traffic wardens, control centre operators, etc.)
- Cycleability Audit undertaken jointly with cycle users and stakeholders (e.g. CRISP, Cycle Route Implementation and Stakeholder Plan, from the UK)
-
1.3.2 Assess the Potential Conflict
Cyclists exposed to side swipe
Where potential conflicts are identified, determine how likely they are to occur and how severe the outcome might be.
Consider in particular:
- The level of risk, where Risk = Likelihood of occurrence x Severity of outcome
- Are previous accidents likely to recur?
- Locality – are there particularly vulnerable users present? (i.e. children, elderly, school groups, etc)
- What is the likely worst outcome?
-
1.3.3 Address the Potential Conflict
Potential conflict can be addressed by Removing, Reducing or Accepting, but also by Management.
Removing – potential conflicts
- Remove potential conflict through design, e.g. smoother transitions, wider facilities, signal sequencing etc
- Divert or segregate conflicting road users
- Curtail particular network usage, e.g. truck ban, relocate bus stops, ban particular turns etc
- Remove the hazard, e.g. street furniture, vegetation, unsuitable roundabout etc
Reducing – potential contributing factors
- Speed differentials between road users
- Drainage detailing, surface quality, lighting, etc
- Traffic capacity, e.g. lane reductions, traffic calming etc
Accepting – that the level of risk is reasonable
- Investigate previous accident history
- Satisfy that no design weakness contributes to a potential accident
- Assure that the likelihood of repetition is remote
Management – transferring the responsibility to users (after all reasonable design steps have been taken)
- Address behaviours of users and raise awareness of the conflict, e.g. bus drivers, passengers and cyclists around bus stops
- Appropriate signage and guidance at potential conflict
- Education / training of school children and other vulnerable road users
- Education / training of other road users, e.g. HGV drivers and learner drivers
- Provide on-site instruction to users
- Undertake publicity campaigns
-
1.3.4 Monitor the Outcome
The final step in the conflict management process is to monitor the effectiveness of the design measures implemented.
Consider in particular:
- Review any subsequent accidents and identify if causes relate to conflicts already identified in Step 1
- Provide a feed-back arrangement for user to comment / complain
- Review available accident data, including:
- RSA Accident database
- Site-specific information
- Conflict trends and details
- Hospital A & E data