‘Vision Zero’ and OLA improved level crossings

Two severe accidents in 2004 and 2005 brought focus on the dangers of level crossings. According to ‘Vision Zero’, fatalities and severe injuries are not acceptable in the transport system. Since level crossings concern many key players, Banverket took the first steps to cooperation and Vägverket provided the OLA working approach.

‘Vision Zero’ was passed in the Swedish Parliament in 1997 and was the start of an entirely new way of thinking regarding traffic safety. The system designer was given the primary responsibility for safety of the transport system. The long-term goal is that no-one will be killed or seriously injured. ‘Vision Zero’ accepts that preventing all accidents is unrealistic. The long-term objective is to achieve a transport system which allows human error but without it leading to serious injury.

System designer has primary responsibility

System designers (e.g. road and rail administration, vehicle manufacturer, police, interest organisations) are responsible for the design, operation and the use of the transport system and are thereby responsible for the level of safety within the entire system.

Users are responsible for following the rules of using the transport system set by the system designers.

If the users fail to comply with these rules due to lack of knowledge, acceptance or ability, the system designers are required to take the necessary further steps to counteract people being killed or injured.

On the basis of ‘Vision Zero’, the Swedish Road Administration has developed the OLA working approach. OLA is an acronym for Objective data, List of solutions and Addressed action plans. The working approach involves system designers working together to provide solutions to a common problem.

With this approach, all key players are offered an opportunity to present desired measures which they are able to implement and as a result to contribute to improved traffic safety.

OLA

O – Objective data

In the first phase, facts are presented and discussed and the facts, for example, can be:

• Accident statistics
• In-depth studies of fatal road accidents
• Facts and knowledge from other key players

By studying the chain of events point by point, system designers can together offer an idea of why the accident became fatal. Some issues include:

• Is the road and rail environment suitably designed?
• Was appropriate safety equipment used?
• What was the cause of death?

In Level Crossing OLA, the Objective data consisted of information about level crossings in Sweden and Level crossing accident statistics from road and rail administration.

L – List of solutions/actions

In the second phase, system designers present and discuss proposals and ideas for solutions – both in the short and long-term. Measures can be both large and small. It is important that discussions are forward looking and focus on finding opportunities for improvement. The discussion should mainly concentrate on what each system designer can do, either individually or together with another system designer.

A – Addressed action plans

The third phase concerns what concrete measures system designers can initiate to improve safety. A declaration of intent is a description of what, when and to what extent measures will be implemented along with the aim of each measure.

Announcement

When the action plans from participating system designers are signed by the Director-General or CEO, the result of the OLA-project goes public. The OLA is also documented and published on a website, www.vv.se/ola.

Follow-up meetings

System designers are responsible for implementing and following-up their own action plans. One year after the announcement, the first of three follow-up meetings take place to share information about accident trends and implementation of the action plans.

Level Crossing OLA

Level Crossing OLA was initiated in 2005 and is still an ongoing process. Eight organisations took part in the collaboration:

• Association of Swedish Train Operators
• Bombardier Transportation
• National Federation of Private Road Associations
• Stockholm Transport
• Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions
• Swedish Association of Road Haulage Companies
• Swedish Rail Administration
• Swedish Road Administration

There are approximately 10,000 level crossings in Sweden – approximately 3,000 of them have some kind of signalling equipment. Banverket is responsible for 8,000 level crossings. Of these, 2,200 have barriers and 700 some kind of light and/or audible signal. All installations are automatically operated by the movement of trains. The number of grade separated intersections is nearly 3,000. Every year, approximately 100 crossings are closed. At this rate, level crossings will remain a reality for many years.

Efforts over recent years to improve safety have resulted in fewer level crossings, and also added safety at remaining crossings. In 1996, there were 52 accidents at level crossings, a figure that since then has decreased to just below 30 per year. The number of fatalities is below 10 per year.

Results

Level Crossing OLA resulted in approximately 50 action plans. Some examples are presented to follow:

• Association of Swedish Train Operators has stimulating member companies, those operating at ports and industrial track facilities, to equip their locomotives with warning lights
• Banverket has identified level crossings where heavy, low vehicles could be grounded. Reconstruction of such crossing is in progress. In some cases, warning signs are more appropriate. See below.
• Banverket is testing signs in the inside of full barriers with the text: “Drive through the barrier!” in some level crossings.
• Vägverket, Banverket and the Swedish Association of Road Haulage Companies have carried out a campaign where drivers are enforced to report, in their point of view, level crossings with poor standards. The reports can be filled in on a website. The website is open for everyone, not only lorry drivers. The result is approximately one report per week.
• The National Federation of Private Road Associations has published a newspaper issue about risks at level crossings which reached 8,000 members.

Experiences

Cooperation between key players is essential when working towards ‘Vision Zero’. Working models, such as OLA, ensure a systematic approach.

The OLA working approach provides a short and clear process witch makes it easy to gather key players for collaboration.

The OLA working approach includes the Director-General or CEO signing the addressed action plan. This implies an aware decision from the management to implement measures regarding level crossings.

Improving the road profile in level crossings

In 2005, a severe accident was caused by a grounded trailer on a level crossing. After inventing and analysing more then 3,000 level crossings, the work to take measures is in progress. Focus on the inventory has been level crossings on roads where heavy/long and low transport vehicles are possible. Pedestrian crossings have been excluded from the inventory. Also, farm roads have been excluded. Certainly such crossings have heavy vehicles but the risk to get stuck with farm machinery is not so high. A farm road crossing usually has just one user who is experienced with the crossing.

At the invented crossings, a lot of data has been collected and entered in a computer on-site. The vertical road profile has been measured with a point of measuring every meter. Also, sight conditions have been sampled at the same time. At every level crossing, six photos have been taken.

The most common problem is road humps. Other problems are high inclines, sharp curves and too low crossing angles.
The best measure is to adjust a level crossing and make it appropriate for existing road traffic. Sometimes the measures are too expensive or not even possible. In such cases, warning signs are the solutions.

A road hump is not only a question for the road keeper. If the level crossing is located in a curve of the railway line, the installed cant could cause a road hump. To avoid mistakes when upgrading the standard of the railway, the instructions for such projects have been updated. If the track position must be changed, the road keeper must be involved in the project planning.