Study of 10 accident-prone intersections on tramway networks in France

Management: STRMTG/DTMR
Production: CEREMA
January 2012 - in progress

STRMTG asked CEREMA to conduct an in-depth study of 10 accident-prone intersections on tramway networks in various French cities. The aim of the two-phase study was to gain a better understanding of the causes of events at these intersections, and the layout and operating problems from the perspective of all users (STRMTG only has the tramway point of view). Once these causes were identified, ways of improving safety were recommended for each intersection, and then evaluated.

These 10 intersections were chosen for their accident-prone nature (number of events and impression of tram drivers), to represent a diversity of tramway networks (no more than two intersections per urban area) and intersection types (roundabouts, simple and complex traffic-light intersections, etc.). The first eight were identified because of the high number of events between a tramway and third party between 2004 and 2010 (average > 1.7/year), while the last two were chosen because of their "sensitive" nature, and because tram drivers saw them in a particularly negative light at the time.

During the first phase of the study, each of the ten intersections was analysed in terms of the history of the design, any modifications carried out, the operation of the intersection, the infrastructure and its accident history.

In 2015, these specific analyses led to:

• an improvement action plan for each intersection based on the recommendations from CEREMA DTer representatives, agreed by all players (transit authority, operators, municipalities, STRMTG, CEREMA) with estimated short/medium/long-term implementation times;
• a general report drawn up by CEREMA DTer Med, targeting the problems observed by type (roundabouts crossed by a tram line, tangential traffic circles, left-turn roundabouts, complex roundabouts).
• Since then, some changes were implemented immediately or within the deadlines set out in the action plan, while others have been postponed or even abandoned (with justification).

There has now been enough feedback from these measures to analyse their impact. The second phase of the study involves an assessment of the various tools used, and their effectiveness in terms of both accidents and intersection operation. To this end, an assessment of each intersection is planned, updating the on-site observations made in 2012 and comparing changes to the site, uses and accidentology.

Finally, the study will end with a summary report.