Road safety improving in blackspot of Mount Bromo tourist road access, East Java

Mount Bromo in East Java is one of Indonesia’s priority tourist attractions. Safe, secure, orderly, and smooth traffic access is needed to support tourism. Safe roads can be an essential part of realizing this. This study aims to prioritize handling blackspots to discover safe roads. The research was conducted on three access roads to Mount Bromo from Probolinggo: Jalan Raya Sukapura, Jalan Raya Bromo, and Jalan Raya Lumbang. Analysis of the probability value of accidents, the impact value of the severity of accident victims, and the risk value of accidents are used to determine handling priorities. The results of the analysis obtained priority handling for Blackspot 1 by increasing the width of the road shoulder, Blackspot 2 by providing a crossing integrated with APILL, Blackspot 3 by completing street lighting and increasing lane width, Blackspot 4 by completing street lighting, and Blackspot 5 by increasing lane width. Prioritizing the handling of accident-prone locations in the road and environmental aspects can be done by reviewing the risk value of accidents for each road sub-component. A safe road will be realized at the Blackspot location.


Introduction
Mount Bromo is one of Indonesia's ten priority tourism destinations [1].Located on the border of four districts, namely Malang, Lumajang, Probolinggo, and Pasuruan, there are many routes to Mount Bromo.The best route is through the entrance from Probolinggo City and Regency because there are many public transportation options, close to toll road access and Probolinggo terminal and station.As one of Indonesia's priority tourism destinations, it requires smooth, safe, and comfortable traffic access [2].Millions die in accidents yearly, resulting in substantial economic losses [3].Based on accident data recorded in Integrated Road Safety Management (IRSMS), from 2020 to 2022, the number of traffic accidents on the route to Mount Bromo continued to increase.In 2021, there were 51 accidents, an increase of 31.37% from the previous year, and continued to increase in 2022 to 53 accidents.This figure may be smaller than the facts on the ground, and it is because not all accidents are reported to the Police [4].Accidents are influenced by three main factors, namely human factors, vehicle factors, and road and environmental factors [2].In general, accidents occur because transportation facilities and infrastructure, both in terms of roads, vehicles, and other supporting infrastructure, are inadequate for societal development [5].As much as 27% of accidents are caused by the interaction between human and environmental factors [6].Good roads should be designed to enable safe, comfortable, efficient, and effective movement of people and goods [7].Roads should ensure mobility and, most importantly, be safe [8].It is important to conduct road safety inspections on existing roads to ensure safer roads [9].Road safety inspections are a very efficient and cost-effective way to improve road safety [10].Planning for road safety improvement can be done by prioritizing the handling of accident-prone areas, then handling can be done on road segments based on the average risk value of each segment [11].This study aims to describe handling prioritization to improve road safety at the tourist access to Mount Bromo, East Java.

Data Collecting
This research uses two types of data, namely primary and secondary data.Primary data in road safety inspection data includes road geometric data, pavement structure data, road section utilization data, complementary building data, road equipment, and traffic management and engineering.At the same time, secondary data is in the form of traffic accident data for 2020 -2022.

Data Analysis
Improving road safety in Indonesia is a long-term program to improve living standards, enhance government effectiveness, and strengthen the management capabilities of government institutions [12].Recent studies have not only focused on human error as the main cause of traffic accidents.This way of thinking is based on the fact that human error may be caused by traffic conditions and road systems that sometimes cannot be predicted by road users [13].In realizing safe roads, it is important to conduct safety inspections, and then the results of road safety inspections will be analyzed using risk scores.A road safety inspection examines an existing road to identify deficiencies, faults, and hazards that could cause an accident.A road safety inspection aims to ensure that the road and its components comply with applicable technical requirements and identify any features that may compromise safety [14].Road safety inspection results are then analyzed using: (i) analysis of accident probability values, (ii) analysis of victim severity impact values, and (iii) analysis of risk values.
The probability of an accident value is determined based on the magnitude of the infrastructure deficiency value against the applicable technical requirements standard.The amount of road infrastructure deficiency against technical standards can be obtained with Equation 1.
Where: X is the infrastructure deficiency against the technical standard, a is the road safety technical standard, and b is the measurement and observation results.
The probability values of the accident causes are shown in Table 1.The severity impact value of accident victims is determined from accident data recorded in the Integrated Road Safety Management System (IRSMS).The accident data used is from at least the last three years [15].The data collected is categorized based on the fatality level of the incident, namely fatal accidents (victims died), victims suffered serious injuries, victims suffered minor injuries, and no victims (only material losses) [15] [16].The victim severity impact values are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Accident victim severity impact value Evacuation results of accident victims
Qualitative assessment Quantitative assessment The victim only suffered material losses.

Very light 1
Victims suffered minor injuries and material losses.Light 10 Victims suffered serious injuries and material losses.Medium 40 Victims were seriously injured and potentially died in the treatment process, as well as material losses.Heavy 70 The victim died at the scene and material losses.

Very heavy 100
The risk value is obtained from Equation 2.
Where R is the risk value of the accident, P is the probability value of the accident cause, and D is the impact value of the victim's severity.
In accident risk assessment, the priority handling order is based on the risk category and the importance of handling [17].The risk value and importance of handling are shown in Table 3.

Priority Order of Handling in Blackspot 1
Based on the analysis, there are three categories, namely Non-Hazardous (NH), Moderately Hazardous (MH), and Hazardous (H) in the KM SBY 94+500 -95+000 segment as shown in Table 4.The priority order of the main handling at Blackspot 1 based on Table 4 is the utilization of road right-of-way (Rumaja) sub-components with a risk value of 300 (category of Hazardous, H), shoulder width sub-components with a risk value of 200 (category of Moderately Hazardous, MH), and utilization of road courtesy space (Rumija) sub-components with a risk value of 200 (category of Moderately Hazardous, MH).Handling is done by controlling street vendors around KM SBY 94+800, widening the road shoulder to 2 m, and controlling illegal buildings for free space needs.

Priority Order of Handling in Blackspot 2
Based on the analysis, there are two categories, namely Non-Hazardous (NH) and Very Hazardous (VH) in the KM SBY 99+000 -99+500 segment as shown in Table 5.The main handling priority order at Blackspot 2 , based on Table 5 is the crosswalk sub-components with a risk value of 400 (category of Very Hazardous, VH).Handling is done by providing zebra crossing facilities around Muneng Market.

Priority Order of Handling in Blackspot 3
Based on the analysis, there are two categories, namely Non-Hazardous (NH) and Moderately Hazardous (MH) in the KM SBY 102+000 -102+500 segment as shown in Table 6.The main handling priority order at Blackspot 3, based on Table 6 is the lane width sub-components with a risk value of 200 (category of Moderately Hazardous, MH).Handling is done by widening the lane to 3.5 m.

Priority Order of Handling in Blackspot 4
Based on the analysis, there are two categories, namely Non-Hazardous (NH) and Very Hazardous (VH) in the KM SBY 102+000 -102+500 segment as shown in Table 7.The main handling priority order in Blackspot 4, based on Table 7 is the street lighting subcomponents with a risk value of 400 (category of Very Hazardous, VH).Handling is done by providing road lighting lamp facilities.

Priority Order of Handling in Blackspot 5
Based on the analysis, there are two categories, namely Non-Hazardous (NH) and Moderately Hazardous (MH) in the KM TGS 15+500 -16+000 segment as shown in Table 8.The main handling priority order at Blackspot 5, based on Table 8 is the lane width sub-components with a risk value of 200 (category of Moderately Hazardous, MH).Handling is done by widening the lane to 3.5 m.

Recommendations for Handling Blackspot
Road safety improvements on blackspots as an effort to realize safe roads are shown in Table 9.Based on Table 9, road safety improvements need to be made on almost all road components.Only the pavement structure aspects are functionally feasible and follow road safety technical standards.Seriousness is needed to improve road safety on Mount Bromo tourist access to realize a safe road.

Conclusions
The priority of handling blackspots on Mount Bromo tourist access is based on each blackspot's most significant value and risk category.In Blackspot 1, the shoulder, Rumija, and Rumaja sub-components are categorized as Moderately Hazardous (MH) with a risk value of 200.At Blackspot 2, the crosswalk sub-components are classified as Moderately Hazardous (MH) with a risk value of 200.At Blackspot 3, the street lighting sub-components are categorized as Very Hazardous (VH) with a risk value of 400.At Blackspot 5, the lane width sub-components are classified as Moderately Hazardous (MH) with a risk value of 200.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Map of the research location

Table 1 .
Accident probability value Deficiency to technical standards 40% -70%Accidents occur 5-10 times a year 3Deficiency to technical standards 70% -100% There were 10-15 accidents in one year 4Deficiency to technical standards >100% Accidents occurred more than 15 times in one year 5

Table 3 .
Value and risk category

Table 4 .
Risk value at Blackspot 1

Table 5 .
Risk value at Blackspot 2

Table 6 .
Risk value at Blackspot 3

Table 7 .
Risk value at Blackspot 4

Table 8 .
Risk value at Blackspot 5

Table 9 .
Recommendations for handling at blackspot locations