Risk-Based Prioritization of School Safety Zone Interventions Based on Accident Risk and Safety Facility Conditions in Banjar City

Veronica Simanjuntak; Siti Khodijah Koto; Dian Virda Sejati; Mega Suryandari

doi:10.59976/jurit.v4i3.394

Authors

Veronica Simanjuntak Politeknik Transportasi Darat Indonesia-STTD
Siti Khodijah Koto Politeknik Transportasi Darat Indonesia - STTD
Dian Virda Sejati Politeknik Transportasi Darat Indonesia - STTD
Mega Suryandari Politeknik Transportasi Darat Indonesia - STTD

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59976/jurit.v4i3.394

Abstract

This study examined seven School Safety Zones (ZoSS) in Banjar City, West Java, where traffic conditions and safety facilities vary across schools. It aimed to assess traffic conditions and facility compliance, rank schools needing safety improvements, and propose interventions with cost estimates. A quantitative approach was used, combining traffic surveys, vehicle speed measurements, inspections of 18 safety facility components, student enrollment data, and distances to accident-prone areas. Six indicators traffic volume, degree of saturation, vehicle speed, number of students, facility deficiencies, and distance to accident-prone areas were assessed using the Weighted Linear Combination (WLC) method. Traffic volumes ranged from 177 to 502 vehicles per hour, while vehicle speeds ranged from 37.5 to 43 km/h. None of the assessed safety facility components at SDN 3 Mulyasari and MI Rancakole met the requirements. Facility deficiencies reached 83.3% at SDN 1 Karangpanimbal and SDN 1 Sukamukti. Based on the reported WLC rankings, SDN 1 Karangpanimbal was the first priority (score 106), followed by SDN 7–9 Hegarsari (138) and SDN 1 Sukamukti (190). Proposed interventions include warning lights, traffic signs, road markings, and other supporting safety facilities. The estimated total cost for these three locations is IDR 469,047,563.33, potentially benefiting 607 students. The findings provide local authorities with an initial basis for selecting intervention sites, identifying needed facilities, and planning safety budgets. However, inconsistencies in facility deficiency data across tables and incomplete WLC weighting details must be resolved before the rankings guide final funding decisions. Because the proposed improvements have not yet been implemented, their effects on traffic speeds, pedestrian safety, and crashes remain untested. Future evaluations should assess actual conditions after installation to establish whether the interventions improve student safety. the study connects field assessments with practical planning while recognizing that stronger evidence and verified calculations are necessary for reliable implementation decisions.

References

B. Katoch, I. Ghosh, and S. Chandra, “Safety of children in school zones—A systematic review,” Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav., vol. 113, pp. 554–569, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2025.05.020.

Y. Amiour, E. O. D. Waygood, and P. E. W. van den Berg, “Objective and perceived traffic safety for children: A systematic literature review of traffic and built environment characteristics related to safe travel,” Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, vol. 19, p. 2641, 2022, doi: 10.3390/ijerph19052641.

M.-S. Cloutier et al., “State-of-the-art review: Preventing child and youth pedestrian motor vehicle collisions: Critical issues and future directions,” Inj. Prev., vol. 27, pp. 77–84, 2021, doi: 10.1136/injuryprev-2020-043829.

J. M. Swanson et al., “Observing pedestrian-vehicle traffic conflicts in school zones to evaluate the effectiveness of road safety interventions and reduce injuries in Ghana, Vietnam, and Mexico, 2019–2021,” J. Inj. Violence Res., vol. 14, pp. 145–152, 2022, doi: 10.5249/jivr.v14i3.1710.

I. J. Lee, S. Sagar, N. Agarwal, S. Srinivasan, and R. Steiner, “Data-driven approach to develop a master plan to prioritize schools for the Safe Routes to School Program,” Transp. Res. Rec., vol. 2678, pp. 1148–1159, 2024, doi: 10.1177/03611981241250019.

Z. Jin, W. No, and B. Noh, “Do enhanced school zone policies improve pedestrians’ safety? A deep learning-based case study of Osan City, South Korea,” Cities, vol. 156, p. 105505, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2024.105505.

A. Renard, L. Novačko, K. Babojelić, and N. Kožul, “Analysis of child traffic safety near primary school areas using UAV technology,” Sustainability, vol. 14, p. 1144, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su14031144.

K. Zhang, R. Tamakloe, M. Cao, and I. Kim, “Exploring fatal/severe pedestrian injury crash frequency at school zone crash hotspots: Using interpretable machine learning to assess the micro-level street environment,” J. Transp. Geogr., vol. 121, p. 104034, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2024.104034.

V. Bahrami, S. Lavrenz, and M. M. Ahmed, “Severity analysis of pedestrian and bike crashes in school buffer zones,” Transp. Res. Rec., vol. 2679, pp. 732–748, 2025, doi: 10.1177/03611981241297682.

X. Hu et al., “Assessment of the collision risk on the road around schools during morning peak period,” Accid. Anal. Prev., vol. 210, p. 107854, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2024.107854.

A.-M. Almaei and M. Effati, “Spatial analysis of school-related pedestrian crashes near urban schools: Comparing area-based and segment-based models in developing countries,” Transp. Res. Rec., vol. 2680, pp. 109–130, 2026, doi: 10.1177/03611981251401587.

L. Rothman et al., “Pilot study to evaluate school safety zone built environment interventions,” Inj. Prev., vol. 28, pp. 243–248, 2022, doi: 10.1136/injuryprev-2021-044299.

J. Osuret, A. Van Niekerk, O. Kobusingye, L. Atuyambe, and V. Nankabirwa, “Driver yield and safe child pedestrian crossing behavior promotion by a school traffic warden program at primary school crossings: A cluster-randomized trial,” Traffic Inj. Prev., vol. 25, pp. 510–517, 2024, doi: 10.1080/15389588.2024.2305426.

R. von Stülpnagel, N. Riach, R. Hologa, J. Kees, and S. Gössling, “School route safety perceptions of primary school children and their parents: Effects of transportation mode and infrastructure,” Int. J. Sustain. Transp., vol. 18, pp. 465–477, 2024, doi: 10.1080/15568318.2024.2350992.

S. Gössling, J. Kees, R. Hologa, N. Riach, and R. von Stülpnagel, “Children’s safe routes to school: Real and perceived risks, and evidence of an incapacity-incapability space,” J. Cycl. Micromobility Res., vol. 2, p. 100019, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jcmr.2024.100019.

K. Pérez, E. Santamariña-Rubio, J. Ferrando, M. J. López, and L. Badiella, “Effectiveness of a road traffic injury prevention intervention in reducing pedestrian injuries, Barcelona, Spain, 2002–2019,” Am. J. Public Health, vol. 113, pp. 495–499, 2023, doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2022.307216.

J. Park, M. Abdel-Aty, and J. Lee, “School zone safety modeling in countermeasure evaluation and decision,” Transp. A Transp. Sci., vol. 15, pp. 586–601, 2019, doi: 10.1080/23249935.2018.1519646.

S. Heydari, L. Miranda-Moreno, and A. J. Hickford, “On the causal effect of proximity to school on pedestrian safety at signalized intersections: A heterogeneous endogenous econometric model,” Anal. Methods Accid. Res., vol. 26, p. 100115, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.amar.2020.100115.

G. Fancello, M. Carta, and P. Fadda, “Road intersections ranking for road safety improvement: Comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods,” Transp. Policy, vol. 80, pp. 188–196, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.04.007.

J. Yu and Y. Liu, “Prioritizing highway safety improvement projects: A multi-criteria model and case study with SafetyAnalyst,” Saf. Sci., vol. 50, pp. 1085–1092, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.11.018.

N. Hidayati, R. Liu, and F. Montgomery, “The impact of school safety zone and roadside activities on speed behaviour: The Indonesian case,” Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 54, pp. 1339–1349, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.848.

M. A. Martins and T. V Garcez, “A multidimensional and multi-period analysis of safety on roads,” Accid. Anal. Prev., vol. 162, p. 106401, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2021.106401.

L. Kattan, R. Tay, and S. Acharjee, “Managing speed at school and playground zones,” Accid. Anal. Prev., vol. 43, pp. 1887–1891, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.04.009.

X. Zhao, J. Li, H. Ding, G. Zhang, and J. Rong, “A generic approach for examining the effectiveness of traffic control devices in school zones,” Accid. Anal. Prev., vol. 82, pp. 134–142, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2015.05.021.

S. Gunathilaka, S. Dissanayake, and P. Bhavsar, “Assessing the safety impacts of school zone speed management: Developing crash modification factors using before-and-after evaluation methods,” Safety, vol. 12, p. 92, 2026, doi: 10.3390/safety12040092.

A. J. Khattak and M. S. Haque, “Investigation of motorist speeds and crashes in school zones for sustainable safety policy,” Sustainability, vol. 18, p. 4517, 2026, doi: 10.3390/su18094517.

B. Jiao and H. Evdorides, “Methods of strategic road safety management: A systematic review,” Int. J. Inj. Contr. Saf. Promot., vol. 31, pp. 420–430, 2024, doi: 10.1080/17457300.2024.2335503.

S. Daniels et al., “A systematic cost-benefit analysis of 29 road safety measures,” Accid. Anal. Prev., vol. 133, p. 105292, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2019.105292.

C. B. Byaruhanga and H. Evdorides, “A budget optimisation model for road safety infrastructure countermeasures,” Cogent Eng., vol. 9, p. 2129363, 2022, doi: 10.1080/23311916.2022.2129363.

C. B. Byaruhanga and H. Evdorides, “The impact of indirect benefits (reduced travel time, fuel use and emissions) in cost benefit analysis of road safety countermeasures,” Traffic Inj. Prev., vol. 25, pp. 434–439, 2024, doi: 10.1080/15389588.2024.2322665.