A426 AYLESTONE ROAD / LUTTERWORTH ROAD / LEICESTER

Transcription

A426 AYLESTONE ROAD / LUTTERWORTH
ROAD / LEICESTER ROAD
BETTER BUS AREA FUND
RSA 2012 010
ROAD SAFETY AUDIT STAGE 1
August 2012
Audit Team Leader:
Telephone:
Internal:
Email:
Steve Warrington
(0116) 252 8659
29 8659
[email protected]
Address:
Transport Strategy Section
Planning, Transportation and Economic Development
Leicester City Council
A6, New Walk Centre
Welford Place
Leicester
LE1 6ZG
A426 Aylestone Road/Lutterworth Road ~ RSA Stage 1
August 2012
1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
This report results from a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit carried out on a
proposed bus corridor project on the A426 in both Leicester and
Leicestershire. The Audit was requested by Chris Sherwin, Leicestershire
County Council.
1.2
The Audit Team membership was as follows:
1.3
•
Steve Warrington
MSc, BSc (Hons), IEng, FIHE
Leicester City Council (Transport Strategy Team)
•
Graham Seaton
Leicester City Council (Transport Strategy Team)
•
Alex Taylor
Leicestershire County Council
(Accident Investigation and Prevention Team)
The audit comprised an examination of the following documents provided by
Chris Sherwin:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Road Safety Audit request form dated 20th July 2012
Drawing Number: 1234/S4/1000.
Drawing Number: A1/12/1.
Drawing Number: H1/1/1.
No traffic speeds or vehicle counts have been provided with the Road Safety
Audit request for assessment.
The Audit has reported on the information provided and the obtained accident
record.
1.4
The audit took place in the New Walk Centre offices of Leicester City Council,
Welford Place, Leicester and on site during July and August 2012. Site visits
were made during both the morning and afternoon of Friday 27th July 2012 to
the section from Woodbank to Saffron Lane. The weather was fine and dry.
The length of A426 between Almond Road and Newarke Street was inspected
on the afternoon of Monday 30th July 2012. On this occasion, the weather was
showery and the road surfaces were damp. The Audit Team Leader visited
the junction of Oxford Street and Bonners Lane during the afternoon of
Wednesday 8th August 2012 when the weather was fine and dry. A final site
visit was undertaken on the morning of Tuesday 14th August 2012. On this
Page 1
August 2012
visit, the weather was again fine and dry. Traffic was generally light on all
visits.
1.5
The terms of reference of the audit are broadly as described in HD 19/03. The
team has examined and reported only on the road safety implications of the
scheme as presented and has not examined or verified the compliance of the
design to any other criteria.
1.6
Scheme description (taken from Road Safety Audit request form): “Better Bus
Area Fund – A426 Bus Corridor road widening, junction Improvement, and
pedestrian footway facilities improvements. To provide a 3m wide bus lane
from Blaby through to Leicester City.”
Page 2
August 2012
2
ITEMS RAISED AT THIS STAGE 1 AUDIT – GENERAL ISSUES.
2.1
STAGE 1 - PROBLEM 1
Location: General.
Summary: Reduced traffic lane widths increase the risk of cyclists colliding
with passing traffic.
The proposals for 3.0m bus lanes generally result in 3.0m all-traffic lanes.
These lane widths are considerably less than the existing situation. As such,
cyclists will be intimidated by the proximity of passing traffic and could be
struck by these vehicles. Narrow lanes widths will increase the damage to
existing and proposed gullies caused by heavy vehicles. Resultant sunken
gullies will be a serious hazard for cyclists. They will either become unstable
when riding over them or move out into the carriageway to avoid them. In
each case, sunken gullies are likely to lead to cyclists being hit by passing
traffic.
RECOMMENDATION
Install side-entry gullies along the length of the A426 to mitigate the risk of
sunken gullies and improve the safety of cyclists.
2.2
STAGE 1 - PROBLEM 2
Location: General.
Summary: Risk of pedestrians and cyclists being hit by vehicles exiting private
drives and risk of pedestrians falling into the carriageway and being hit by
passing traffic.
For considerable lengths of the A426 the scheme proposes a footway width of
1.8m with no verges next to a three-lane 40mph single carriageway road and
numerous private drives, many of which have overgrown hedges adjacent to
them.
Proposals to provide footways at the back of the highway boundary adjacent
to private driveways will severely compromise inter-visibility and is likely to
lead to an increase in the number of accidents between pedestrians/cyclists
on the footway and drivers of vehicles exiting private drives. The proposals to
reduce running lanes to 3.0m is likely to lead to an increase in the number of
cyclists choosing to utilise the footway due to intimidation from traffic on the
carriageway. There is already a history of personal injury accidents on
Lutterworth Road involving cyclists on the footway and vehicles exiting private
Page 3
August 2012
drives. There is therefore concern that the proposed scheme will increase the
number of accidents of this type.
The scheme proposes sections of 1.8m wide footway immediately adjacent to
three 3.0m lanes on the carriageway. As such, there is concern that
pedestrians will be intimidated by the proximity of passing traffic. Any
pedestrian tripping is in danger of falling into the carriageway and being hit by
passing traffic.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure there is adequate inter-visibility between pedestrians and cyclists on
the footway and motorists exiting driveways.
Provide a verge between the main carriageway and the footways in order to
increase the feeling of pedestrian security and reduce the risk of pedestrians
falling into the carriageway.
2.3
STAGE 1 - PROBLEM 3
Location: General.
Summary: Inconsistent road markings increase the risk of accidents as a
result of driver confusion.
The drawings provided show inconsistencies between the design of the road
markings for the bus lanes and the advice contained within Chapter 5 of The
Traffic Signs Manual.
In addition, there are inconsistencies between the proposed signs and road
markings on the proposed bus lanes and the existing signs and road markings
on the existing bus lanes on the A426.
These inconsistencies would be confusing for road users and could result in
inappropriate behaviour leading to road traffic accidents.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure bus lane signs and markings on both the proposed bus lanes and the
existing bus lanes are designed and installed in accordance with The Traffic
Signs Regulations and General Directions and The Traffic Signs Manual.
Page 4
2.4
August 2012
STAGE 1 - PROBLEM 4
Location: General.
Summary: Risk of shunt accidents as a result of driver frustration due to
increased delays.
It is considered that the introduction of bus lanes will lead to a reduction of
capacity resulting in an increase in driver delay. This will lead to an increase
in driver frustration which is will lead to inappropriate behaviour and could
result in an increase in accidents, in particular shunt accidents on the
approach to junctions.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure the scheme does not significantly reduce capacity or increase delays.
2.5
STAGE 1 - PROBLEM 5
Location: General.
Summary: Risk of shunt accidents at traffic signals.
None of the drawings provided suggest that anti-skid surfacing will either be
renewed at existing locations or provided at the new pelican crossing at Red
House Road. It is considered that approach speeds at some of the traffic
signals may contribute to shunt accidents.
RECOMMENDATION
Provide anti-skid surfacing as considered appropriate in accordance with
approach speeds.
Page 5
2.6
August 2012
STAGE 1 - PROBLEM 6
Location: General.
Summary: Risk of accidents involving illegal vehicles using the proposed bus
gates.
There is concern that when the traffic signals show red to the all-vehicle lanes,
some vehicles will divert into the bus lane and bypass the signals by means of
the bus gate. This situation has been observed frequently at a similar facility
on Sanvey Gate in Leicester. This could result in these illegal vehicles
colliding with vehicles, particularly cyclists, using the bus lane or traffic
emerging from either Woodbank or Graham Goodes.
RECOMMENDATION
Provide enforcement equipment to discourage any illegal use of all the bus
gates.
2.7
STAGE 1 - PROBLEM 7
Location: General.
Summary: Lack of cycle detection at traffic signs leading to cyclist frustration
resulting in red light running.
There are existing problems throughout the scheme relating to detection of
cyclists at traffic signals. Lack of detection will lead to cyclist frustration and
will result in cyclists red light running. This will lead to conflicts with other
traffic and could result in cycle accidents at traffic signals.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure all traffic signals detect all approaching cyclists.
Page 6
August 2012
3
ITEMS RAISED AT THIS STAGE 1 AUDIT – DRAWING NO. H1/1/3.
3.1
STAGE 1 - PROBLEM 8
Location: Proposed Bus Gate adjacent to Woodbank.
Summary: Risk of side-swipe accidents between bus gate users and traffic in
the all-vehicle lane.
Drawing No. H1/1/3 states the method of bus gate operation. There is
concern that the method of operation will lead to side-swipe accidents
between users of the bus gate and traffic in the all-vehicle lane.
The loop detection method will not register a demand from cars. This will
mean that hackney carriages and cyclists will not be detected and will thus the
controller will not hurry call Stage 1 of the signal cycle for these users.
Hackney carriages and cyclists will therefore have to give way and merge with
traffic in the all-vehicle lane and could result in side-swipe accidents.
In addition, the southbound approach to the signals is down a considerable
gradient with a speed limit of 40mph and no bus stops in the immediate
vicinity. As such, buses may be travelling at a considerable speed as they
approach the bus gate. The drawing provided does not indicate the location of
the proposed loop detection equipment and there is concern that buses will be
past the bus gate before the signals indicate red to traffic in the all-vehicle
lane. This could result in side-swipe accidents at the merge point between
buses and all other traffic.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure all permitted vehicles are detected at the bus gate.
Ensure detection loops are positioned in relation to both the anticipated speed
of buses and the time to revert of Stage 1 of the signal cycle.
Page 7
3.2
August 2012
STAGE 1 - PROBLEM 9
Location: Proposed Bus Gate adjacent to Woodbank.
Summary: Risk of traffic emerging from Woodbank colliding with bus gate
users.
There is concern that drivers emerging from Woodbank will see traffic stopped
at the signals on the all-traffic lane at the bus gate but, given that the bus lane
is set back from the direct field of vision, will not concentrate on any vehicles
using the bus gate, especially cyclists. There is therefore concern that traffic
will emerge out of Woodbank into the path of vehicles which have used the
bus gate.
RECOMMENDATION
Locate the bus gate further away from Woodbank.
3.3
STAGE 1 - PROBLEM 10
Location: Junction of Woodbank and Leicester Road.
Summary: Risk of vehicles colliding with southern kerb-line.
The proposed alignment of Leicester Road is such that the carriageway is
widened by around 2.0m to the north of Woodbank but not amended to the
south of the junction. This results in a poor alignment for users of the bus
gate. Given the downhill approach to the County Arms junction and that
Leicester Road is subject to a 40mph speed limit, there is a risk that the poor
alignment will result in buses and taxis colliding with the kerb on the southern
side of Woodbank. Photograph 1 on page 10 provides an indication of the
proposed alignment.
RECOMMENDATION
Locate the bus gate further away from Woodbank and improve the alignment.
Page 8
3.4
August 2012
Location: Junction of Woodbank and Leicester Road.
Summary: Relocation of give way line decreases visibility to the left.
The proposed bus gate will necessitate the relocation of the give way marking
at the junction of Woodbank and Leicester Road further into the side road.
This will compromise the already poor visibility to the left for traffic emerging
from Woodbank. This could result in an increase in the number of accidents
involving traffic turning right from Woodbank colliding with northbound vehicles
on Leicester Road.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure the scheme does not compromise visibility at the junction of
Woodbank and Leicester Road.
3.5
Location: Leicester Road opposite Woodbank.
Summary: Risk of shunt accidents due to obscured signal head.
There is thick vegetation on the western side of Leicester Road opposite
Woodbank. It is proposed to install a secondary traffic signal for the bus gate
at this location. There is therefore concern that vegetation will hide the signal
head and could lead to drivers being unaware of the signals which could result
in shunt accidents.
RECOMMENDATION
Cut and maintain vegetation in order that adequate visibility of the secondary
signal is afforded at all times.
Page 9
3.6
August 2012
Location: Leicester Road adjacent to Woodbank.
Summary: Risk of shunt accidents due to obscured sign.
Photograph 1 below shows the existing situation at the junction of Leicester
Road and Woodbank at the position of the proposed bus gate. As can be
seen, there is a large Advance Direction Sign which is already masked by
vegetation. The proposals do not indicate a new location for the sign. There
is therefore concern that, with the proposed carriageway widening, the sign
will be relocated to a position whereby forward visibility is further compromised
due to vegetation.
Photograph 1 – Junction of Leicester Road and Woodbank – 27th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Relocate the sign to a position whereby adequate forward visibility is provided
and ensure this is maintained.
Page 10
3.7
August 2012
Location: Junction of Leicester Road and Woodbank.
Summary: Traffic turning into Woodbank could collide with bus lane users.
It is expected that the scheme will worsen the existing problem of southbound
traffic on Leicester Road queuing across the junction of Woodbank. This will
prevent right turning vehicles from entering the side road and could result in
queuing right turners being shunted by northbound traffic on Leicester Road.
In addition, queuing southbound traffic will restrict the forward visibility of traffic
in the bus lane for right turning vehicles. Drivers could therefore turn right into
Woodbank without checking for vehicles in the bus lane, particularly cycles
and hackney carriages. This could therefore result in right turners colliding
with bus lane users.
RECOMMENDATION
Provide a yellow box marking of an appropriate size.
3.8
Location: Leicester Road in the Vicinity of Wharf Way.
Summary: Risk of loss of control accidents and risk of pedestrians entering the
carriageway.
North of Wharf Way, it is proposed to widen the verge on the eastern side of
Leicester Road and widen the carriageway on its western side. As can be
seen on photograph 2 on page 12, the proposed carriageway alignment
exacerbates the existing right hand bend and could lead to vehicles hitting the
kerb and resulting in loss of control accidents.
In addition, there is an existing BT control box on the western side of Leicester
Road outside no. 82. Proposed carriageway widening will result in this control
box being located in the footway and will reduce the footway width to around
1.0m. This could lead to blind and partially sighted pedestrians walking into
the box and wheelchair, mobility scooter and double-buggy users being
unable to use the footway and entering the carriageway. This could result in
them being hit by passing traffic.
Page 11
August 2012
Photograph 2 – Junction of Leicester Road and Wharf Way – 27th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Do not undertake verge widening on the eastern side of Leicester Road to
reduce the need for carriageway widening on the western side, thereby
reducing the bend.
Relocate the BT controller so that it does not compromise the width of the
footway.
Page 12
3.9
August 2012
Location: Leicester Road – Outside No 63.
Summary: Risk of shunt and loss of control accidents due to level differences.
It is proposed to widen the eastern side of Leicester Road opposite Glenville
Avenue in order to construct a southbound bus lane. As photograph 3 below
illustrates, there is a considerable difference in levels between the
carriageway and the footway at this point. The proposed widening will
exacerbate the level difference and present difficulties to drivers entering and
exiting private driveways. They will have to do so at much reduced speeds
and this will increase the risk of shunt accidents on Leicester Road.
Photograph 3 – Level Differences - Leicester Road – 27th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure levels are such that safety is not compromised.
Page 13
3.10
August 2012
Location: Toucan Crossing between Glenville Avenue and Hillsborough Road.
Summary: Risk of accidents between cyclists and footway users due to substandard cycleway/footway width adjacent to the crossing.
It is proposed to widen the carriageway on the western side of Leicester Road
at the toucan crossing between Glenville Avenue and Hillsborough Road.
This will much reduce the width of the footway. Photograph 4 below illustrates
the width issues on the footway. Given that this footway is signed as a
cycleway/footway, the resultant width will be far below the minimum
acceptable width of 3.0m as detailed in Local Transport Note 2/08 Cycle
Infrastructure Design. The scheme compromises the safety of cyclists and
other users of the facility. This could result in accidents between cyclists and
footway users.
Photograph 4 – Narrow Footway at Toucan Crossing - Leicester Road – 27th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Convert the toucan crossing to a pelican crossing and do not sign the footway
as a cycleway/footway.
Page 14
3.11
August 2012
Summary: Inappropriate markings increasing driver confusion.
Drawing No. H1/1/3 illustrates markings to Diagram Nos. 1048 and 1049
within the zig-zag area and no zig-zag markings on the southbound exit from
the crossing. This proposal is not in accordance with Chapter 5 of The Traffic
Signs Manual and would be confusing for road users.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure the markings at the crossing are laid out in accordance with Chapter 5
of The Traffic Signs Manual.
3.12
Summary: Visibility of signal heads increasing risk of shunt accidents and risk
of vehicles colliding with pedestrians/cyclists.
The proposed bus lane will result in two outbound lanes at the toucan crossing
between Glenville Avenue and Hillsborough Road. Buses in the nearside lane
will block visibility of the nearside signal heads. Large vehicles waiting to turn
right into Hillsborough Road may block visibility of the offside signal heads.
Therefore southbound traffic may be unaware of the crossing which could
result in shunt accidents or collisions with pedestrians and cyclists using the
facility.
RECOMMENDATION
Provide a tall pole for outbound traffic and ensure all signal heads are visible
at all times.
Page 15
3.13
August 2012
Location: Junction of Leicester Road and Hillsborough Road.
Summary: Risk of shunt and side-swipe accidents due to junction design.
It is proposed to commence the southbound bus lane immediately to the south
of Hillsborough Road. This will result in buses entering the lane at the mouth
of the Hillsborough Road junction. There is therefore concern that bus lane
users could collide with vehicles waiting to exit the side road as the drawing
does not indicate any proposals to amend the give way markings.
In addition, the radii at the junction of Leicester Road and Hillsborough Road
are generous. As such, vehicles can enter/exit the side road at inappropriate
speeds. This could result in vehicles entering Hillsborough Road colliding with
vehicles waiting at exit the side road. It could also result in vehicles turning
left out of Hillsborough Road shunting buses waiting at the adjacent bus stop.
RECOMMENDATION
Construct a physical build-out on the western side of Leicester Road to the
south of the junction so that bus lane users can only enter the facility after the
junction, thereby reducing the likelihood of collision with vehicles waiting to
exit Hillsborough Road.
Reduce the radii of the junction of Leicester Road and Hillsborough Road in
order to reduce entry/exit speeds.
In addition, ensure that all bus stops adjacent to junctions are treated
consistently throughout the scheme to ensure all road users understand how
the facilities operate and what actions they must take.
Page 16
August 2012
4
4.1
Location: Junction of Leicester Road and Dorothy Avenue.
Summary: Risk of accidents involving buses at the northbound bus stop
adjacent to Dorothy Avenue.
There is an existing northbound bus stop to the south of Dorothy Avenue. It is
considered that, when sited close to a junction, bus stops should be located
on the leaving side. This location is inconsistent with other similar locations
along the route.
In addition, it is proposed to commence the northbound bus lane within the
acceleration lane from Dorothy Avenue. This gives a poor lining alignment
and could lead to buses entering the bus lane across the junction mouth and
colliding with a vehicle waiting at Dorothy Avenue.
RECOMMENDATION
Relocate the northbound bus stop to the northern side Dorothy Avenue and
provide a build-out on the northern side of Leicester Road as described in
paragraph 3.13 above. This would result in the bus stop being located on the
leaving side of the junction and would be consistent with other similar
locations.
Commence the bus lane a little further to the north in order create a smoother
lining alignment.
4.2
Location: Eastern Side of Leicester Road between Dorothy Avenue and Red
House Road.
Summary: Level differences increasing the risk of shunt and loss of control
accidents.
It is proposed to widen the eastern side of Leicester Road between opposite
Dorothy Avenue and Red House Road in order to construct a southbound bus
lane. As photograph 5 on page 18 illustrates, there is a considerable
difference in levels between the carriageway and the footway at this point.
The proposed widening will exacerbate the level difference and present
difficulties to drivers entering and exiting private driveways. They will have to
do so at much reduced speeds and this will increase the risk of shunt
accidents on Leicester Road.
Page 17
August 2012
Photograph 5 – Level Differences - Leicester Road – 27th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
4.3
Location: Proposed Pelican Crossing adjacent to Red House Road.
Summary: Bus stops located within zig-zag area encourage illegal overtaking
and reduces visibility.
It is proposed to construct a new pelican crossing of Lutterworth Road to the
north of Red House Road. Drawing No. H1/1/2 shows that it is not intended to
relocate the two existing bus stops in the vicinity. This results in bus stops
within the zig-zag area of the crossing. There is concern about buses blocking
visibility and vehicles overtaking within the zig-zag area. This could result in
vehicles colliding with opposing traffic or pedestrians using the crossing.
In addition, regarding the southbound bus stop, it is considered that, when
sited close to a junction, bus stops should be located on the leaving side. This
location is inconsistent with other similar locations along the route.
Page 18
August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Relocate both bus stops away from the zig-zag area and amend road
markings to incorporate the full number of exit markings.
Relocate the southbound bus stop to the south of Red House Road.
4.4
Location: Junction of Leicester Road and Red House Road.
Summary: Excessive radii at the junction encourage inappropriate entry/exit
speeds.
Although it is proposed to remove the acceleration and deceleration lanes on
Leicester Road/Lutterworth Road and the junction with Red House Road,
there is concern about the excessive radii at the junction. As such, vehicles
can enter/exit the side road at inappropriate speeds. In addition, these radii
present pedestrians with a long distance to cross thereby increasing their
exposure to traffic and increasing the risk of accidents.
RECOMMENDATION
Reduce the radii of the junction of Leicester Road and Red House Road in
order to reduce entry/exit speeds and lessen the crossing distance for
pedestrians.
4.5
Summary: Visibility of signal heads increases risk of shunt accidents and risk
of vehicles colliding with pedestrians/cyclists.
The proposed bus lane will result in two inbound lanes at the proposed pelican
crossing adjacent to Red House Road. Buses in the nearside lane will block
visibility of the nearside signal heads. Large vehicles waiting to turn right into
Red House Road may block visibility of the offside signal heads. Therefore
southbound traffic may be unaware of the crossing which could result in shunt
accidents or collisions with pedestrians and cyclists using the facility.
Page 19
August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Provide a tall pole for inbound traffic and ensure all signal heads are visible at
all times.
4.6
Summary: Inter-visibility at proposed pelican crossing could result in
southbound vehicles colliding with pedestrians on the crossing.
There is concern that inter-visibility between southbound traffic and westbound
pedestrians at the proposed pelican crossing is inadequate due to the
adjacent bend, hedge and Vehicle Activated Sign. Photograph 6 below shows
pedestrian visibility to the right at the proposed location. Given the likely
approach speed of southbound traffic, it is considered that a lack of visibility
could result in southbound vehicles colliding with pedestrians using the
crossing facility.
Photograph 6 – Visibility from Proposed Pelican Crossing - Lutterworth Rd nr Red House Rd – 27/07/12
RECOMMENDATION
Relocate the proposed pelican crossing.
Page 20
4.7
August 2012
Location: Lutterworth Road – Outside No. 147.
Summary: Overhanging vegetation could force pedestrians to use the
carriageway.
Widening the carriageway on the western side of Lutterworth Road in the
vicinity of No. 147 to accommodate the northbound bus lane will result in the
footway being relocated to the back of the highway. As can be seen from
Photograph 7 below, there is overhanging vegetation which will impede the
passage of pedestrians using the footway. This could lead to pedestrians
entering the carriageway in order to pass the obstruction. This could result in
passing vehicles colliding with pedestrians.
Photograph 7 – Overhanging Vegetation – Outside No. 147 Lutterworth Road – 27th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Cut and maintain overhanging vegetation to ensure pedestrians are not
impeded or discouraged from using the footway.
Page 21
August 2012
5
5.1
Location: Lutterworth Road – Outside Nos 141 and 82.
Summary: Control boxes in footway impeding pedestrian passage.
There are existing control boxes on Lutterworth Road outside nos. 141 and
82. Photograph 8 below shows the box outside no. 141. Proposed
carriageway widening will result in these control boxes being located within the
footway and will reduce the footway width to around 1.0m. This could lead to
blind and partially sighted pedestrians walking into the box and wheelchair,
mobility scooter and double-buggy users being unable to use the footway and
entering the carriageway. This could result in them being hit by passing traffic.
Photograph 8 – Control Box in Footway – Outside No. 141 Lutterworth Road – 27th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Relocate the control boxes so that they do not compromise the width of the
footway.
Page 22
5.2
August 2012
Location: Western Side of Lutterworth Road to the South of Gilmorton Avenue.
Summary: Level differences increase the risk of shunt and loss of control
accidents.
It is proposed to widen the western side of Lutterworth Road to the south of
Gilmorton Avenue in order to construct a northbound bus lane. As photograph
9 below illustrates, there is a considerable difference in levels between the
carriageway and the footway at this point. The proposed widening will
exacerbate the level difference and present difficulties to drivers entering and
exiting private driveways. They will have to do so at much reduced speeds
and this will increase the risk of shunt accidents on Lutterworth Road.
Photograph 9 – Level Differences – Lutterworth Road adjacent to Gilmorton Avenue – 27th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Page 23
5.3
August 2012
Location: Lutterworth Road – Existing Bus Lay-By opposite Gilmorton Avenue.
Summary: Southbound alignment of carriageway and bus lay-by and
inadequate width of lay-by could result in vehicles colliding with kerb or
standing bus, or passengers falling when boarding or alighting.
There is an existing bus lay-by on the eastern side of Lutterworth Road
immediately to the south of Gilmorton Avenue. As can be seen from
photograph 10 below, the existing southbound alignment is poor. It is
proposed to widen the carriageway on the northern side of the lay-by and
widen the footway on its southern side. This will worsen the already poor
southbound alignment which could result in vehicles hitting the southern kerb
and consequent loss of control accidents.
Drawing No H/1/1/1 proposes that the width of the lay-by is 2.1m. Local
Transport Note 1/97 Keeping Buses Moving suggests a minimum width of
2.75m. It is considered that a bus lay-by width which is considerable below
standard will lead to buses straddling the main running lane which could result
in shunt accidents by overtaking vehicles.
In addition, the alignment will present difficulties for buses to pull up parallel to
the kerb-side. It will therefore be difficult for pedestrians to board and alight
buses which could result in pedestrians falling and being run over by a bus.
Photograph 10 – Southbound Alignment – Lutterworth Road adjacent to Gilmorton Ave – 27th July 2012
Page 24
August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure the bus lay-by is of adequate width to safely accommodate a bus and
improve the proposed alignment of the southbound lane.
5.4
Location: Lutterworth Road – Existing Bus Lay-By opposite Gilmorton Avenue.
Summary: Upstand and gully at bus lay-by could result in loss of control
accidents for two-wheeled vehicles.
The existing bus lay-by on the eastern side of Lutterworth Road has a
considerable upstand and there is a gully in the channel line. Both the
upstand and the gully can be seen on Photograph 11 below. There is concern
that the alignment described in Problem 31 above will exacerbate the hazard
posed by these features and could cause two-wheeled vehicles to lose control
and fall into the path of passing traffic.
Photograph 11 – Bus Lay-By – Lutterworth Road adjacent to Gilmorton Avenue – 27th July 2012
Page 25
August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure there is no upstand at the edge of the bus lay-by and there are no
gullies in the channel line.
5.5
Location: Lutterworth Road – Outside No. 92.
Summary: Proximity of proposed refuge to access could result in problems for
vehicles turning left out of No. 92.
It is proposed to construct a new refuge in Lutterworth Road a little further to
the north and east of the existing refuge. This will cause difficulties for
vehicles turning left out of No. 92 and could result in shunt accidents as
vehicles struggle to manoeuvre.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure that vehicles can safely turn left from No. 92 Lutterworth Road.
5.6
Location: Lutterworth Road – Refuge to the South of Gilmorton Avenue.
Summary: White lines lead traffic into refuge.
Drawing No. H/1/1/1 shows white line hatch markings leading traffic to the
refuge. This could result in passing vehicles clipping the kerb on the refuge
and losing control.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure white lines lead traffic around refuge.
Page 26
5.7
August 2012
Location: Junction of Lutterworth Road and Gilmorton Avenue.
Summary: Right turn lane could lead to vehicles queuing in southbound
running lane resulting in shunt accidents or accidents involving bus lane users.
There is an existing ghost island at the junction of Lutterworth and Gilmorton
Avenue. The proposals reduce the length and width of this right turn lane.
There is currently northbound peak time queuing on Lutterworth Road through
the junction. It is considered that proposals will increase this queuing.
Queuing vehicles may block access for vehicles turning right into Gilmorton
Avenue. Right turners may therefore queue back and across the main
southbound running lane. This could lead to shunt accidents between
southbound traffic and queuing right turners.
There is also concern that a gap in queuing traffic in the all-vehicle lane may
lead drivers to believe it is safe to turn right and undertake the manoeuvre
without checking for vehicles in the bus lane, especially cycles and taxis. This
could therefore result in right turners colliding with bus lane users.
There is also concern that vehicles turning left into Gilmorton Avenue from the
all-traffic lane will not check for vehicles using the bus lane. This could result
in left turners colliding with bus lane users.
RECOMMENDATION
Provide a standard ghost Island junction and provide a yellow box of an
appropriate size to maximise visibility to discourage northbound traffic blocking
the junction and preventing traffic turning right into Gilmorton Avenue.
Page 27
August 2012
6
ITEMS RAISED AT THIS STAGE 1 AUDIT – DRAWING NO. A1/12/1.
6.1
Location: Junction of Lutterworth Road/Glenhills Way/Soar Valley Way.
Summary: Southbound alignment through junction leads vehicles into the
central island or nearside kerbs.
The proposals to provide a segregated right turn lane into Glenhills Way result
in poor southbound alignment through the junction. This is likely to result in
southbound traffic colliding with either the central island or the nearside kerbs
to the south of the junction.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure good alignment through the junction by moving the central islands in
Lutterworth Road further west. The proposed northbound approach lanes are
scaled at a width of 3.2m. It is considered these widths can be reduced in
order to partially accommodate shifting the central islands. In addition, obtain
additional land and further widen the carriageway on the western side of
Lutterworth Road by around 1.0m to help in relocating the two central islands
to provide good southbound alignment.
Widening the western side of Lutterworth Road for a much longer length than
the proposed 30m back from the stop line will ensure southbound alignment is
improved but not to the detriment of the northbound alignment through the
junction. Such widening would need additional land take to the west of
Lutterworth Road at the junction and level differences could necessitate some
form of protection.
Page 28
6.2
August 2012
Summary: Footways widths compromised by street furniture and utility
equipment.
The proposed widening of Lutterworth Road at its junction with Glenhills
Way/Soar Valley Way will result in the relocation of footways and some
reduction in their width. There are sign posts and other equipment such as
the street lighting control box shown in Photograph 12 below which will reduce
effective width of the footways. This could lead to pedestrians entering the
main carriageway in order to pass the obstructions which could result in them
being hit by passing traffic.
Photograph 12 – Street Lighting Control Box – Lutterworth Road adjacent to Soar Valley Way – 27/07/12
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure footway widths are not compromised by sign posts, control boxes or
similar equipment.
Page 29
6.3
August 2012
Summary: Direction sign and overhanging vegetation may restrict forward
visibility of nearside primary signal head.
The proposed widening of the western side of Lutterworth Road south of its
junction with Soar Valley Way/Glenhills Way would result in the relocation of
the nearside primary signal. As can be seen from Photograph 13 below, the
proximity of the direction sign and the adjacent overhanging vegetation may
restrict forward visibility. This could result in shunt accidents if forward
visibility of the secondary signal is blocked by a large vehicle.
Photograph 13 – Direction Sign & Signal Pole – Lutterworth Rd adjacent to Soar Valley Way – 27/07/12
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure forward visibility of the nearside primary signal is not compromised at
any time by the direction sign or vegetation.
Page 30
6.4
August 2012
Summary: Widening of the carriageway on the south eastern corner of the
junction will restrict visibility of signal head.
In order to accommodate the segregated right turn into Glenhills Way, it is
proposed to widen to south eastern corner of the junction. This will
necessitate relocation of the nearside primary traffic signal head. As can be
seen from photograph 14 below, there is a substantial hedge on the nearside
of the westbound approach to the traffic signals. Due to the hedge, relocation
of the signal head will reduce its forward visibility which could result in shunt
accidents.
Photograph 14 – Signal Pole –Glenhills Way adjacent to Lutterworth Road – 27th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure forward visibility of the nearside primary signal is not compromised at
any time by the hedge.
Page 31
6.5
August 2012
Summary: Signal staging could result in pedestrians crossing carriageway
against a red man due to frustration.
Stage 1 of the proposed signal staging permits the two right turns from
Lutterworth Road. This enables pedestrian steams J, K and L to operate
concurrently. The staging would also permit pedestrians to cross the
southbound side of Lutterworth Road to the south of the junction at the same
time. The staging diagram does not enable this pedestrian phase at Stage 1.
Nor does the staging diagram permit this pedestrian phase at any other time in
the cycle. As a result pedestrians will be crossing against a red man and will
be in danger of being hit by on-coming traffic.
RECOMMENDATION
Incorporate a pedestrian crossing phase of the southbound side of Lutterworth
Road on Stage 1 of the cycle.
6.6
Summary: Signal staging could result in pedestrians crossing carriageway
against a red man due to frustration.
Stage 5 of the proposed signal staging opens up the three manoeuvres from
Soar Valley Way. As such, pedestrian stream I across the northbound side of
Lutterworth Road to the south of the junction is also permitted. Pedestrian
streams J and O could also be opened on this stage but are not shown as
such. This will lead to pedestrian frustration and result in pedestrians not
trusting the signals at the junction. As such, pedestrians may become used to
crossing the junction against a red man and be at risk from being hit by oncoming traffic.
RECOMMENDATION
Open up pedestrian streams J and O on Stage 5 of the cycle.
Page 32
August 2012
7
ITEMS RAISED AT THIS STAGE 1 AUDIT – DRAWING NO. 1234/S4/1005.
7.1
Location: Lutterworth Road – Outside No 49.
Summary: Bus Lane commences on a right hand bend on a downhill gradient
resulting in poor visibility.
It is proposed to commence the northbound bus lane on Lutterworth Road
outside No. 49. At this point the carriageway is on a right hand bend and a
downhill gradient. This could affect the visibility of the start of the lane and
enhances the kick over effect of the lead-in taper line. This could result in
vehicles seeing the lane late and losing control whilst moving to the all-vehicle
lane.
RECOMMENDATION
Commence the bus lane some 30m further south.
7.2
Location: Junction of Lutterworth Road and Marsden Lane.
Summary: Traffic turning into Marsden Lane could collide with bus lane users.
It is expected that northbound traffic on Lutterworth Road will queue across
the junction of Marsden Lane in the all-traffic lane. This will prevent right
turning vehicles from entering the side road and could result in queuing right
turners being shunted by southbound traffic on the southbound carriageway of
Lutterworth Road. In addition, queuing traffic in the all-traffic lane of the
northbound carriageway will restrict the forward visibility of traffic in the bus
lane for right turning vehicles. Drivers could therefore turn right into Marsden
Lane without checking for vehicles in the bus lane, particularly cycles and
hackney carriages. This could therefore result in right turners colliding with
bus lane users.
There is also concern that vehicles turning left into Marsden Lane from the alltraffic lane will not check for vehicles using the bus lane. This could result in
left turners colliding with bus lane users.
Page 33
August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Provide a yellow box of an appropriate size to both discourage northbound
traffic blocking the junction and preventing traffic turning right into Marsden
Lane and to maximise visibility between right turners and bus lane users.
7.3
Location: Lutterworth Road – Northbound Bus Stop between Middleton Street
and Marsden Lane. (General Point to be applied to all Bus Stops on the
Route)
Summary: Carriageway failing could lead to loss of control by cyclists.
There is existing carriageway failing at the northbound bus stop between
Marsden Lane and Middleton Street. The situation is commonplace at bus
stops with raised kerbs along the A426 corridor. As can be seen on
photograph 15 below, the wearing course is binder-rich and has failed at a
location which is subject to repeated forces caused by buses braking and
turning/steering at the bus stop. This carriageway failing is a hazard for
cyclists and could lead to loss of control resulting in collisions with passing
vehicles.
Photograph 15 – Bus Stop –Lutterworth Road between Middleton St and Marsden Lane – 27th July 2012
Page 34
August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Reconstruct the carriageway at this and other bus stops along the route,
ensuring that the works specification takes account of the forces transferred to
the carriageway repeatedly at a single location by a braking bus.
7.4
Location: Lutterworth Road - Proposed Bus Gate outside No. 15.
Summary: Proximity of bus stop to bus gate causing problems for overtaking
buses.
The distance between the existing bus stop outside no. 19 and the proposed
bus gate outside no. 15 is scaled at 10m. Given that a bus can be 12m long,
there is concern that buses overtaking stationary buses waiting at the stop will
have difficulty returning the nearside lane prior to the bus gate. As such, there
is concern that overtaking buses will collide with the refuge of the bus gate.
RECOMMENDATION
Either construct a bus lay-by to enable through buses to remain in the bus
lane or relocate the bus stop further away from the bus gate to enable easy
access by overtaking buses.
Ensure any bus detection provided at the bus gate to call a red light to the alltraffic lane will cancel should a bus be waiting at the bus stop.
7.5
Location: Lutterworth Road – Entrance to Graham Goodes.
Summary: Vehicles turning left into Graham Goodes could collide with bus
lane users.
The proposed bus gate outside no. 15 is immediately prior to the entrance to
Graham Goodes. Drivers turning left into Graham Goodes will be doing so
having received a green light at the bus gate and may not check for vehicles
using the bus lane. It is considered that some bus lane users will not adhere
to the give way markings at the end of the bus lane, especially cyclists given
the considerable downhill gradient. There is therefore concern that vehicles
turning left into Graham Goodes may collide with bus lane users.
Page 35
August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Relocate the bus gate further south, away from the entrance to Graham
Goodes.
7.6
Location: Lutterworth Road – Between Middleton Street and outside No. 21.
Summary: Poor lane alignment could result in side-swipe accidents between
opposing traffic.
Drawing No. 1234/S4/1005 shows that the proposed bus gate results in a poor
lane alignment between Middleton Street and outside no. 21 Lutterworth
Road. This is due to the relative positioning of the proposed bus gate, the two
bus stops and the central hatched markings. The poor lane alignments will
lead to poor longitudinal movements by vehicles and could result in side-swipe
accidents. This is especially acute at the bus stop outside no. 14b where
southbound traffic will be overtaking stationary buses whilst opposing traffic
will be negotiating the bus gate.
RECOMMENDATION
Undertake carriageway widening as necessary to enable good lane alignment
on this section of Lutterworth Road.
7.7
Location: Lutterworth Road - Proposed Bus Gate outside No. 15.
Summary: Northbound drivers may mistake the traffic signals at the Middleton
Street junction for traffic signals at the proposed bus gate.
The distance from the stop line at the proposed bus gate to the stop line at the
Middleton Street junction is only 57m. There is concern that drivers
approaching the bus gate may not notice the traffic signals at that location and
be concentrating on those at the Middleton Street junction. Should those
signals be on the green phase, drivers may progress through the bus gate on
a red light, change lanes to the nearside to travel straight on and could collide
with bus lane users.
Page 36
August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Either ensure the two sets of signals always show the same aspect or provide
louvres or other equipment to mask the signal heads at the Middleton Street
junction to drivers at the bus gate.
Page 37
August 2012
8
8.1
Location: Central Islands on Aylestone Road and Lutterworth Road at the
junction with Wigston Lane/Middleton Street.
Summary: Proposed changes to central islands result in pedestrians
approaching the crossing point with their backs to on-coming traffic.
At the current time, pedestrians on the two central islands on the A426
approach the crossing points facing traffic. It is proposed to change the
stagger on the central islands so that pedestrians will have their backs to oncoming traffic. This is due to the location of the push button units. As such,
pedestrians may not look for on-coming vehicles and start to cross which
could result in them being hit by passing traffic.
In addition, as can be seen from Photograph 16 on page 38, there is a ‘see
through’ problem at the crossing. There is concern that pedestrians will see a
far side green aspect and cross the nearside carriageway, stepping into the
path of on-coming traffic.
Photograph 16 – ‘See through’ - Central Island –Lutterworth Road – 27th July 2012
Page 38
August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Retain the existing stagger so that pedestrians on the central islands approach
the crossing point facing traffic.
Provide louvres or other measures to ensure that pedestrians are not able to
see the far side pedestrian aspect.
Page 39
August 2012
9
9.1
Location: Aylestone Road - Pelican Crossing outside no. 695a.
Summary: Risk of elderly and infirm pedestrians being hit by passing traffic
due to excessive crossing distance.
It is proposed to widen the carriageway of Aylestone Road at the existing
pedestrian crossing outside no. 695a in order to accommodate an outbound
bus lane. This will result in a crossing distance of 11.5m for pedestrians. This
distance is considered excessive for elderly and infirm pedestrians. There is
concern that these slow pedestrians will be unable to cross the whole
carriageway before vehicular traffic is presented with a green aspect. This
could result in these vulnerable people being hit by passing traffic.
RECOMMENDATION
Relocate the crossing and construct a central island in order to provide a
staggered crossing so that pedestrians cross Aylestone Road in two separate
manoeuvres.
9.2
Summary: Incorrect road markings at pelican crossing.
Drawing No. 1234/S4/1003 shows hatched road markings within the zig-zag
area of the pelican crossing outside no. 695a Aylestone Road. These
markings are not permitted in The Traffic Signs Regulations and General
Directions and could therefore be confusing for road users.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure there are no hatched markings within the zig-zag area and that the
road markings conform to The Traffic Signs Manual and The Traffic Signs
Regulations and General Directions.
Page 40
9.3
August 2012
Summary: Poor visibility of signal heads increasing risk of shunt accidents and
vehicles colliding with pedestrians.
The proposed bus lane will result in two outbound lanes at the pelican
crossing outside No. 695a Aylestone Road. Buses in the nearside lane will
block visibility of the nearside signal heads. Inbound vehicles may block
visibility of the offside signal heads.
Photograph 17 below shows the southbound approach to the crossing. As
can be seen, there is concern that visibility of the proposed signal head
location may be further compromised by overhanging vegetation.
Southbound traffic may be unaware of the crossing which could result in shunt
accidents or collisions with pedestrians using the facility.
Photograph 17 – Pelican Crossing –Outside No. 695a Aylestone Road – 27th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Provide a tall pole for outbound traffic and ensure all signal heads are visible
at all times.
Page 41
9.4
August 2012
Summary: Position of gully could result in powered two-wheeled vehicles
losing control.
Drawing No. 1234/ S4/1003 shows a gully in lane 1 of the southbound side of
Aylestone Road immediately to the north of the pelican crossing outside no.
695a. This will be a hazard to powered two-wheelers and could result in loss
of control accidents for these road users.
RECOMMENDATION
Relocate the gully out of the main carriageway and provide side entry access.
9.5
Location: Junction of Aylestone Road and Paigle Road.
Summary: Queuing over Paigle Road could result in shunt accidents.
As can be seen from Photograph 18 on page 43, there is currently a yellow
box marking across both lanes of the southbound side of Aylestone Road at
its junction with Paigle Road. Drawing No. 1234/S4/1003 suggests that it is
proposed to reduce this marking to lane 2. There is therefore concern that
users of lane 1 will queue over the junction. This would prevent access to and
egress from Paigle Road and could result in shunt accidents on Aylestone
Road.
Page 42
August 2012
Photograph 18 – Yellow Box –Junction of Aylestone Road and Paigle Road – 27th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure the yellow box on Aylestone Road covers the whole junction of Paigle
Road.
9.6
Location: Junction of Aylestone Road and Paigle Road.
Summary: Vehicles accessing and egressing Paigle Road at inappropriate
speeds.
Photograph 18 above illustrates the junction of Aylestone Road and Paigle
Road. As can be seen, the radii of the junction are generous. This
encourages inappropriate entry and exit speeds. The scheme proposal to
extend the bus lane exacerbates the road safety concerns as side road traffic
will be coming from and going to lane 2. This means that drivers will not be
concentrating on lane 1 traffic which could result in collisions with bus lane
users.
Page 43
August 2012
In addition, pedestrians cross around 15m of side road. This is considered an
excessive distance for pedestrians to cross as it increases exposure to turning
traffic. Given that traffic will be turning to and from the all-vehicle lane 2, there
is concern that the scheme will increase the risk of these vehicles colliding
with crossing pedestrians.
RECOMMENDATION
Tighten the radii of the junction of Aylestone Road and Paigle Road.
9.7
Location: Proposed Bus Lane Extension – Aylestone Road adjacent to Paigle
Road.
Summary: Driver confusion due to inconsistent bus lane operation times.
The existing southbound bus lane on Aylestone Road between Banks Road
and Paigle Road operates in the evening peak only. The proposed southern
extension to this bus lane is proposed to operate at all hours. There are
inconsistencies between operation times and therefore the bus lanes are
signed incorrectly. Driver would therefore be confused by different operation
times. There is therefore a risk of side-swipe accidents due to inappropriate
lane changing.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure times of operation of the bus lanes are consistent along the entire
length of the A426 corridor.
Page 44
August 2012
10
10.1
Location: Aylestone Road – Outbound Bus Stop to the south west of Saffron
Lane.
Summary: Position of bus stop could result in overtaking accidents.
The outbound bus stop on Aylestone Road outside Sturgess Garage
immediately to the south west of Saffron Lane is positioned at a point where
outbound traffic will be merging in advance of the bus lane. There is concern
that southbound vehicles will be changing lanes through the junction when
overtaking a stationary bus. This could result in side-swipe accidents.
RECOMMENDATION
Relocate the bus stop to the south west of the access to Sturgess Garage
within the bus lane.
10.2
Location: Aylestone Road – Eastern Side under Railway Bridge.
Summary: Match-day parking could force buses into the all-traffic lane causing
side-swipe accidents.
Football match day parking currently takes place on the eastern side of
Aylestone Road on the section under the railway bridge. The proposed bus
lane will prohibit this parking from taking place, but there is concern that
vehicles will still park in this location on match days. This would result in
buses having to enter the all-traffic lane to overtake parked vehicles and could
result in side-swipe accidents.
RECOMMENDATION
Enforce the Traffic Regulation Order so that the bus lane is kept clear at all
times.
Page 45
August 2012
11
11.1
Location: Junction of Almond Road and Aylestone Road.
Summary: Road markings could lead to poor lane discipline by traffic entering
Aylestone Road from Almond Road resulting in side-swipe accidents.
There are currently lane markings on Aylestone Road, and at its junction with
Almond Road gaps are provided to aid merging drivers. The proposals show
uninterrupted lane markings through this junction. This could be confusing for
drivers turning right into Aylestone Road and attempting to merge into these
lanes which could lead to poor lane discipline and side swipe accidents.
RECOMMENDATION
Incorporate road markings to Diagram No. 1010 to guide vehicles from
Almond Road into the correct lanes on Aylestone Road.
11.2
Location: Aylestone Road – West Side between Sawday Street and Filbert
Street East.
Summary: Parking and loading in bus lane.
On the west side of Aylestone Road, there are shops between Sawday Street
and Hazel Street as shown on photograph 19 on page 47. There is currently a
single yellow line outside these shops and they are able to load and unload
from Aylestone Road. Further north, on the section of Aylestone Road
between Hazel Street and Filbert Street East, there are residential properties
with a single yellow line which permits evening parking for residents.
The proposed bus lane will prohibit this loading and parking from taking place,
but there is concern that vehicles will still load and park in these locations.
This would result in buses having to enter the all-traffic lane to overtake and
could result in side-swipe accidents. In addition, displaced loading and
parking could take place in inappropriate locations in the area. This is likely to
exacerbate existing footway parking in the area which will increase the hazard
for pedestrians.
Page 46
August 2012
Photograph 19 – Parking and Loading – Aylestone Road near to Hazel Street – 30th July 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Provide alternative parking for residents and loading for the shops and enforce
the Traffic Regulation Order so that the bus lane is kept clear at all times.
11.3
Location: Junction of Aylestone Road and Walnut Street.
Summary: Short merge and lack of stacking space could lead to late lane
changing and result in side-swipe and shunt accidents.
There is a heavy demand on the left turn from Aylestone Road into Walnut
Street. The proposed bus lane will result in a short weaving length for left
turning traffic to change lanes from lane 2 to lane 1. This could result in sideswipe accidents between vehicles changing lanes to the left and bus lane
users.
In addition, the short stacking length of the left turn into Walnut Street could
result in bus lane users shunting traffic waiting to turn left.
Page 47
August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Terminate the proposed bus lane to the south of Filbert Street East in order to
increase the length of merge.
Page 48
August 2012
12
12.1
Location: Junction of Oxford Street and Carlton Street.
Summary: Incorrect road markings could result in driver confusion.
Drawing No. 1234/S4/1000 shows road markings outside the Swan and
Rushes indicating the commencement of a bus lane. At this point, the bus
lane is a continuation of the existing bus lane on Infirmary Road. As such, the
road markings shown are incorrect and could lead to accidents as a result of
driver confusion over the status of the bus lane facilities.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure bus lane signs and markings on both the proposed bus lanes and the
existing bus lanes are designed and installed in accordance with The Traffic
Signs Regulations and General Directions and The Traffic Signs Manual.
12.2
Location: Junction of Oxford Street and Bonners Lane.
Summary: Bus gate will be little used leading to driver frustration and shunt
accidents. Those buses which use the bus gate have a short merge length
which could result in side-swipe accidents.
It is understood that around 95% of buses turn right from Oxford Street into
Newarke Street. As such, they need to be in lane 3 at this junction. Site
observations have shown that the majority of buses move into lane 3 on the
weaving length of Oxford Street between Carlton Street and Bonners Lane.
This includes those buses which have used the bus stop to the south of
Bonners Lane. Photographs 20 and 21 on page 50 illustrate buses changing
lanes without issue on this weaving length. The bus in photograph 20 had set
down a passenger at the stop to the south of Bonners Lane. There is
therefore concern that the proposed bus gate will be little used which will
increase driver frustration due to the increased congestion in the two all-traffic
lanes due to deceased capacity. This is likely to result in an increase in the
incidence of shunt accidents on Oxford Street and may lead to increased
problems with red light running at the junction of Oxford Street and Bonner
Lane.
Page 49
August 2012
Photograph 20 – Bus moving to Lane 3 – Oxford Street – 8th August 2012
Photograph 21 – Bus moving to Lane 3 – Oxford Street – 8th August 2012
Page 50
August 2012
It is recognised that buses may have difficulties moving across into lane 3 in
the peak hours. At these times, it is considered that buses would be more
likely to utilise the proposed bus gate. There is, however, a short merge
length between Bonners Lane and Newarke Street. Congestion at the Oxford
Street/Newarke Street signals is likely to result in buses being unable to
merge into lane 3. This could lead to an increase in driver frustration resulting
in side-swipe accidents.
(To be read in conjunction with Problem 63)
RECOMMENDATION
See Problem 63.
12.3
Summary: Large groups of pedestrians will congregate on the central island
and spill onto the carriageway and be at risk of collision from passing traffic.
The existing crossing of Oxford Street outside The Polar Bear suffers from
considerable pedestrian congestion at peak times. This is due to major
pedestrian generators such as the nearby Leicester Royal Infirmary and the
adjacent De Montfort University, as well as Mill Lane being a very important
pedestrian route to the city centre from the Narborough Road area.
Pedestrian pressure on this crossing has increased considerable since the
closure of the subway at Newarke Street. There is already a history of
pedestrian accidents at the crossing.
The proposed scheme introduces a bus gate at the junction of Oxford Street
and Bonners Lane and the staging diagram shows that Stage 1 allows bus
lane traffic only whilst Stage 2 allows the all-traffic lanes on Oxford Street only.
Given the pedestrian demands at the junction and the existing pedestrian
delays due to a long wait time, there is concern that pedestrians will decide to
cross Oxford Street against the red man in two stages using the shadow of the
proposed refuge. This could result in large numbers of pedestrians, especially
students, waiting in the centre of Oxford Street between the bus lane and the
all-traffic lanes. These pedestrians are likely to spill into the main carriageway
and be hit by passing traffic.
RECOMMENDATION
Do not provide the bus gate at the junction of Oxford Street and Bonners
Lane.
Page 51
12.4
August 2012
Summary: Lack of lane signs leading to poor lane discipline and resulting in
side-swipe accidents.
There is poor lane discipline on the length of Oxford Street from Carlton Street
to Newarke Street. As such, there is a history of accidents on this length of
the A594 involving side-swipes as a result in lane changing. The proposed
bus lane and bus gate is likely to increase the incidence of lane changing,
particularly between Bonners Lane and Newarke Street which, combined with
the short weaving length, is likely to increase the incidence of side-swipe
accidents.
RECOMMENDATION
Provide lane signs both in advance of and after the junction of Oxford Street
and Bonners Lane to encourage better lane discipline.
12.5
Summary: Increase in wait time will lead to pedestrian frustration which will
result in inappropriate crossing manoeuvres.
The junction of Oxford Street and Bonners Lane currently operates on a two
stage signal cycle. There is a long wait time for pedestrians and cyclists
wishing to cross Oxford Street. Even though traffic on Bonners Lane will be
much reduced, the introduction of an additional signal stage at the junction
could increase this wait time which could therefore increase pedestrian
frustration. As discussed above, there is a history of pedestrian accidents at
the junction. Pedestrian frustration will increase the incidence of inappropriate
behaviour and manoeuvres, in particular, pedestrians crossing from the
northern side of Bonners Lane diagonally across to York Road and vice versa.
This is likely to lead to an increase in pedestrian accidents.
RECOMMENDATION
Minimise pedestrian wait times and increase the length of pedestrian guard
rail on the eastern side of Oxford Street to discourage inappropriate
pedestrian behaviour.
Page 52
12.6
August 2012
Summary: Lack of pedestrian signal heads could result in pedestrians being
hit by passing traffic.
Drawing No. 1234/S4/1000 does not indicate that any pedestrian signal heads
will be provided at the crossing of the northern side of Bonners Lane. This will
result in pedestrians crossing at inappropriate times within the signal cycle and
could result in them being hit by traffic turning left from Bonners Lane.
RECOMMENDATION
Provide pedestrian signal heads on the eastbound side of Bonners Lane.
12.7
Summary: Tactile paving is incorrect and could result in accidents involving
blind and partially sighted pedestrians.
Drawing No. 1234/S4/100 shows the tactile paving stem on the eastern side of
Oxford Street outside The Polar Bear to be on the left hand side. This is
contrary to the advice contained within Guidance on the use of Tactile Paving
Surfaces and will lead to confusion for blind and partially sighted pedestrians,
especially visitors to De Montfort University. As such, these vulnerable road
users may step into the carriageway and be hit by passing traffic
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure the tactile paving stem is on the right hand side and installed in
accordance with Guidance on the use of Tactile Paving Surfaces.
Page 53
12.8
August 2012
Summary: Tactile paving is incorrect and could result in accidents involving
blind and partially sighted pedestrians.
On the southern side of the junction of Bonners Lane and Oxford Street,
Drawing No. 1234/S4/1000 shows that the back edge of the tactile paving is
proposed to be parallel to the kerb rather than perpendicular to the direction of
travel. This is not in accordance with Guidance on the use of Tactile Paving
Surfaces and will be confusing for blind and partially sighted pedestrians. This
is likely to lead to inappropriate pedestrian behaviour and could result in
accidents involving these vulnerable road users.
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure the back edge of the tactile paving is perpendicular to the direction of
travel and installed in accordance with Guidance on the use of Tactile Paving
Surfaces.
12.9
Summary: Cycle Slip encourages inappropriate use of Toucan Crossing and
could result in Collisions between Cyclists and Pedestrians.
Drawing No. 1234/S4/1000 shows a proposal to construct a cycle slip on the
western side of the triangular island at the junction of Bonners Lane and
Oxford Street. The segregated cycleway/footway on the eastern side of
Oxford Street is for cyclists travelling from York Road to Bonners Lane only as
it is not wide enough to allow for two way cycling. Cyclists travelling from
Bonners Lane to York Road should use the advance stop line and reservoir
and the existing cycle slip at the junction of Oxford Street and York Road
instead.
The proposed cycle slip on the triangular island will encourage incorrect use of
the cycle facility and will lead to conflicts between cyclists and pedestrians
using the crossing and between eastbound and westbound cyclists on the
segregated cycleway/footway on the eastern side of Oxford Street.
RECOMMENDATION
Do not provide the cycle slip access to the triangular island.
Page 54
August 2012
12.10 STAGE 1 - PROBLEM 70
Summary: Wide traffic lane on Bonners Lane will encourage two traffic lanes
to form leading to vehicles obstructing the cycle lane.
There are currently two all-traffic lanes on Bonners Lane in advance of the
junction of Oxford Street as shown on Photograph 22 below. It is proposed to
reduce this to a single lane. The proposed width of this lane is 3.5m. Given
the adjacent cycle lane, it is considered that traffic will continue to form two
lanes on the approach to the signals. This will block access to the cycle lane
and will lead to cyclists performing inappropriate manoeuvres which could
result in cyclist colliding with either traffic or pedestrians.
Photograph 22 – Two Lanes of Traffic – Bonners Lane – 8th August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Widen the footway on the northern side of Bonners Lane to reduce the width
of the all-traffic lane to below 3.0m to ensure one traffic lane forms.
Page 55
August 2012
Summary: Lack of cycle detection at the traffic signals will lead to
inappropriate behaviour by cyclists and could result in collisions with traffic on
Oxford Street.
As can be seen on Photograph 23 below, the existing detection loops on
Bonners Lane do not extend into the cycle lane. As such, the traffic signal will
not recognise a demand from any cyclist in the cycle lane. Due to delays
caused by the bus gate, this will lead to cycle frustration and is likely to result
in cyclists ignoring a red light and colliding with traffic on Oxford Street.
Photograph 23 – Traffic Signal Loops – Bonners Lane – 8th August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Ensure the traffic signal loops extend into the cycle lane and that it detects all
cyclists.
Page 56
August 2012
Summary: Build-out could result in loss of control accidents.
Photograph 24 below shows an existing build-out outside The Polar Bear. As
can be seen, there tyre marks on the build-out indicating collisions are already
taking place. Reducing the number of all-traffic lanes at this location from
three to two will increase the number of vehicles using lane 3. This increased
exposure will increase the risk of collision with the build-out which could result
in loss of control accidents. This will also increase the risk of errant vehicles
colliding with pedestrians and cyclists waiting at the crossing.
Photograph 24 – Tyre Marks on Build-Out – Oxford Street outside The Polar Bear – 8th August 2012
RECOMMENDATION
Provide a long taper to the build-out to mitigate the risk of collision.
Page 57
August 2012
Location: Oxford Street outside the Jain Centre.
Summary: Proposed removal of the existing pelican crossing will increase the
number of pedestrians at already busy adjacent crossings and could result in
pedestrians still crossing at the existing pelican location.
It is proposed to remove the existing pelican crossing on Oxford Street outside
the Jain Centre. The existing pedestrian crossings at Magazine Square and
Bonners Lane are used by large numbers of pedestrians, especially students
given the proximity of De Montfort University, who frequently spill out into the
carriageway as there is inadequate stacking space at the crossings. Removal
of the crossing outside the Jain Centre will lead to an increase in usage of
these two crossings. As discussed in paragraph 12.3, there is already a
pedestrian accident problem at the Bonners Lane crossing.
RECOMMENDATION
Do not remove the existing pelican crossing.
Page 58

A426 AYLESTONE ROAD / LUTTERWORTH ROAD / LEICESTER

Transcription

Similar documents

ROCHI 2007 – Ovidius University Constanta Legend

Bus restoration

Innovations in London`s transport: Big Data for a better customer

350m - SDCC Development Plan

Welcome to the Fitness Trails

Wed 17th August 2016

Heavy Duty Electric Buses

The Swift Flash

January Newsletter 2016

Our Mission December 2014 Newsletter

File

2015 Guide - Paving the Way