Safety Campaign
A9 Tore Non-Motorised User Review on behalf of Transport Scotland
FINAL REPORT Abridged for Website
TMS Project No: 1562
Date: September 2013, Revised January 2014
Vanguard Centre, University of Warwick Science Park,
Sir William Lyons Road, Coventry CV4 7EZ
Tel: +44 (0)24 7669 0900
Fax: +44 (0)24 7669 0274
Email: info@tmsconsultancy.co.uk
Web: www.tmsconsultancy.co.uk
Contents
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................
BACKGROUND AND SITE DESCRIPTION
METHODOLOGY
SITE INVENTORY OF EXISTING FACILITIES FOR NMUS
DATA REVIEW
SITE VISIT FINDINGS
ROUTE ASSESSMENTS
RECOMMENDATIONS –SHORT AND MEDIUM TERM
DISCUSSION OF LONGER TERM ISSUES
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
APPENDIX A: Table of short and medium term recommendations
A9 TORE NON-MOTORISED USER REVIEW
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 This report provides a review of the facilities for Non-Motorised Road Users (NMUs) and the conditions they experience whilst travelling in and around the village of Tore, Highland Region, Scotland. The Study Brief is to establish the NMU needs of the local community, and to propose recommendations for improving conditions for NMUs where necessary. TMS Consultancy has been commissioned to undertake this study on behalf of Transport Scotland.
1.2 The brief for the study supplied by BEAR (on behalf of Transport Scotland) requires the review to encompass safety, comfort, convenience, continuity and connectivity of routes, and coherence with local networks. The users to be examined are:
Pedestrians, children, cyclists, people with disabilities.
1.3 TMS Consultancy was established in 1990 to provide specialist consultancy, research and training services in traffic management and road safety Engineering. TMS currently provides these services to a wide client base in both the public and private sectors in the UK and internationally. TMS Consultancy has an internationally recognised reputation in this field of work and runs the industry standard RoSPA Road Safety Engineering (AIP) and the Advanced Road Safety Engineering training courses.
1.4 This study has been carried out by the following team members, who are both experienced in the field of traffic management and road safety. They have both carried out numerous non-motorised user audits and reviews, road safety audits and cycle audits during their careers.
Stephen Proctor – MSc, MCIHT, MCILT, FSoRSA
Director, TMS Consultancy
Harminder Aulak - BSc (Hons), IEng, FIHE, RegRSA (IHE)
Principal Engineer, TMS Consultancy
1.5 A subjective assessment of safety risks, together with an assessment of the extent to which comfort, convenience, continuity, connectivity and coherence of routes for NMUs has been compromised, has been undertaken as part of this study.
1.6 Options for improvement to mitigate risk and improve conditions for NMUs are suggested as part of this report.
1.7 This report has been prepared by TMS Consultancy independently from the client. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of Transport Scotland.
2 BACKGROUND AND SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Tore village is located approximately six miles north of the city of Inverness. It is spread over a wide area and some major routes pass through or close to the built-up areas of the village. These routes are the A9 Perth to Thurso Trunk Road, the A835 Trunk Road and the A832 Principal Road. These roads join near the village, forming a large a-grade junction, which is known as Tore Roundabout.
2.2 A plan of the village is shown in Figure 1.
Tore Primary School , Petrol Station and Service Area, Tore Community Hall
Residential Areas
2.3 As can be seen from Figure 1, the different areas of the village are separated by the major routes, with the dominant routes being the A9 and A835 Trunk Roads. This results in non-motorised road users having to cross the various roads to reach the different facilities, raising concerns regarding road safety, comfort, convenience, continuity, connectivity, coherence and whilst travelling in and around the village.
2.4 The speed limits within the study area are as follows:
A9 NB approach to Tore Roundabout: default 70mph
A9 north of Tore Roundabout: default 60mph
A835 west of Tore Roundabout: default 60mph
A832 southwest of Tore Roundabout: default 60mph
A832 in Tore village: posted 40mph
village roads to north around school and community hall: posted 20mph
village road to south on east side (between A832 and A9 south side crossing):
default 30mph with street lighting, or 40mph from A832 - (no terminal signs)
village road to south on west side (between A9 south side crossing and A832):
default 30mph with street lighting or 60mph from A832 – (no terminal signs).
2.5 Street lighting is provided to varying levels within the study area:
the south side uncontrolled crossing is unlit
the roundabout is lit with white light to include the north side crossing
the A832 east side into Tore village is lit, the minor roads on the south side are lit with lower level lighting the 20mph area on northwest side is unlit except at the Community Hall and school (individual lights).
2.6 The minutes of the Killearnan Community Council meeting raise various concerns regarding perceived dangers faced by NMUs. The major concerns relate to the dangers of crossing the A9 Trunk Road, which creates severance between different parts of the village. There are also concerns regarding the lack of footways along the A832 (east) between the Tore roundabout and the filling station/shop/cafe. Some concerns have also been expressed about dangers at the A835/ Tore Primary School junction, particularly when turning right into the side road (it should be noted that this is a vehicular issue rather than a NMU issue).
2.7 The area for the NMU Review is the boundaries of the A9 Trunk road including the Glackmore junction to the south, the A835 Trunk Road and the A832 Local Authority Roads.
2.8 TMS is aware of an issue regarding the northbound bus stop to the south of Tore Roundabout. Apparently the northbound buses do not stop at the bus stop just south of the roundabout due to a concern that it is difficult to get into the outside lane to proceed northbound on the A9. The TMS NMU review team did not notice this issue during their site observations and have therefore not commented further.
3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 The following information was provided by BEAR Scotland (on behalf of Transport Scotland), and was studied as part of the review:
Non-Motorised Road User Review Brief provided by BEAR Scotland (on behalf of Transport Scotland), July 2013; Injury accident data provided within the brief (1st January 2006 to 31st December 2012);
Damage only accident data provided within the brief (1st January 2006 to 31st December 2012);
Record of issues raised by Killearnan Community Council at their meeting on 20th June 2013.
Subsequent information regarding speed limit reviews on the A9 and A835 was supplied by Transport Scotland, traffic flows were obtained from Transport Scotland and Highland Council, and development proposals were provided by Highland Council.
3.2 The site was visited by the Review Team on Wednesday 28th and Thursday 29th August 2013, during the following time periods:
Wednesday 28th August 13:00hrs to 19:00hrs, and 22:00hrs to 23:00hrs
Thursday 29th August: 08:00 to 10:00hrs.
The weather conditions during the site visits were fine and dry. Traffic conditions varied throughout the day, though no extensive vehicle queueing or heavy congestion were observed along the roads and at the Tore roundabout.
3.3 The purpose of the site visit was to gain an understanding of the area, carry out short pedestrian, cycle and vehicle speed and flow surveys, establish NMU desire lines, observe any conflicts between road users, and obtain a site inventory of existing NMU facilities (which included some site measurements). Though no formal consultations were carried out with road users, any comments received by NMUs were noted and taken into account as part of the study.
3.4 Information provided within the brief and the data gathered from the site visit was studied by the Review Team. This formed the basis of assessing the suitability of existing NMU facilities and suggestions for improvement where necessary.
4 SITE INVENTORY OF EXISTING FACILITIES FOR NMUs
4.1 During the site visit, a site inventory was carried out to plot all existing NMU facilities.
These are shown on Figure 2:
Shared use footway/cycleway
Footway only
On-carriageway pedestrian and cycle route
On-carriageway cycle route
Bus-stops
4.2 There are a variety of facilities for NMUs around the village. At the A9 Tore Roundabout, there is a shared use footway/cycleway around the perimeter of the roundabout. There is also a shared use facility along the northern side of the A835 near the Tore Primary School/ Community Hall junction. There are some short sections of footway near Tore Primary School and along the southern side of the A832 (east).
4.3 The other NMU facilities are on-carriageway pedestrian and cycle routes, consisting of routes using service roads and sections of the A832. Some of these constitute signed cycle routes, with the major one being the long distance Sustrans NCN1,which uses the facilities and roads to the north of the A835 and the A832 (east). A regional cycle route is also signed via the service roads linking the two sections of the A832.
4.4 All crossing points are uncontrolled, with the dominant ones being the staggered crossing on the A9 (south) between two bus-stops and the northern A9 crossing at the Tore roundabout.
4.5 The primary school admits pupils between the ages of 5 and 12, after which many of them travel (by bus) to Fortrose Academy to the east of Tore. The primary school attracts pupils from a wider area than Tore village itself, and two minibuses operate a drop off/ pick up service at the school at 08.50 and 15.30hrs. One of these brings pupils the short distance from the east side of the village. The Review Team was told by the minibus driver that no children walk to the school, they either travel by minibus or taxi, or are taken and picked up by parents who use the drop off area at the car park by the Community Hall. The fact that no children walk to school and are all taken there by a variety of motorised transport methods demonstrates very clearly the way in which the A9 severs the local community. The Review Team did, however, observe secondary school pupils crossing the A9 on the south side (dual carriageway) staggered crossing at around 4pm. A web search shows this area is likely to be dark (sunset) at 4pm from mid November to mid January.
5 DATA REVIEW
5.1 The injury collision data shows that there have been no collisions involving NMUs over the data range (7 years, 2006 to 2012). In terms of the damage only data, there has only been one NMU incident over the same data range. This occurred in 2006 and involved a minor collision between a car and pedal cycle on the circulatory carriageway of the Tore roundabout.
5.2 The data indicates that the site has a good collision record for NMUs.
5.3 The collision data does not account for any perceived risks by NMUs and any suppressed demand that may result from such perceptions of risk.
5.4 Figures available show the following annual average daily traffic (AADT) flows:
Transport Scotland traffic count web site:
A9 Artafallie south of Tore 2-way AADT: 22,721
A9 north of Tore 2-way AADT: 10,320
A835 Tore to Leanig 2-way AADT: 9,935
Highland Council
A832 west of Tore 2-way AADT: 3,100
A832 east of Tore 2-way AADT:4,200
5.5 Various traffic, pedestrian and cycle surveys were carried out during the site visit. These were manual counts to allow the Review Team to gain a “snap shot” of the areas surveyed during various times of the day. However, as they did not cover the whole day or week, they should not be treated as formal surveys. The results are shown in Table 1.
Vehicle, Pedestrian and Cycle Volume and Speed Counts
Location Time Period Survey Results
A9, south of Tore Rbt, 08:15hrs to 08:30hrs Car: 290
southbound carriageway (volume) HGV: 20
at crossing point Bus: 2
Motorcycle: 2
Pedestrians crossing: 1
Pedal cyclists crossing: 0
14:30hrs to 14:45hrs Car: 147
(volume) HGV: 14
Bus: 2
Motorcycle: 3
Pedestrians crossing: 0
Pedal cyclists crossing: 0
17:30hrs to 17:45hrs Car: 304
(volume) HGV: 17
Bus: 2
Motorcycle: 16
Pedestrians crossing: 1
Pedal cyclists crossing: 0
14:15hrs to 14:30hrs 56mph (85%ile)
(speed) 50mph (50%ile)
17:30hrs to 17:45hrs 48mph (85%ile)
(speed) 41mph (50%ile)
A9, south of Tore Rbt, 16:00hrs to 16:15hrs Car: 251
northbound carriageway at (volume) HGV: 10
crossing point Bus: 1
Motorcycle: 3
Pedestrians crossing: 8
Pedal cyclists crossing: 1
17:00hrs to 17:15hrs Car: 416
(volume) HGV: 13
Bus: 3
Motorcycle: 5
Pedestrians crossing: 0
Pedal cyclists crossing: 0
14:15hrs to 14:30hrs 42mph (85%ile)
(speed) 33mph (50%ile)
17:00hrs to 17:15hrs 43mph (85%ile)
(speed) 37mph (50%ile)
A9, north of Tore Rbt, 08:45hrs to 09:00hrs Car: 206
at crossing point (volume; 2-way flow) HGV: 30
Bus: 3
Motorcycle: 2
Pedestrians crossing: 0
Pedal cyclists crossing: 0
18:00hrs to 18:15hrs Car: 313
(volume; 2-way flow) HGV: 18
Bus: 4
Motorcycle: 9
Pedestrians crossing: 0
Pedal cyclists crossing: 4
18:00hrs to 18:15hrs 28mph (85%ile)
(speed) 23mph (50%ile)
A835, at priority junction 09:15hrs to 09:30hrs Car: 181
for Tore Primary School (volume) HGV: 8
and Community Hall Bus: 3
Motorcycle: 0
Pedestrians crossing: 1
Pedal cyclists crossing: 1
09:30hrs to 09:45hrs 56mph (85%ile)
(westbound speed) 50mph (50%ile)
09:30hrs to 09:45hrs 55mph (85%ile)
(eastbound speed) 51mph (85%ile)
Notes: 1) Weather conditions during the surveys were fine and dry
2) For the speed counts, only cars were measured in free flow conditions
3) HGVs were vehicles over 7.5 tonnes in weight
4) Motorcycles included all powered two wheelers, including mopeds
5.6 The results of the TMS “snap shot” surveys show that the A9 dual-carriageway (south of the Tore roundabout) is a busy section of road, particularly during peak periods when flows are almost doubled when compared to off-peak periods. However, the variation in HGV flows was less between peak and off-peak periods. Buses and motorcyclists typically only formed a small proportion of overall traffic flow.
5.7 In the vicinity of the southern crossing point across the A9 dual carriageway, southbound vehicles speeds were quite high, with 85th percentile speeds of 56mph during off-peak periods and 48mph during peak periods. Northbound vehicle speeds past the crossing point were lower with 85th percentile speeds of 43mph, with little variation between peak and off-peak periods. The southbound speeds were higher as vehicles accelerated away from the roundabout onto the dual carriageway, whereas northbound drivers were starting to slow down for the roundabout.
5.8 The TMS surveys show that traffic flows were lower along the A9 single carriageway north of the Tore roundabout. This is confirmed by the formal Transport Scotland data, where flows north of Tore are 45% of those compared to the dual carriageway section. TMS measured traffic speeds lower in the vicinity of the northern crossing point (85th percentile speed of 28mph) as it was located closer to the roundabout, which acts as a speed control measure.
5.9 The TMS surveys show that the A835 trunk road was less busy than the A9 trunk road, and turning movements at the Tore Primary School junction were generally low. Thesesnap shot traffic counts were again corroborated by the Transport Scotland data, which showed A835 flows at 96% of the A9 north of Tore, and 44% of the A9 south of Tore. Speeds observed in the vicinity of the Tore Primary School junction were in excess of 50mph (85th percentile speed of 56mph), as the junction is on a link section of road away from the Tore roundabout.
5.10 In terms of pedestrian and cycle movements, flows were low throughout the day, according to the TMS data. A small number of pedestrians and cyclists crossed the A9 (dual and single carriageway sections), and numbers were also low at the A835/Tore Primary School junction. The only noticeable pedestrian flow across the A9 dual carriageway was when some school children alighted from a school bus and crossed the road between 16:00 and 16:15hrs. Pedal cycle numbers tended to be higher crossing the A9 north of the Tore roundabout rather than the south, probably because the northern crossing point is on the long distance Sustrans NCN 1 Route.
5.11 In summary, the A9 is a busy trunk road, particularly the dual carriageway section during peak periods. Southbound speeds along the dual carriageway section past the crossing point were observed in excess of 50mph, as vehicles accelerated away from the Tore roundabout. At the single carriageway section, speeds were controlled by the Tore roundabout itself. The A835 trunk road is less busy than the A9 trunk road and turning movements were low at the Tore Primary School junction, though speeds were observed in excess of 50mph as it is on a link section of road. Pedestrian and cycle movements were generally low throughout, though it was noted that more pedestrians
crossed the A9 south of the Tore Roundabout, whereas cycle numbers were higher at the A9 north crossing point.
6 SITE VISIT FINDINGS
6.1 The extent of the non-motorised road user review is shown in Figure 3.
A832 West of Tore Rbt
A9 South of Tore Rbt,
Crossing point to Glackmore junction
6.2 Each of the pedestrian and cycle routes shown on the Site Inventory Plan (Figure 1) were observed and walked at various times of the day, during both daylight and night- time hours. The findings from these observations are incorporated in the following sections of the report.
6.3 Where appropriate, a comment has been added to describe whether, in the view of the Review Team, the issue identified is primarily one of Safety, Comfort, Convenience, Continuity, Connectivity, or Coherence. These factors are described in general terms below:
Safety: a situation in which non-motorised users are involved in recorded injury
collisions OR the threat of motor traffic puts non-motorised users at considerable risk
when in conflict with motor traffic OR non-motorised users are at a risk to their
personal security
Comfort: a situation in which non-motorised users would not be comfortable due to
(for example) the width/ nature of the travel surface or overhanging branches
Convenience: a situation in which non-motorised users may find the route
inconvenient in relation to their origins and destinations
Continuity: a situation in which there is a break in the route, such that non-motorised
users cannot continue their journey without proceeding into live traffic
Connectivity: a situation in which the route does not connect with appropriate
adjacent routes
Coherence: a situation in which it is difficult for non-motorised road users to
understand the route, it does not form part of a coherent strategic plan for the area
6.4 A832 East Of Tore Roundabout
6.4.1 The major built-up area of the village is the A832 through Tore. This has a 40mph speed limit and is lit by a system of street lighting. The majority of the area is residential, though there is a large petrol station/shop/cafe on the northern side of the road at the eastern extents of the village. The road has no footways, except for a small section on the southern side of the road and a section of shared use footway/cycleway from the Tore roundabout. The A832 also forms part of the Sustrans Cycle Route
NCN1 (Dingwall to Inverness) and a regional cycle route (Muir of Ord to Tore).
Entry to Tore Village from roundabout
6.4.2 Pedestrian Issues
6.4.2.1 The lack of footways along the A832 results in pedestrians having to walk in the carriageway, particularly as the verges are narrow and uneven to walk upon. This could be intimidating for pedestrians, especially for the elderly, disabled or young children. At certain times, the presence of heavy goods vehicles, narrow road width and busy nature of the road does make walking along this road potentially hazardous. The speed limit of 40mph is also considered high for a road where NMUs are expected to travel in the carriageway with no segregation from live traffic.
Issues of Safety, Comfort, Convenience, Continuity, Connectivity
Lack of footways along A832
6.4.2.2 The most dominant trip attractor in the area would be the petrol station/shop/cafe, but there are no direct footways or crossing connections to this facility. There is also no footway route to the shared use footway/cycleway at the Tore roundabout, which limits connectivity for pedestrians travelling from the village to Tore Primary School and the Community Hall. However, pedestrian flows were observed to be very low along the A832 (just two pedestrians were observed during the study period) and there have been no injury or damage only collisions involving NMUs. It is not known whether the low pedestrian movement is typical for the area or whether there is suppressed demand due to the lack of facilities.
Issues of Safety, Comfort, Convenience, Continuity, Connectivity
No footway connection to petrol station/shop/cafe
6.4.2.3 In terms of site specifics, overgrown vegetation limits the width of the short section of footway provided on the southern side of the road, which reduces comfort levels for pedestrians. Overgrown vegetation also restricts intervisibility where this footway meets the road to Bogallan, which could be hazardous if pedestrians step out into the path of vehicles.
Issues of Safety, Comfort
Overgrown vegetation restricts footway width and limits intervisibility
6.4.3 Pedal Cycle Issues
6.4.3.1 Cycle routes are signed on-carriageway along the A832, (although there is no specific provision within the carriageway). The route provides continuity for cyclists travelling through Tore, though some of the signing can be confusing due to missing, hidden or misaligned signs. For example, there is no sign for NCN1 at the right turn from the A832 to the road to Bogallan and Inverness. Other signs at this junction are hidden behind overgrown vegetation.
Issues of Convenience, Connectivity
Example of cycle route sign masking and inconsistency at A832/North Kessock junction
6.4.3.2 The A832 is considered reasonable to cycle along, though it could be intimidate for less confident and novice cyclists, such as young children, particularly where they need to cross the carriageway to turn at junctions or to access to footway/cycleway at the Tore roundabout. Westbound cyclists seeking to use the north side crossing and follow the NCN1 have no nearside sign to assist them to turn right onto the shared use facility, and so could end up on the roundabout circulatory carriageway, in conflict with live traffic.
Issues of Safety, Connectivity, and Coherence
Right turn to access Tore roundabout cycleway could be difficult for novice cyclists
Absence of nearside sign indicating NCN1 to right, on approach to roundabout
6.5 A9 South Of Tore Roundabout (Crossing Point And Service Roads)
6.5.1 The A9 (south) dual carriageway separates the residential area on the south-western side of the trunk road from the major part of the village east of the Tore roundabout. There are service roads leading up to the A9 on both sides, with a staggered uncontrolled crossing across the A9 itself. The stagger is “wrong-way”, in that NMUs travel through the central reserve to the crossing location with their backs to traffic, which could put them at greater risk of stepping into the path of live traffic. There are northbound and southbound bus-stops along the A9 in the vicinity of the crossing point. The trunk road is derestricted with a 70mph speed limit.
Issues of Safety, Comfort
6.5.2 The length of the stagger at the crossing is 17m. Each carriageway has two traffic lanes and each carriageway is 8m wide. There is a 1m wide path through the central reserve, which is 4.4m wide. The bus stop on the east side is 45m south of the crossing point, and the bus stop on the west side is 58m north of the crossing point. At both east and west kerbside crossings, pedestrian guard rail guides pedestrians to the dropped kerbs, where tactile paving appropriate for an uncontrolled crossing has been installed.
A9 dual carriageway, near uncontrolled crossing point
6.5.3 Pedestrian Issues
6.5.3.1The route for pedestrians from one side of the village to the other is continuous, with the service roads being reasonable to walk along as they are effectively cul-de-sacs. However, the crossing of the A9 dual carriageway presents a major obstacle for pedestrians.
Service roads are quiet cul-de-sacs
6.5.3.2 The severance created by the trunk road results in pedestrians having to cross the road to reach the different parts of the village or the bus-stops. The crossing movement would be considered to be very hazardous, due to the high vehicle speeds (especially southbound leaving the roundabout) and traffic volumes during peak periods. As an example of this, for those pedestrians crossing the 8m wide southbound carriageway, it takes 5 seconds for a vehicle to leaving the circulatory carriageway to arrive at the crossing. 85%ile speeds at this point were observed by the Review Team to be between 48 and 56mph.
Issues of Safety, Comfort
6.5.3.3 It can be difficult to judge vehicles speeds and gaps in traffic on high speed roads.
The elderly, disabled or children pedestrians could face particular difficulties under such circumstances (school children do cross here to catch school buses). If NMUs do get struck by vehicles at the crossing point, the consequences are likely to be serious or fatal injuries.
School children crossing dual carriageway
6.5.3.4 It was noted during the site visit that the presence of the crossing is not obvious to drivers. In the northbound direction, drivers are likely to be concentrating on the roundabout and may not appreciate the presence of pedestrians in the carriageway. The information presented to drivers in advance of the crossing location includes direction signs, countdown makers, and other signs.
In the southbound direction, drivers would be accelerating away from the roundabout and may not anticipate the need to slow down if pedestrians are crossing ahead. Again the information presented in advance includes clearway for 117 miles signs. The signs warning of the presence of pedestrians are not specific to a particular type of crossing facility.
Issues of Safety
Position of crossing not obvious, despite warning signs
6.5.3.5 The crossing is beyond the extent of the street lighting at the Tore roundabout and so is in darkness at night. This would exacerbate the hazards as drivers may be unable to see pedestrians in the carriageway. Pedestrians could also find it more difficult to judge the speed of approaching vehicles at night and there could be personal security issues in the absence of lighting.
Issues of Safety, Comfort
A9 southbound approach to crossing from circulatory carriageway at night
6.5.3.6 In terms of site specifics, there are some local hazards which are considered to require attention. On the southbound carriageway, there are some road studs within the crossing area. These could be a trip hazard for pedestrians (especially at night).
Similarly, the anchorage points for the wire rope and steel safety barrier in the central reservation could be a trip hazard for pedestrians at night. In addition, there is inconsistency with the “Look Left/Look Right” signs and road markings at the crossing point, with some of the signs being quite small and inconspicuous. The crossing on the northbound carriageway does not have “look left/ look right” markings, and the look left sign in the central reserve for NMUs crossing from east to west is very small.
Issues of Safety, Comfort
Roads studs within crossing point
Wire rope barrier trip hazard
Steel barrier anchorage hazard
Small, inconspicuous “Look Left” sign
6.5.3.7 Pedestrian flows were generally observed to be low at the crossing point and the service roads. In addition, there have been no injury or damage only collisions involving NMUs. It is not known whether the low pedestrian movements are typical for the area and whether there is suppressed demand due to the lack of facilities.
6.5.4 Pedal Cycle Issues
6.5.4.1 Cyclists follow the same route as pedestrians along this section of the village, with the regional Muir of Ord to North Kessock cycle route signed through this area (which eliminates the need for cyclists to negotiate the Tore roundabout). As for pedestrians, the service roads are reasonable to cycle along as the surfaces are good and the roads are lit.
6.5.4.2 However, the crossing of the A9 dual carriageway presents a similar challenge for cyclists as it does for pedestrians. Cyclists are likely to feel vulnerable and intimidated whilst crossing the road, especially if they are inexperienced or novice cyclists.
Issues of Safety, Comfort
6.5.4.3 There are some particular issues for cyclists which could make the route difficult to negotiate. The gaps through the fences linking to the service roads are narrow at 1- 1.3m, with the signs requiring cyclists to dismount. It is also implied that cyclists should walk whilst crossing the A9 dual carriageway. This makes the journey for cyclists inconvenient and less seamless. In addition, the central reservation is narrow, with a 1m path set within a 4.4m central reserve that also accommodates safety fences. These constraints require cyclists to give-way to oncoming cyclists and pedestrians.
Narrow linkage to service roads
Central reservation narrow for cyclists
6.6 A9 South Of Tore Roundabout (Crossing Point To Glackmore Junction)
6.6.1 General NMU Issues
6.6.1.1 The A9 south of the crossing point is not designed for NMUs as it is rural in nature carrying long distance traffic. There is little evidence of NMU use, though some cyclists were observed using it in the northbound direction. These were observed to be long distance leisure cyclists and it is not known whether they decided to purposely use this route instead of the signed alternative Sustrans NCN1 route, which avoids the A9 trunk road.
Issues of Safety, Comfort
Northbound cyclist using A9 (left carriageway and entered footway near Tore roundabout)
6.6.1.2 The A9 dual carriageway is not considered to be a suitable route for NMUs, especially as a signed alternative cycle route exists. A small number of pedestrians, originating in Glackmore, could possibly walk on the verge towards Tore, but this was not observed during site visits by the Review Team.
A9 dual carriageway unsuitable for NMU use
Scheme: A9 Tore Non Motorised User Review –Final
6.7 A9 North/A835/A832 Tore Roundabout
6.7.1 The Tore Roundabout has a continuous shared use footway/cycleway around the majority of its perimeter, except for a small section on the eastern side. The crossing points across all arms are uncontrolled. The roundabout is lit and the speed limit is derestricted (60mph), though speeds are constrained by the geometry of the roundabout itself (the entry deflection does appear to control entry speeds).
Shared use footway/cycleway around Tore roundabout
6.7.2 Pedestrian Issues
6.7.2.1 The shared use footway/cycleway does provide a near continuous route for pedestrians around the roundabout. The surface is good and the paths are suitably illuminated at night.
6.7.2.2 The most difficult arm to cross is the A9 north as this is the busiest route. This uncontrolled crossing has a splitter between 3-4m wide, with an east side carriageway width of 9m, and a west side width of 7m. There is some pedestrian guard rail on the west side to guide pedestrians to the dropped kerbs, which have tactile paving appropriate for an uncontrolled crossing. Traffic tends to arrive at the crossing in platoons, which can result in a lengthy wait for pedestrians whilst the traffic queue dissipates. However, this crossing is perceived to be less hazardous than the A9 (south) dual carriageway crossing as it is located closer to the roundabout itself where speeds are lower. Nevertheless, if NMUs do get struck by vehicles at the crossing point, the consequences could involve serious injuries, as some speeds were observed in excess of 30mph.
Issues of Safety, Comfort, Convenience
Crossing of the A9 north can be difficult when traffic arrives in platoons
6.7.2.3 The A9 north crossing forms an important link for pedestrians travelling between the built-area on the eastern side of the roundabout and the residential area, primary school and Community Hall facilities to the west of the roundabout. The difficulty of crossing here (particularly at peak times) reduces connectively between the eastern and western parts of the village, but as discussed earlier, it is considered that the problems here are not as acute as at the A9 south dual carriageway crossing. Nevertheless, discussions with school transport drivers have indicated that primary school children are not encouraged to cross the A9 and instead are bussed to and from the school, which highlights the severance created by the A9 trunk road (see also Section 4.5).
Issues of Connectivity
6.7.2.4 The other arms of the roundabout (A835 and A832) are easier to cross as traffic flows tend to be lower on these arms, though the A835 can be busy at peak times when platoons of traffic arrive at the same time.
A835 trunk road can be busy at times
6.7.2.5 There are some site specific issues which need attention to improve conditions for NMUs. At some crossing points, there is an accumulation of silt and gravel at the dropped kerbs, which could be a slip hazard. Some of the upstands at the dropped kerbs are high, which could be problematic for wheelchair users and other mobility impaired pedestrians. In addition, there is an intervisibility issue at the A9 north crossing as vegetation obscures visibility for NMUs crossing the road and southbound vehicles approaching the roundabout.
Issues of Safety, Comfort
Silt/gravel slip hazard for NMUs at crossing points
Intervisibility restricted at A9 north crossing
6.7.3 Pedal Cycle Issues
6.7.3.1 The shared use facility provides a continuous route for cyclists. The A9 north crossing also provides an important route for cyclists following the Sustrans NCN1 route.
6.7.3.2 Cyclists face similar challenges to pedestrians when negotiating the roundabout but there are some areas which affect the comfort of cyclists using the route. The gap in the boundary fence which connects the roundabout path to Torwood Way is narrow. The left turn from the roundabout path to the gap is also awkward, requiring cyclists to slow down significantly or possibly dismount to accomplish the turn.
Issues of Comfort, Convenience
Narrow gap for connection to Torwood Way
6.7.3.3 On the southern side of the roundabout (between the A9 dual carriageway and A832 (west), the shared use path around the perimeter ends suddenly, with no indication of the route that cyclists should take beyond this point. Cyclists would either need to turn back or continue along the narrow footway past the A9 northbound bus-stop. (Alternatively they could take the service road through the small residential housing area to the south of Tore.)
Issues of Connectivity, Convenience
Roundabout cycle route ends abruptly where it meets the A9 dual carriageway
6.7.3.4 There is no comprehensive cycle route signposting in the area.
6.8 A9 North Of Tore Roundabout (Up To Killen Road Junction)
6.8.1 General NMU Issues
6.8.1.1 The A9 north is a single carriageway road and there are no NMU facilities along the road from the Tore Roundabout to the Killen Road junction. A few cyclists on long distance journeys (commuter and leisure trips) were observed using this section of road. Discussions with some of these cyclists revealed that the route was used as no convenient alternative route existed for cyclists, except for a lengthy detour via Dingwall following the Sustrans NCN1 route. Cyclists expressed the view that cycling along the A9 was unpleasant and hazardous (due to traffic volumes and speed), but they used the route through necessity rather than choice.
Issues of Safety, Comfort
Cyclists travelling along A9 north
6.8.1.2 No pedestrians were observed walking along the A9 north as there are no trip generators /attractors sites in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, it is not considered that this section of road is an important route for pedestrians
6.9 A835 West Of Tore Roundabout (Up To Primary School Junction)
6.9.1 The A835 is a single carriageway trunk road. From the Tore Roundabout to the primary school junction, there is no requirement for NMUs to travel in the carriageway as an alternative parallel route exists along Torwood Way. From Tore Community Hall, a shared used footway/cycleway is provided alongside the A835, which forms part of the long distance Sustrans NCN1 cycle route.
A835 trunk road, with shared use footway/cycleway on northern side
6.9.2 Pedestrian Issues
6.9.2.1 Torwood Way service road is a cul-de-sac and thus has very low traffic volumes. The road also has a 20mph speed limit. Therefore, even though there is no footway along the road, it is suitable for pedestrians to travel along in relative comfort and safety. However, the road is unlit, and not overlooked by properties, and so there
could be personal security issues for pedestrians using sections of the road at night
near to overhanging trees. (It is noted that this situation is common in many rural
areas.)
Issues of Safety (security)
Torwood Way provides an alternative route for NMUs, avoiding the A835
6.9.2.2 There are some footways in the vicinity of Tore Primary School and the Community Hall, but the kerb upstands at some pedestrian crossing points are high, which could create difficulties for mobility impaired pedestrians, such as wheelchair users. Some overgrown vegetation also restricts footway width and limits intervisibility at crossing points. The footways form part of the school walking route from the car park at the Community Hall to the primary school entrance, but some of the markings and surface treatments are worn.
Issues of Comfort
High upstands at dropped kerbs near Tore Primary School
Overgrown vegetation restricts intervisibility at crossing point
6.9.3 Pedal Cycle Issues
6.9.3.1 Sustrans Route NCN1 travels along the A835, via Torwood Way service road and a shared use footway/cycleway along the northern side of the trunk road. The route is well signed and provides a continuous facility for cyclists parallel to the A835.
Sustrans route NCN1 from Torwood Way and along A835
6.9.3.2 The only area where cyclists (and pedestrians) could face difficulty is where the shared use path crosses the A835/Primary School junction. The junction has a very wide bellmouth and NMUs could be vulnerable crossing the wide junction. Intervisibility at the crossing point is also restricted by vegetation. In addition, the wearing course of the carriageway is worn and could be uncomfortable for NMUs.
Issues of Safety, Comfort
NMUs have to cross wide junction bellmouth
Intervisibility restricted at crossing point
6.10 A832 West Of Tore Roundabout
6.10.1 General NMU Issues
6.10.1.1 There are no specific NMU facilities along the A832 from the Tore roundabout to the service road junction. An alternative route exists for pedestrians and cyclists using the quiet service road to the south of the A832. Beyond the service road junction, the A832 is signed as regional cycle route to Muir of Ord, with cyclists travelling on-carriageway.
Cyclists signed via service road to avoid A832 towards Tore roundabout
6.10.1.2 There was no evidence of NMUs using the section of the A832 under review, as the alternative route via the service road is more convenient and attractive for pedestrians and cyclists. The service road is a cul-de-sac with low traffic flows and speeds. The road is also lit to a reasonable level and comfortable for use by NMUs at night.
Service road provides quiet alternative route avoiding A832 west
7 ROUTE ASSESSMENTS
7.1 An assessment has been made of the safety and “usability” of the two main NMU routes in Tore. The northern (NCN1) route between the A832 and the A835 via Tore Roundabout and Torwood Way has been assessed, and the southern route across the A9 dual carriageway has also been assessed. The observations and comments in Section 6 of this report form the basis for this assessment.
7.2 The assessment has been made in two ways. First, a risk assessment of safety issues has been carried out using the CIHT risk assessment matrix published in their Road Safety Audit Guidelines of 2008, and shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3
7.3 Second, an assessment of “usability” based on the extent to which comfort, convenience, continuity, connectivity and coherence of routes for NMUs has been compromised has been undertaken. In each case the route is considered as being good, average, or poor for each of the aspects assessed.
7.4 Northern route Assessment:
Risk Safety Assessment pedestrians: – severity: serious; frequency: less than
10 yrs; overall risk: MEDIUM (risk of serious injury if a pedestrian is struck by a large vehicle at 30mph or over. Frequency is considered to be less than 10 years as current exposure to risk is very low – very few pedestrians were observed crossing the road and no injuries took place in the last 7 years)
Risk Safety Assessment cyclists: – severity: serious; frequency: 5-10 yrs; overall risk: MEDIUM (risk of serious injury if a cyclist is struck by a large vehicle at 30mph or over. Frequency is considered to be 5 - 10 years as some cyclists were observed crossing the road, but no injuries took place in the last 7 years)
NMU Comfort: POOR
NMU Convenience: AVERAGE
NMU Continuity and Connectivity: POOR
NMU Coherence: AVERAGE
Overall NMU “usability”: POOR
7.5 Southern route Assessment:
Risk Safety Assessment cyclists: – severity: fatal; frequency: 5-10 yrs;
overall risk: HIGH (risk of fatal injury if a cyclist is struck by a vehicle at 50mph or over. Frequency is considered to be 5 - 10 years as current exposure to risk is low – a few cyclists were observed using the road but no injuries took place in the last 7 years)
Risk Safety Assessment pedestrians: – severity: fatal; frequency: 5-10 yrs; overall risk: HIGH (risk of fatal injury if a pedestrian is struck by a vehicle at 50mph or over.
Frequency is considered to be 5 - 10 years as current exposure to risk is low – some pedestrians, including children, were observed crossing the road but no injuries took place in the last 7 years)
NMU Comfort: POOR
NMU Convenience: AVERAGE
NMU Continuity and Connectivity: AVERAGE
NMU Coherence: AVERAGE
Overall NMU “usability”: POOR - AVERAGE
7.6 The southern route has a higher safety risk assessment due to the speed of traffic and the fact that school children appear to cross the road on a regular basis. From a “usability” point of view the northern route is considered slightly worse, mainly due to convenience and connectivity issues along NCN1 and the lack of footways along the A832 east through Tore village.
7.7 Comparatively few NMUs were observed by the Review Team crossing the A9 at either location. This may well be due to the threat posed by traffic, and the comparatively poor level of service provided for NMUs.
7.8 The overall level of service could be improved, both in terms of safety and usability, and recommendations for short, medium and long term improvement are addressed in the next two sections of this report.
8 RECOMMENDATIONS –SHORT AND MEDIUM TERM
The outline recommendations are set out below and categorised in terms of the northern NMU route, the southern NMU route, and other aspects of NMU use in Tore. The issues raised in section 6 are repeated in summary form in Sections 8.1 - 8.3 below.
8.1 Northern NMU route inc A832 east, A9 crossing, and NCN1
8.1.1 A832 east of Tore Roundabout
Issue 1: Lack of footways for pedestrians and route for cyclists
Short term:
undertake pedestrian and cycle usage survey on A832 between Tore Roundabout and Service Station, together with full speed survey
Medium Term:
depending on results of survey undertake design of improved footways and a specific cycle facility through the link, together with an appropriate NMU crossing of the A832 on a suitable desire line
consideration should be given to a 30mph speed limit on this section
Issue 2: Overgrown vegetation overhangs short footway sections on south side
of road
Short term:
cut back vegetation and maintain
Issue 3: Poor cycle signage for NCN1
Short term:
provide sign for NCN1 at right turn from A832 eastbound to North Kessock/ Inverness
cut back vegetation obscuring cycle signage
provide nearside sign on A832 for westbound cyclists turning right onto shared
use footway for NCN1
1 formal NMU count of movements
8.1.2 A9 north side of Tore roundabout inc NCN1 crossing location
Issue 1: Pedestrians crossing at the roundabout splitter
Short term:
undertake pedestrian/ cycle usage survey to ascertain current use
remove accumulations of silt and gravel at dropped kerbs and maintain
provide flush (6mm max) upstands at the dropped kerbs
cut back foliage within the central island of the roundabout to improve inter- visibility between circulating traffic and pedestrians looking left and stepping from the central reserve into the northbound carriageway
Issue 2: Comfort of cyclists accessing NCN1 on west side of crossing
Short term:
widen the gap in the boundary fence on the access to Torwood Way
improve the left turn radius into the gap from the south west side footway to enable cyclists to keep riding as they turn into Torwood Way from the south
8.1.3 NCN1 west of Tore roundabout inc Torwood Way and link to A835
Issue 1: Torwood Way personal security for pedestrians
Short term:
consider the provision of local lighting in Torwood Way
Issue 2: Cyclists using NCN1 at A835/ Primary School junction
Short term:
cut back vegetation at bellmouth to improve inter-visibility between NCN1 users and traffic and maintain
Medium term:
check swept paths of vehicles likely to use this junction to determine whether a splitter can be provided in the bellmouth. This would assist NMUs as they cross the junction on NCN1.( Alternatively corner radii could be adjusted to narrow the junction.)
8.1.4 Additional measures on the northern NCN1 route
Short term:
replace any faded signs/ markings for NCN1
Medium term:
provide greater route continuity and coherence by providing additional signs and markings appropriate to NMUs throughout the route. These should give greater confidence to users, in addition to demonstrating the route to motorists.
consideration should be given to providing a highlighted route from the North Kessock Road to the A835 shared use section west of Tore, by adopting a local route marking / surface colour/ symbol for cyclists and highlighting the crossing at the splitter in coloured surfacing
8.2 Southern NMU route inc A9 crossing and local service roads
Issue 1: Pedestrians using staggered crossing on A9
Short term:
improve conspicuity of the crossing location by reviewing positions of advance signing, for example placing the southbound clearway signs south of the crossing location
add sign plates to the existing “pedestrians in road” signs with a message more specific to the hazard and location
extend the lighting for the roundabout to include the crossing location, with appropriate lighting of similar standard to that on the roundabout
consider the use of “smart” signs whereby pedestrian presence is detected and a warning to drivers is shown
remove the road studs from the current (west side) carriageway that are located within the crossing area and replace them away from the crossing
add “look left/ look right” legends as appropriate on the west side, at the nearside and central reserve drop kerbs
increase the size of the “look left” sign in the central reserve for users crossing westbound from the central reserve
highlight the anchorage point for the wire rope safety fence so that it is conspicuous at night
continue to undertake pedestrian road safety education exercises targeted at pupils in Fortrose Academy currently crossing the road between bus stops,
aimed at highlighting how to cross the road as safely as possible
Issue 2: Comfort of cyclists using the southern crossing
Short term:
widen gaps in the fences linking the service roads to the footways adjacent to the A9 crossing (east and west sides)
8.3 Other aspects for NMUs in Tore
Issue 1: Cyclists using A9 main carriageway south and north of Tore
Short term:
ensure NCN1 is well signed at both the Inverness northbound and Dingwall southbound approaches to the Tore area
consideration should be given to the travel needs of long distance and commuter cyclists and adding major destinations to NCN1 signage to avoid confusion for those travelling such distances
Issue 2: Northbound cyclists leaving A9 south of Tore roundabout and remaining on footway
Short term:
provide a short section of shared use at footway north of the bus stop, to join the section around the radius into the A832. This will complete the shared use section on the west side of the roundabout
Footway north of the bus stop on A9 leading to shared
use section around radius onto A832
Issue 3: Issues for pedestrians in the vicinity of Tore Primary School/
Community Hall
Short term:
replace the worn “footprint” markings leading from the Community Hall to the Primary School. Ensure all dropped kerbs are flush (max 6mm upstand)
cut back vegetation to improve inter-visibility at the uncontrolled crossing point from the Community Hall and maintain
continue with current road safety education activity at Tore Primary School, and add to this if necessary
Issues 4: Right turn from A835 into primary school road
Medium term:
although this is not a NMU issue per se, it is possible that children being taken to school by car could be at risk from injury in shunt type collisions as the vehicle turns right. Whilst there are no recent collisions recorded at this location, a conflict study could be undertaken, with a view to determining the potential for shunt collisions occurring. Depending on the outcome of this study, further measures could be considered
