RSA 3 CarringtonLane IsherwoodRoad GDPR compliant 002.pdf

Road Safety Audit Stage 3
Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
CO00201439 / RSA 3/2022/006
29/09/2022

Document Control Sheet
Project Name:
Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Project Number:
CO00201439
Report Title:
Road Safety Audit Stage 3
Report Number:
RSA 3/2022/006

Issue
Status/Amendment  Prepared
Reviewed
Approved
First issue
Name:
Name:
Name:
…
…
…
Signature:
Signature:
Signature:

Date: 27/09/2022
Date: 27/09/2022
Date: 27/09/2022
Name:
Name:
Name:

Signature:
Signature:
Signature:

Date:
Date:
Date:
Name:
Name:
Name:

Signature:
Signature:
Signature:

Date:
Date:
Date:
Name:
Name:
Name:

Signature:
Signature:
Signature:

Date:
Date:
Date:

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3

link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 7 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 10 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 15 link to page 16 link to page 17 link to page 18 link to page 19 link to page 20 link to page 21 link to page 22 link to page 5 link to page 21 link to page 6 link to page 8 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 8 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 11 link to page 12 link to page 12 link to page 12

link to page 12 link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 15 link to page 15 link to page 16 link to page 16 link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 18 link to page 19

1. Introduction
1.1. Commission and Terms of Reference
1.1.1 This report results from a Stage 3 Road Safety Audit carried out on the Isherwood Road Junction Section
106 Works scheme at the request of … on behalf of the Overseeing Organisation, Trafford Council.
1.1.2 The Audit Team membership approved by … on 1/09/2022, who also issued / approved the brief, for this
road safety audit was:
Membership
Name
Details
Audit Team Leader
xxx
IEng, FIHE, RegRSA(IHE)
Audit Team Member
xxx
FIHE, BSc (Hons) Civil Engineering
Table 1: Audit Team Membership
1.1.3 Both members of the Audit Team hold a Road Safety Certificate of Competency meeting the requirements of
the European Directive 2008/96/EC and GG119 Rev.2.
1.1.4 It is confirmed that this is a Stage 3 Road Safety Audit and was undertaken in accordance with the
requirements of GG119 Rev.2. The audit comprised an examination of the completed works together with
the documents provided, and these are listed in Appendix A.
1.1.5 A site visit was completed by the audit team during daylight hours on Tuesday 13/09/2022 between 2:00pm
and 4:00pm. The weather was fine and the road surface was dry. Traffic conditions were free flowing. The
site visit during the hours of darkness took place on the same day between 8:15pm and 9:15pm. The
weather was fine and the road surface was dry.
1.1.6 Invites were issued to Greater Manchester Police and to the maintaining agent for the overseeing
organisation, Trafford Council. … representing the maintaining agent for Trafford Council attended, however,
the Police were unavailable on this occasion.
1.1.7 The terms of reference of the audit are described in GG119 Rev.2. The team has examined and reported
only on the road safety implications of the scheme as presented in the provided documents (Appendix A)
and has not examined or verified the compliance of the designs to any other criteria.
1.1.8 All comments contained in the report with regard to Traffic Signs will be in accordance with the Traffic Signs
Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD), 2016 or revisions thereof. Diagram numbers will be referred to
if necessary.
1.1.9 This is the Second known audit for the scheme. A previous Stage 1/2 Road Safety Audit was undertaken in
July 2020 by Amey and any relevant matters will be reported in Section 2.
1.1.10 The comments and suggestions for road safety improvements made in this report are aimed to address
matters that might have an adverse effect on road safety in the context of the chosen design. To clearly
explain a safety problem or a recommendation to resolve a problem, the Audit Team may, on occasion, refer
to a Design Standard. In addition, the Audit Team may provide an illustrative sketch to clarify a
recommendation particularly in the event of a complex recommendation. Such sketch illustrations do not
represent any design solution.
1.1.11 Any recommendations included within this report should not be regarded as being prescriptive design
solutions to the problems raised. They are intended only to indicate a proportionate and viable means of
eliminating or mitigating the identified problem, in accordance with GG 119 Rev.2, and in no way, imply that
a formal design process has been undertaken. There may be alternative methods of addressing a problem
which would be equally acceptable in achieving the desired elimination or mitigation and these should be
considered when responding to this report.
Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
3

link to page 6

1.2. Scheme Description
1.2.1 The scheme is a section 106 junction improvement on Manchester Road (which becomes Carrington Lane at
the junction of Isherwood Road) as part of future development and includes:
▪  An extension of the right turn lane to Isherwood Road
▪  New junction access to proposed development
▪  Widening of the carriageway on south side of Manchester Road
▪  New bus lay-by
▪  Relocation of gullies in line with new kerb/channels
▪  Relocation of existing lighting columns
▪  Associated signals work
▪  Signing and lining amendments to suit the new carriageway layout
1.2.2 Figure 1.2-1 indicates the extents of the scheme considered under this Stage 3 Road Safety Audit in
accordance with the Audit Brief.
Figure 1.2-1:  Extent of Road Safety Audit Stage 3

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
4

1.3. Audit Management
1.3.1 Upon issue of the Road Safety Audit report a Road Safety Audit Response Report in line with GG119 Rev.2
(Section 4 and Appendix F) shall be produced by the design organisation in collaboration with the
Overseeing Organisation. A copy of this response report should be issued to the Audit Team within one
month after their Road Safety Audit report’s submission.
1.3.2 In addition to the Road Safety Audit report, the Road Safety Audit team shall report to the Overseeing
Organisation any other issues relating to maintenance defects and those that are not covered by the RSA
brief.

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
5

2. Matters Raised at Previous Road Safety Audit Stage
2.1. Previous Audits
2.1.1 The previous Stage 1/2 Road Safety Audit which was undertaken in July 2020 by Amey, identified 7
problems.
2.1.2 A designers response was provided. After inspecting the constructed works, it was deemed five of the
problems were either addressed or deemed to be no longer an issue and two remain either partly or fully
unaddressed and are reiterated as follows:
2.2. Problem 1 – (as numbered and written in the Stage 1/2)
Location: Visibility of Ackers Lane junction from the signalled junction
Summary: Intervisibilty of Ackers Lane junction from the signalled junction
Details: The ahead / right turn lane on the northeast bound approach to the signalled junction is to be
extended back across the junction of Ackers lane. This requires carriageway widening which has been taken
from the south side of Manchester Road. This will set back the give way line of the Ackers Lane junction by
a few metres.
Ackers Lane junction would not be
seen from northeast approach
Boundary fence causing obstruction

Figure 2.2-1 :Intervisibilty is reduced by setback junction
Photo 2.2-1: Ackers Lane junction would not be seen from
northeast approach

Consequently, this will reduce the intervisibilty of the Ackers Lane junction to the approach from the
signalled junction. The rear boundary fence of the properties would appear to be the main feature causing
the obstruction (see Figure 2.2-1 and Photo 2.2-1). The remaining intervisibility is deemed inadequate for
the existing speed limit. It is possible drivers travelling at speed through the signalled junction from the
north east could approach Ackers Lane too fast, particularly towards the end of the green stage when
drivers tend to accelerate to avoid stopping at the signals which could potentially result in a side impact type
collisions.
Recommendation:
Adequate intervisibilty for the expected speeds should be provided by amending the design accordingly.
Designers Response:
The removal of the existing hedge as already included in the design will benefit the visibility from the
signalised junction to Ackers Lane. Change in alignment not possible due to existing position of highway
boundary between Ackers Lane and the signalised junction.
Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
6

Comment at this Stage 3 Road Safety Audit:
Even though the designer’s response states the alignment cannot be improved due to the highway
boundary, it could be seen during the site visit, that the existing hedge row due for removal had not been
done and is still obscuring the intervisibility between the bell mouth of Acker Lane junction and vehicles
approaching from the Isherwood Road signalled junction, as shown in Photos 2.2-2 and 2.2-3.

Photo 2.2-2: Intervisibility between Isherwood Rd and Ackers
Photo 2.2-3: Intervisibilty from Ackers Lane to Isherwood Road
Ln is obscured by hedge row
is obscured by hedge row
Therefore, as per the site clearance drawing, the foliage should be cut back as far as possible to increase
and achieve maximum intervisibility between the two junctions.

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
7

2.3. Problem 2 – (as numbered and written in the Stage 1/2)
Location: Southwest bound approach through the signalled junction and past Ackers Lane junction
Summary: Adverse deflection between signalled junction and Ackers Lane
Detail: The carriageway widening on the southeast side of the signalled junction will create a new
alignment for the southwest bound approach from the signalled junction as it nears the junction with Ackers
Lane.
Adverse horizontal deflection
Ackers Lane

Figure 2.3-1: Adverse deflection travelling southwest through the junctions
Such severe deflection could potentially cause a vehicle travelling at speed to lose control or potentially
encroach into the adjacent lane and have a head-on collision with a vehicle approaching in the opposing
direction.
Additionally it was observed, as existing there is no keep left bollard on the south west bound exit from the
signalled junction which is where the new alignment & deflection begins as shown below.

Figure 2.3-2: Adverse deflection travel ing southwest through the junctions

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
8

Recommendation:
The adverse change in alignment should be reduced if possible and highlighted to approaching drivers
together with installing a keep left bollard to help channelise drivers accordingly. For example contrast could
be added to the carriageway to help make its alignment more prominent.
Designer’s comments: Comment accepted. Change in alignment not possible due to existing position of
highway boundary between Ackers Lane and the signalised junction. Therefore, design change will be
inclusion of new ‘keep left’ bollard on the pedestrian island as mentioned in the above recommendation.
Furthermore, current elements within the design including the removal of the hedge and the dragons teeth
markings will contribute to reducing the effect of the adverse alignment.
Comment at this Stage 3 Road Safety Audit:
Even though the designer’s response states the alignment cannot be improved due to the highway
boundary, it could be seen during the site visit, that the existing hedge row had not been removed and is
still obscuring the intervisibilty between the bell mouth of Acker Lane junction and vehicles approaching from
the Isherwood Road signalled junction as shown below. Also, the proposed keep left bollard had not been
installed (see Photo 2.3-1).
Hedgerow not cut
Keep left bollard not installed
back

Photo 2.3-1: Hedgerow not cut back and bollard not installed
Therefore, the foliage should be cut back as far as possible to increase and achieve maximum intervisibility
between the two junctions and the keep left bollard should be installed.

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
9

3. Items Identified at this Stage 3 Road Safety Audit
3.1. Problem 1
Location: Western end of the scheme at the unfinished bell mouth into the proposed development.
Summary: The western most radius of the new bell mouth is directly in the line of travel of westbound
vehicles whereby drivers could collide head on into it and lose control.
Detail: There is an unfinished bell mouth for the junction of a future development yet to be constructed.
Sections of the radii corners for this junction are partly installed as shown in Photos 3.1-1 and 3.1-2.

Photo 3.1-1: Western most radius section of unfinished bell
Photo 3.1-2: Eastern most radius section of unfinished bell
mouth
mouth
However, the kerb alignment on the southern side of Manchester Road places the western radius section
directly in the line of travel of westbound drivers, whereby they could collide head on into it. This ‘head on’
alignment is shown in Photos 3.1-3 and 3.1-4 from the dashcam for both day and night.
Drivers could drive directly into this kerb

Photo 3.1-3: Western radius of unfinished bell mouth is directly
Photo 3.1-4: Western radius of unfinished bell mouth is directly
ahead - day
ahead - night

Recommendation: Guidance, such as an edge of carriageway marking to delineate the edge of the driven
lane should be provided to align drivers accordingly.

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
10

3.2. Problem 2
Location: Western end of the scheme at the unfinished bell mouth into the proposed development.
Summary: The bell mouth has no delineation to show the edge of carriageway, whereby vehicles might
enter this area and collide with pedestrians crossing the newly formed junction.
Detail: Further to the previous problem, the bell mouth leaves a rather wide-open area of live carriageway
for pedestrians to cross with no delineation of the edge of carriageway for passing drivers, as shown in
Photo 3.2-1.
Bell mouth has no delineation for edge of carriageway

Photo 3.2-1: Bell mouth has no delineation putting pedestrians at risk of being struck by vehicles
It is possible drivers could drive into this area without realising and put pedestrians at risk of being struck.
Recommendation: Guidance such as an edge of carriageway marking to delineate the edge of the main
line should be provided to align drivers away from the bell mouth area.

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
11

3.3. Problem 3
Location: Western end of the scheme at the unfinished bell mouth into the proposed development.
Summary: The bell mouth edges are in a state that present a slip, trip and fall hazard for pedestrians.
Detail: The installed radius sections of the bell mouth edges have been left in a state that present an
unsafe transition from footway to carriageway as shown in Photos 3.3-1 and 3.3-2.
Trip hazards

Photo 3.3-1: Western radius is in a state that presents a trip
Photo 3.3-2: Eastern radius is in a state that presents a trip
hazard
hazard

It is possible that pedestrians could slip, trip and fall at these transition points particularly during the hours
of darkness.
Recommendation: The transition points of the footway to carriageway should be made safe for
pedestrians to safely cross.

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
12

3.4. Problem 4
Location: Western end of the scheme on south side of Manchester Road.
Summary: An area of footway has an unfinished rear edge, presenting a slip, trip and fall hazard to
pedestrians.
Detail: Towards the western end of the scheme, west of the new bell mouth, there is an area of footway
that is left in such a state that it presents a slip, trip and fall hazard as shown in Photos 3.4-1 and 3.4-2.
Trip hazard

Photo 3.4-1: Footway area with trip hazard at the rear edge –
Photo 3.4-2: Footway area with trip hazard at the rear edge –
facing west
facing east

It is possible that pedestrians could slip, trip and fall at this location.
Recommendation: The area at the rear of the footway should be made safe.

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
13

3.5. Problem 5
Location: A6144 Manchester Road – west arm of signalled junction with Isherwood Road / Carrington Lane.
Summary: The original road markings are still showing on the west arm of the signalled junction which
could mislead drivers into the wrong position and cause head-on and side-swipe type collisions.
Detail: The west arm of the signalled junction has the original white lining still showing as shown in Photos
3.5-1 and 3.5-2.
Original markings are still visible
Original markings are still visible

Photo 3.5-1: Original white lining showing through - eastbound
Photo 3.5-2: Original white lining showing through -
westbound

It is possible the original lining could mislead drivers and cause them to follow the previous alignment,
potentially causing head-on and side-swipe type collisions.
Recommendation: The original white lining should be properly removed.

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
14

3.6. Problem 6
Location: East of Ackers Lane.
Summary: Pedestrian intervisibility between approaching traffic from the signalled junction is obscured by
foliage.
Detail: It was observed that pedestrian / vehicle intervisibility, east of Ackers Lane, is obscured by foliage
when stood at the corner of the junction, more than how it was prior to scheme implementation as shown in
Photos 3.6-1 and 3.6-2.

Photo 3.6-1: Intervisibility pre-scheme implementation 2020
Photo 3.6-2 : Intervisibility post-scheme implementation 2022
If left like this is, it could cause pedestrian / vehicular conflicts if a left turning vehicle into Ackers Lane
emerges from the Isherwood Road junction at speed, as a pedestrian is just about to step into the
carriageway. The speed limit sign is also partially obscured at this location.
Recommendation: The foliage should be removed to improve intervisibility and to make the sign more
visible.

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
15

3.7. Problem 7
Location: Western corner of Ackers Lane.
Summary: Loose tactile paving slab could present a slip, trip and fall hazard.
Detail: It was observed there was a tactile paving slab which was beginning to come loose which moved as
it was walked upon. The slab is shown in Photo 3.7-1.
Loose tactile paving slab

Photo 3.7-1: Loose tactile paving slab will become a slip, trip and fall hazard over a period of time
Even though it did not present a significant problem at the time of the site visit it is likely to deteriorate over
a period of time and possibly become a slip, trip and fall hazard.
Recommendation: The tactile paving slab should be rectified accordingly so it is no longer loose.

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
16

3.8. Problem 8
Location: A6144 Manchester Road - westbound exit from signalled junction with Isherwood Road /
Carrington Lane.
Summary: Westbound 30mph speed limit gateway sign is obstructed by foliage whereby drivers could drive
at inappropriate speeds causing tail end type shunts.
Detail: The speed limit gateway sign informing drivers of a drop in the speed limit from 40mph to 30mph
on the western arm of the signalled junction is obscured by foliage in the westbound direction as shown in
Photo 3.8-1.

Photo 3.8-1: Speed limit gateway sign is obstructed in westbound direction
Notwithstanding there is a speed limit roundel marking on the carriageway, it is possible drivers could miss
this and continue to travel at inappropriate speeds, whereby a tail end shunt, side-swipe or loss of control
type collision could occur.
Recommendation: The foliage on the approach to this sign should be permanently removed.

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
17

4. Audit Team Statement
4.1.1 We certify that this audit has been carried out in accordance with GG119 Rev.2.

Road Safety Audit Team Leader
…
Signed:

Date:

Road Safety Audit Team Member
…
Signed:

Date:

Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
18

Appendix A. Scheme Documentation
The Road Safety Audit was conducted using the documents listed in the table below:
Drawing Number
Revision
Details
HW-201293-001-04
C2
Site Clearance and Earthworks
HW-201293-001-05
C1
Drainage
HW-201293-001-06
C2
Construction Plan and Details
HW-201293-001-07
C2
Kerbing
SL-201293-001-01
C0
Lighting Layout
TR-201293-001-01__A
C2
Proposed Road Markings
TR-201293-001-01__B
C2
Site Clearance Road Markings
TR-201293-001-02
C1
Proposed Traffic Signs and Signs Site Clearance
TR-201293-001-03
C0
Proposed traffic signs

Documentation
RSA 3 Brief
Isherwood Road ESA
IsherwoodRd_RSA12 with designers comments amended

Table 2: List of documents
Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
19

Appendix B. Problem Location Plan

Stage 3 RSA problems
5
Previous Stage 1/2 RSA Problems
1
2
6
8
3
7
4
2
1
Project Name: Isherwood Road Junction Section 106 Works
Document Title: Road Safety Audit Stage 3
20