Failing A75 30mph street speed controls within Springholm: EIR release

Information requested

Transport Scotland to provide us with the information requested below within the statutory time limit.

1. We wish to know on what date Transport Scotland or its relevant road maintenance contractor became aware that the inbound speed activated halt signals located at Springholm west were failing to respond to approaching vehicles exceeding 33 MPH being, we understand, the present threshold trigger speed of this anti speeding system.
2. We wish to know when Amey first received a report from the public that the signals were unresponsive to speeding drivers together with video evidence of the defect in action incorporating radar speed tracking of the approaching vehicles.
3. We wish to know the performance standard specified in the A75 maintence contract currently in force with Amey in so far as this specifies a minimum inductive speed detection loop installation and maintenance standard, frequency of inductive loop defect monitoring, timescale for rectification of contractor identified/3rd party reported sigalling defects and the requisite standard(s) for rectification, both temporary and permanent. We ask this because we hold a number of images and or film clips of carriageway exposed cables and frayed conductors associated with inductive loops installed here which were allowed to remain in that condition for long time periods.
4. We wish to know the timeline of actions after Amey became aware of this defect.We understand from a communication received from Vincent Tait by Chris Wybrew that the defect was already known to Amey and had been traced to the inductive loops (rather than any other part of the speed control system). Was this correct and does that remain the case? What actions followed? How is a defect of this nature normally repaired and by whom? Is it by total replacement of the entire loop or simply rejoining broken conductor(s)? Given that inductive loops are very widely used in connection with traffic management systems is it not the case that there are numerous contractors capable of undertaking loop repair/replacement? Which contractor notified Amey that there were supply chain issues preventing early rectification of the defect? What exactly is the nature of the supply chain difficulties preventing rectification?What alternative options, if any, have been explored given that the speed activated halt signals are a key part of a suite of measures designed to combat chronic A75 endangering speeding on Springholm main street - a mattter of longstanding and widespread community concern as evidence by public turn out at road safety meetings convened here and the 2019 residents' attitude survey? Is it not possible to have meantime operated the signals using radar as was formerly the case? Was this considered as an option, if not why not? What further updates have been sought or received regarding the timeline for rectification? Have the police being notified that the system is out of action given that because of its installation and the total fiction that it is to be, quote, "self enforcing" they have since stood down all enforcement patrols leaving every speeder here, no matter how egregious their speed, unpunished and thus free to speed repeatedly without sanction?
5. Do these presently defective inductive loops also serve a secondary purpose associated with the gathering of traffic data? If so is that data gathering function similarly out of action as from the same date as the signals ceased to respond to speeding incoming vehicles above the threshold trigger speed?
6. Given that the usage of inductive loops for traffic management purposes is very widespread how many other ongoing instances are there of traffic control systems presentlyrendered inoperative due to the same supply chain issues regarding rectification of defective inductive loops?
7. We wish to know what progress has been made regarding securing enforcement status for these legally toothless speed activated halt signals which are unfit for purpose when most needed due to an unacceptably level of driver red signal defiance particularly by those driving large freight vehicles on a regular basis using the North Channel ferries?
8. At what other locations in Transport Scotland's roads estate are speed activated signals currently deployed and what is the enforcement status of these in relation to red signal running.
9. Transport Scotland did not innovate this type of traffic management speed control instead it adapted the technology of legally enforceable speed activated halt signal systems used on continental Europe. What specialist advice, if any, did it seek before deciding that the system should be trialled in Springholm without enforcement? In 2017 Humza Yousaf announced these signals as an interim measure. What is the remaining duration of these trials given that it it has long been self evident every hour of every day at every signal that these are being defied by many drivers who regard unenforced signals as being of no influence on their chosen speed within free flowing conditions?

On 21 April we asked you to confirm the following:

“In particular, with regard to Q6, it would be helpful if you could please confirm which specific type of traffic control system you are referring to. Also, regarding Q8, are you referring to speed activated 'halt' signals?”

On 22 April you provided the following clarification:

Question 6 remains as asked. Explanation: we were told quote "the signals have experienced a fault in the detection loop and our teams are working with our supply chain partners to resolve this as a matter of urgency". We are aware that vehicle detection inductive loops are nowadays a common place component part of traffic management and data gathering technology. Indeed we have multiple sets of such loops within the village associated with both halt signals and ATCs. These are simply embedded single or multi conductor cables. In this particular instance retrofitted by slotting the road surface, inserting the cables and applying sealant to retain and protect cables in their slots. We have made this information request because we find it difficult to accept that there should be any substantial delay in simply replacing or reconnecting such defective loops when the new cabling and sealant should be readily available and the slotting of it into the road is hardly rocket science. If there are, as stated, supply chain issues then, logically, given the widespread use of such inductive cables nationally, it would seem highly probable that the cited supply chain issues may be similarly affecting the rectification of other defective inductive loop traffic management or vehicle count/classification systems installed across the Transport Scotland and Council roads estate at this time.

Question 8 Yes. Explanation: we thought the reference to red signal running clearly implied that this question is referring to traffic management systems, such as we have here, where a red signal is presented to selected drivers based solely on their illegal approach speed in the expectation they may thus be induced to bring their vehicle to a halt before crossing the signal line on a return to green.”

As the information you have requested is 'environmental information' for the purposes of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs), we are required to deal with your request under those Regulations. We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA.

This exemption is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. This is essentially a technical point and has no material effect on the outcome of your request.

Response

Question 1

We wish to know on what date Transport Scotland or its relevant road maintenance contractor became aware that the inbound speed activated halt signals located at Springholm west were failing to respond to approaching vehicles exceeding 33 MPH being, we understand, the present threshold trigger speed of this anti speeding system.

21 February 2022

Question 2

We wish to know when Amey first received a report from the public that the signals were unresponsive to speeding drivers together with video evidence of the defect in action incorporating radar speed tracking of the approaching vehicles.

21 February 2022.

Question 3

We wish to know the performance standard specified in the A75 maintenance contract currently in force with Amey in so far as this specifies a minimum inductive speed detection loop installation and maintenance standard, frequency of inductive loop defect monitoring, timescale for rectification of contractor identified/3rd party reported signalling defects and the requisite standard(s) for rectification, both temporary and permanent. We ask this because we hold a number of images and or film clips of carriageway exposed cables and frayed conductors associated with inductive loops installed here which were allowed to remain in that condition for long time periods.

Standard detection loops are designed in accordance with Schedule 2, Section 8, Clause 8.2.11 of the Scottish Trunk Road Network Management Contract (NMC) South West Unit as follows:

8.2.11: The Operating Company shall ensure all Design complies with the;

• Design Manual for Roads and Bridges
• the Manual of Contract Documents for Highway Works,
• the Roads for All: Good Practice Guide for Roads,
• Safe System Approach to Road Safety,
• this Contract and
• any other Design requirements issued by the Director.

Installation is to be in accordance with the design and specification and certified by the Operating Company as set out in the Scottish Trunk Road Network Management Contract South West Unit as follows:

• 8.4.25: The Operating Company shall complete and sign each construction Certificate detailed in Schedule 2 Scope, Appendix 8 Design, Construct & Certification of Operations Attachment 8.1 Certificates in Relation to Certification Procedures within five (5) Working Days of completion of the Site construction of the identified part of the Design or Design Element. For the purposes of this Certificate, completion shall be the completion of the Operations excluding the Defects Correction Period, as relevant for the particular Scheme.

Maintenance and inspection of the trunk road network is set out in the NMC and the Trunk Road Information Manual referenced therein as follows:

• Our Operating Company for this area Amey, has a contractual obligation to inspect the trunk road network at 7-day intervals. These inspections are primarily to identify defects that require prompt attention (Category 1 defects) because they present, or could present, an immediate hazard to road users. Cat 1 defects on the carriageway are required to be made safe by 06:00hrs the following day or within 24 hours for all other Cat 1 defects.

If a temporary repair has been carried out, the deferred permanent repair period shall be:

• 56 days for bridge parapets.
• 28 days for all other defects.

Lesser defects and general deterioration which do not necessitate such an immediate safety-led response are recorded as Category 2 defects which are then considered with findings from our annual condition assessments of the network to help determine future maintenance schemes and then considered against competing priorities across the trunk road network and programmed accordingly.

‘Faults’ are called ‘Defects’ in the Contract and are dealt with depending on their severity. The Operating Company is responsible for determining the Defect risk.

The NMC sets out that Defects shall be temporarily and or permanently rectified by the Operating Company in accordance with the Trunk Road Information Manual. This requires rectification in accordance with the Manual of Contract Documents for Highway Works with a minor contract clause alteration in the NMC specific to traffic loops to reflect that installations shall conform with the associated equipment’s requirements under LDS8016.

The ‘exposed cables and frayed conductors’ as advised previously relate to superseded equipment. The cables are not live and are not operational so do not pose any risk.

Question 4

We wish to know the timeline of actions after Amey became aware of this defect. We understand from a communication received from Vincent Tait by Chris Wybrew that the defect was already known to Amey and had been traced to the inductive loops (rather than any other part of the speed control system). Was this correct and does that remain the case?

Timeline of actions:

Supplier contacted – 21 February

Loops replaced - 27 April

Testing of loops – 9 May

System recommissioned – programmed to be completed by end of May 2022

It is correct and remains the case, that the defect was already known to Amey and had been traced to the inductive loops (rather than any other part of the speed control system).

How is a defect of this nature normally repaired and by whom?

This depends on the actual fault, in this case it was the loop in the carriageway that was damaged, not any connectors so required full replacement and reconnection. This was carried out by Ameys specialist subcontractor Cutting Edge.

Is it by total replacement of the entire loop or simply re-joining broken conductor(s)?

As above, this depends on the actual fault. However, in this case the loop required full replacement.

Given that inductive loops are very widely used in connection with traffic management systems is it not the case that there are numerous contractors capable of undertaking loop repair/replacement?

There are other contractors capable of undertaking loop repair/replacement however Amey can only use contractors that are approved in the NMC and have sector scheme approval.

Which contractor notified Amey that there were supply chain issues preventing early rectification of the defect?

The Cutting Edge (Scotland) LTD

What exactly is the nature of the supply chain difficulties preventing rectification?

The Cutting Edge (Scotland) LTD loop cutting crews had other commitments that impacted their availability at the time of this request.

What alternative options, if any, have been explored given that the speed activated halt signals are a key part of a suite of measures designed to combat chronic A75 endangering speeding on Springholm main street - a matter of longstanding and widespread community concern as evidence by public turn out at road safety meetings convened here and the 2019 residents' attitude survey?

There have been no alternative options explored as this is a fault. Due to the trial nature and the work to change legislation, no additional measures or amendment to the system are proposed until this is concluded.

Is it not possible to have meantime operated the signals using radar as was formerly the case? Was this considered as an option, if not why not?

This was not considered an option as to revert back to radar would require amending the equipment within the system and reconfiguring all of the internals which would impact the trial. This option would also itself take a period of time.

What further updates have been sought or received regarding the timeline for rectification?

Please see the following Assistant Site Manager updates,

17th March	First emails requesting programme dates for works and discussing required work
18th March	Asked sub-contractor if they had an available date
23rd March	Requested update from sub-contractor
29th March	Requested update from sub-contractor
12th April	Rquested update from sub-contractor
19th April	Sub-contractor confirmed that works could be carried out on 27th April

Have the police being notified that the system is out of action given that because of its installation and the total fiction that it is to be, quote, "self-enforcing" they have since stood down all enforcement patrols leaving every speeder here, no matter how egregious their speed, unpunished and thus free to speed repeatedly without sanction?

Police Scotland have not been notified that the system is out of action.

Question 5

Do these presently defective inductive loops also serve a secondary purpose associated with the gathering of traffic data? If so is that data gathering function similarly out of action as from the same date as the signals ceased to respond to speeding incoming vehicles above the threshold trigger speed?

The site is also a counter site but for the purpose of this trial only. It is therefore currently not recording this data.

Question 6

Given that the usage of inductive loops for traffic management purposes is very widespread how many other ongoing instances are there of traffic control systems presently rendered inoperative due to the same supply chain issues regarding rectification of defective inductive loops?

Following consultation with our Operating Companies I can advise that we are not aware of any other traffic control systems presently rendered inoperative due to the same supply chain issues regarding rectification of defective inductive loops.

Question 7

We wish to know what progress has been made regarding securing enforcement status for these legally toothless speed activated halt signals which are unfit for purpose when most needed due to an unacceptably level of driver red signal defiance particularly by those driving large freight vehicles on a regular basis using the North Channel ferries?

Work is ongoing in assembling and testing the emerging evidence and we expect to collect further data on the operational performance of the A75 in Springholm this summer. When we are content this data is in place, and the background documentation and justification is complete, a case can be made for amendment to the wider traffic signal guidance in the UK. To have the best chance of success, which is not guaranteed in any event, time must be taken to present the case as effectively as possible.

Quesion 8

At what other locations in Transport Scotland's roads estate are speed activated signals currently deployed and what is the enforcement status of these in relation to red signal running.

The only other location is on the A78 in Fairlie. These signals are legally enforceable as they are associated with traffic signals that are for junction control which are covered within the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions.

Quesion 9

Transport Scotland did not innovate this type of traffic management speed control instead it adapted the technology of legally enforceable speed activated halt signal systems used on continental Europe. What specialist advice, if any, did it seek before deciding that the system should be trialled in Springholm without enforcement? In 2017 Humza Yousaf announced these signals as an interim measure. What is the remaining duration of these trials given that it has long been self-evident every hour of every day at every signal that these are being defied by many drivers who regard unenforced signals as being of no influence on their chosen speed within free flowing conditions?

The idea of using speed responsive traffic signals on the edge of a built up area as a speed management measure was taken from other examples, but the technology is not that used elsewhere in Europe as it had to be compatible with UK specifications.

The signals here were developed following a successful trial of signals on the A78 at a junction in Fairlie. We have been clear that the signals in Springholm cannot be enforced as their use as a standalone installation is not a permitted use of traffic signals except as a trial of the type underway, or after that trial allows the necessary guidance and legislation to be change in a way that supports such use more widely.

The duration of the trial will continue whilst the case is made for amendment to the traffic signal guidance.

About FOI

The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at http://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.