Monday, April 04, 2011

Nairn Against ProposedTraffic Lights

The Citizens of Nairn are stirring. Transport Scotland beware? More on the Facebook page Nairn Against Proposed Traffic Lights. (you have to be logged onto Facebook to see it). If you don't have a Facebook account don't worry, it looks like there will be a public meeting soon - more info when available.


Anonymous said...

Whoever authorised these new lights should get the sack forthwith. The distance between Albert Street and the Leopold Street lights is absolutely stupid. The roadworks are bad enough now, but once the lights are up it will be murder. The traffic is using as a bypass once again, the wee Little Kildrummie single track road and it is not suitable for the speeding traffic - same is happening to the Cawdor Road. A serious accident will occur soon for certain, unless some sort of restriction is imposed. Heads must roll......

Nairn said...

Nairn is certainly the Highland red light district with plenty of curb crawling in evidence every day of the week (at present)

We've also got many cafes in the town, so is it possible we could become the 'Amsterdam of the north'?

Expect red light tourists any day soon folks!

Anonymous said...

I would have thought yellow boxing would have been just as effective and finished being painted in one night.

Still the jams may encourage people to give up trying to get to Sainsburys, cut their losses and park up at the Coop.

Anonymous said...

Why do people assume that Sainsburys wanted to pay for these traffic lights. I think they were forced into it by the powers that be.
I also think the lights at Albert St. and Seabank Rd. are un-necessar. Manse Rd. maybe, just so there is a bit of space for cars to move from one set of lights to the other.
People who do not shop at the coop now are not going to be put off by queing, after all they are travelling to Inverness and Forres just now.That takes a bit of time and money..

Brian Turner said...

I can't help but wonder if the traffic lights issue has nothing to do with Sainsburys, but instead is an attempt by canny planners to force the issue of a bypass on Scottish Ministers.

There's probably a local government law somewhere that says if a main trunk road has more than eight sets of traffic lights within one mile, then a bypass must be built around the bottleneck.

Or perhaps that's just wishing thinking on my part, as otherwise the idea of three extra sets of lights makes no sense at all.

Spurtle said...

It's less a matter of Sainsbury’s not wanting to pay for the lights, and more of the fact that they have to pay for them. The installation of the lights was simply a condition imposed by Transport Scotland , should permission be granted for the development at Balmakeith, and it was, so they have to.

It has to be said though that there is no clear case for at least three sets of them. The only ones I would have thought necessary are the set being installed at the Moss-side Road/ A96 junction.

Transport Scotland certainly seems to have used some really bizarre criteria when making these decisions, which unfortunately, now that the supermarket is under construction, it is impossible to challenge.

The time to question the road plans was years ago, when the store was going through planning. Some people actually bothered to read the small print and fully understood the potential impact that the road proposals would have on the town. Their concerns were ignored though, by Councillors and some members of the public alike who were too busy getting excited about the chance to pack their groceries in orange carrier bags to bother taking any notice of the devil hidden in the detail.

Transport Scotland's idea of what Nairn needs to cope with the extra traffic generated by Sainsburys is absolute folly......but equally to blame are the four local Councillors who sat on the planning committee, and members of some Community Councils who went far beyond their normal remit in actively supporting the development. At one point a Councillor even denied that any traffic lights would be part of the package.

These people must learn to ensure that they have a full grasp of the potential consequences of supporting such proposals, prior to leaping aboard the bus of, what may turn out to be, relatively short term positive public opinion.

We needed a new supermarket but the proposed road works could have been challenged and modified, had they bothered to take any notice at the time. The price the whole town , and anyone trying to drive through it, is going to pay for the next few years, may well come back to haunt them.

So when it comes to starting any sort of action group , any great efforts may be better focussed on ensuring that our elected representatives are fully capable of understanding planning matters.
Or greater consideration should perhaps be given to electing those that do.

Perhaps we should name each set of lights after members of the Council, a fitting tribute indeed.

Anonymous said...

The traffic lights where mentioned in the planning application, which was available on line with a plethora of other docs relating to the new build of sainsburys since last year. It seems silly to complain now about something that has been available for months if people could be bothered to look into it properly!!! bit like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.

Graisg said...

@ anon, can you provide a source please for what was said by the expert witness at the inquiry?

Anonymous said...

Let's get rid of the rose tinted spectacles for a wee minute and all those who have now crawled out of the woodwork with their "I told you so's" and "you wanted a new supermarket" and point scoring get down from their high horses. If people have a quick think back they might remember that traffic flow through Nairn at certain times has been deteriorating anyway. Let's be realistic here, of course the delays have got even worse but how much is that due to the road works?

You never know this may, as well as may not, be an improvement, we'll just have to give it a chance.

Lights out said...

We're not used to radical solutions, but how about the introduction of a 20mph zone stretching from the Balmakeith to Sandown. Remove all traffic lights including existing ones, paint yellow boxes on the A96 at major junctions, have more zebra type crossings for pedestrians (well lit but without traffic lights)
Traffic on the A96 would move albeit slowly, but the slow pace would allow cars to pull out at junctions, and the decreased speed would help protect pedestrians from accidents
Cost? much lower than the current traffic lights proposal and I would suggest better traffic flows for all road users
Likely to happen, I doubt it. Too much common sense!

Graisg said...

Maybe something was stated in the documents stored on the DPEA site Anon.
That'd be more use or a scan of a press cutting.
You will appreciate that a quote that someone said X from anon is not enough.