Recurring concern
Unsafe road design and layout
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correctionFirst reported 2 Dec 2013•Latest report 2 Feb 2026
What this concern includes
Includes deficiencies in the design, geometry, layout or standards compliance of public roads where the road arrangement itself is identified as unsafe or as failing applicable design or regulatory requirements, including the A285 and comparable road-layout concerns.
Not included
- Excludes deficiencies limited to a specific dedicated road control, such as signage, markings, lighting, drainage, barriers, sight distance, road width or speed limits, where road design and layout is not the shared unsafe condition.
- Excludes highway inspection, hazard reporting, maintenance or remedial-action process failures unless the road design or layout itself is identified as unsafe.
- Excludes vehicle design, driver competence and non-road premises or transport hazards.
- Excludes isolated collisions or road-user behaviour where no continuing unsafe road-design or layout condition is identified.
- Reports
- 34
- Individual concerns
- 35
- Date range
- 2013–2026
- Stated actions
- 64
Distinct published reports
A report can raise multiple concerns
First to latest report issue date
Described in published responses
Reports over time
Reports over time
Reports about this concern issued each year.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of kerb or pavement bordering the road
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Programme a scheme to reduce the road’s speed limit to 50 mph.
Stated by Kent County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Junction design permitting left-turning traffic from Lane 2 to cross straight-ahead traffic
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.5
-
Action
Progress the Camberwell Green junction safety scheme, including cyclist and pedestrian safety measures, through consultation, design updates and final road safety audit.
Stated by Transport for London -
Action
Install left-turn and through-lane arrows between bus stop Q and the existing pelican-crossing zig-zag lines.
Stated by London Borough of Southwark -
Action
Install durable left-turn and through-lane arrows between the relocated bus stop Q and the pelican-crossing zig-zag lines.
Stated by London Borough of Southwark
-
Action
Install an advisory sign specifying left-turn-only movement except buses in the nearside lane and through movement only in the offside lane.
Stated by London Borough of Southwark -
Action
Install raised entry treatment at the Orpheus Street–Denmark Hill junction to encourage vehicles to slow when turning.
Stated by London Borough of Southwark
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Changes affecting the Strategic Route Network require TfL approval and cannot be implemented unilaterally.
Stated by London Borough of Southwark
-
Concerns raised1
Road layout misleading pedestrians and motorists about traffic direction
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.4
-
Action
Install a raised zebra crossing south of the junction to provide safer pedestrian routes between Millennium Village, the existing school, Pilot Busway and West Parkside.
Stated by Greater London Authority and Royal Borough of Greenwich and Transport for London -
Action
Improve junction signage and road markings to increase pedestrian awareness of oncoming traffic.
Stated by Greater London Authority and Royal Borough of Greenwich and Transport for London -
Action
Complete feasibility work identifying conversion of the existing layout to a dual carriageway with bus lanes to address road-safety concerns.
Stated by Greater London Authority and Royal Borough of Greenwich and Transport for London
-
Action
Implement the proposed dual-carriageway and bus-lane changes to the road layout at the earliest opportunity, subject to considering consultation responses.
Stated by Greater London Authority and Royal Borough of Greenwich and Transport for London
-
Concerns raised1
Inadequacy of the road layout at the collision location
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Maintain the local safety scheme’s large yellow-backed chevrons, widened carriageway and bend hatching.
Stated by Cornwall Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Existing chevrons, bend widening, hatching and the reduced speed limit have improved safety, leaving little further to do.
Stated by Cornwall Council
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to provide a dual carriageway throughout the A66
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.5
-
Action
Upgrade the A66 and A69 in line with the Government’s commitment.
Stated by Department for Transport -
Action
Carry out the Northern Trans-Pennine strategic study of improvements to the A66 and A69.
Stated by Department for Transport -
Action
Install average-speed cameras at A66 Kirkby Thore.
Stated by Department for Transport
-
Action
Introduce safety measures between A66 Appleby and Brough, including upgraded signs and markings, extended double white lines and roadside safety barriers.
Stated by Department for Transport -
Action
Decide whether to proceed with the proposed 50 mph speed limit between A66 Appleby and Brough after considering the objection.
Stated by Department for Transport
-
Concerns raised1
Unsafe staggered road-junction layouts
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Undertake a scoping study to inform potential updates to design guidance for major and minor junctions and accesses, including staggered junctions.
Stated by Department for Transport
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
Position
Lincolnshire County Council is responsible for local road safety and deciding whether to install a roundabout on the local road.
Stated by Department for Transport
-
Position
Highways England found no apparent pattern of similar safety issues at this type of junction.
Stated by Department for Transport
-
Concerns raised1
Use of chamfered kerb stones on the carriageway
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
The existing splayed kerb is appropriate for a dual carriageway because it allows vehicles to leave the carriageway during emergencies.
Stated by Stockport Borough Council
-
Concerns raised1
Lack of a westbound slip road or deceleration lane at the crossover point
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.3
-
Action
Inspect and assess the A66 road layout at Vale House Farm.
Stated by National Highways -
Action
Stop up the gated moorland access to remove westbound right-turn manoeuvres from the A66.
Stated by National Highways -
Action
Submit a funding bid for the proposed safety work.
Stated by National Highways
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
Position
The proposed work cannot currently be undertaken because funding is unavailable; funding must first be secured through a priority-based bid.
Stated by National Highways
-
Position
Improvement of the alternative moorland access is contingent on reaching agreement with the landowner.
Stated by National Highways
-
Concerns raised1
Serious road design safety hazard at the Kingsway/Metro system
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.3
-
Action
Install temporary pedestrian barriers directing pedestrians to existing signal-controlled crossings.
Stated by Swansea Council -
Action
Monitor temporary pedestrian barriers for accident reduction and potential safety risks.
Stated by Swansea Council -
Action
Revise the Kingsway road layout, including removing eastbound bus movements and implementing the associated infrastructure changes.
Stated by Swansea Council
-
Concerns raised1
Failure of the A285 to meet modern road design standards
This report raised 5 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
The specific junction does not have a sufficiently high collision rate to justify intervention under the Council’s investigation criteria.
Stated by West Sussex County Council
Data last updated 7 September 2026