Recurring concern

Inadequate road sight distance for drivers to identify hazards safely

First to latest report 15 Nov 2013 — 23 Apr 2025

Reports that mention this concern
25
Times this concern has been raised
26
Stated actions linked to this concern
14

What this concern includes

Includes road crests, bends, junction layouts and comparable fixed road features where the coroner identifies inadequate driver sight distance.

What is not included
  • Vehicle conspicuity or vehicle blind spots
  • Road lighting, signs or markings where geometric sight distance is adequate
  • General highway maintenance without an identified sight-distance hazard

Reports and published responses 25 reports

See individual reports that have raised this concern, and the actions taken in response

  1. Manchester North

    AI-generated summary

    Miss Beryl Brinkman · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Miss Beryl Brinkman was involved in a serious road traffic collision on 8 January 2014 after emerging from an un-adopted side road onto the A58 Featherstall Road. She suffered catastrophic injuries and died at Royal Oldham Hospital on 10 January 2014. Concerns included the proximity of parked vehicles to the junction, reduced driver visibility, the risk of harm to road users and pedestrians, the appropriateness of the parking bays, and whether the side road should be adopted.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Parking bays reducing driver visibility when emerging onto the A58

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The proximity of the parking bays to the junction, resulting in a marked reduction of driver visibility when emerging on to the A58/parked cars are present. ”

    Source location

    Miss Beryl Brinkman · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review accident history and inspect the junction to assess highway safety issues.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “As with any serious and fatal collision, it is normal protocol that on receipt of the Police Incident Report the Road Safety Team carries out a full review and site visit to determine any possible highway issues which may have had an impact on the accident.”

    Source location

    2014-0314-Response-by-Rochdale-Borough-Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 July 2014

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Submit and secure approval for funding to implement the proposed highway safety scheme.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A commissioning form was submitted to Pennines Township for funding on the 23rd January and agreed approval on the 18th February. The Network Management Team is currently working on the scheme and the introducing the waiting restrictions.”

    Source location

    2014-0314-Response-by-Rochdale-Borough-Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 July 2014

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Implement removal of parking bays and introduction of ‘At Any Time’ waiting restrictions on the A58, including required traffic orders.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A commissioning form was submitted to Pennines Township for funding on the 23rd January and agreed approval on the 18th February. The Network Management Team is currently working on the scheme and the introducing the waiting restrictions.”

    Source location

    2014-0314-Response-by-Rochdale-Borough-Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 July 2014

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The junction was not considered a priority for action because only one personal injury collision had been recorded there in 12 years.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In order to build up a picture of any previous incidents the accident database was reviewed and results showed that there had been only one recorded personal injury accident at this junction in the last 12 years, as such; the site was not on the priority list for action.”

    Source location

    2014-0314-Response-by-Rochdale-Borough-Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 July 2014

    Open published response

  2. Leicester City and South Leicestershire

    AI-generated summary

    Paul Millis · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Paul Millis died after riding his motorbike through the junction of Troon Way and Nicklaus Road in Leicester and colliding head-on with a car on 3 December 2013. The principal concerns were the short distances over which two lanes merged and opposing traffic joined, potentially causing delayed lines of sight, together with the acute movement of one lane into the carriageway.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Delayed lines of sight between opposing traffic flows

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The merger of the 2 lanes occurs within a very short distance of the junction: approximately 35 metres. The process of merger by the 2 lanes is that the traffic moves in opposite directions – i.e. the inner lane moves to the right, thereby avoiding the verge, and the outer lane is directed by arrows to the left. 2. The westbound carriageway merges as described, and then as a single lane continues to the right until it straightens out into a single carriageway adjoining the eastbound traffic. The joining of the two flows of traffic occurs only 90 metres after the junction described above. 3. The situation described in 2 above means that any vehicle either behind another vehicle, or even beside it, will have a very delayed line of sight for traffic travelling eastbound, and likewise applies to eastbound traffic’s line of sight to a vehicle behind a first vehicle travelling westbound. As stated all of this movement of traffic is occurring in a very short distance and time. 4. It would appear that when the inner lane makes its sudden, very acute move to the right, that there is vacant verge area that would have allowed the lane to move less acutely. ”

    Source location

    Paul Millis · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Undertake a fourth road safety audit after 12 months, reviewing serious accident records and causes and making recommendations on potential design and safety issues.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A fourth safety audit is required to be undertaken after 12 months. This will take into account records of accidents and make recommendations for any changes where significant levels of risk to users are identified.”

    Source location

    2014-0176-Response
    Page 2 · response
    Published 17 April 2014

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The junction design complies with mandatory standards, and the merge length, alignment, visibility and traffic arrangement are considered reasonable and customary.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I can confirm and provide assurance that the highway design does comply with relevant standards, including the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (Volume 6, Section 2, Part 3 - TD 50/04). I can also confirm that although the A563 Troon Way is not a trunk road, the higher design standards for trunk roads have been applied during the design process. In particular, the mandatory standards relating to visibility on approach to junctions have been met.”

    Source location

    2014-0176-Response
    Page 1 · response
    Published 17 April 2014

    Open published response

  3. West Yorkshire Eastern

    AI-generated summary

    Craig Marren · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    On 18 May 2013, Craig Marren was riding an off-road motorcycle on Tyersal Lane, Bradford, when he collided with a motorcar travelling in the opposite direction. The concern was that trees and foliage obstructed the sight line around a blind left-hand bend for approaching vehicles.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Obstructed sight lines for vehicles travelling around a left-hand bend

    Wider context from the report

    “My concern is that this is effectively a blind left hand bend for any vehicles approaching in the direction shown in the photographs. The trees and/or foliage at this point impedes the sight line for any vehicle travelling around the bend. ”

    Source location

    Craig Marren · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Raise an order to have the obstructing hedge flailed back to clear the highway.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I can confirm that the Highway Authority does have powers under the Highways Act (1980) to do so. I have raised an order for the hedge to be flailed back sufficiently to clear the highway of obstruction.”

    Source location

    2014-0106-Response-by-City-of-Bradford-Council
    Page 1 · response
    Published 10 March 2014

    Open published response

  4. West Yorkshire (Western)

    AI-generated summary

    Karl Olaf Nilsson · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Karl Olaf Nilsson died minutes after suffering catastrophic injuries in a motorcycle collision at the junction of Victoria Road and the A657 Saltaire Road on 14 October 2012. The report raised concerns that the junction’s layout and the visibility of the STOP sign may have contributed to the fatality, and noted that this was the only junction along Victoria Road where drivers did not have right of way.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure of the STOP sign and stop line to be clearly visible

    Wider context from the report

    “1. There are a number of factors which could, in my opinion have caused or contributed to this fatality. Victoria Road is an absolutely straight road which is aligned in almost a perfect north-south direction. It is a wide avenue type of road, with large trees visible on both the east and west pavements. On both sides of the road there are parking bays, and the cars are able to park fully on the road, whilst still leaving ample room for cars to pass in both directions. The layout is the same on both sections of Victoria Road – both before and after it is bisected by the A657 Saltaire Road. There is a gradient of approximately 1:7 stretching uphill from north to south. The slope of the road is only interrupted by the A657, which is perfectly level, but due to the slope of the road, it is not seen until the driver is approximately 20 meters from the junction. Moreover, due to the slope of the road, the STOP sign and stop line painted on the road is only really visible when the driver is approximately 20 meters from the junction. The overall layout of the road (i.e. it being perfectly straight with a sort of symmetrical appearance on both sides) contrives to almost create an optical illusion. The driver’s eye is drawn to the horizon in the centre – and as such, the STOP sign at the mouth of the junction is only in the driver’s peripheral vision. 2. I am concerned that the overall layout of this junction was a substantial contributing factor to this fatal accident. 3. I am concerned that the STOP sign is not clearly visible in its current 4. Furthermore, I understand from the evidence which was given to me that this is the only junction on the entire length of Victoria Road where the driver does not have right of way. It is possible that Mr Nilsson became confused as to where he was on Victoria Road. ”

    Source location

    Karl Olaf Nilsson · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Construct the junction improvement scheme with stronger signing, lining, junction demarcation, detection loops and queue-triggered puffin crossing control.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “A public realm scheme for Victoria Road has recently been awarded funding. This will involve the restoration of Victoria Road back to it's historical beginnings. One of the proposals is to remove all the trees for both sides of Victoria Road as the trees were a later addition to Victoria Road and did not feature in the original plan for the street. A consultant is currently taking place on this. As part of the public realm/safety improvements, a junction improvement scheme is about to be constructed (please find attached plan). The design incorporates stronger signing and lining and a clear, on-road demarcation of the junction from both approaches into Saltaire Road. An addition of detection loops to Victoria Road will assist with right turning vehicles into Saltaire Road. A puffin crossing 10 yards away from the junction will be triggered (i.e.”

    Source location

    Response from Bradford Metropolitan District Council
    Page 2 · response
    Published 23 February 2014

    Open published response

  5. Derby and Derbyshire

    AI-generated summary

    David Allan Cox · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    David Allan Cox died after his vehicle left a narrow, icy bridleway at a sharp blind bend, overturned and entered the river. The principal concern was that the absence of barriers, together with the narrow track and further blind bends, created an ongoing risk of vehicles leaving the bridleway and entering the river.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Blind bends along the bridleway

    Wider context from the report

    “The track at the point of the bend where the vehicles left the track on 24th January 2013 being extremely narrow and acute, leaving no margin for error and creating a risk of other vehicles leaving the track and sliding down the river bank into the river below due to the absence of any barrier. There is no barrier or wall along the length of the bridleway between the track and the river and I had confirmed in evidence that there are in total three blind bends along the length of the bridleway. The presence of two further blind bends along the same track also causes me concern. The concern is that circumstances creating a risk of further deaths will occur or will continue to exist in the future relating to the risk of vehicles leaving the narrow bridleway at the blind bends and rolling into the river due to the track being extremely narrow and the absence of any barrier between the bridleway and the river below. ”

    Source location

    David Allan Cox · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Install permanent public-safety signage at both ends of the track.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “a. The Authority installed further permanent signage at both ends of the track in December 2013. The signage states “Public Safety Notice. Narrow track. Blind bends. Cycle with care. Expect to meet authorised vehicles”. A photograph of this signage is attached.”

    Source location

    2013-0355-Response
    Page 1 · response
    Published 15 November 2013

    Open published response

Actions and positions describe what organisations say in published responses. Implementation is not independently verified.

Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026