The consultation paper that suggests how traffic changes could be made to the road network to enable the Nairn South development to go ahead is now online and Highland Council are seeking your comments.
This observer followed the link that a local councillor had posted on Facebook and went to look at the document.
It's a 241 page document and a PDF you have to download - it is a bit user unfriendly too in that you have to adjust the size regularly to flit from text to looking at maps- how are members of the public supposed to find the time to look at this let alone attempt to decipher it? Parts of it need someone to translate it into language that people use in real life. Even people that normally attempt to pay attention to this kind of thing will be p***** off with this. It's all a bit too much folks.
How about a room with maps and interpretors like they had for the A96 Nairn bypass? Give us a chance please! After all the document that Nairn's four councillors discussed before it went to this stage was only 25 pages long!
Anyone with the nerve to go and get themselves a copy of the document can do so here.
12 comments:
Seems to be a case of 'never mind the quality feel the width'
Nairn Bookshop has a "Ladybird" version, called "Go West, not South!"
What a fuss about A few houses being built something this town needs but none of your readers appear to show any concern for the safety of people using the brae.
Yes what is being put forward is to allow N.S? Those complainers appear to be willing to let the danger on the brae remain if it will stop houses being built
Leave it dangrous and it might stop N.S.? Sort it and you lose the trump card.
People's lives are in danger but that does not seam to matter.
CONSIDER what i have put forward to the public and the Nairn South Transport Appraisal for their opinion to make the brae safer.
Let the traffic flow as it did before it was made dangrous or is people's safety A lower priority compared to stopping houses being built.
At all Community Council meetings I have attended it has been agreed the danger exists and it also appears willing to object to anything that would improve the situation.!
It would be of interest to your readers as to what they intend to do regarding the brae the only thing I have heard said is it requires a new bridge how a new bridge will solve the problem is beyond me considering the whole aria is surrounded by high embankments and belongs to the Railway
MURD
It is up to Highland Council to make the brae safer Murd. Local councillors have been told that people fear for their lives when using the brae. No good the excuse of no money, that road is just too dangerous.
Could not agree with you more Graisg.
BUT It's not the road it's what they have put on it that causes the danger!!
You and I have both attended meetings when it has been said there is no money for this.
. Any thing I have suggested has always been directed to the Highland Council.
Personally I dont care who pays for the making of the brae safe.
IN my book peoples safty has to be top priority as it should be with all elected councilors.
Not trying to prevent the saftey by objecting to what is being presented.
Without offering A better soulition to have it sorted. Comunity Councils managed to organize petition's when it suit them but never has it been said one should be orgnized to make the brae safe.
Why because what is there is preventing Nairn South.
You have herd me ask if developers are not alowed to spend the money we will have to live with the danger the answer was yes.
SOME THING I CANNOT ACCEPT and will continue to try and have it made safe
Like or not there is an offer on the table to improve saftey on the brae one way or another it has to be improved.
get murd on the council,hes the one to get things done,and being disabled myself,i can only get up to firhall bridge then turn and go back,a damn disgrace,
the amount of wasted money by council could have paid for survey 5 times over.
(cripple creek)
....theres money for that real dangerous Z bend to be totally straightened out between Croy and Clephanton - yet some rumble strips and a solid no overtake lines would cure that issue - so why spend all that cash chopping trees, building a new road and tarmac...... there is money out there - its just not being well spent!!!!!!!!!!
I'm not sure Murd is thinking straight on this one. He seems to be saying
1) the station brae is not safe with existing pavements and traffic;
2) so let a developer build 300 or 500 houses at Nairn South and it will all be fine.
Eh?
First, adding a whole lot more traffic on to Cawdor/Balblair Roads and Station Brae won't make it safer.
Second, expecting the developer of Nairn South to improve those roads, widen the pavements and replace the narrow railway bridge with something wider is naive. It simply won't happen. Did the developers of Lochloy improve and widen the road junctions on to the A96 by ScotMid? No. Will Cawdor Estates build a proper and safe access roundabout into their Delnies development? They tried to avoid the obligation to do so. The last Nairn South development application (which was turned down) claimed the existing roads would cope well and safely. All of Nairn, and the Planning Reporter, recognised that claim was rubbish.
Third, if Murd thinks a new Nairn South application and hundreds more houses and cars in and around Nairn South will make the Station Brae safer, he should look at that 241-page transport appraisal document. To cope with all the extra traffic, what does that study propose? Wider pavements, narrower roadways, more traffic lights, no change to the bridge/underpass. A recipe which will increase congestion, add to road-rage, and cause more rat-running through residential back streets. All of which will increase the risks of accidents.
If we are going to have a debate, then at least let's have a realistic one.
WELL road runner
When have I ever said a new Nairn South application and hundreds more houses and cars in and around Nairn South will make the Station Brae safer, What I have said and put forward, How I think would make the brae safer WITH OR WITH OUT NAIRN SOUTH.
Every one agrees there is a danger to people getting hurt on the brae as it and has to be sorted but you appear to want to LEAVE it as it is.
I WANT IT TO BE REINSTATED to what it was is all i have ever said.
Who pays for this I don't care but the Highland C say they have no money for this so you may get your wish and it will be LEFT AS IT IS?
Now A few facts for you the pavement measurers 1m.350 both sides of the bridge
1m700 unber the bridge. Pavements out side Ashers top shop smaller most of HARBOUR STREET are well under that in fact at the chipper +out side Jacko's only 800mm with car parked and is a very busy road with both cars and walkers.
AT the moment traffic going under the bridge MAXIMUM in one hour 10 am 2047 average for 5 days=218.
Going under the LONGMAN INVERNESS over 1,000 per hour in a working day.
That is the traffic using two separate bridges but you tell me the Nairn bridge cant cope with additional traffic.
So let me repeat all I have said make the brae SAFE and return it to the way it was.
I have said Nairn needs homes get them built and I don't care where.
You can interperate what ever way you want.
What is of interest. Cause more rat-running through residential back streets.
Please enlighten every one where this would be possible for anyone to get where they want to go.And to get there faster, is that not the point of a rat run??
I am willing to debate what I have said with anyone who thinks I have said any thing different.
What is really disappointing is the blinkered solutions being proposed. For example, why not make the road under the bridge one way, heading out of town. Create room to build a roundabout in the vicinity of the balblair junction, and build a one way route up to a level crossing to connect with the station approach. Pedestrians could walk up the station approach and cross the line then walk down to the Balblair roundabout. And before anyone says that a level crossing wouldn't be safe, we seem to manage with one in Forres, and another at Brodie, and theres even one just off the roundabout into the Longman estate in Inverness. At the very least, it would only be a one way crossing.
Instead HC seem to be content to make more inpact than necessary on surrounding roads.
Did we have all this anger when Firhall was developed?
Dont know who is who has got the blinkers on.
Part of the danger to the public is the fact that traffic is forced to cross over to pavement side of the road at two points and this is the DANGER.
Uunfortunately high sided vehicles have to use the center of the bridge and at the moment pass along side the pavement.
So I will try once again to simple explain what I have put forward
1 Return THE BRAE to how it was by removing the offending island this in its self will allow driver to give pedestrians A wide berth when passing by not having to GO close to the pavement.
2 Under the bridge the have extended the pavement 350mm wider than the rest of the walk way with traffic running along side causing one of the dangers.
REMOVE the 350mm of the pavement replace that aria with bolards on the road NOT the pavement this wold prevent the traffic passing so near to the pavement.
3 Balblair junction in stall traffic lights that would allow traffic out this system works well on the Mossside road adjoining the A96 with this system in place the other island could be removed which in turn will allow traffic from being forced to go close to the pavement and on the wrong side of the road if you are coming from Queens park.
If this was to be used the DANGER would be greatly reduced and allow traffic to flow as before. At the moment traffic con be stopped twice before going under the bridge and caused delays.
4 The DANGER of using the steps to and from the Railway can be removed by making an exit onto George Street the platform extends far enough to allow this and would also allow access for everyone at the moment any one unable to use the steps has to go up the Baldrar road with no pavement at all another DANGER REMOIVED.
So there you have what I have suggested.
Nothing about Nairn South in what I have put forward.
Yes I have said it appears only developers will pay for this as Highland C. HAVE NO MONEY. Read in to that what they want?
By the way I have also suggested to the Highland Council if any thing I have put forward saves money could some of it be directed to wards A RAMP AT THE FIRHALL bridge another thing that is needed for access for the bisabled.
Mr GURN will you accept my apologies for having to repeat to some of your readers what I am trying to achieve for saftey on the BRAE as you will have gathered some people seam to be confused as to what I WANT when I say the DANGER has to be revoived for the safety of the users.
M.R. DUNBAR
Post a Comment