Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2017
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2017-0183, written 5 Jun 2017. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 5 Jun 2017 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2017-0183 |
| Deceased | Jack Braniff |
| Coroner | Catherine McKenna |
| Coroner area | Manchester North |
| Category | Road (Highways Safety) related deaths |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 1 |
Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1)
REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS
THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:
1. Highways England, Piccadilly Gate, Store Street, Manchester, M1 2WD
2. Head of Highway Maintenance, Oldham Council, Oldham, OL1 1UT
CORONER
I am Catherine McKenna, Assistant Coroner for the Coroner area of Manchester North
CORONER'S LEGAL POWERS
I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroner's and Justice Act 2009 and
Regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (lnvestigations) Regulations 2013
1
2
3
INVESTIGATION and INQUEST
On the 11 November 2016, I commenced an investigation into the death of Jack Edward Braniff
then aged 19. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 5 May 2017. The
conclusion of the inquest was Road Traffic Collision, the medical cause of death being multiple
skull fractures and intracerebral haemorrhage.
4
CIRCUMSTANCES OF DEATH
At approximately 01:00 hours on 5 November 2016, Jack Braniff stepped from the pavement into
the path of an oncoming car on Middleton Road in Chadderton, Oldham. An illuminated
advertising board positioned close to the kerb obstructed Jack's view of the road and the car
driver's view of the pavement. Visibility issues for both Jack and the car driver were compounded
by the shadows cast by overhanging tree canopies against the illumination of the advertising board
and a nearby bus shelter. Jack was taken to the Royal Oldham Hospital and died at 02:10 hours
on 5 November 2016 as a result of the injury he sustained upon impact with the car.
5
CORONER'S CONCERNS
During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern. ln my
opinion there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken. ln the circumstances it is
my statutory duty to report to you.
The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows:-
1. The evidence was that the size and position of the illuminated advertising board at the site
of the collision obstructs pedestrians' view of the road and drivers' view of pedestrians. The
concern is to ensure that road safety is fully considered when decisions are made about the
size, position and location of illuminated advertising boards on public highways.
2. The overhanging tree canopies at the site of the collision compounded the visibility issues
which led to this death. The evidence suggested that there is a nexus between a reduction
in the tree lopping in the Greater Manchestet area and an increase in road traffic collisions.
The concern is that if this continues, it may lead to further fatalities.
6
ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN
ln my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe each of you
respectively have the power to take such action.
7
YOUR RESPONSE
You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely 31
Juty 2017. l, the Assistant Coroner, may extend the period.
Your response nrust contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out the
limatahla
tll I 19tqvlg
r,r¡hrr nn anfinn
ì/^r r mr rcf avnlain
Jvu
l.ìf}ranrrica
tvl Yrrev
v(l
fnr a¡{inn
qvtlvl
tvl
iq nrnnnqcd
I I rver
vr\Ì/¡v
l.
ö
ULrl'lEÐ anq l- UE L¡t,A I lLtN
I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following lnterested Persons
namely:-
.
r
I am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response.
The Chief Coroner may publish either or both in a complete or redacted or summary [rom. He lrtay
send a copy of this report to any person who he believes may find it useful or of illterest. You may
make representations to me the coroner at the time of your response, about the release or the
publication of your response by the Chief Coroner.
Date:
June 201 7
9
Signed:
1 response published against this report on judiciary.uk. A response is a body's written reply to the coroner's concerns; publication is at the discretion of the Chief Coroner's office, so an absent response does not mean nobody replied.
____________________ Unitypartnersh ip Highways and Engineering Coroner’s Officer Traffic Section, Floor 1 HM Coroners’ Court Henshaw House, Cheapside Phoenix Centre Oldham OL1 1NY LC/p Stephen Shaw Way Heywood Switchboard: 0161 770 3000 OL1O1LR Fax: 0161 7703411 28 July 2017 Your Ref: Our Ref: GDS /710 Dear Ms Turner Re: REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS: Oldham Council’s Responses to the Coroner’s concerns: Thank you for your recent communication with regards to Regulation 28 and the concerns you have raised following the fatal Road Traffic Collision on the A669 Middleton Road, Chadderton Oldham. Please be assured that Oldham Council takes Road Safety very seriously and is constantly committed to reducing the number of people killed or injured on its highways. Since the start of the new millennium we have seen a steady improvement in Road Safety across the Borough for many categories of road user. This trend culminated in 2016 with the annual number of Road Traffic Collisions (RTC’s) in Oldham falling to 229 which is an all-time low. I am encouraged to point out that within this data there is evidence of significant reductions in the number of pedestrians injured on roads during the hours of darkness where there is an operational street lighting system. This is demonstrated in our recent Road Safety figures as summarised in the table below: Numberof Pedestrian lotal Number Year ‘Collisions in Oldham along RTC’s roadswith streetlighting 2000 886 70 2005 717 51 2010 403 33 2015 273 15 It is also worth noting that both the road markings and carriageway were in excellent condition at the time of the collision. With regards to your specific concerns I have responded to each one in turn, overleaf: www.unitypartnership.com Proudtobe partofthe Otdhamteam Registered n EnglandatTempafordHall,Sandy, 5edfordshr, SG192BD RegisteredCo. 5916336 C- Concern 1 The evidence was that the size andposition ofthe illuminatedadvertising boardatthe site ofthe collision obstructspedestrians’ view oftheroadanddrivers’ viewof pedestrians. The concern is to ensure that roadsafetyis fully considered when decisions are madeabout the size, position and location ofilluminatedadvertising boards on public highways. The placement of advertising on the highway is controlled by “The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 Under the current Planning process, an Application for Advertisement Consent is required by Oldham to display a freestanding sign of the type under discussion. O)dham considers any such application against its visual appearance, impact on amenity and any detrimental influence it may have on highway (road) safety. With regard to the impact of the particular advertising sign on Middleton Road, its location does not restrictvisibility at the nearby junction of Mime Street, and is set far enough back from the kerb edge to allow vehicles to travel along Middleton Road safely. There are existing controlled pedestrian crossings nearby and I do not consider that the siting of the sign would adversely impact on pedestrians using these crossings Incidentally, the existing sign is set back 500mm from the kerb edge to provide what is termed the “dynamic envelope” designed such that it is unlikely to be struck by wing mirrors or overhanging vehicles; consequently, this space also allows some intervisibility between pedestrians and drivers should a decision be made to cross at this point. To restrict the level of visual contrast that occurs when the sign is illuminated whilst empty, under our current powers it would be impossible to control when an advert was removed and difficult to monitor whether the empty sign was illuminated or not. Planning conditions are not generally attached to control the continued illumination because of the difficulties that would be encountered in trying to entorce this. However, in light of yourfindings, I feel it would be prudent for Qldham to attach a Condition to future applications that restricts illumination of the units when they are empty. De’ivered by Unity Partnershipon behaif of Odham Counci; Concern 2 The overhanging tree canopies at the site ofthe collision compounded the visibility issues which led to his death. The evidence suggestedthat there is a nexus between a reduction in the tree loppingin the GreaterManchesterarea andan increase in road traffic collisions. The concern Is thatifthis continues, it mayleadto furtherfatalities. Oldham Council currently manages its Street Lighting network under a PR Contract with the neighbouring Borough of Rochdale in what is termed the Community Lighting Partnership (CLP). Our Contract is with the CLP where the appointed Sub Contractor E-on carries out all the day to day operations to align with the project’s Output Specification. The Street lighting on the A669 Middleton Road (from itsjunction with A663 Broadway to 86048 Featherstall Road has previously been assessed in relation to its lighting classification and associated compliance with British Standard 5489 -1: 2003. The conflict areas, including road junctions, the signalised pedestrian crossings near Melbourne Street and the Zebra crossing near to Victoria Street were all been included in the assessment. In June 2017 a visual site survey was also carried out to check the siting of street lighting columns in relation to other Street furniture and assets including trees. This operation identified that the lantern on column 47 was one that may suffer from excessive tree canopy foliage growth during the spring and summer months of the year. A copy of this Report is attached. As part of the PFI agreement contract described above, the detrimental effect that overgrown tree canopies have on lanterns is monitored through a combination of routine maintenance and night time inspection regimes. Where trimming and pruning is required the work is programmed to be carried out as soon as reasonably practicable. In light of the concerns that you have raised the Council will ensure the tree pruning continues as efficiently as possible and is committed to reviewing the program process and will implement practical improvements where appropriate. However, the recent survey has confirmed that the lighting level along this section of the A669 Middleton Road is compliant with the British Standard. It is worth noting that the levels achieve ME 2 classification which is in fact a higherstandard than is required for a road of this category; on roads such this, a lighting classification of ME 3 would be acceptable. Furthermore, by positioning the street lighting columns at the main crossing points we are able provide good negative contrast at key locations where conflicts occur. I hope that the above information has helped to address the two concerns that you have raised. Delivered by Unity Partnership on behalfofOldham Council C Should you have any queries about this letter, the matter is being dealt with by my colleague , who may be contacted on Yours sincerely Head of Highways and Engineering Unity partnership Direct line: 0161 770 3000 Doc Ret: Devered by Unity Partnershp on behalf of Oldham Counci’
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Road (Highways Safety) related deaths, and how often a new one appears.
What would an alert for this have sent me? Search the full text
Free to try — the preview shows the real matches and how many arrived in the last 12 months. Your first email alert is free.
These reports are published by the Chief Coroner's office at judiciary.uk and are © Crown copyright. The text here is reproduced from the published PDF so it can be searched. If something on this page is wrong, or you are a person named in it and want it reviewed, email drcjar@gmail.com and we will act promptly.