EIR/202600515866 · FOI/EIR · partially withheld
Transport Scotland - A82 safety management, traffic behaviour and signage data: EIR release
Information requested
Information relating to safety management, traffic behaviour and signage on the A82, particularly between Inverness and Fort William.
Please provide:
Any reports, assessments, or internal reviews conducted within the last 5 years relating to: Traffic flow on the A82 Slow-moving vehicles and traffic queues Driver behaviour, including overtaking incidents Any documents, correspondence, or internal discussions relating to: The use of laybys by slower traffic Consideration of signage such as “slow traffic use laybys” or similar messaging Driver awareness initiatives on the A82 Any data held on: Collisions or incidents on the A82 involving overtaking or driver error Identified high-risk sections of the route Any communications or work carried out with: Car hire companies Tourism bodies Other organisations
regarding driver awareness on trunk roads in the Highlands
Any information on whether Transport Scotland has considered introducing additional signage or traffic management measures on the A82, and any outcomes of those considerations.
If any of this information is already publicly available, please provide links or directions to where it can be accessed.
If parts of this request are too broad, I would be happy for it to be refined to ensure it can be processed effectively.
Response
As the information you have requested is 'environmental information' for the purposes of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs), we are required to deal with your request under those Regulations. We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA.
This exemption is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. This is essentially a technical point and has no material effect on the outcome of your request.
To aid my response I have numbered your questions.
Q1. Any reports, assessments, or internal reviews conducted within the last 5 years relating to:
Traffic flow on the A82 Slow-moving vehicles and traffic queues Driver behaviour, including overtaking incidents
A1. While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, under the exception at regulation 10(4) (b) of the EIRs a public authority may refuse a request for information if it is 'manifestly unreasonable'. The Scottish Information Commissioner's guidance on the regulation 10(4)(b) exception at: http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/Law/EIRs/EIRsExceptions.aspx says that there may “be instances where it is appropriate for the Commissioner to consider the proportionality of the burden on the public authority in terms of the costs and resources involved in dealing with a request when considering the application of this exception”. Our searches identified 11,900 documents relating to your question and to check each of these for relevance and redacting third party personal information is considered to be manifestly unreasonable because this would impose a significant burden as it would require a disproportionate amount of time, and the diversion of an unreasonable proportion of our resources from our core functions.
This exception is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exception. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exception. While we recognise that there may be some public interest in this information it is outweighed by the public interest in ensuring the efficient and effective use of public resources by not incurring excessive resource pressures when complying with information requests.
The potential range of variables using your keywords has resulted in an excessive number of records being returned. It might be helpful to consider what specific documents you are looking for or narrow your date range if possible. Ultimately if you are able to be as specific as possible, this is more likely to result in focussed returns on any future searches and assist you in identifying the information you are looking for.
Q2. Any documents, correspondence, or internal discussions relating to:
The use of laybys by slower traffic Consideration of signage such as “slow traffic use laybys” or similar messaging Driver awareness initiatives on the A82
A2. While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, under the exception at regulation 10(4) (b) of the EIRs a public authority may refuse a request for information if it is 'manifestly unreasonable'. The Scottish Information Commissioner's guidance on the regulation 10(4)(b) exception at: http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/Law/EIRs/EIRsExceptions.aspx says that there may “be instances where it is appropriate for the Commissioner to consider the proportionality of the burden on the public authority in terms of the costs and resources involved in dealing with a request when considering the application of this exception”.
Our searches identified 8,600 documents relating to your question and to check each of these for relevance and redacting third party personal information is considered to be manifestly unreasonable because this would impose a significant burden as it would require a disproportionate amount of time, and the diversion of an unreasonable proportion of our resources from our core functions.
This exception is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exception. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exception. While we recognise that there may be some public interest in this information it is outweighed by the public interest in ensuring the efficient and effective use of public resources by not incurring excessive resource pressures when complying with information requests.
The potential range of variables using your keywords has resulted in an excessive number of records being returned. It might be helpful to consider what specific documents you are looking for or narrow your date range if possible. Ultimately if you are able to be as specific as possible, this is more likely to result in focussed returns on any future searches and assist you in identifying the information you are looking for.
However, with respect to the potential introduction of your suggested signage option, these would require special authorisation.
Under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, it is Transport Scotland who has responsibility for the placing of traffic signs and road markings on the Trunk Road Network in Scotland. However, it is essential that a consistent approach to signing is adopted so that every driver can understand and, where necessary, respond to the information given by a road sign or marking.
This consistent approach is achieved through the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) which is legislation reserved to the UK Parliament. The TSRGD prescribes not only the signs and markings to be used but also, the circumstances when they may be placed on Britain's roads.
However, the roads authorities in Scotland (including Transport Scotland) may erect signs not included in the TSRGD but only with the special authorisation of the Scottish Ministers. The signage on the A82 has been introduced in accordance with the TSRGD to provide the appropriate consistent message, with any amendments being recommended when a change in layout or circumstances highlight such a need.
In relation to your request regarding signs to assist with layby use. Your suggestions are noted, however Transport Scotland’s opinion is that whilst these signs may help with reducing frustration and unsafe overtaking it would likely add more carriageway rejoining manoeuvres, which would create additional vehicle conflicts.
Q3. Any data held on:
Collisions or incidents on the A82 involving overtaking or driver error Identified high-risk sections of the route
A3. As no date range was provided in relation to the request for collisions or incidents, the date range has been taken as 1 January 2005 to 5 March 2026. Since 1 January 2005 to 5 March 2026, there were 981 collisions on the entire length of the A82 (from its junction with A898 at Erskine Bridge to its junction with the A9 at Longman Roundabout, Inverness) that included a reference to Driver / Rider Error or Reaction.
Since 1 January 2005 to 5 March 2026, there were 205 collisions on the entire length of the A82 (from its junction with A898 at Erskine Bridge to its junction with the A9 at Longman Roundabout, Inverness) that included reference to an overtaking manoeuvre.
Transport Scotland assesses the safety performance of the trunk road network on an annual basis by screening all locations where three or more personal-injury accidents have occurred in a three-year period. In addition, accident patterns and rates in the form of Route Accident Reduction Plans (RARP) are also considered. This ensures that full consideration is given to accidents that may be spread along a corridor. Further investigations are then carried out and, where appropriate, mitigation measures are prioritised for delivery. This robust, evidence-based approach ensures that the funding available is prioritised for those locations with the potential to deliver the greatest ‘casualty-accident’ savings. It is by using the evidence in this way that available funding can be optimised to best support the delivery of Scotland’s Road Safety Framework and our overarching vision of a future where no one is killed on Scotland’s roads.
In the most recent annual road safety review report for the 2026/27 financial year, the A82 between A887 junction to Drumnadrochit Bridge and the A82 Ballachulish Bridge to Inchree were identified as sites for further investigation.
For awareness, below is a list of ongoing design and construction schemes highlighted from previous years annual screening process: • Glen Etive Junction Signing • Achintore Road uncontrolled crossing and Vehicle Activated Signs (VAS) • Tyndrum to Glencoe Route Measures, including new signs, road marking and verge hardening works. • Torlundy to Spean Bridge Signing Improvements • Shore Street Roundabout Signing and Road Marking Review • A82 Creag nan Eun – signing and vehicle restraint system. • A82/A887 Invermoriston Footway & Signalised Pedestrian Crossing • Fort Augustus Pedestrian Video Survey to determine need for any additional pedestrian facilities • A82 Kenneth Street/Tomnahurch Street New Bollards • North of Lochybridge Vehicle Restraint System (VRS) • Great Glen Ranch VRS • Achnabobane Junction VRS • Clansman Hotel 40mph speed limit • A82 Glencoe 40mph Speed Limit • A887 Invermoriston Speed Limit Alterations • A82 Fort William Speed Limit rationalisation of existing speed limits and associated signs
The schemes listed below have previously been identified through the annual screening process for further investgation, and will be investigated in 2026/27 with any proposed measures introduced in future financial years.
• A861 Corran Ferry Jct to West End R/bout, Fort William. • B862 Foyers Junction to A887 Junction. • B8004 junction at Commando Memorial to A87 Invergarry. • Invermoriston to Drumnadrochit. • Ballachulish to Inchree. • Invermoriston to Drumnadrochit.
It is important to highlight that whilst an investigation will be undertaken, this does not guarantee significant issues will be identified nor that engineering improvement measures, including signing or traffic management works will necessarily follow. The safety performance of the trunk road network is assessed on an annual basis. This robust, evidence-based assessment identifies locations to be considered for remedial action. It is essential that we use this evidence to enable us to prioritise resources across the country to support the effective delivery of the Scottish Government’s targets.
Q4. Any communications or work carried out with:
Car hire companies Tourism bodies Other organisations regarding driver awareness on trunk roads in the Highlands
A4. While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, under the exception at regulation 10(4) (b) of the EIRs a public authority may refuse a request for information if it is 'manifestly unreasonable'. The Scottish Information Commissioner's guidance on the regulation 10(4)(b) exception at: http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/Law/EIRs/EIRsExceptions.aspx says that there may be circumstances where the burden of responding to a request justifies treating it as ‘manifestly unreasonable’, for example where: 1. the time and cost involved in complying with the request mean that any reasonable person would regard them as excessive; and 2. an extension of an additional 20 working days (under regulation 7 of the EIRs) is not sufficient to make the request manageable. Our searches identified over 267,000 documents and emails relating to your question and to check each of these for relevance and redacting third party personal information is considered to be manifestly unreasonable because this would impose a significant burden as it would require a disproportionate amount of time, and the diversion of an unreasonable proportion of our resources from our core functions.
This exception is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exception. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exception. While we recognise that there may be some public interest in this information it is outweighed by the public interest in ensuring the efficient and effective use of public resources by not incurring excessive resource pressures when complying with information requests.
The potential range of variables using your keywords has resulted in an excessive number of records being returned. It might be helpful to consider what specific documents you are looking for or narrow your date range if possible. Ultimately if you are able to be as specific as possible, this is more likely to result in focussed returns on any future searches and assist you in identifying the information you are looking for.
In relation to unfamiliarity with Driving on the Left, Road Safety Scotland (RSS) has worked with the British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association (BVRLA) and Police Scotland since 2019, to develop and run a campaign targeting foreign drivers/those not familiar with driving on the left. Leaflets, wristbands, and windscreen stickers were provided to car rental companies to distribute to foreign drivers hiring vehicles at airports across Scotland. In 2023, following Covid, the campaign was revived and further developed, and relaunched by the Transport Minister. In addition to the BVRLA route, campaign resources were made available in: Visit Scotland iCentres; airports; and ferry ports and supported by variable message signs on appropriate routes. Working with partners, RSS has run this campaign for several years, developing and disseminating resources which rental companies and the tourist industry share with their customers. RSS continues to refine its assets, incorporating messages on fatigue, and the campaign will rerun during the tourist season when collisions can spike. The wristbands for drivers say 'drive on the left' in eight languages, and RSS has also produced reservoir gaiters saying 'ride on the left' in eight languages for use by motorcyclists. Furthermore, a short, animated video was produced for companies to send to drivers in advance of picking up their vehicles. RSS is currently in discussions with the BVRLA, Police Scotland, the Scottish Government Marketing Team and several other organisations to see what more can be done to address www.transport.gov.scot this issue. Further information on the campaign can be found here: Driving on the left - Road Safety Scotland
Q5. Any information on whether Transport Scotland has considered introducing additional signage or traffic management measures on the A82, and any outcomes of those considerations.
A5. The below schemes are programmed for design and implementation in the 2026/27 financial year. These are a result of previous investigations through the annual screening process. • Glen Etive Junction Signing • Achintore Road uncontrolled crossing and Vehicle Activated Signs (VAS) • Tyndrum to Glencoe Route Measures • Torlundy to Spean Bridge Signing Improvements • Shore Street Roundabout Signing and Road Marking Review • A82 Creag nan Eun • A82/A887 Invermoriston Footway & Crossing • Fort Augustus Pedestrian Video Survey • A82 Kenneth Street/Tomnahurch Street Bollards • North of Lochybridge Vehicle Restraint System (VRS) • Great Glen Ranch VRS • Achnabobane Junction VRS • Clansman Hotel 40mph speed limit • A82 Glencoe 40mph Speed Limit • A887 Invermoriston Speed Limit Alterations
Across Scotland, safety cameras are deployed through the Scottish Safety Camera Programme primarily where they have the greatest potential to reduce injury collisions and where there is evidence of both collisions and speeding. This is in accordance with criteria contained in the Scottish Safety Camera Programme Handbook. This can be viewed at: https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/scottish-safety-camera-programme-handbook/ An annual site prioritisation process is undertaken each year to determine new safety camera sites across our road network. This national exercise acts to ensure the right camera technology is in the right place at the right time and is undertaken by the Scottish Safety Camera Programme in collaboration with Police Scotland and all 32 road authorities.
There are five mobile enforcement locations on the A82 between Arden to Tarbet on the A82 at Loch Lomond. In 2024, a pilot of temporary average speed cameras was deployed over the summer and autumn period as a temporary change of technology. This pilot was also intended to test the reliability of the equipment. This was reinstated on 13 May 2026 to improve road safety during a period of anticipated higher traffic volumes.
There are a further twenty-five mobile enforcement locations along the A82 from Glasgow to Inverness and three fixed safety cameras along the A82 Great Western Road, from Hyndland to Blairdardie.
Further information on all locations can be found at Safety Camera Locations — Police Scotland Safety Cameras.
About FOI
The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at https://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.
Contact Please quote the FOI reference Central Correspondence Unit Email: contactus@gov.scot Phone: 0300 244 4000 The Scottish Government St Andrew's House Regent Road Edinburgh EH1 3DG
Detected exemption language
We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA. This exemption is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, under the exception at regulation 10(4) (b) of the EIRs a public authority may refuse a request for information if it is 'manifestly unreasonable'.
Attachments
No attachments found.