BeechRoadSafetyWorkingGroupInterimReport-June2020

ExecutivesummaryThisinterimreportontheworkofBeechRoadSafetyWorkingGrouphasbeenpreparedattherequestofBeechParishCouncil.Speedingtrafficremainsamajorconcernformostvillagers.VolunteersformedBRSWGfollowingameetinginJanuary2020.HavingadoptedtermsofreferencebasedonascheduleofworkdevelopedbyBPC,theteamhasdiligentlyresearchedoptionsforfeasiblesolutionstotheissueofspeedingtraffic.

Theworkinggroupdivideditseffortsintofourworkstreamsinordertofocusactivityandmakeprogressacrossallareasofinquiry.Referencetotheworkstreamsismadethroughoutthereport.Theyare:1:Pathways2:Speedmanagement3:Campaigningandlobbying4:Funding.

Theworkinggroupadoptedatwo-foldstrategy,onedesignedtomovepedestriansofftheroad;theseconddesignedtoreducetrafficspeeds.Threeoptionswereconsideredformovingpedestriansontofootpaths;fouroptionswereconsideredregardingreducingtrafficspeeds.

ItwasrecognizedattheoutsetthatfailuretoenforcethespeedlimitarosefromlackofpoliceresourceswhichappeartobeparticularlyacuteintheAltonandRuralsector.Furthermore,officersfromHampshireCountyCouncilfrequentlycitepoliceresistanceasareasonfornotconsideringtrafficcalmingschemesthathavedemonstrablysavedliveselsewhereinthecountry.

Policeresistancetospeedlimitreductionsarisesagainfromlackofresources.Inordertobreaktheviciouscircleofblamelaying,theworkinggroupdecidedthatitshouldsupportacampaigntargetingHampshireConstabularyandthePoliceandCrimeCommissionercallingforfairerallocationofresourceslocally.Paradoxically,withmoneynowavailableforpolicerecruitment,thenumberoflocalofficershasactuallydeclined.ThecampaignisongoingandhasreceivedfrontpagecoverageintheAltonHeraldafteraletterwassenttotheChiefConstablewithsupportfromthechairsofeighteentownsandparishes,alongwithsixdistrictcouncilors,allbasedinAlton.

InresponsetheChiefConstablehaspromisedthatconcernsraisedintheletterwillbereviewedbytheAssistantChiefConstableandencouragesengagementwiththedistrictpolicecommander.Ourvoiceisbeinglistenedtoandtheworkinggroupintendstofollowuptheseopportunities.

Fundingisakeyconsiderationbutitisprovingdifficulttoidentifyavailablefundsduringthecurrenthealthcrisis.Worse,giventheimpactofCovid-19ontheeconomyitislikelythatfindingfundsexternallywillnotbecomeeasierinthecomingmonths.Wearefocusingonwhatisfeasible.

Thereportmakesanumberofrecommendations.Asummaryoftheseisincludedatpage15.

TheworkinggroupaimstodeliverafinalreportinAutumn2020thoughhittingthistargetwillbelargelydependentuponcouncilofficersreturningtotheirofficeswherekeyinformationisstored.

Theteam’smembershipcommandsawiderangeofskillsrelevanttothedeliveryofthisproject.TheyremainwillingtocarryouttheroleforwhichBeechParishCouncilaskedthattheyvolunteer.SirCharlesCockburnBt.Chair,BeechRoadSafetyWorkingGroup21June2022

2

1. Background1.1Sinceitsinceptionin1999,BeechParishCouncil(BPC)hasbeenawarethatthespeedoftrafficthroughBeechrepresentsvillagers’greatestcommunity-relatedconcern.MedsteadRoadisnarrowandwindingwithoccasionalhighbanks.Itoftenlackssufficientroadwidthtoaccommodatetwovehiclesandapedestrian.ThesamedescriptionappliestoKingsHill

1.2Apartfromawell-maintainedshortsectionoffootpathattheeasternendofMedsteadRoad,leadingtotheA339junction,therearenofootpaths.Thefootpathistheroadandpedestrians,cyclistsandequestriansallfeelveryvulnerableduetospeedingtraffic.

1.3BPChasmadetwopreviousconcertedeffortstoaddressthisproblem.Bothresultedinactionbeingtaken(eg,whitelinesbeingpaintedontheroadmarginstogivemotoriststheappearanceofanarrowerroad,inhopeofreducingspeeds;morerecently,whitelineswerepaintedonthecarriagewaytocreatesectionsofvirtualfootpath:onealongsideBushyLeazeWood;theotheronKingsHill;bothontheSouthsideofthecarriageway.

1.4Concernamongvulnerableroadusershasnotdiminished.Villagerscontinuetodrive150metrestotheVillageHallratherthantaketheriskofwalkingalongMedsteadRoad.

1.5SpeedsthroughthevillagehavebeensubjecttomeasurementusingaSIDcameraandthedataanalysed.Speedshavenotdiminished,thoughtheyarebelowthenationalaverage.

1.6Beechisanactivecommunitywithawell-establishedNeighbourhoodWatch(NHW).Asspeedingvehiclesremainedanissue,aCommunitySpeedWatch(SW)wasestablishedin2016andrunbyvolunteersovertwoyears.SWisabouteducation,ratherthanenforcement.

1.7Thevolunteersunanimouslydecidedtoceaseactivitiesaftertwoyearswhendatashowedthepercentageofdriversspeedingthroughthevillageatover35mph,thelowestfigureSWwasallowedtorecordandreport,remainedunchangedat35%.

1.8TheSWvolunteersconcludedthattheireducationaleffortswerehavingzeroeffect.Theyadvisedtheywouldonlyrecommencetheiractivitieswhensomethingsubstantialchanged,ideallyregardingenforcementorconstructionofphysicaltraffic-calminginfrastructure.

1.9InJune2019aproposalwasputtoBPCtoallocateexpenditureof£12.5ktotheconsultancyarmofHampshireHighwaystoproduceastudyonroadsandfootpaths.Itsaimwouldbetoidentify,considerandcostpotentialsolutionstothespeedingissuewhileseekingoptionstomovepedestriansofftheroad.BPCrejectedthatproposal.

1.10InJanuary2020BPCheldawell-attendedpublicmeetingatBeechVillageHallwiththeaimoffindingvillagerswillingtotakeontheworkofproducingthestudy.Dissentingvoicessuggestednoprogresscouldbemadeunlessmoneycouldbefoundtopayforanysolutions;othersbelievedthatfindingfeasiblesolutionswhichcouldcommandthesupportofvillagerswouldhelpdrivetheprocessoffundraisingforanagreedsolution.

1.11VolunteersagreedtoformaWorkingGroup(WG)todevelopanddeliverthestudy.2. BRSWG-termsofreference;aims,objectives;membership;reporting2.1InFebruary2020,thefirstmeetingofBeechRoadSafetyWorkingGroup(BRSWG)washeld.AChairandSecretarywereappointed.NoTreasurerwasappointed,asnofundswouldbeheld.BPCinstructedthatnomoneycouldbespentwithoutprioragreement.

3

2.2ItwasagreedthattheScheduleofWork(SoW)proposedintheslidesshownattheBVHpresentationwouldprovidetheWG’stermsofreference.TheSoWincluded:

a)EstablishownershipoflandborderingthefulllengthofMedsteadRoadandKingsHill.Wheresuchlandisn’tcontrolledbyHampshireCountyCouncil(HCC),establishwiththeownerswhethertheirlandmaybeincludedinanyfootwayscheme.

b)Deviseanidealroadsafetyscheme(trafficcalmingmeasuresand/orroadsidefootways),oroneormoreoptions,forthefulllengthofMedsteadRoadandKingsHill.

c)Considerwhetheranyfootwaysshouldincludeprovisionforotherusers(e.g.cyclists),andsosetanoutlinespecificationforfootways.

d)Establishwhetheranyexistingornewoff-roadfootpathscanplayapartinthescheme.

e)Considerwhatphysicaltrafficcalmingelementsarerequired.

f)Obtainoutlinecostingforallschemeelements.

g)Narrowdownandrefinefeasibleoptions,includingcheckingacceptabilitywithHCC.

h)Determinethedefinitivescheme,probablytobedeliveredinphasesovertime.

i)Establishavailablesourcesoffunding.

j)Establishacombinedfundinganddeliveryprojectplan.

2.3Aim-ourprimeaimwouldbetoproduceareportforBeechParishCouncilsettingoutfeasibleoptionsfordealingwiththeissuesofvulnerableroaduserssharingtheroadswithspeedingtraffic,supportedwithcostedrecommendationsforaction.

2.4Objectives-tofullyinvestigateeachoftheissuesraisedinourtermsofreferenceandtomakerecommendationsuponthebasisoffeasibility,includingcost.

2.5Nextsteps-theWG’sreportwouldbeconsideredbyBPC.Recommendationswouldthenbeputtoavillagereferenduminaformalconsultationprocess.

2.6Deliverydate-thereportandvillageconsultationprocesstobecompletedbyJuly2021,meaningthatourreportshouldbedeliveredduringAutumn2020.(Delayref)

2.7Strategy-WG’sstrategywastwo-fold:first,wewouldseekoptionsforgettingpedestriansofftheroads,particularlyinthevillagecentreandonKingsHill;second,wewouldseekoptionstoreducetrafficspeedsinthevillage.

2.8Membership-fourmembersattendedthefirstmeetingandinsubsequentweeksfivefurthermembersjoinedtheWG.Threemembershavesinceresigned:twoowingtoworkpressures;thethirdfollowingdisagreementoverthedesignofroadsafetyposters.

2.9Experience-members’expertiseandexperienceincludesprojectmanagement;dataanalysis;highwaysdesign;campaigningandlobbying;speedawarenesscoursedesign;SpeedWatch.

2.10Workstreams-fourdistinctworkstreamswereestablishedenablingindividualteammemberstofocusondevelopinganswerstoquestionsraisedinourtermsofreference,thusdividingtheworkloadandensuringprogresswouldbemadeacrossalltheissues.Theyare:1:Pathways2:Speedmanagement3:Campaigningandlobbying4:Funding.

2.11Reporting-updatereportsontheWG’sactivitiestoBPCmeetingshavebeendeliveredonamonthlybasisinpersonbytheChair.

4

2.12Meetings-theWGhasheldface-to-facemeetingsinFebruaryandMarchandon-linemeetingsinAprilandMay(twomeetings).Ournextmeetingisplannedon29June2020.

2.13Minutes-formalminuteshavebeentakenandsubmittedtotheParishClerkandChairofBPC,alongwithsupportingdocuments.

2.14Declarationofinterest-BRSWGreportstoBPC.Allinterestsaredeclared.3. Worksteam1:Footpaths3.1.1TheWGacceptedBPC’sviewthatitwouldbeadvisabletomovepedestriansofftheroadwhereverpossible,soavoidingtheneedtosharethecarriagewaywithmotorvehicles.

3.1.2Thusfar,wehavelookedatthreepossiblesolutions,oneofwhichcouldgetearlyapprovalbutwouldrequiremoremoneythanisavailableatthispointtotheParishCouncil.Forsimplicity,wethinkofthemas1)KingsHilltoVillageCentrepath;2)the1970sroadwideningandfootpathscheme;3)theSouthPerrottoption.

3.1.3Option1:KingsHilltoVillageCentreTheWG’sfirstprioritywastoestablishwhetherafootpathcouldbecreatedwhichwouldbringresidentsfromKingsHilltothevillagecentreandVillageHallwhileavoidingwalkingalongMedsteadRoad.(SeeSoWcanddat2.2above)

3.1.4SucharoutewouldinvolvetravellingfromKingsHillthroughBushyLeazeWood(BLW)tothemainentranceonMedsteadRoad.Withgoodsightlinesatthatpoint,itispossibletocrossMedsteadRoadandwalkuptheWellhouseRoadloop(formerlyknownasGrangeRoad)andtheninrelativesafetyalongWellhouseRoad(ideallyenhancedbytwovirtualfootpathwhitelines)tothepedestrianentranceofBeechVillageHallandGreen.

3.1.5InquirieswithSeongGi,owneroftheprivatelyownedwoodlandbordering1KingsHill,MedsteadRoadandthewoodlandownedbyForestryEngland,revealedthathewaswillinginprincipletoallowapathwaytobeconstructedacrosshisland.

3.1.6Thispathwouldcommencenearthedrivewayto1KingsHill,runningthroughthewoods,alongalineroughlyparalleltoMedsteadRoad,tothemainentrancetoBLWontheSouthsideofMedsteadRoad.ThepathwouldenablepedestrianstoavoidafairlynarrowsectionofMedsteadRoadandwouldlinktoexistingvirtualfootpathsatbothends.

3.1.7TheWGisawareofanestimatefromPoulsomforconstructinga1,300metrelong,1.3-1.5metrewidepaththroughSeongGi’swoodstotaling£53,750+VAT.ThisestimateisalludedtoinanemailbuttheWGhasnotseentheoriginal.(SeeAppendixA:estimate)3.1.8IssuesrelatedtopursuingOption1

a)Thoughwehavebeeninformallyassuredofhiscommitment,WGisnotawareofanywrittencommitmentbySeongGiorhislegaladviserstoallowaccesstohisland.

b)SeongGi’slanddoesnotquiteextendtotheMainEntrancetoBLW,fallingsome50metresshort.ItmightbepossibletobridgethatgapusinglandadjacenttotheroadownedbyHampshireHighways(HH)butpermissioncannotbeassumed.

c)Thequalityoftheun-metaledsurfaceof‘GrangeRoad’whichis‘adopted’but‘notmaintained’isverypoorinplacesandoftendeterioratesfollowingheavyrain.ThiscouldfurtherdeterthosepedestriansalreadyputoffbytheclimbtoWellhouseRoad.

5

d)ThereisnofootpathonWellhouseRoadandthespeedoflocaltrafficalongithasalreadycausedconcernamongvillagers.SightlinesaremostlybetterthanthoseinMedsteadRoad,particularlyasthelatternearsthevillagecentreEastofthebridlewaycrossingnearNo.95.

e)Thoughsignshavebeenplacedatthetopof‘GrangeRoad’todissuadedriversfromfollowingsatnav,deliverydriversstillsometimesuseitasathroughroad.Thereisnospaceforbothpedestrianandvan,andinplacesnowhereforapedestriantogoifsoconfronted.

f)Conversely,animprovedsurfacedesignedtoassistpedestriansmightbringwithitunwantedencouragementtodriverstouse‘GrangeRoad’asathoroughfare.

g)Thepreciselinefortheproposedpathhasyettobeestablished.Poulsom’sestimatewasprovidedfollowingasitevisiton11March2020.ItisdependentuponaccesstoSeongGi’slandbeinggainedviatheBLWmainentrance,whichbelongstoForestryEngland.Permissiontousethisentrancecannotbeassumedandmaynotbeforthcoming.

h)TheWGarrangedtoview‘GrangeRoad’withHHofficers;thiswascancelledduetoCovid-19.

3.1.9Recommendation-TheWGbelievesthatOption1shouldbepursuedfurtherasitcouldhelpdeliverSoWb,c,d,fandg(see2.2above).However,itwouldinvolvefundraising.

3.1.10Option1a:FootpaththroughBushyLeazeWoodTheKingsHillpathcouldbeextendedfurtherEastrunningpastthemainentrancetoBushyLeazeWoodparallelwithMedsteadRoadtothepointwherethebridlewaycrossesfromBLWtowardsBeechRecreationGround.

3.1.11TheWGhasmadecontactwithForestryEnglandtoestablishwhetherpermissionwouldbegrantedtoputapathacrossitsland,linkingtheentranceofthebridlewayadjacentto95MedsteadRoadtothemainentrancetoBLW.Permissionwasrefused.

3.1.12ForestryEnglandhasrecentlyundergoneamajorre-structuring,addedtowhichthedisruptioncausedbyCovid-19mayhaveresultedinourproposalnotbeinggiventhefullestconsideration.Itmaybepossibletorequestareviewofthisdecisioninthefuturebutisclearlyunlikelytomakeprogressintheshortterm.

3.1.13AnalternativewouldbetoextendapatheastwardsonlandownedbyHH,adjacenttoMedsteadRoad.However,thelandinquestioniswooded,veryunevenandcontainsanumberoftroughsactingassoak-aways,whichcaptureflood-waterfromMedsteadRoad.Thiswillmakeconstructingafootpathaparticularlytoughtaskandpotentiallyverycostly.

3.1.14.AvirtualfootpathisalreadyinplacealongtheSouthcarriagewayofMedsteadRoad.Thispathtakestheformoftwowhitelinespaintedonthecarriagewayandrunsalongapartoftheroadwheresightlinesinbothdirectionsarequitegoodandtheroadwideenoughtoaccommodateapedestrianandtwocars.ItlinksthebridlewaytoBLWmainentranceandsoimitatestheproposedroutethroughthewood.However,itdoesnotachievetheobjectiveofgettingvulnerableroadusersofftheroadand,thoughresearchneedstobedonetojustifythisview,itdoesnotappeartobemuchused,possiblybecauseatrackthroughBLWisavailable.3.1.15Recommendation-TheWGdoesnotproposetopursueOption1aanyfurther.

3.2.1Option2:1970sroadwideningandfootpathschemeSoWa)requiresthattheWGshould“EstablishownershipoflandborderingthefulllengthofMedsteadRoadandKingsHill.Wheresuchlandisn’tcontrolledbyHampshireCountyCouncil(HCC),establishwiththeownerswhethertheirlandmaybeincludedinanyfootwayscheme.”Intheearly1970sHampshireCountyCouncil(HCC)devisedaschemetowidenMedsteadRoadandinstallafootpathontheSouthsideoftheroadrunningthroughthecentreofthevillageWesttothebridlewaywhereBLWcommences;andalsoalongtheSouthsideofKingsHill.

6

3.2.2Underthisschemetherequiredlandwouldbecompulsorilypurchased.Onceitbecameclearthattheirlandwouldbeacquired,someownersenteredintonegotiationswithHCC;inexchangeforagreedcompensation,theCountyacquiredanoptiontobuildafootpathoverpartofthoseowners’properties.Thisoptionwasknownasa‘dedication’ofland.

3.2.3Otherownersrefusedtonegotiate.WhileCPOsweredrawnup,itisnotclearthatalltherefusniks,orindeedany,wereactuallyservedwithaCPO,meaningthatsomepropertieshavefrontagesthataresubjectneithertotheownershipof,nordedicationtoHCC.

3.2.4Unawareof‘dedications’,theWGputconsiderabletimeandresourceintotryingtoestablishownershipoflandbut,whilewearenowclearerabouttheextentofHampshireHighways-ownedland,ithasprovedimpossibletoestablishwithcompleteaccuracywhetherthereisanunbrokenlineoflandownedby,ordedicatedto,HCCtoenableconstructionofafootpath.

3.2.5InearlyMaytheWGChairreceivedanemailfromMrColinBengree,avillagerwithsomeinsightintothehistory,whichineffectattackedtheWG’smethodology.TheWGhadsetouttoestablishinformationabout‘ownership’ofland,whichwebelievedwouldbeheldbytheLandRegistry.WithhelpfromHHwegainedaccesstotherelevantrecordsbutwerenotmuchwiser.

3.2.6TheWG’sapproachwasunderminedbythediscoverythat‘dedications’,oroptionsacquiredoverland,arefrequentlynotrecordedbytheLandRegistry.Ownershipwouldthereforebeirrelevantwhereanunregistereddedicationexisted,sinceHCCwouldhaveacontinuingrighttoconstructafootpathoverthededicatedland,theoreticallyinperpetuity.

3.2.7FollowingMrBengree’sintervention,theWGmadecontactwiththerelevantHHofficer,MrMarkHousby.HebelievesafootpathcouldinfactbebuiltalongHCCownedanddedicatedland.

3.2.8Howeverhecannotestablishtheexistenceofanunbrokenline;norcanheclarifywhatlandisactuallyHH-owned(iecompulsorilyacquired),whatlandisdedicated,andwhatlandissubjecttoneitherqualification,becausehedoesnothaveaccesstotherelevantdocumentsasheiscurrentlyinCovid-19lockdown.

3.2.9MrHousbyhasundertakentosearchHH’sdeedssafeonhisreturntotheofficesothatwecanfinallyestablishthedetailedposition.ItispossiblehewillreturntotheofficeinJuly2020.

3.2.10NofurtherprogresscanbemadeonthisoptionaheadofMrHousby’sinvestigation.

3.2.11IssuesrelatingtoOption2

a)Dedicationsweresupposedtobeattachedtotheoriginaldeedsofthepropertiesinquestionbutquiteoftenduringtheinterveningyearsthesehavebecomedetached.SomepresentdayownersmaynotbeawareofthededicationheldbyHCCovertheirland;norwouldsuchdedicationsberevealedbyaLandRegistrysearch.

b)Otherownersareawarebutmayhavereceivedacopyofaletterdated1979addressedtotheownerof75MedsteadRoadfromalocalsolicitorhavingobtained“…confirmationfromtheHampshireCountyCouncilEstatesOfficerthattheCouncilnolongerwishtoacquirethesmallpieceofyourfrontagebecausetheroadwideningschemehasnowbeenshelved”.Itispossiblethatsomepropertyownersarerelyingonthat40yearoldreassurance.

c)MarkHousby,inemailconversationwithColinBengree,raisedtheissueofrelyingon40yearolddedications,particularlywherelandownersmightbeunawareoftheirexistenceandwhohadinsomecasesconstructedgaragesandotherinfrastructureacrossdedicatedland.

7

d)TheWG’sviewisthatwewouldlosesupportamongvillagersifwerecommendaproposalthatwouldresultintheirbeingforcedtoteardownexpensivelyconstructedinfrastructureinordertobuildafootpathonthebasisofdedicationsmadeover40yearsago.

3.2.12Recommendation-Option2shouldremaininplaceuntilclarificationhasbeenreceivedfromMarkHousby,followingwhichadecisioncanbemadeonwhethertopursueitfurther.Evenifacontinuouslineofownedordedicatedlandexists,constructionofafootpathontheSouthsideofMedsteadRoadandKingsHillisunlikelytocommandthesupportofallvillagers.3.3.1Option3:The‘SouthPerrott’optionThisschemecomesfromthevillageofSouthPerrottontheDorset/Devonborders.TheA356runsthroughthevillagewithacarriagewaythatappearsnowiderthanMedsteadRoadandisboundedbyhighstonewalls.Formuchoftheroutethroughthevillagethereisnofootpath.AswithMedsteadRoad,thefootpathistheroadwithnoroomtoaccommodatevehiclestravellinginoppositedirectionsandpedestriansformuchofitslength.

3.3.2Thistrafficcalmingschemecreatedafootpathalongtheroadwitha20ml(3/4”)raisedcurbandadifferentcolouredsurfacehighlightingthevirtualfootpaththuscreated.Withthecentrelineremovedtheschemeappearstodriverstobelittlewiderthanasingletrackroad.Itispossibleforvehiclestopassoneanotherbymountingthefootpath.However,itisunderstoodthatthismanoeuvretendsnottohappenatspeedowingtothedrivers’sensethattheyhavemountedanareareservedforpedestrians,whichisreinforcedbythelowkerbanddifferentcolouredsurface.

3.3.3TheSouthPerrottscheme(seephotoatAppendixB)hasbeeninplaceforsome8-10yearsandsomaybeconsideredasuccess.ItsA-roadstatusappearsnottohavebeenabartoitsdesign,meaningthatthemodelshouldbeapplicabletoMedsteadRoadwithitsC-roadstatus.

3.3.4TheWGhasengagedwithvillagersinSouthPerrotttofindoutmoreaboutthescheme’sinstallationandrenewal,alongwiththeinitialandongoingcosts.Thatworkisongoing.

3.3.5Recommendation-TheWGbelievesthatOption3)shouldbeinvestigatedfurthersinceisofferstheopportunitytofulfillSoWsb),c),d)ande).ItalsoavoidstheissuesarisingfromSoWa);asthefootpathwouldbebuiltonthecarriagewaytherewouldbenoneedtoacquireprivateland.4. Workstream2:SpeedManagement

4.1.1TheWG’stwo-foldstrategyisa)togetpedestriansofftheroadandb)toslowthespeedofmotortrafficalongtheroads,particularlyMedsteadRoadwhichisaratrun.

4.1.2SpeedsoftrafficonMedsteadRoadaremeasuredbyaSIDcamerawhichismovedaroundanumberofsites.Datafromthecameraisdownloadedandanaylsedonamonthlybasis.

4.1.3Datahasalsobeengatheredoveratwo-yearperiodbySpeedWatchandremainsavailable.

4.1.4Wealsohaveaccesstothetrafficcountandspeeddatafromearlier7daysurveys,dated2000,2002,and2009whichprovidehistorictrends.ThesesurveyswerefundedbyBPC.

4.1.5Therearetwowaysofreducingtrafficspeedsthoughthevillage:thefirstwouldinvolvetheinstallationofphysicaltrafficcalminginfrastructure,suchasspeedhumpsandplatforms,chicanesinvolvingshiftsofright-of-waypriority,andbarriersgivingprioritytovehiclesexitingthevillage(asinSelborne);thealternativeistoreducethespeedlimit,thoughacombinationoftrafficcalmingandspeedlimitreductionispossible(asinSelborne).

4.1.6Itiswellestablishedthatphysicalinfrastructureisthemosteffectivemeansofensuringthatspeedsarereduced,butthissolutioncanbeveryexpensiveanditisknownthatHCCisstrongly

8

resistanttotheinstallationofroadhumps,partlyduetotheirimpactonbuses(MedsteadRoadisonalittleusedscheduledbusroute,andschoolbusrouteuseddailyintermtime),partlybecausetheemergencyservicesdon’tlikethem.MedsteadRoadisakeythroughroute.

4.1.7Thespeedlimitthroughoutthevillageis30mphfromtheAbbeytothejunctionwithSnodeHill,where,inexplicably,itrisesto40mph,justmetresshortofthedangerousA339junction.

4.1.8TheWGbelievesthatifspeedswerereducedto20mphinthecentreofthevillagefromtheexistingfootpathtothebridlewaycrossingnexttoBLW,andfromthecornerby1KingsHilltoAltonAbbey,pedestrianswouldfeellessthreatenedbypassingvehicles.Onboththesestretchesofroadthereisnoalternativebuttowalkalongthenarrow,winding,high-bankedcarriageway.

4.1.9ShoulditproveimpossibletoconstructafootpathalongthenarrowstretchesofMedsteadRoadandKingsHill,reducingthespeedlimitfortrafficmightaloneprovideasolutiontotheconcernsofvulnerableroadusers,thoughenforcementwouldberequiredtoensurecompliance.

4.1.10ThesectionofMedsteadRoadrunningfromthecornerbelow1KingsHillandthebridlewaycrossingadjacentto95MedsteadRoadcouldremainattheexisting30mphlimitprovidedafootpathisconstructedthroughtheprivatelyownedsectionofBLW.

4.1.11SpeedsalongWellhouseRoad-almostexclusivelyvehiclesbelongingtoresidentsanddeliverydrivers-havebeenofconcerntopedestrians,dogwalkersandequestrians,forwhomthelinktothebridlewayfromAltontoTheddenusestheroadaftertraversingtheRecreationGround.

4.1.12WellhouseRoadhasnofootpath.UnlikesectionsofMedsteadRoadandKingsHill,therehasbeennohistoricschemetoinstallafootpathanditisbelievedthatthevergesareentirelyownedbytherespectiveresidentiallandowners.Pedestrianshavenorighttowalkalongtheverges,thoughthesedoofferarefugefromspeedingvehiclesformuchoftheroad’slength.

4.1.13ThereisspacealongmostofWellhouseRoadtoconstructafootpath.However,thiswouldrequireeitherthecooperationofresidentsortheimpositionofCPOsbyHCC.Inanyevent,thepleasingrurallookandfeelofWellhouseRoadwouldbechangedbytheimpositionofafootpath.Furthermore,BPCwouldmostlikelyhavetofundtheacquisitionofthenecessaryland.

4.1.14Ifa20mphspeedlimitcanbeachievedalongsectionsofMedsteadRoadandKingsHill,theWGbelievesthata20mphlimitshouldalsobeintroducedthroughoutWellhouseRoadtoo.

4.1.15TheWGbelievesavirtualfootpath(twowhitelines)shouldalsobeinstalled,notleasttoremindlocaldriversthatwherenofootpathexists,pedestrianshaveright-of-way.

4.1.16Thebenefitstovulnerableroadusersofreducingspeedlimitsto20mphinresidentialareasiswellunderstood.DepartmentofTransportAdvisory7/93showsthatapedestrianhitbyamotorvehicleat20mphhasa1in20chanceofbecomingafatality.At30mphthechancesriseto9in20;andat40mph,aspeedatorabovewhich950vehiclesdrovethroughBeechduringoneweekinMay2020,thechancesofbecomingapedestrianfatalityriseto17in20.

4.1.17RecommendationTheWGbelievesitshouldinvestigatethecreationof20mphzonesinthecentreofthevillageonMedsteadRoad,KingsHillandWellhouseRoad.4.2.Issuesrelatingtoreducingthespeedlimitto20mph

a)HCCintroducedanumberof20mphpilotschemesin2012.In2018,followingareviewHCCdecidednotcontinuethesepilots,thoughsignificantlynonehavebeenremoved.LocallytheseschemesremaininplaceinMedsteadandSelborne.Atbothsites,villagerscomplainthatthelimitisnotenforcedbutacceptthatitislargelyself-enforcingandthataveragespeedshavedeclined.

9

b)HCC’sdecisiontodropthe20mphpilotschemeshasbeenattackedby“20’sPlentyforUs”,anationalcampaigningorganisation.ItsHeadofCampaignsSouth,AdrianArendt,haspublishedacritiqueoftheHCCdecisionclaimingthedatadoesnotsupporttheconclusionsreached,amongothermajorflaws.(SeeAppendixC)Inparticular,thecritiqueattacksHCC’sapproachwithregardtoKilledandSeriouslyInjured(KSI)figures.HampshireHighwayswillnotinvestinspeedlimitinginfrastructureorschemeswhichcannotshowtheywillresultinareductioninKSInumbers.

c)IftherearenoKSIs,thenthereisnoproblemandsononeedtofixitsofarasHCCisconcerned.

d)AdrianArendtpointsoutthattheissueisnotaboutspeeds,injuriesanddeaths;itisabouthowweliveandwhetherwechoosetoliveinfear.TheangerfeltbyBeechresidents,particularlythosewholiveonMedsteadRoadandKingsHill,istheresultoffrequentlybeingmadetofeelfearfulbyinconsideratemotorists.

e)HCCisresistanttoreducingspeedlimitsbecauseitisawarethepolicewillnotsupportthenecessaryenforcement.HampshireConstabularyroutinelyobjectstoTrafficRegulationOrders,thenecessaryprecursortoanyspeedreductionmeasure,citinglackofenforcementresources.

f)HCC’sbudgetsareseriouslyconstrainedwhichmeansthatitisseverelylimitedintherangeofsolutionsthatitiswillingtoconsider.Cyclistsinthelocalityarewellawarethatroadsarepoorlymaintained,encounteringfrequentpotholes,brokensurfaceedgingandpotentiallylethalloosegravel,suchasthatseeninMedsteadRoadafteranydownpourofrain.FollowingtheCovid-19emergency,HCCisunlikelytoseeanincreaseinincomefromCouncilTaxorGovernmentgrant.

g)ItisclearthatHCCwillcontinuetoberesistantto20mphspeedlimitschemes.ThispolicyisunlikelytobereviewedunlessenoughpressureisplacedupontheCountybyanorganisedlobby.4.3Enforcementofexisting30mphspeedlimit

4.3.1The30mphspeedlimitisenforcedintwoways:first,throughtheuseofaSIDcameraremindingdriversoftheirspeed,thoughvehicleregistrationnumbersarenotrecorded;second,throughtheoccasional,rarevisitofapoliceenforcementvanequippedwithcamera,whichcananddoesleadtospeedingmotoristsbeingticketedandfinedalongwithpointsdeductions.

4.3.2DataprovidedbytheSIDshowsthatthevisitsbythepoliceenforcementvan,whichdoesnotoperateduringtherushhours,arenotsufficientlyfrequenttodeterspeedingdrivers.

4.3.3Enforcementwasprovidedbytwoothermeans,nownolongeravailabletothevillage.First,anumberof30mphreminderdiscswereremovedfromtheirpostsontheinstructionsofHampshireHighways(HH).Second,SpeedWatchoperatedoveratwo-yearperiodbetween2016-2018whenvolunteersquitbecausedatashowedtheireffortswerenothavingthedesiredeffect.

4.3.4TheWGhasestablishedthatthereminderdiscswereremovedbecausewherea30mphspeedlimitisinplacepurelyduetotheexistenceofregularlypositionedstreetlighting(asitisBeech)suchdiscspreventpoliceenforcement.Itisconsideredthattheexistenceofthestreetlightsaloneshouldbesufficienttoremindmotoriststhattheyareina30mpharea.

4.3.5TheWGaskedHHofficersforevidenceofwhatappearstobeanonsensicalruling.Nonehasbeenforthcoming,onlyanassertionthattheruleisof“long-standing”.

4.3.6TheWGhasphotographedMedsteadRoad/KingsHill.Streetlightsareplacedatthecorrectintervalsbutlamppostsaremostlyinvisible,buriedwithinhedges;sothe‘reminder’effectislost.

4.3.7TheSWteammightbepersuadedtorecommenceactivities,butonlyifeitherpoliceenforcementisimprovedorphysicaltrafficcalminginfrastructureisinstalledtoreducespeeds.

10

4.3.8SW’senforcementrolewasverylimited.Theteamwasallowedtouseitscameratorecordthespeedofapassingvehiclebutnotthevehicleregistration,whichhadtobewrittendownbyhandintheeventthatavehiclewastravellingat35mphormoreuptoamaximumof49mph.Theteambelievedthatsomevehiclesweretravellingfasterthan49mphbutthecameradidnotshowanyhigherspeed.Driverstravellingatbetween35and49mphwerereportedtothepolice.

4.3.9Driversweresentaletterbythepoliceinformingthemthattheyhadbeenseenspeedingandwarningthemastotheirfuturebehaviour.Asecondoffencefollowedthesameprocess.Athirdoffenceresultedinavisittothedriverbyapoliceofficerwithapersonalwarning.Nofineswereissued,norpointsdeducted.TheWGhaslearnedthatthosewhoreceiveavisitgoontothepolicecomputerandifcaughtspeedingbyapoliceofficeraremorelikelytoreceiveaticket/fine/pointsdeductionbecauserecordsshowstheyhave‘previous’.Thisisnotwidelyknown.

4.3.10OncedriversrealisedthattheywouldreceivenomorethanaslappedwristafterreceivingnotificationfromSW,theycontinuedtospeedthroughthevillage,withonewomangivingthefingertoSWvolunteersasshepassedby,oftenatthemaximumspeedshownbythecamera.

4.3.11ThecostofgoingthroughtheSWenforcementprocessis£300.Itisnotclearwhopays.4.4EncouragingSpeedCompliance-Posters

4.4.1Recentlyithasbecomepossibletoerectposters(semi-permanentsignswithalifeof4-5years)encouragingmotoriststobeawareofpedestriansandothervulnerableroadusers.

4.4.2BoththedesignofpostersandtheirpositioningissubjecttoapprovalbyHHand,ifpositionedonprivateland,subjecttoplanningapprovalbythelocalplanningauthority,EHDC.

4.4.3TheWGsawanopportunityforearlyprogressandhavingagreedposterdesignsataspecialmeetingheldon7May2020,submittedthemforBPCapprovalinrelationtoarequestfora£600allocationoffundstopurchasebothpostersandtwoadditionalposts,havingestablishedthatposterscouldbemountedtoexistingpostsprovidedtheywerenotspeedlimitsorstopsigns.

4.4.4Unfortunately,theagreedposterswerenotthosesubmittedtothe20MayBPCmeeting.

4.4.5IthassincebecomeclearthatthepositioningofthenewpostsissubjecttoHHapproval.

4.4.6TheposterdesignsoriginallyagreedhavenowbeensubmittedbothtoBPCandHH.IthassincebecomeclearthatHH’sprocessforapprovingpostersisnotyetfullyinplace.Atthetimeofwritingitisnotclearwhenapprovalofthere-submitteddesignswillbegranted.

4.4.7Consequently,thehiatuscausedbythesubmissionofthewrongdesignsisunlikelytohaveresultedinanyadditionaldelaytotheinstallationoftheposters,whichareawaitingapproval.

4.4.8OnceHHhasapprovedposterdesigns,volunteerswillhelpinstallthepostersandnewposts.BPChasconfirmedwithitsinsurersthatvolunteersarecoveredtocarryoutthiswork.

4.4.9Onceinstalled,sixposterswillbemovedaroundfoursites.TheSIDwilltracktheirimpact.

4.4.10RecommendationTheWGbelievesthepostercampaignandSIDtrackingshouldgoahead.4.5Encouragingspeedcompliance-ANPRcameras

4.5.1Thoughtherisksarisingfrompedestriansandothervulnerableroaduserssharingtheroadwithmotorvehiclesmovingat30mph(seeaboveat4.1.15)carriagearewellunderstood,theWGconsidersthatevenifnoreductionto20mphcouldbeachieved,persuadingmotoriststoobservetheexistingspeedlimitwouldrepresentagoodoutcome,respondingtoSoWsb,dande(at2.2)

11

4.5.2PriortotheestablishmentofBRSWG,BPChadbeenaskedtoconsiderthereplacementofitsSIDcamerawithanANPRcamera.Thelatterismoresophisticatedinthatitrecordsregistrationnumbersaswellasthespeedofthevehicleconcerned.Thepriceofthehardwarerisesfromaround£2.5-3.5kfortheSIDto£5-6kfortheANPR.Thereareadditionalcostsrelatedtothemovementofcamerastodifferentpositionsaroundthevillageandthedownloadingofdata.

4.5.3AtthepricequoteditisbelievedBPCcouldcoverthecostsfromitsownresources.BPChasnotcommittedtothepurchaseofanANPRcamera.

4.5.4TheWGwasmadeawareofcamerasthatappearedinMay2019alongHeathrowAirport’sperimeterroads.TheseareANPRcamerasmountedonpostswithasignwarning“averagespeedcamera”.Theeffectonmotoristbehaviourwasimmediateandon-going.Averagespeedsremainwellbelowthoseexperiencedpreviouslyonaroutemuchusedbycabsanddeliverydrivers.

4.5.5TheWGapproachedthesuppliersoftheHeathrowANPRcamerasandrequestedfullerdetailsontheiroperationandenforcement.ThesupplierswerewellknowntotheWGhavingsuppliedBPC’sSIDcameraalongwith,morerecently,quotesforstandardANPRcameras.

4.5.6Itwasestablishedthatthe‘averagespeed’camerasatHeathrowworkalongthesamelinesasSpeedWatch-ie,twowarningletters,followedbyvisitfromapoliceofficer.EnforcementisthejointresponsibilityofHeathrowAirportLimitedandtheMetropolitanPolice.

4.5.7AkeybenefitofanaveragespeedsystemisthatANPRscanberecalibratedtoreflectalteredspeedlimitsandcouldtakeintoaccountdifferingspeedlimitsthroughthevillage.

4.5.8ThisappearedtobeapromisingsolutionwhichcouldbeachievedwithinBPC’sexistingfinancialresourceswithouttheneedforfurtherfundraising.However,itisavailabletoHeathrowlargelybecausetheroadsconcernedarenotpublicbutownedbyHeathrowAirportLimitedandspecialrulesapply.Itisnotclearwhethersuchcamerascouldbedeployedonpublicroads.

4.5.9Recommendation-Theaveragespeedcameraoptionrequiresfurtherresearch.

4.5.10ThesupplierputusintouchwithapoliceofficerinCountyDurham,EllisHutchinson,whohasmountedanANPRinavanrunbySpeedWatch.Occasionally,PCSOsaredeployedtoo.Thebenefitisthatthecamerarecordstheregistrationnumbers,whichmeansthereisnorequirementforwritingdownnumbers-itseemsmanyerrorsweremadeintranscriptionandlettersweresenttothewrongpeople,withpredictablyunhappyresults.

4.5.11ThissystemdoesnothaveHomeOfficeapprovaland,again,enforcementfollowsthesamelinesasSpeedWatchwithlettersbeingsentbythepolice.Drivereducationremainsthechiefaim,butithasbeenveryeffectiveinreducingspeedslocallysinceitsfirstdeploymentinAugust2019.EllisHutchinsonbelievesthatpeoplegetusedtostaticsignsandthatthevan-mountedANPRcameraiseffectivebecauseitsdeploymentisrandomandbecauseofthevan’sSpeedWatchsign.

4.5.12The£26kcostofpurchasingthevanandcamerawasmetbythreeparticipatingvillages.DurhamConstabularypaidforthevehicle’son-goinginsuranceandrunningcosts.

4.5.13TheWGbelievesthatasystemsuchasthatdeployedinDurhamcouldbeequallyeffectiveinBeechwiththecostsharedaroundanumberofvillages,thoughSWwouldhavetobeinvolved.

4.5.14AsofJanuary2020therearenolongeranyPCSOsintheAltonandRuralsector,whichincludesBeechandneighbouringvillages.Itisunclearwhetheravan-mountedANPRwouldbesupportedbylocalpoliceasitisinDurham.Thisshouldberaisedwithseniorlocalpoliceofficers.

12

4.5.15Crucially,avan-mountedcamerawouldrequirethere-establishmentofBeechCommunitySpeedWatchandforthatteamtoworkinclosecoordinationwithSpeedWatchteamsinotherlocaltownsandvillages.ItisunclearwhetherthissolutionwouldmeettheSWteam’sstipulations.

4.5.16RepresentationshavebeenmadetotheChiefConstableofHampshireConstabulary,statingdissatisfactionwiththepaucityofthelocalpolicepresence.TheCC’sresponsesuggestsnowmaybeanopportunetimetoraisethequestionofpolicesupportforavan-mountedcamera.

4.5.17Recommendation.TheWGbelievesthatboththepossibilityofinstallinganaveragespeedANPRsystem,whichmightbeachievedatacostofaround£20k,andthepossibilityofacquiringavanmountedsystemshouldbethesubjectoffurtherresearch.Itwillalsobenecessarytoestablishwhetherthemovefromhand-writtenrecordsoftheregistrationnumberofspeedingvehiclestocamerarecordsrepresentssufficientchangetopersuadetheBeechCommunitySpeedWatchteamtorecommencetheiractivitiesonthebasisthatenforcementwillbeimproved.5. Workstream3:Lobbyingandcampaigning5.1TheWGunderstoodfromtheoutsetthatifweweretorecommendanidealsolution(SoWb)thiswouldlikelyrunintodifficulties,owingeithertothelackoffunds,orduetoHHofficersbeingconfrontedwithpolicyrestrictionswhichlimitedtheirabilitytosupportpreferredsolutions.

5.2Itbecameclearthatanyidealsolutionthatinvolvedspeedlimitenforcement,orreduction,wouldalsorequirethesupportofHampshireConstabulary.

5.3ItwasdecidedtheWGshouldengagebothwithrelevantcouncilofficersandwithcouncillors.Researchwasconductedtoestablishwhowieldssufficientpowerorinfluencetobringaboutthechangesthatmightberequiredbyanidealsolutionandcontactestablishedwiththem.

5.4ItwasalsounderstoodthattheWGmighthavetolobbyforpreferredoutcomesandmoneytofundthemandthatacampaignwouldinvolvedeliveryofconsistentmessagestoallaudiences.

5.5Itwasalsorecognisedthatreducingspeedsoftrafficthroughthevillagewouldinvolvemuchgreaterenforcement,and/ortheinstallationofphysicaltrafficcalminginfrastructure.Increasedenforcementwouldinturnrequiretheactivesupportofcouncilofficersandseniorpoliceofficers.Similarly,aspoliceresistancetoimposinglowerspeedlimitsduetolackofresourcesisoftencitedbycouncilofficersasareasonfornotadoptingaparticularscheme,soitbecameclearthatthetargetsofanycampaigntodeliverchangewouldneedtoincludebothpolicymakersandpolice.

5.6Beechhasawell-runandwell-supportedNeighbourhoodWatch.InJanuary2020,inthefaceofrisingcrimelevelslocally,BeechNHWlearnedthattheAltonandRuralsectorwastoloseitsthreeremainingPCSOs.Twofull-timepoliceofficerswerelefttoprovidecommunitypoliceservicesforsome35,000residents,demonstratingthatpoliceresourcesareseriouslystretched.

5.7Paradoxically,therecruitmentof20,000policeofficerspromisedbycentralgovernmentatthe2019generalelectionhasmademattersworse.TwoofthePCSOsappliedforfull-timeposts.Itisknownthatoncetheirtrainingiscompletetheywillbepostedelsewhere.TheremainingveryexperiencedPCSOwaspostedtothetroubledfamiliesprogramme,oneofHampshireConstabulary’sfourpriorities.Resourcesforlocalspeedenforcementaresimilarlystretched.

5.8ItrecentlyemergedthatEHDCfundspaidforthecostofthethreePCSOs.Thisarrangementwasunilaterallyabandonedbythepolice,whostatedtheycouldnolongersupportthestructure.NeitherofficersnorcouncillorsatEHDChaveofferedanexplanationforthepoliceactionandappeartobeinthedarkthemselves.ItseemsclearthatEHDCwouldhavecontinuedthescheme.

13

5.9TheWGdecidedthattheconcernsaroundtheremovalofthePSCOscouldbeexploitedtodevelopalocalcampaigntopressforgreaterresourcestobedeliveredtoAltonandRuralbothwithregardtocrimepreventionanddetectionand,crucially,aroundspeedlimitenforcement.

5.10Theobjectofthecampaignwastoraisetheissueofverylowlocalpolicenumbersandpoorlevelsofresourcing,includingspeedlimitenforcementonratrunslocally,includinginBeech.

5.11AsecondobjectivewastoopenupconversationswithlocalSpeedWatchteamsandChairswhoseParisheshadparticularlyproblemswithratrunningvehicles.Thiswouldfacilitatejointrepresentationsbothtocouncilofficersandpoliceofficerswithaviewtoimprovingenforcement.

5.12AkeylongertermobjectiveistoestablishBRSWGasaninfluentialvoiceindrivingpolicychange,whichwillbeimportantinpersuadingcouncilofficerstoagreetosupportourapproachtospeedreductionandenforcement,onceouridealschemehasbeenagreed.Thiswilltaketime.

5.13AlettertoHampshire’sChiefConstable(CC),copiedtothePoliceandCrimeCommissioner,wasdraftedandsentforapprovalandsignaturebytheChairsof18localtownandparishcouncils.

5.14AlleighteenChairssigned.InfollowingupthedraftstoencourageChairstosign,contactwasmadewithlocalSpeedWatchteams,whoseexperiencemostlyechoedthatofBeech.

5.15Thedraftwassentto14Districtand2CountyCouncillorswhosewardslieinAltonandRural.Sixsigned,allwithwardsinthetownofAlton,whoseTownCouncilalsosupportedthedraft.Oftheremaining8districtcouncillors,2declinedtosignandtherestdidnotrespond.Ofthosewhodeclinedtosign,onewasthedistrictcouncillorwhosewardincludesBeech.NeitherCountyCouncillorresponded,includingtheCouncillorwhosewardincludesBeech.

5.16.IttookeightweeksfromthedistributionofthedraftlettertoitsdespatchtotheChiefConstable,whichprovidedtimeforParishCouncilChairstoconsultwithcolleagues.DistrictandCountycouncillorsweregiventwoweekstorespond,havingbeeninformedthatall18TownandParishCouncilChairshadputtheirnamestothedraftletterofcomplaint.

5.17TheChairofBRSWGhasnowreceivedaresponsefromtheChiefConstable,whichacceptsthatrisingcrimeratesandspeedingtrafficcauseslegitimateconcerninruralcommunities.

5.18TheresponsetaskstheAssistantChiefConstable,wholeadsonlocalpolicingandisalsoresponsiblefortheStrategicRuralCrimeBoard,togiveconsiderationtotheconcernssetoutintheletterofcomplaint.Thereisnocommitmenttoincreasingcommunitypolicenumberslocally.

5.19TheChiefConstable’sresponseinvitestheWGChairtomakecontactwiththeDistrictCommander,whilestatingthatruralcrimeisapriorityforhiscommand,withanewRuralCrimeTacticalBoardestablishedto‘bringcommunitiestogether’toshareinformation.

5.20Ineffect,theresponseencouragesengagementwiththeestablishedconsultativeframeworkbetweenthepoliceandlocalauthorityrepresentatives.Thiscouldprovehelpfulinopeningdoors.

5.21TheWGunderstandsthattherelationshipbetweenEHDC,HCCandpoliceisverygood.However,theconcernisthatifrelationsbecometoocosy,thoseinvolvedwillbeincreasinglyreluctanttorefertotheelephantintheroom.Insufficientresourcesarebeingallocatedlocally.

5.22NoamountofconsultativemachinerycandisguisetherealitythatthePCSOshavegoneandAltonandRuralhasonlytwofull-timecommunitypoliceofficerstopolicesome35,000people.

5.23Meanwhile,thereisnexttonospeedlimitenforcement.Onlycontinuingpressurewillresultinmoreresourcesbeingallocatedtodealwithproblemssuchasburglary,speeding,andanti-socialbehaviour,whichtheChiefConstableacceptshasa“devastatingimpactonthequalityoflifeandconfidenceofallourcommunities.”

14

5.24RecommendationsTheWGshouldcontinuewithitscampaignwhichhasseenearlysuccessinachievingitsstatedobjectives:deliveringclear,consistentmessages;engagingwithotherswhoshareourconcerns;demandingandobtainingareviewofpriorities;developingapositionofinfluenceamongthosewhohavethepowertomakepolicychanges,whichwillhelpdeliveranidealsolutionforthespeedingtrafficproblemsconfrontedbyvillagersinBeech.Inessence,it’sthesqueakywheelthatgetsthegreaseandweshouldmaintainpressureforbetterenforcement.

5.25TheWGconsidersthatalong-termcampaigninggoalshouldbetoseekareviewofHCC’sexisting20mphpolicy.Policesupportwillbeessentialinasuccessfulcampaignfora20mphlimit.

5.26Villagerscanhelpbystickingtothespeedlimitandtravellingat20mphinthevillagecentreandKingsHill,thushelpingtoeducatespeedingdriversusingBeechasaratrun.6. Workstream4:Funding6.1Thisistheleastdevelopedofthefourworkstreams,reflectingtheWGsviewthatweshouldconducttheresearchtoestablishfeasibleoptionsfirstandseekwaysoffundingthemthereafter.

6.2Whereverpossible,theWGhassoughttocostoptionsasitsworkhasprogressed.

6.3ConsiderationhasinvariablybeengiventowhetheranysolutioncouldbepaidfordirectlyfromBPC’slimitedfunds.TheParishCouncilisnowinits21styearofoperationandthereforedoesnothaveaccesstothesubstantialreserveswhichmighthavebuiltupbyalonger-livedparish.

6.4BRSWGunderstandsthatsomemoneyremainsavailableinthedevelopersfundsheldbyEHDCbutthesearelimitedandwouldnotsupportanysolutionwhichinvolvedexpenditureofmorethantensofthousandsofpounds.

6.5BRSWGisawarethatinthepastvillagershavebeenwillingtocontributetheirownfundsforexampleforthebuildingofanexpandedandrenewedvillagehall.IfanidealsolutionproposedbytheWGcouldcommandthesupportofthevillageatareferendum,thenitmaybepossibletotapthispotentialsourceoffunds.ItisunderstoodthatnoreferendumcanbeheldbeforeMay2021.

6.6SomeoftheWG’sworkhasreachedahiatusowingtotheCovid-19lockdownwithdisplacedofficersunabletoprovideadviceorpreciseanddetailedresponsestoquestions.TheimpactofCovid19onpublicfundsislikelytobesubstantialandlonglasting.Itfollowsthatanyidealsolutionthatreliesheavilyonpublicfundingislikelytofaceseveredifficulties.

6.7RecommendationTheWGshouldcontinueitsworktoidentifyanidealbutfeasiblesolution.Whetherthesolutioniscapableofattractingfundswilltoalargeextentdetermineitsfeasibility.Equally,ifnosolutionisproposed,therecanbenoquestionofattractingfunds.Moneyisunlikelytobecomeavailableforaprojectwhosedetailshavenotbeenfullycostedandthoughtthrough.

15

7.Summaryofrecommendations7.1TheWGbelievesPathwaysOption1)shouldbepursuedfurtherasitcouldhelpdeliverSoWa,b,c,d,fandg(see2.2above).However,thisoptionwouldinvolvesubstantialfundraising.

7.2WithaviewtodeliveringPathways-Option1)theWGshouldseekawrittenin-principlecommitmenttotheconstructionofapathwayacrossSeong-Gi’swoodland.SeeAppendixAforanestimateofcosts.Note,theestimateincludesanaddedsumforaneastwardextensionfromBushyLeazeWoodsentrancetobridleway.

7.3TheWGshouldengagewithHampshireHighwaystoestablishifinprincipleitiswillingtoallowtheconstructionofapathonlandownedbyHCC,eithertobridgethegapbetweenthepaththroughtheprivately-ownedwoodsandtheBLWmainentrance;oralternativelytorunalongthesectionofMedsteadRoadrunningfromthecornernearIKingsHilltoBLWmainentrance.

7.4TheWGrecommendsthatOption1a)eastwardsextensiontobridlewayadjacentto95MedsteadRoadshouldnotbepursued.

7.5TheWGconsideredthatPathwaysOption2)shouldremaininplacependingclarification,aboutownedanddedicatedlandontheSouthsideofMedsteadRoadandKingsHill,hasbeenreceivedfromHCC,followingwhichadecisioncanbemadeonwhethertopursueitfurther.

7.6TheWGbelievesthatOption3)SouthPerrotschemeshouldbeinvestigatedfurthersinceisofferstheopportunitytofulfillSoWsb),c),d)ande).ItalsoavoidstheissuesarisingfromSoWa);asthefootpathwouldbebuiltonthecarriagewaytherewouldbenoneedtoacquireprivateland.

7.7TheWGbelievesitshouldinvestigatethecreationof20mphzonesinMedsteadRoadandKingsHill.

7.8Ifa20mphspeedlimitcanbeachievedalongsectionsofMedsteadRoadandKingsHill,theWGbelievesthata20mphlimitshouldalsobeintroducedthroughoutWellhouseRoad.

7.9Ifno20mphspeedlimitcanbeintroducedonWellhouseRoad,theWGbelievesavirtualfootpathshouldbeinstalledtoremindlocaldriversthatwherenofootpathexists,pedestrianshaveright-of-wayontheroad.

7.10TheWGbelievesthepostercampaignandSIDtrackingshouldgoahead,subjecttoapproval.

7.11Theaveragespeedcameraoptionrequiresfurtherresearch.

7.12TheWGbelievesthatboththepossibilityofinstallinga)anaveragespeedANPRsystem,andb)acquiringavanmountedsystemshouldbethesubjectoffurtherresearch.BeechSWshouldalsobeconsultedabouttheirwillingnesstorecommenceactivitiesusingavanmountedANPR.

7.13TheWGshouldcontinuewithitscampaign,whichhasseenearlysuccessandweshouldmaintainpressurebothforbetterpoliceenforcementandpolicesupportforSpeedWatch.

7.14TheWGconsidersthatalong-termcampaigninggoalshouldbetoseekareviewofHCC’sexisting20mphpolicy.Policesupportwillbeessentialinasuccessfulcampaignfora20mphlimit.

7.15TheWGbelievesvillagerscanhelpbystickingtothespeedlimitandtravellingat20mphinthevillagecentreandKingsHill,thushelpingtoeducatespeedingdriversusingBeechasaratrun.

7.16TheWGshouldcontinueitsworktoidentifyanidealandfeasiblesolution,recognisingthatidentifyingandattractingsufficientfundsforanidealsolutionwillimpactonitsfeasibility.

7.17Letusgetonwithourjob.

16

8.Conclusions8.1TheWGhasproducedalargeamountofworkinashorttimeinthecurrenthealthemergency.

8.2TheWGmembershipcontainsanappropriaterangeofskillstoenableittocompletethetaskithasbeensetbyBeechParishCouncilandremainswillingtocarryoutthenecessarywork.

8.3TheWG’scampaigningworkstreamhasproducedanearlysuccess,whichwillopendoorstoseniorpoliceofficersenablingustolobbyforbetterenforcementandbettersupportforCommunitySpeedWatch.Thissuccessmustbefollowedup.

8.4TheCovid-19emergencyhasresultedinsomeoptionsnotbeingfullyexplored.Oncethelockdownhasrelaxedweexpecttogetanswerstothequestionsraisedwithcouncilofficers.

8.5OncethedesignshavebeenapprovedbyHampshireHighwaystherecommendedpostercampaignandSIDtrackingschemeopensupanearlyopportunitytodemonstratetovillagersthattheWGisactiveandtakingopportunitiestoeducatedrivers,encouragingthemtocomplywiththespeedlimit.Thesupportofthevillagewillbeneededtodrivetheinstallationandfundingofanidealsolution.ThepostercampaignwillinstilconfidencethatBPCisgoingdowntherighttrack.

8.6QuestionshavebeenraisedconcerningthefutureofBRSWGwithsuggestionsthatthestudyshouldnowbeputbackintothehandsofHampshireHighways.TheWGconsidersthatwhilethereismeritincontinuingtoliaisewithHHwhoareactingbothinaregulatoryandadvisoryrole,itisgenerallyunwisetoaskpeopletomarktheirownhomework.SolutionswillinevitablybebaseduponananalysisofwhatofficersseeasHCC’spolicyatthattime,whichwillrestricttheirvision.IntheviewoftheWG,paucityofvisionwasnotwhatBeechParishCouncilwasseekingwhenmakingitsappealtovillagersatthevillagehallmeetinginJanuary.Wehavegoodideasandhaveonlyjustgotstarted.Deliverywillpickupspeedasofficersreturntowork.Asthisreportdemonstrates,thereareworthwhileoptionswellworthpursuing.

RecommendationLetusgetonwithourjob.

AppendixA-Estimatetoconstructpaththroughwoods

On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 at 10:57, Katy Poulsom <[email protected]> wrote: Dear Tony Following our site meeting on Wednesday, I am pleased to provide you with the following estimate to create a new footpath inside the woodland shown. The woodland is mainly privately owned with a smaller section belonging to the Forestry Commission Measurements given 1.3 km x 1.5 wide footpath To clear the footpath line of trees and overhanging vegetation To provide all plant, labour and materials. To set up compound within the FC section To excavate path tray and cast neatly aside arisings To supply and lay a Geotextile membrane To lay 100mm depth of chalk base and consolidate To overlay 100mm depth of Fittleworth Sandstone and consolidate To supply and install Twin wall UPVC culvert pipe in ditch line that delineates FC property and the private wood Please note the above will be in line with the HCC footpath specification (attached) To leave site tidy. Price £53,750.00 + VAT

17

AppendixB-SouthPerrot,Dorset:beforeandafter

18

AppendixC-20’sPlentyforUs:SummaryCritiqueofHampshirePolicy

20’s Plenty for Us calls for Hampshire County Council to withdraw its report on the 20mph Pilot Programme and to press ahead with rolling out 20mph in residential streets across the county.

Introduction 20’s Plenty for Us has conducted a detailed review of the report dated 5th June 2018 into Hampshire County Council’s 20mphPilot Programme1. We draw different conclusions from the Director of Economy, Transport and Environment. Rather than rejecting 20mph, HCC should recognise the benefits that the pilot schemes have already brought to local communities in Hampshire and extend 20mph to all residential streets, including narrow residential rural lanes and town and village centres in the county.

Summary conclusions The report itself has a number of failings:

• draws the wrong conclusions from the data provided;

• local community support for 20mph schemes ignored;

• latest research on 20mph not considered;

• inaccurate references to Department for Transport’s guidelines on setting local speed limits; and

• success criteria of the schemes not set out clearly, making it hard to judge “success”

Most Local Authorities that have introduced 20mph have seen major benefits in terms of community support and engagement, lower speeds, casualties reduced by around 20%2 and increased levels of cycling and walking. It is clear that the pilot schemes are supported by the community and have brought benefits. However, if HCC has not seen the same level of benefits of 20mph as other Local Authorities, then it needs to examine the pilot schemes in detail and learn lessons about how to achieve greater benefits. These could include:

• ensure that the schemes are sufficiently wide and in appropriate places;

• more education to drivers and enforcement, including promoting Community Speedwatch;

• assessing whether more signs or road engineering measures are required; and

• whether there is sufficient budget.

None of the matters are explored in the report.

Recommendation • Withdraw the recommendations to cancel further 20mph schemes;

• Council officers to investigate lessons learned from the pilot schemes;

• Council officers to report back with recommendations about how 20mph schemes can be implemented more successfully; and

• Use the findings to roll out 20mph across all residential streets and in town and village centres.

1 “Review of Residential 20mph Pilot Programme”

2 E.g. Bristol (casualties down 14%); Calderdale (22%); Edinburgh (24%); Newcastle (25%); Portsmouth (20%)