Public Meeting - report

The public meeting with Cllr Tom Thacker from HCC went off very well - around 20 people attended, which for a wet, cold December night a week out from Christmas is frankly amazing.

Local blog Liveable Whitchurch have an excellent writeup here, which given I'm knee-deep in the 'flu, is your best way to get up to date: http://liveablewhitchurch.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/tufton-junction-public-meeting.html

More follow-up actions and info once I'm over this bug / Christmas. Have a safe and happy Yule.

Regards

Mike

Things are looking up

News just in that HCC Cllr Tom Thacker has met with representatives from Whitchurch Town Council, Hampshire Highways and the Highways Agency at the intersection, and several ideas are being considered to improve the situation. These will be shared at the public meeting on the 19th.

Also the Highways Agency area manager has today confirmed that "as mentioned in my letter to Sir George Young, I will let you have a reply to your earlier Email before your meeting of 19 December"

Will Christmas may come a bit early for local road users? Let's see...

The Highways Agency: You've gotta admire their grit

One thing the Highways Agency must be admired for: when they take a stance, nothing short of dynamite will shift them. Despite repeated requests from the public and our MP they still refuse to speak to the public.

Below is the latest letter sent to Sir George Young MP, outlining the HA's view on the Tufton sliproad. I think the most telling sentence is "...the site has not been identified as a location that needs to have a reduction in speed."

I know a few people who beg to differ, but that's by the by.

What they do say in this letter is that they will provide "a full response" to issues raised, before the meeting.

Today the HA have been sent this reminder, with Sir George Young in copy:

=======================================
Dear ...

It is now nearly two weeks since I wrote with the below questions. I have received a copy of your reply to Sir George Young dated 23rd November, in which you advise him that you will not be attending the meeting but you promise Sir George that I will have "a full response before the meeting".

I trust that it is simply taking some time to collate these answers, and that the Highways Agency will be responding in full to the eight questions raised below prior to the 19th December.

Regards

Cutting corners...

A local website dedicated to sustainable transport in Whitchurch has shown strong support for this campaign, including some stunning new photos of cars and HGV's cutting the corner of the intersection:

( Photo below shamelessly lifted from http://liveablewhitchurch.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/tufton-a34-junction-dangers-in-spotlight.html )

Yesterday on a stunning late Autumn ride I took this photo of the road surface. It's a bit hard to make out, but you can see how the grit on the hatching area (laid the previous evening) has been swept clean by the tyres of vehicles cutting the corner. From the centre of the proper lane to where vehicle tyres have swept the grit away is over two meters - which give you an idea of just how far over vehicles are cutting the corner:

Time for T?

Local Andrew Reeves-Hall knocked up this idea for what this intersection could look like if re-jigged just a bit. No major earthworks needed either.

Works for me. T-junctions off slip roads are nothing new, the one at Micheldever works just fine.

More questions for the HA

Following a meeting with the Hurstbourne Priors Parish Council (fully supportive BTW) and a local couple last night, the HA has been sent this list of questions:

Dear ...

While we let our MP and your area manger contemplate the political fallout from the HA not discussion this issue in person with the community, could we please clarify some points?

1. How many people have to be killed or seriously injured before the 'business case' can be assembled?

This is not a flippant question, I am genuinely interested in the metrics the HA uses. For example, is a child's life worth more or less than an adult's? Is a UK national worth more or less than a foreign resident?

2. Are there examples elsewhere in the HA network where slip road speed limits have been lowered from the default 70MPH? If there are, what were the criteria for the lowering, and did people have to die or be injured before the lowering occurred?

3. What is the estimated cost to the taxpayer of improving signage and possibly installing frangible reflective plastic 'road pickets' to clearly delineate the one-way / two-way boundary?

4. What is the estimated cost to the taxpayer of reviewing and lowering the speed limit?

Given a number of residents (out of the very small sample contacted so far) have witnessed both cars and HGV's driving up the slip road, then having to reverse back down, can you please advise:

5. How often does the HA expect wrong-way traffic on any given slip road?

6. Is occasional wrong-way traffic on a slip road an acceptable trade-off for lack of spending on more signage?

7. Does the HA have a metric for 'acceptable number of wrong-way incidents per thousand/million car movements' or similar? Basically I want to gauge the HA's appetite to tolerate this sort of occurrence as a fact of life.

8. Finally, given the design of the road means cars almost inevitably travel too fast to stop safely within the DfT's own guideline Sight Stopping Distances, what advice does the HA have for road users to ensure their safety when turning across or exiting this intersection?

Regards

Highways Agency: no-one's died yet.

This just in:

=================

Dear Mr Stead

 

Thank you for your Email below but I will not be attending the meeting as I am not in position to negotiate and agree changes to the strategic road network, at a meeting, as you are proposing. The Highways Agency has well established processes in place to identify and promote solutions to issues on its network.

 

I note that you are looking to the HA to reduce speed limit on the off-slip road but, as you have already been advised, this is not an option. To take forward alteration to the network requires a robust business case but, our review of speed limits, has not identified this slip road as a location where a reduction in speed limit is required. Consequently, we are unable to develop a business case for the change in speed limit, or bid for funds for related works such as new signage, etc. 

 

Nevertheless, we do not wish to discourage ideas on dealing with the issues on the network and would be happy to receives any other thoughts you may have. These can then be considered on their merit, with advice from our specialist advisors.

 

...Asset ManagerHighways Agency

==================

My subsequent response to the relevant HA manager, the HA area Manager and our MP (who had asked the HA to attend):

Dear ..., Ms Koenig, Sir George

I read with dismay in the below text that the HA is refusing to come and hear the concerns from locals regarding the aforementioned A34 slip road.

We were after no 'negotiation' or 'agreement' - we were simply asking for an HA representative to be present, to listen, to understand and to be an expert voice when locals or Hampshire County Council suggested solutions or ask questions. The big challenge here is that this intersection falls on the boundary between the HA and HCC.

This non-appearance and the text below - "our review of speed limits, has not identified this slip road as a location where a reduction in speed limit is required. Consequently, we are unable to develop a business case for the change in speed limit, or bid for funds for related works such as new signage, etc" - re-enforces our firmly held belief that someone - a spouse, child, partner - has to die at this clearly dangerous intersection before the HA will commit funds to any sort of review.

This rationale leaves me cold. Again I ask the HA to reconsider attendance at the meeting, seeing as we have now clarified that we expect nothing more than to be heard, and the outcome not pre-judged.

HCC: digging in.

This just in from HCC:

=====================================

Dear Mr Stead

Thank you for your message regarding a planned public meeting about the A34 junction with Nuns Walk at Whitchurch.

I would be grateful if you could contact the officers involved and let them know the objectives of the public meeting and the issues you wish to raise.  The County Council can then judge the appropriate response.  If the issues raised are relatively simple and can be resolved through the County Council's routine work then attendance at a public meeting would not be needed and a written statement would be adequate.  I should add that a meeting with representatives from Whitchurch Town Council and the local County Councillor, rather than a public meeting, would usually be the most appropriate method for discussing more complex matters where it is easier for an officer to discuss possible solutions in person.

...

======================================

...in other words, no. We don't want to meet you.

What makes me cross is making out they don't know what the meeting will be about. I'm sure HCC officers aren't that dumb, that all the emails and many blog posts, with diagrams, photos etc, don't clearly spell out the problem.

It's now back with them, to clarify whether the HCC Exec has the power to force officials to attend. We shall see.

UPDATE: Cllr Tom Thacker has confirmed his attendance at the meeting on the 19th, which is great news. Here's hoping we can get the HCC and HA technical officers along as well. They know the ins & outs of all this, we will get much quicker understandings and resolution if they talk instead of relying on thousands of emails.

HCC refuse to attend public meeting

News just in that the Hampshire County Council Highways Team have declined to attend a public meeting to discuss the Tufton Intersection with locals:

Dear Mr Stead,

 

Thank you for your message and your invitation to attend a public meeting.

 

I am afraid officers from Hampshire County Council will not be attending the meeting. I would be happy to provide a short statement in response to any relevant agenda items, or matters you have raised with the County Council recently, should the meeting go ahead. Please let me know if that would be helpful.

 

Regards,

...
Team Leader - Traffic Management (North) 

A response has been sent back, CC'ing in our HCC councillor Tom Thacker, HCC executive member for transport Mel Kendal,  and HCC leader Ken Thornber, asking for HCC to re-consider attending the meeting.

We shall see if HCC can make the time to attend.

Terrifying. Just terrifying.

I've received an email two four five emails from Tufton residents on the subject of the intersection and vehicle speeds:

===============================
...it would be a pleasure to assist in giving full support to improving the hazardous road way which leads to Nuns Walk.  I should say I think this involves pedestrians, cyclists and cars alike as the turn right in to Nuns Walk is extremely dangerous, and i have experienced a number of very near misses.  I can also state that on a number of occasions i have witnessed cars travelling under the A34  towards Whitchurch on the wrong side of the road, clearly oblivious of the fact that the road at this point becomes two way.

Whilst I know that many cycle, we have for a number of years stopped our children from cycling to town because of the lack of path.  That said the corner which follows the immediate turn is also dangerous as to a large extent blind and cars travel at remarkable speeds along Nuns Walk, as it is a rat run on many sat nav systems.

And from another resident:

Hopefully the local people I emailed today will all have witnessed the many vehicles that are not only on the wrong side of the road coming down the off ramp but those cars who are obviously very confused with the intersections layout, despite signs, and end up driving up the on ramp trying to go north bound on the A34.  This has happened many times.

The other classic is lorries turning to go back or reverse back after they see the no entry sign and the road size and restrictions on Nuns Walk, not to mention cars stopped at the Nuns Walk/Tufton turn facing the on coming traffic with maps out, lost.

The stories and near misses are numerous!

I had to clarify this, the author confirmed she was referring to cars and HGV's driving up the off-ramp - i.e. into the traffic coming from the south - to try and go north on the A34.

Then there's this:

This intersection is lethal . I have tried in the past to bring to the attention of HCC , but the response I received was that until a fatal accident actually occurs nothing can be done do to reduce speed and produce better signage- ridiculous !

This campaign has my full support.

===============================

(highlight added by Ed for emphasis)

This, dear reader made my blood run cold when I read it. Many, many times we have cycled that road, waiting in the centre of the left-hand lane to turn right into Nun's Walk. The thought that a car might come around the corner at 50+ MPH, oblivious to the fact it is a two-way road, and smash head-on into a family of five, completely unprotected on bicycles, does not bear thinking about. It would be multiple fatalities, no question. It would make the national news. Hampshire Highways and the Highways Agency would be interviewed. 

No doubt they would say it was a 'tragic accident', that 'could not be foreseen', that 'nothing could have been done' to prevent it.

Apologies for those of a gentle constitution, but:    BULL_SH*T.

I believe the applicable term here is 'clear and present danger'. There are many factors involved here: 60 and 70MPH speed limits, sharp corners, banked roads, limited visibility, downhill slopes, intersections, cyclists, pedestrians, one way-two-way traffic flow change, bus stop, underpass with contrasting light/dark areas, large, slow farm vehicles turning etc etc. One or two of these factors could be accepted and managed. But all dozen or so, at once, with no warning, is too much of a cognitive load for even an experienced driver to deal with. That is why I say this has been engineered (or not un-engineered) into a mantrap.

This is why I'm passionate about holding our County and National representatives to account here, to get action on a section of local road that is clearly dangerous. That is currently designed and regulated to funnel unsuspecting motorists into a situation they did not anticipate and once there, cannot get out of due to the speed and nature of the road.

No-one has died...yet. That is pure luck. Residents know it. Road users know it.

Will those we employ to manage our roads, that we entrust to keep us safe, our elected representatives - will they answer public calls to remove the designed-in risk here?

UPDATE: A resident copied me in on this email to our County Councillor, Tom Thacker. It is reproduced with his permission:

=============================
My wife and have lived in Tufton for 10.5 years and during our time we have encountered numerous near misses in turning right in to Nuns Walk from Winchester Road.  In general these are as a result of drivers from the A34 using a two lane slip road, which moves in to a single lane, being oblivious to the fact that the one way slip road becomes two way under the A34 bridge.  Whilst there are hatched lines regretfully many drivers cut corners or indeed don't recognise e reason for them being on the road.  They therefore travel for some distance on the wrong side of the road.

I am fortunate that we have not had an accident, but this is in my opinion despite the layout of the road net work. Both my wife and I were disappointed to see that the recent works undertaken on the slip road didn't result in a solution to a clear danger.

This is further compounded by the speed that drivers travel along Nun's Walk as a result of it being a sat nav rat run to travel to Hurstbourne Priors and beyond without needing to go to Whitchurch.

All this has meant that as a family we have decided the boys are not allowed to use their bikes to travel to Whitchurch unless my wife and I are with them.  Even then due to the breadth of the footpath, on which we insist the boys cycle, my wife and I need to walk in the road.

As I am sure you appreciate the situation is at best most unsatisfactory and at worst, a pure danger to all road users.

Great news from Hampshire County Council

Well this is nice: progress, of what might well be the concrete sort, in the form of an email from the HCC County Highways team:

==============================

Dear Mr Stead

Re: A34 Junction with Nuns Walk and London Road Whitchurch

I have been asked to collate a single response regarding you enquiries about the shared use footway requirement near Nuns Walk [and] the sign location near Nuns Walk.

I believe my colleague has promised a response from myself specifically regarding your proposals for a shared use cycleway along Winchester Road starting at Nuns Walk.  I have looked into this and understand there are a number of issues.  Firstly there is a missing section of informal gravel footway between the A34 bridge and Nuns Walk.  This I have been informed is to be implemented in a similar manor to the existing path along the rest of Winchester Road (an informal gravel path).  This will obviously have no cycleway status but will provide an improvement in terms of linking the existing informal footpath with Nuns walk.  In the longer term it is going to be possible to consider a cycleway proposal as part of a programme of works for Whitchurch.  I need from you however the exact details of what you feel is required preferably with a plan showing the extents of the proposed shared use path.  Once I have received this, the proposal can be raised and discussed with Whitchurch Town Council.  If they are in agreement with the proposal and the scheme is prioritised by the Town Council members, funding options would be explored.  I would like to highlight however that this is a long term plan and I would suggest discussing your concerns in the area directly with the Town Council if you have not done so before now.

With regards to the sign location the requirement for the sign is being reviewed.  As part of the proposed informal footway works the sign will either be removed or relocated to the back of the footway.

==============================

So it's off to the Keynote for me then, to draw up what I think would be a good answer to the vexed problem of getting children on bikes from Whitchurch to Tufton in a manner that is both safe and that feels safe.

Sigh. Wrong. Again.

Following on from this post where the Highways Agency claimed there had been 'no recorded collisions' at the Tufton sliproad junction, they have now replied to MP Sir George Young that, er, actually there have been three. Sorry.

The accepted font of wisdom regarding crashes is the database held by the DfT called STATS19. While this isn't considered perfect, you'd think that two government agencies could get their act together.

They managed to find an extra crash involving two vehicles, lost one single-vehicle rollover crash completely and classed the other as 'minor', and found one that involved an animal (a comedy dog, perhaps?). You couldn't make it up. Unless that is what they did, of course.

Let's see what they come up with this time...

HCC washes hands of sliproad, embraces footpath

This response from the HCC Transport Executive, Mel Kendal:

============================================

This response is sent from Councillor Melville Kendal, Executive Member for Environment and Transport, Hampshire County Council

Dear Mr Stead 

Thank you for your email of 11 September.  Hampshire County Council is the highway authority for the local highway network which in respect to your query includes Winchester Road and Nuns Walk. These roads are currently subject to the national speed limit which is an appropriate speed limit for a rural highway with little or no frontage development. The speed limit changes at Whitchurch to 40mph and then 30mph and as more development fronts the highway. This is in accordance with Department for Transport speed limit guidelines. A three year search of injury accidents in the area around Tufton shows two accidents have been recorded by the police. Both accidents resulted in a serious injury, one involved a passenger of a refuse lorry getting out of the vehicle while it was still moving and the other involved a motorcycle hitting the rear of a vehicle while travelling at low speed. High vehicle speed was not a factor in either of these accidents and this record raises no concerns with the County Council.

The County Council is seeking to respond to your concerns regarding a new short section of footway and associated relocation of a traffic sign on the northern side of Winchester Road. This work will be considered for inclusion in a future work programme subject to priority against other similar schemes in the Basingstoke and Deane area.

With regards to the A34 slip road from the A34 to Winchester Road, this section of highway is managed by the Highways Agency. The County Council has no powers to make any changes to the speed limit on this section of highway and I recommend continuing your correspondence with the Highways Agency on this matter.

Yours sincerely

Councillor Melville Kendal
Executive Member for Environment and Transport

============================================

Which is not unexpected, and kind of hopeful in respect of the footpath and associated work / re-definition as a shared cycle path.

Problem? What problem?

My MP George Young raised a query with the Highways Agency regarding the Tufton junction. Here's the reply:

Apparently there have been 'no recorded collisions at this location' therefore 'no further action at this location is required'

Which is curious, because the only official HA communication I have received (on 13 Sept, from their area contractor EnterpriseMouchel) included reference to both recent collisions. Deliberately misleading an MP or just incompetent?

Ahem: THIS and THIS (or just scroll down to see the last two posts. Handy.)

It would appear the Highways Agency cannot use its own internal search tools. I have asked George Young to query the HA about this, and see if there is a different reaction to 'no further action required', as the benchmark was clearly because there had been 'no recorded collisions'.

Crash Bang Wallop

So according to the Highways Authority the A34 sliproad at Tufton doesn't need slowing down eh? Let's look at the crashes from the last 5 years then...

Here's the data on the first crash, from 2007 when a 54yr-old woman flips her car into a tree (link here)

Report for collision no. 440528695 in year 2007:

# Accident report

Accident Year:	2007
Accident Severity:	Slight
Casualties:	Car occupant
Accident Ref. No:	440528695
Police Force Code:	44
No. of Vehicles:	1   [Details below]
No. of Casualties:	1   [Details below]
Accident Day:	15
Accident Month:	November
Day of Week:	Thursday
Hour of Accident:	21
Minute of Accident:	50
Local Authority:	490
Location - Easting:	446020
Location - Northing:	146560
Longitude (looked up):	-1.342489
Latitude (looked up):	51.216393
1st Road Class:	A
1st Road Number:	34
Road Type:	Slip road
Speed Limit:	70
Junction Detail:	Not at junction or within 20 metres
Junction Control:
2nd Road Class:
2nd Road Number:
Pedestrian Crossing - Human Control:	No crossing 50m or phys. crossing not controlled
Pedestrian Crossing - Physical Facilities:	No crossing facility within 50 metres
Light Conditions:	Darkness - no lighting
Weather Conditions:	Fine no high winds
Road Surface Condition:	Wet/damp
Special Conditions at Site:	None
Carriageway Hazards:	Any animal in carriageway (except ridden horse)
Place Accident Reported:	Yes (Police National Form only)
Date and time:	2007-11-15 21:50:00

# Casualty report

Casualty Type:	Car occupant
Accident Year:	2007
Accident Ref. No.:	440528695
Vehicle Ref. No.:	1   [Details below]
Casualty Ref. No.:	1
Casualty Class:	Driver or rider
Sex of Casualty:	Female
Age of Casualty:	54
Severity of Casualty:	Slight
Pedestrian Location:
Pedestrian Movement:
Pedestrian Direction:
School Pupil:	Other (from 1994)
Seat Belt Usage (1979 - 1993):
Car Passenger:	Not car passenger
Bus or Coach Passenger:	Not a bus or coach passenger

# Vehicle report

Accident Year:	2007
Accident Ref. No.:	440528695
Vehicle Ref. No.:	1
Vehicle Type:	Car
Towing and Articulation:	No tow or articulation
Vehicle Manoeuvre:	Going ahead left-hand bend
Compass Point - From:	S
Compass Point - To:	NW
Vehicle Location - Road:
Veh. Location - Restr. Lane/Away frm Main Carriageway:	On main carriageway - not restr. lane
Junction Location At Impact:	Not at, or within 20 metres of, junction
Skidding/Overturning:	Overturned
Hit Object In Carriageway:	None
Vehicle Leaving Carriageway:	7
Hit Object off Carriageway:	Tree
Vehicle Prefix/Suffix Letter:
1st Point of Impact:	Front
Other Vehicle Hit-Ref No.:	0
Combined Damage:
Roof/Underside Damage:
Sex of Driver:	Female
Age of Driver:	54
Hit and Run:	Other
Foreign Registered Vehicle:	Not foreign registered vehicle
Journey Purpose of Driver/Rider:	Other/Not known

And the second crash from 2010, when a 17yr-old again flips his car (into the ditch this time), injuring himself and his passenger. Note that both this and the previous vehicle were on exactly the same part of the sliproad. Link is here:

Report for collision no. 440417333 in year 2010:

# Accident report

Accident Year:	2010
Accident Severity:	Slight
Casualties:	Car occupant
Accident Ref. No:	440417333
Police Force Code:	44
No. of Vehicles:	1   [Details below]
No. of Casualties:	2   [Details below]
Accident Day:	1
Accident Month:	October
Day of Week:	Friday
Hour of Accident:	13
Minute of Accident:	8
Local Authority:	490
Location - Easting:	445990
Location - Northing:	146580
Longitude (looked up):	-1.342916
Latitude (looked up):	51.216576
1st Road Class:	A
1st Road Number:	34
Road Type:	Slip road
Speed Limit:	70
Junction Detail:	Not at junction or within 20 metres
Junction Control:
2nd Road Class:
2nd Road Number:
Pedestrian Crossing - Human Control:	No crossing 50m or phys. crossing not controlled
Pedestrian Crossing - Physical Facilities:	No crossing facility within 50 metres
Light Conditions:	Daylight - no lighting
Weather Conditions:	Raining no high winds
Road Surface Condition:	Wet/damp
Special Conditions at Site:	None
Carriageway Hazards:	None
Place Accident Reported:	Yes (Police National Form only)
Date and time:	2010-10-01 13:08:00

# Casualty reports (2 casualties)

# Casualty no. 1

Casualty Type:	Car occupant
Accident Year:	2010
Accident Ref. No.:	440417333
Vehicle Ref. No.:	1   [Details below]
Casualty Ref. No.:	1
Casualty Class:	Driver or rider
Sex of Casualty:	Male
Age of Casualty:	17
Severity of Casualty:	Slight
Pedestrian Location:
Pedestrian Movement:
Pedestrian Direction:
School Pupil:	Other (from 1994)
Seat Belt Usage (1979 - 1993):
Car Passenger:	Not car passenger
Bus or Coach Passenger:	Not a bus or coach passenger

# Casualty no. 2

Casualty Type:	Car occupant
Accident Year:	2010
Accident Ref. No.:	440417333
Vehicle Ref. No.:	1   [Details below]
Casualty Ref. No.:	2
Casualty Class:	Passenger
Sex of Casualty:	Male
Age of Casualty:	17
Severity of Casualty:	Slight
Pedestrian Location:
Pedestrian Movement:
Pedestrian Direction:
School Pupil:	Other (from 1994)
Seat Belt Usage (1979 - 1993):
Car Passenger:	Front seat passenger
Bus or Coach Passenger:	Not a bus or coach passenger

# Vehicle report

Accident Year:	2010
Accident Ref. No.:	440417333
Vehicle Ref. No.:	1
Vehicle Type:	Car
Towing and Articulation:	No tow or articulation
Vehicle Manoeuvre:	Going ahead left-hand bend
Compass Point - From:	S
Compass Point - To:	NW
Vehicle Location - Road:
Veh. Location - Restr. Lane/Away frm Main Carriageway:	On main carriageway - not restr. lane
Junction Location At Impact:	Not at, or within 20 metres of, junction
Skidding/Overturning:	Skidded and overturned
Hit Object In Carriageway:	None
Vehicle Leaving Carriageway:	1
Hit Object off Carriageway:	Entered ditch
Vehicle Prefix/Suffix Letter:
1st Point of Impact:	Offside
Other Vehicle Hit-Ref No.:	0
Combined Damage:
Roof/Underside Damage:
Sex of Driver:	Male
Age of Driver:	17
Hit and Run:	Other
Foreign Registered Vehicle:	Not foreign registered vehicle
Journey Purpose of Driver/Rider:	Other/Not known

What conclusions can we draw from this? That this sliproad, and this corner, are a crash waiting to happen. Very different drivers, at different times of the day, having exactly the same crash.

But wait you say - thousands of cars a week use this sliproad, and 'only' two rollover crashes in five years? OK, let's compare with the rest of Winchester road, from around the corner to where the 40MPH zone starts. A stretch of road three times as long, carrying twice the traffic (south onto the A34 as well as north off the A34). How many crashes in five years? six times as many? double? the same? ...a few less?

No. None. Zero.


But according to the Highways Authority, it's not worth slowing drivers down on the sliproad.