(1) Basingstoke & Deane Borough Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object /comment / Respondent Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment number support Resident (RG21) 25 Comment Access to and within the town the town centre on foot. No Already identified in Town Access Plan and TS

Park & ride investigation is identfied in L16. The transport I think park and rides, car share schemes should be considered proposals need to be seen as a package of highway, public Resident (RG24) 37 Comment Yes before just building lights. transport and healthy modes. Car share schemes are already identified in the TAP scheme (L6) and will add to scheme location.

The Transport Statement Table 1 has three strategic schemes that would assist in reducing congestion to and from Chineham Business Park suggesting it is a high priority. These are: 1) Scheme S7 is the junction improvement of the A33 with Crockford Lane and when introduced delays could be expected to be The traffic jam that occurs leaving Chineham business park is significantly reduced. Traffic modelling work carried out has Resident (RG24) 38 Comment No unacceptable. identified this junction for improvement in line with Local Plan developments. 2) A northern access via Gaiger Ave and Cufuade Lane is being investigated and this would tie in with scheme S3. 3) Scheme S2, Chineham rail station, a long standing proposal that would also reduce congestion as the station well located to the employment area.

Traffic lights at the Chineham 'Red man' roundabout are See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 38 Comment No essential to create traffic flow during peak times..5.00- 7.00pm. Park. The road structure around Chineham is unable to cope with the level of housing being built there, let alone the extra pressue See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 38 Comment No added by workers from the Chineham business park at peak Park. times. Acknowledge the role for public transport but need to recognise the existing, and growing, pressures on local road networks See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (GU34) 41 Comment No including, specifically those surrounding access to and exit from Park. Chineham Business Park at peak times. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 43 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 30 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Roundabout from the A33 into Chineham park with the red men See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 44 Comment on it needs traffic lights. Traffic too heavy to work without traffic No Park. lights. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 47 Comment Traffic delays getting out of Chineham Business Park. No Park. care must be taken to not waste money on unnecessary See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 62 Comment No 'improvements' Park. to leave the existing traffic flowing as much as possible - See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 62 Comment No adding traffic lights simply adds traffic. Park. basingstoke has an excellent road network compared to See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 62 Comment No average - money can be better spent elsewhere. Park. total cost of local improvements are far less than strategic See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 62 Comment improvements and so should be funded in priority. better to fix No Park. 100 small issues than waste money on just one or two juctions. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 62 Object S6 and S7 improvemenmt are simply not worth £5m. No Park. do not waste money converting perfectly usable roundabouts into hybrid roundabouts / traffic lights or just traffic lights. temporary changes to the crockford lane roundabout due to road works near great binfields roundabout in early 2012 showed what a disasterous impact on commuting times so See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 62 Object No called road 'improvements' can make. instead encourage Park. business to adopt flexible working times as basingstoke's junctions and roundabouts are perfectly capable 95% of the time. business and commuters need to adapt rather than the council wasting £x millions. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (GU34) 65 Comment A33 and A339 improvements. No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (GU34) 65 Comment No caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout Park. from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey.

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (GU34) 65 Comment No caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout Park. from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 68 Comment A33 overcrowding at rush hour. No Park. 87 A33 Crockford Lane Roundabout (Carpenters Down/Reading See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 68 Comment No Road) Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 68 Comment No caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout Park. from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. The Crockford Roundabout on the A33 needs severe improvement for the rush hour traffic on Crockford Lane joining See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG21) 69 Comment the A33. The build-up of traffic on Crockford Lane, caused by No Park. the inability to join the roundabout, is adding an additional 20- 30 minutes on my journey. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG26) 110 Comment No caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout Park. from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey.

“The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG21) 112 Comment No caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout Park. from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved massively - especially during the evening rush hour. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 113 Comment The long queues of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars No Park. getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, add 20 minutes to my journey. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG21) 115 Comment No caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout Park. from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey.

final question of Transport Statement consultation document 6. Please use this space for any other comments about the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 116 Comment No Transport Statement: “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the Park. A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour.

Traffic lights to help traffic flow, increase lanes from 2 to 3 See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 119 Comment No coming out of crockford lane. Park. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 119 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service“.

“The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 119 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service“.

More focus on building more housing with a road network that See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 126 Comment No cannot cope this this. Park. More housing being built, bringing more people into See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 126 Comment No Basingstoke with a road network that cannot cope. Park.

a journey that should take me 5-10 minutes as a local resident See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 126 Comment No takes me 20 minutes due to congestion. Park.

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 126 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service.

FYI MEPC are pleased to advise you that HCC have confirmed See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 139 Comment that the transport modelling investigation of the A33 is to be No Park. commenced imminently.

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 140 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 absolutely needs to be improved during the morning and evening rush hour. The See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 154 Comment build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars pulling No Park. out on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, adds at least 20 minutes to The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 155 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 173 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 183 Comment Traffic on roads around Chineham business park at peak times. No Park. S7 RT2 - A33/ Crockford Lane Roundabout (Carpenter's Down/Reading Road) Daily delays trying to get home from See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 183 Comment work from Chineham business park. I live in Old Basing and it No Park. sometimes takes takes half an hour to get home. As soon as I am off of the business The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 194 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 196 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service.

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RH10) 200 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 2 HOURS to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service.

See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 203 Comment Provision of more extensive cycle paths around the area. No Park. I am pleased that the Crockford Lane roundabout has been identified for improvement, and that the transport statement also calls out issues with morning and evening peak times. I would like to specifically comment on this, as I strongly support the need for improvements to this junction. I work on the Chineham Park industrial estate, and getting out onto Crockford Lane roundabout at the end of the day is a nightmare. There See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 203 Comment No are too few gaps in the traffic travelling north up the A33 for Park. cars to come onto the roundabout from Crockford Lane. This can easily cause an extra 15-20 minutes of delay to my journey home - just sitting in the traffic burning fuel. This also makes a mockery of the otherwise excellent bus service from the industrial estate, as this is subject to the same delays. Please address this as a high priority.

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 205 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The A33 Roundabout in Crockford Land Chineham. Shuttle Bus See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 208 Comment No gets stuck there due to traffic Park.

As previously mentioned some improvements to the exit coming out of crockford lane in Chineham as as this is quite often clogged up with traffic during 5-6pm. Lots of people I See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 208 Comment No know who get the bus as well as myself end of missing their Park. trains due to the delays and for myself I have to catch a Bus home afterwards so I quite often miss by bus by about 5mins. I think there are some good proposals hope the ones in See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 208 Support No crockford lane in particular can be done. Park. Back log of traffic trying to exit Chineham Business Park from 5.30 onwards is ridiculous. Part time traffic lights are urgently needed. It can take anything up to a half hour to exit the business park because of the volume of traffic trying to leave. What should be a 10 to 15 min journey takes from 35 to 45 See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG22) 218 Comment No minutes. Hundreds of slow moving cars pumping exhaust Park. fumes into the atmosphere can't be good for the environment. Let alone the stress caused to people trying to make connections for trains and not being able to rely on the bus service running to schedule. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG21) 222 Comment A33 / CHINEHAM BUSINESS PARK No Park. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG21) 222 Comment This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who No Park. use the courtesy bus service. The park is not operating at full capacity so the problem will only worsen, the fact the park operates a free courtesy bus shows they are commited to reduce traffic flow themselves. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG21) 222 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG26) 224 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG23) 231 Comment A33 Chineham PArk congestion No Park. Investigate approaches to reduce congestion on the A33 corridor between Basingstoke and Reading, including major See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG23) 231 Comment No junction improvements and a new rail station at Chineham; 4.2 Park. S8

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG23) 231 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey, Park. more on particularly bad days. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service.

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG21) 232 Comment No improved during the evening rush hour. Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG21) 232 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 244 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG20) 247 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 252 Comment Crockford Lane, A33 junction congestion at peak hours No Park. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 252 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (GU12) 258 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 259 Comment Crockford Roundabout congestion No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG24) 259 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service.

Cufaude Lane capacity, Crockford Lane to A33 access at peak See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Resident (RG26) 275 Comment No times Park.

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 31 Comment No (JMC Recruiting) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 32 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 32 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 33 Comment Local traffic congestion No (Spectracom) Park. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 33 Comment S1,S2,S4,S7,L32,L50,L141,L219A No (Spectracom) Park. Every evening there are considerable queues exiting from chineham park. From our location (Beechwood) there are Local Employer queues in both directions and it often takes 20-30 minutes to See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 33 Comment No (Spectracom) exit. Many people use the unsigned "back" exit through the Park. housing estate and this would be reduced if the main exit flowed well. Crockford lane coming out of chineham to the roundabout with Local Employer the red men. It is very dangerous trying to get out in the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business (Gas Safe 39 Comment evening due to speed of traffic travelling round roundabout and No Park. Register) the fact that it is very busy it is very difficult to get out of the road onto the roadabout. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 42 Comment Crockford Lane / A33 roundabout No (Clarity Retail) Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 42 Comment No (Clarity Retail) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Local Employer Simply put traffic lights on Crockford Lane roundabout and See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 45 Comment No (Digipos UK) chineham roundabout, timed correctly with popley lights. Park. Local Employer A33/M3 heavy traffic during peak commuter times of 7-9am & 4- See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 50 Comment No (Clarity Retail) 6pm Monday to Friday Park. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business (Gas Safe 59 Comment bus travel. Chineham Park coach travel No Park. Register) I think the survey is a bit long winded and not user friendly - or Local Employer was that the idea?? . All I know is that trying to get off See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business (Gas Safe 59 Comment Chineham Park takes TOO long due to the volume of traffic No Park. Register) coming to the A33,. 30 minutes to do a journey which should take maximum of two minutes. Local Employer Sub Regional comment is not specific and far too general - "to See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 61 Comment No (MEPC) prioritise priorities" Park. Local Employer A33 Corridor - insufficient infrastructure for evening traffic - See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 61 Comment No (MEPC) affects 5000 workers/10000 residents Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout Local Employer from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to journeys. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 61 Comment No (MEPC) This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who Park. use the courtesy bus service and threatens future economic prosperity, sustainable development and increases carbon emissions The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 64 Comment Infact two days last week leaving at 5.40pm took me 45 No (Hampshire) Park. minutes to get to the Tesco roundabout, I can journey to Newbury or Reading quicker! There needs to be a traffic light system on both the blue men roundabout and the tesco roundabout. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business (Voyager 67 Comment Chineham Business Park link to the A33. No Park. Software) Local Employer Clearing congestion will improve the air quality in the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business (Voyager 67 Comment No Basingstoke area. Park. Software) The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business (Voyager 67 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. Software) This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service.

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business (Miller Homes 81 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. Ltd) This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business (Miller Homes 90 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. Ltd) This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 91 Comment Road network and traffic flow management No (KONE) Park. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 91 Comment No (KONE) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 103 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 103 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 105 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service Local Employer Peak traffic at the redman roundabout on the a33 no right of See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 108 Comment No (Computer 2000) way for cars leaving Chineham Bus Pk Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 108 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 108 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 124 Comment J6 No (Computer 2000) Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 124 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ Local Employer To make roads in general driveable - less pot holes, debris etc - See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 125 Comment No (Computer 2000) general clean up is needed Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 125 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Local Employer Access to the red man roundabout from Chineham business See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 133 Comment No (Computer 2000) park Park.

Section 4.3 Objective 2 will ensure more jobs within Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 133 Comment Basingstoke, without the road improvements, businesses will No (Computer 2000) Park. not be as willing to set up in Basingstoke due to the traffic. There is an improvement needed on the Crockford lane roundabout at the A33 junction. At 1730 it takes in excess of 20 minutes to leave the business park which increases carbon Local Employer emissions (Objective 4 in section 4.5) which is extremely See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 133 Comment No (Computer 2000) harmful to the environment and something the government is Park. trying to decrease on a national level. By easing the congestion leaving the business park, carbon emissions in the area will decrease. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 135 Comment Crockford lane roundabaout, basingstoke No (Computer 2000) Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 135 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 138 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 141 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 141 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 142 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 150 Comment traffic jam No (Motorola) Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 150 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 150 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved significantly during the evening rush hour. The build- Local Employer up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting onto the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 158 Comment No (Motorola) roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to Park. my journey. This traffic jam delays not only the car commuters but also the people who use the courtesy bus service."

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the morning and evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 160 Comment roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 25 minutes to No (Motorola) Park. my journey in the evening and 10 minutes in the morning. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Thanks The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 160 Comment from Crockford Lane, is adding over 25 minutes to my journey No (Motorola) Park. in the evening and 10 minutes to my journey in the morning. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Thanks The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 161 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 30 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service the chineham roundabout is massively congested during peak hours of between 4.30 pm and 7 pm mon-fri, that for the emerging traffic from chineham business park finding its extremely difficult to get past the round about because of the continuous flow of A33 towards reading traffic hitting the round about, causing severe congestions and high emissions as well Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 162 Comment as up to over an hour sometimes to clear the round about.. this No (Motorola) Park. alos results in long journey times plus the back end roads towards chineham village also gets very congested because of the reason, since few more companies moving in to the chineham business park the in and out roads must be improved with necessary ways to ease the traffic flow from the business park. put the part time signal lights to ease the traffic at chineham Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 162 Comment park/A33 round about to sort out this mess as soon as possible No (Motorola) Park. please. Local Employer Prevention of queuing on A33 to Crockford Lane and vice versa See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 168 Comment No (Motorola) in morning and evening rush hour Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 168 Comment from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes (sometimes No (Motorola) Park. more)to my journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Cycle safety could also be improved with a more free flowing exit. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 170 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 171 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 179 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 188 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 191 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 199 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Local Employer Rush hour (17h-18h) traffic jam to get out of Chineham See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 209 Comment No (Motorola) Business park Park. I think we should have bus services coming in and out of Chineham Business park throughout the day not only am, midday and pm. Also the departure times from the station Local Employer should be better coordinated with the trains coming from See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 209 Comment No (Motorola) London. Very often the train arrives and the bus has just left Park. which means we have to wait another 15min. The taxi ride from the station is from 6 to 8 pounds!And we obviously cannot expense that. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 211 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service and linking rail services. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 212 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 30 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 214 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." Local Employer Traffic Lights needed at red man roundabout (crockford lane See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 221 Comment No (Motorola) roundabout with A33) Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 221 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 221 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 230 Comment No (Clarity Retail) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 233 Comment The Crockford Lane roundabout congestion No (Motorola) Park. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour, starting at 4.30pm. The Local Employer build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 233 Comment No (Motorola) on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding at least 20 Park. minutes to my journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 235 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service S7 RT2 Improvements to the A33/Crockford lane roundabout, this is very congested particularly in the evening rush hour. It Local Employer can take 20/30 minutes to negotiate this junction and impacts See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 237 Comment No (Peek Traffic) both car and bus users. This also has the effect of pushing Park. traffic to use the residential roads through chineham to avoid the junction. General improvements required to improve traffic flows around Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 237 Comment the ring road and onto the business parks would improve the No (Peek Traffic) Park. attractiveness of the town to potential employers. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 242 Comment Traffic congestion on Chineham Business Park No (Peek Traffic) Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 248 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 248 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 253 Comment No (DevelopIQ) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 256 Comment No (DevelopIQ) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 257 Comment No (DevelopIQ) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 257 Comment No (DevelopIQ) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ Local Employer Tackling congestion eg A33. Increasing access/safety for See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 272 Comment No (Peek Traffic) cyclists. Park. S7 RT2 A33/ Crockford Lane Roundabout (Carpenter's Down/Reading Road) - would significantly help businesses and commuters entering and exiting the Chineham business park. Local Employer S1 RT12 A339 Ringway / A30/ M3 Junction 6 spur road: Black See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 272 Comment No (Peek Traffic) Dam rdbt - improved access to motorway during rush hour Park. would be a benefit and reduce safety risks. S2 PT11 Chineham Rail Station - improvements in rail services will help Chineham businesses and commuters. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build-up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 272 Comment No (Peek Traffic) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays car commuters and is potentially detrimental to businesses in the area. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 274 Comment A33 traffic congestion in Basingstoke No (Computer 2000) Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 274 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Would like something done about the amount of traffic coming Local Employer out of Chineham Business Park. I live in Brighton Hill and often See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business (Gas Safe 73 Comment No takes 40-45 minutes to get home. Something needs to be done Park. Register) in order to reduce the traffic. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 114 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 127 Comment No (IT Distribution) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. It puts me off working in basingstoke/chineham and urges office relocation Steps urgently need to be taken to improve traffic flow out of Chineham business park via the Crockford lane roundabout on the A33 during evening rush hour. The high flow of traffic from Local Employer the direction of Basingstoke means that cars getting on the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 129 Comment No (Computer 2000) roundabout from Crockford Lane have very low priority. On a Park. daily basis this adds over 20 minutes (sometimes nearer an hour) to my journey, which realistically should only take about 5- 10 minutes as I live in Rooksdown. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 134 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 134 Comment No (Computer 2000) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 217 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 to 30 minutes to my Park. journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 254 Comment There is no national co-ordinated transport system in the UK No (DevelopIQ) Park. Local Employer See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 254 Comment bus service to and from work to town center No (DevelopIQ) Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 254 Comment No (DevelopIQ) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 255 Comment No (DevelopIQ) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. These are representations made by i-Transport on behalf of Croudace Strategic and their land interests at Razor’s Farm, north east Basingstoke. Razor’s Farm was identified as a preferred site to accommodate 480 homes in the LDF Core Strategy Submission Draft January 2012 and Croudace envisage submitting a planning application later in 2012.. Para 2.5 states that a number of local documents have had a Local Employer significant input to the draft Transport Statement including the (i-Transport on LDF Core Strategy Submission Draft January 2012 and the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business behalf of 261 Comment No Infrastructure Delivery Plan. However, the recent Manydown Park. Croudace decision has seen the quashing of the emerging LDf Core Strategic) Strategy. Given the Manydown decision what is the status of the transport statement and how does it relate to future growth? Will the transport statement need updating when the Core Strategy, in whatever form it takes, is being progressed? Section 5 discusses implementation and funding. It suggests that the Borough aim to have a CIL Charging Schedule early in 2013. Is this realistic in the light of the Manydown decision and Local Employer Crockford Lane/A33 Intersection and A33 Flooding at See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 273 Comment No (Motorola) Chineham Railway Bridge Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, Local Employer caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 273 Comment No (Motorola) from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service SOLVE - Save Our Loddon Does not take account of the changes following the Judicial See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 281 Comment No Valley Review (JR) and unlawful LDF. Park. Environment SOLVE - Save Our Loddon Over-development in SE, roads are overloaded, too many See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 281 Comment No Valley people, we can't build our way out. Park. Environment SOLVE - Save Our Loddon If roads must be built consider improvemnts to M3, Junction 7 See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 281 Comment No Valley and a western bypass. Take load off J6 Park. Environment SOLVE - Save Our Loddon Excessive development, road building and economic growth is See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 281 Comment No Valley incompatible with reducing CO2 levels. Park. Environment SOLVE - Save Our Loddon Objective 4 should be No 1 priority. Too much concentration on See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 281 Comment No Valley Black Dam and economic growth. Park. Environment We support the access schemes where there are increased facilities for cycling and walking as well as public transport use. In future, transport plans and the Transport Statement must SOLVE - Save make these a priority. Limited funding should concentrate on Our Loddon smaller local schemes to benefit local communities. Over the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 281 Comment No Valley medium and long term fuel costs and motoring costs will Park. Environment continue to rise and residents will look for alternative travel modes. HCC and BDBC must provide and facilitate this. All road improvements must also include provision for pedestrians, cyclists, bus lanes etc. S1 – The improvements to the Black Dam roundabout and junction 6 of the M3, will not relieve congestion. It is generally accepted that building more roads, or improving them, SOLVE - Save encourages more car journeys which ultimately leads to more Our Loddon See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 281 Comment congestion. The Borough Core Strategy is being re-written and No Valley Park. the emphasis on this route needs a re-think. M3 junction 7 and Environment associated roads should be included in the Transport Statement since encouraging traffic towards junction 7 in the west will help to relieve peak time congestion at junction 6. The Transport Statement was clearly written before the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council Core Strategy was SOLVE - Save declared “unsound” due to “unlawful” actions by BDBC. Once Our Loddon See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 281 Comment the new Core strategy is agreed this Transport statement must No Valley Park. be revisited. There is an over emphasis on road transport and Environment the statement is over ambitious given the continuing and long term lack of resources. Stephen Pownall, Parish Councillor with See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business responsibility for 94 Comment Safe pedestrian access for schoolchildren No Park. transport (Burghclere Parish Council) Stephen Pownall, Parish Councillor with See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business responsibility for 94 Comment L191 Burghclere - access from Clere School to Village No Park. transport (Burghclere Parish Council) Stephen Pownall, Specifically for Burghclere Parish: L190 Aldern Bridge - request Parish Councillor is for grassed areas leading to Bridge a current access is with muddy and slippery L191 Clere School - improved footway from See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business responsibility for 94 Comment the school to the crossroads to make it safer for children to use No Park. transport L192 Kissing Gate - the work has been completed by volunteers (Burghclere L200 Weir Cottages - need for a footwear is increasing as road Parish Council) traffic increases in volume We support the proposals L143 – L149. However, it is unclear as to which scheme would include the cyclist/pedestrian route from Lychpit to Basingstoke (Eastrop Park) to include a footpath/cycle lane along Basing Road from The Street, Old Basing to Swing Swang lane. This is a priority for the Parish Council. In general we support the access schemes particularly Parish councillor where there are increased facilities for cycling and walking as on behalf of the well as public transport use. In looking to the future, transport See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business parish council 227 Comment plans and the Transport Statement must make these a priority. No Park. (Old Basing and Limited funding should concentrate on smaller local schemes to Lychpit) benefit local communities. The world has passed peak oil production and over the long term fuel costs and motoring costs will continue to rise and residents of the town will increasingly look for alternative travel modes. HCC and BDBC must provide and facilitate this. Any road improvements must include provision for pedestrians, cyclists, bus lanes etc. as a matter of course.

Parish councillor S1 – Black Dam and junction 6 of the M3, see comments on behalf of the above. The emphasis on this route needs a re-think since the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business parish council 227 Comment Borough Core Strategy is being re-written. M3 junction 7 and No Park. (Old Basing and associated roads should be included in the Transport Lychpit) Statement.

Parish councillor A reminder that, for Basingstoke, the Transport Statement does on behalf of the not take into account the changes since the Core Strategy was See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business parish council 227 Comment declared “unsound” due to “unlawful” actions by BDBC. The No Park. (Old Basing and statement is over ambitious given the continuing and long term Lychpit) lack of resources. L A Fryer delegated by Council to No information on the effect that developement of houses on See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 240 Comment No complete return the A33 Park. (Chineham Parish Council) L A Fryer delegated by Council to insufficient attention to the road developement brought about See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 240 Comment No complete return by the new proposed housing Park. (Chineham Parish Council) L A Fryer (L11)all improvements to A33 corridor to avoid more and more delegated by traffic from developements into and through Chineham. S2 Council to See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 240 Comment Chineham Railway station as short to mid term target is totally No complete return Park. unrealistic unless funds from B&DBC are used to support (Chineham Network rail finance. Parish Council) Ian Mawer - Senior Planner Transport Please refer to our suggested changes to the Transport See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 265 Comment No Strategy/Basings Strategy submitted by email. Park. toke and Deane Borough Council The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 34 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 36 Comment Traffic out of business park No Park. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 36 Comment Traffic out of Chineham business park from 5.30 is terrible No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 46 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 48 Comment Rush hour congestion No Park. A33 between Basingstoke and Reading and the congestion it See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 52 Comment No causes for Chineham Business Park Park. S7 - Junction Improvements to A33/ Crockford Lane See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 52 Comment No Roundabout (Carpenter's Down/Reading Road) Park. Duel carriageway leading to Chineham Business Park should have the signpost showing people to use both lanes for A33 changed. The sign currently shows 2 straight arrows with A33 above... this confuses some to believe that they can use both See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 52 Comment No lanes for the Business Park, this causes confusion, congestion Park. and on most mornings a near miss. All that would be required would be to change the arrows so that they show going round the roundabout one more junction. A33 between Basingstoke and Reading. Congestion for See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 53 Comment No Chineham Business park during peak times. Park. S7. A33/ Crockford Lane Roundabout (Carpenter's See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 53 Comment No Down/Reading Road). Junction Improvements Park. The traffic leaving the Chineham Business Park has got considerably worse over the last few years. I have been working in the Business park for over 14 years and it hasn't See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 53 Comment No been this bad before. It now takes me over half an hour to get Park. out of the Business park... once out of there I can be home in under 10mins. That's half an hour to move under half a mile... “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 55 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 30 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ You urgently need to look at the Red Man Roundabout problems at peak times. After working on Chineham Park for 5 years the volume of traffice has increased considerably and See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 56 Comment No where it took 15 minutes or less to get to the railway station it Park. can now take up to 30 minutes, meaning that I quite often miss my normal train. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 57 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ Public Transport See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 60 Comment congestion at peak times No Commuter Park. Congestion has increased rapidly over the last few months due Public Transport See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 60 Comment to the expansion of businesses in the Chineham Business Park No Commuter Park. and as such delays have become a daily issue. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 66 Comment Chineham Park No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 66 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service.“ Ref: S7. Crockford Lane roundabout (red people roundabout). Leaving work in Chineham Business Park at 17:30 on weekdays it takes on average 30 minutes to leave the Park and get over the roundabout, the backlog of traffic is immense, sometimes being completely stationary for 10-15 minutes - all See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 71 Comment No due to the contant traffic coming onto the roundabout from Park. town/the Ringroad. This roundabout needs to be traffic lighted to allow a fair for everyone, smooth, constant stream of traffic to enter it from all directions and to ease the backing up of cars into the business park at the end of the working day. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 75 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service Disabled People being able to get to and from work not taking risks on See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 76 Comment No Employee the road or enduring others doing so! Park. I am disabled and have major back issues so would rather not Disabled be in a state of panic every time I try to access the Red Man See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business 76 Comment No Employee roundabout. Or have to wait half an hour to get there from Gas Park. Safe in Cedarwood. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 79 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 80 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 83 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 84 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 85 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 86 Comment Less traffic , and easier access to the Chineham business Park. No Park. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 89 Comment No use the courtesy bus service. “ There are also long delays if you Park. choose to attempt to exit the business park at Cufaude Lane, especially at the present time as the grass/bushes etc are overgrown and makes it dangerous pulling out onto the main road! The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 95 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service Traffic lights on the 'red man' roundabout to ease flow of traffic See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 102 Comment No out of the Business Park Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 102 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 107 Comment Congetion at peak times on the A33 No Park. By a reduction in waiting time at busy roundabouts this will aid See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 107 Comment No economic growth and reduce harmful emmisions. Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 109 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 109 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 111 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 30 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 111 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 30 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 120 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding well in excess of 20 minutes to Park. my journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 122 Comment caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout No Park. from Crockford Lane, this adds considerable time to my journey. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 122 Comment No caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout Park. from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 123 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The businesses on Chineham Park need to operate a flexible See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 131 Comment No working policy for the traffic to ease Park. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 131 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 136 Comment Congestion on the A33 at the Crockford Roundabout No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 136 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Traffic wishing to access the roundabout from Crockford Lane See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 137 Comment No face unacceptable delays Park. Build traffic light signals on the roundabout to be used during the evening peak period between 17h00 and 19h00. This would See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 137 Comment No create more regular gaps in the A33 traffic flow and significantly Park. reduce queuing time on Crockford Lane. Keeping the roads around the A33 and Chineham business park See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 144 Comment No flowing Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 30 minutes to my journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 144 Comment No use the courtesy bus service. Traffic has started to flow into Park. Chineham through the back roads and past the school areas and I'm sure the residents aren't pleased with the new flow of traffic through their usually quiet streets! It should take me just 20 mins to get home but takes 45m-1hr every evening!!!!

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 30 minutes to my journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 144 Comment No use the courtesy bus service. Traffic has started to flow into Park. Chineham through the back roads and past the school areas and I'm sure the residents aren't pleased with the new flow of traffic through their usually quiet streets! It should take me just 20 mins to get home but takes 45m-1hr every evening!!!! The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 145 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 146 Comment The Crockford lane roundabout on the A33 No Park. The Crockford lane roundabout on the A33 is horrific at peak times. It needs to be improved (traffic lights to improve traffic flow) as a matter of urgency. The build up of traffic means that it can take up to 40 minutes for me to travel half a mile to get See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 146 Comment over/across this roundabout, and it's making my employment in No Park. the Hampshire area unbearable, and sadly i know of dozens of others who are actively seeking alternative employment in other areas, it is so bad. It needs to be rectified as a matter of urgency i would suggest. The Crockford lane roundabout on the A33 is horrific at peak times. It needs to be improved (traffic lights to improve traffic flow) as a matter of urgency. The build up of traffic means that it can take up to 40 minutes for me to travel half a mile to get See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 146 Comment over/across this roundabout, and it's making my employment in No Park. the Hampshire area unbearable, and sadly i know of dozens of others who are actively seeking alternative employment in other areas, it is so bad. It needs to be rectified as a matter of urgency i would suggest. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 148 Comment No improved during the evening rush hour. Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 148 Comment from Crockford Lane, is adding over 30 minutes to my journey. No Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service.This reduces the job attractiveness of the Chingford Businesspark and Basingstoke. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 148 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 30 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Access in and out of Chineham Bus Park is not able to deal See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 149 Comment No with the amount of traffic at peak times Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 149 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 153 Comment Crockford Lane evening rush hour No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 153 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 157 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. as usual the economic situation will interfere and there will be See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 163 Comment No budget cuts stopping essential work Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 163 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 166 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 172 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 174 Comment No use the courtesy bus service. Also, what happened to the Park. proposal to develop a train station at Chineham. Given the Governments drive to reduce carbon emissions and move commuters from cars to public transport that this would be a high priority. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 175 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 ( Chineham Park) needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 176 Comment No my journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the Park. people who use the courtesy bus service which means train connections are missed. This is unacceptable particularly when some train services only run an hourly service. Acccess to the Chineham Business Park - The Red Man See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 180 Comment No Roundabout Park. I work on the Chineham Business Park. The access is dreadful See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 180 Comment and it currently takes around 45 mins to get from my office onto No Park. the the M3. A relatively small distance!!! Fix the congestion issue for cars using Crockford Lane to leave See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 182 Comment No work in Chineham business park Park. Crockford Lane /Redman Roundabout RT2 - A33 Crockford Lane /Redman Roundabout - Congestion and delay , especially See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 182 Comment at peak times Investigate and review capacity and operational No Park. enhancements to regulate and manage traffic flow Link: CW1, CW2 “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 182 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20-30 minutes to my Park. journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." The traffic is horrendous. Getting to and from Chineham business park is not only a time consuming matter but is also a dangerous one- as when the round about is being used at peak See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 184 Comment hours cars are taking risks to get out on to the 'Red Man No Park. Roundabout. I believe something needs to be done asap as it is not only affecting those who work in the area but for those who live in the area. safe & efficient highway structure for road commuters on A See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 185 Comment No roads at peak periods Park. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 185 Comment Ref - S7 RT2 / A33/Crockford Lane roundabout No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved drastically during the AM & PM rush hours. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 185 Comment No roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to Park. my journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 186 Comment Crockford Lane Roundabout traffic light introduction No Park. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 186 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 186 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." I live in Southampton and drive to Basinstoke (Chineham Park) every day for work! In the evenings, the bottle neck of traffic See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 187 Comment coming out of Chineham Park A33 / A339 onto the M3 at No Park. junction 6 can add anywhere between 20 - 45 minutes on to my journey home!! M3 junction 6 especially in the evening going toward the M3. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 189 Comment No Also Red Man Chineham Park. Improving morning and evening traffic movement around See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 189 Comment M3/J6 (S1) and Crockford Lane/A33 this would certainly No Park. improve on fuel consumption, CO emiisions and TIME. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 is in a desparate need of improvement. During both morning and evening rush hour, the build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 189 Comment No 20 minutes to my journey. This traffic jam delays the car Park. commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. My journey time is then exacerbated by the further delays of 15- 20 minutes on the A339 heading to the M3 junction 6. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 190 Comment The Red Man roundabout on A33/Chineham Bus Park No Park. S76 RT2.The business park is currently only 50-60% full and the traffic at 5.30pm - 7.00pm is pretty terrible. Is HCC wishes See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 190 Comment No to continue atrracting businesses to the area an improvement Park. on the access on and off the Business Park is vital. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 192 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 193 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service Majority of colleagues would use the train if there was a station See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 198 Comment No at Chineham, to save time/cost Park. S2/PT11 - Chineham Rail Station. I work for a company of approximately 500 employees. Personally I take the train and then the coach to commute form Reading. However, since moving to Chineham majority of my colleagues have said they would take the train if there was a Chineham Station for the purposes of time, cost and enviromental reasons. Although there is a coach service from the station to Chineham, it adds See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 198 Comment to the traffic flow, therefore does not save any time. As such No Park. people find it easier to drive their own vehicles to work. The traffic is extremely dense in the Chineham and town areas at peak times, and I feel a train station would reduce this significantly. I have considered cycling from the station as this would take approximately 15 minutes, which would be quicker than taking the coach, however pure and simple it is not safe to do so as the routes all involve major roads. Traffic congestion at Crockford Lane and Chineham Business See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 201 Comment No Park Park. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 has to be to be improved during the morning and evening rush hours. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 201 Comment roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding at least 20 minutes No Park. to my journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. I'm constantly having to make time up for being late due to the traffic. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 206 Comment Improvement of junction of A33 to Crockford Lane No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 206 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service Getting onto the Crockford Lane roundabout and the tail backs See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 207 Comment No on the Black Dam roundabout Park. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 207 Comment Tracffic lights on the Crockford Lane roundabout No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 207 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 210 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 223 Comment No from Crockford Lane, can add up to 40 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 228 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ Departing after work on any day of the week has become an increasing nightmare on Chineham Business Park. I travel by the courtesy bus and some nights, when catching the 1730/1745 or 1800 it can take 25-30 minutes to travel the one mile from my bus stop to the Crockford Lane roundabout. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 229 Comment Perhaps a set of traffic lights at this roundabout for use during No Park. peak travel at the start and end of the day would be a help. I am fortunate that I only need to reach the town centre to get home. The people on the bus who have to then catch a train practically stampede off the bus to make their trains - not good from a safety point of view for anyone. Thank you. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 234 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 243 Comment A33 Congestion Crockford Lane No Park. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 243 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 243 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 245 Comment A33 Crockford Lane Roundabout No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 (S7/RT2) needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build-up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars to enter the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 245 Comment No roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to Park. my journey every day. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Road condestion at peak times, particularly Black Dam and M3 See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 246 Comment No link and the A33 Redman roundabout. Park. BS Ref: S7, TAP Ref: RT2, A33 Crockford Lane Roundadbout. Improvements to this junction need to be made within the next couple of years. There is already significant evening time See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 246 Comment No congestion and long delays on leaving the park. If the current Park. empty buildings become occupied then the resultant increase in traffic will not be supportable by the current junction.

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build-up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on to the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 246 Comment This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who No Park. use the courtesy bus service. In addition, the resedential area of Chineham is being impacted by the high volume of cars that seek an alternative exit route from the business park. This is both a nuisance and a safety issue. S1 RT12 A339 Ringway / A30/ M3 Junction 6 spur road: Black See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 249 Comment Dam rsbt and S7 RT2 A33/ Crockford Lane Roundabout No Park. (Carpenter's Down/Reading Road) The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 249 Comment No This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who Park. use the courtesy bus service. The Black Dam roundabout junction frequently experiences major delays, particularly at peak times, and urgently needs improvement. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 250 Comment Reducing congestion in Chineham No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 250 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 260 Comment A33 at rush hour! No Park. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 260 Comment Enviromentals shouldn't be a priority in a recession No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 260 Comment from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. No Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. It is bad enough now, but if/when the park is full it will be awful. S7 RT2 Traffic flow at the Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved. I use the courtesy bus service from See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 262 Comment Chineham Business Park and frequently find that the queue to No Park. get across that roundabout takes longer than the whole journey should. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 263 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. There are major issues at the Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33, which needs improvement to prevent major traffic build-ups during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 264 Comment caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout No Park. from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. This traffic jam delays not only car commuters, but also people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Local Employee 268 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 82 Comment This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who No Park. use the courtesy bus service. The knock-on effect of this delay is also that some of the traffic intending to use this exit from the Business Park now use the back exit (Crockford Lane to Hanmore Road) and which results in this exit being congested. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 121 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 121 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. “ Crockford lane . Needs to reduce congestion at peak times See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 130 Comment into Chineham Park through temporary traffic lights or find No Park. third alternative access route which would be viable. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 147 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service." See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 159 Comment Red Man roundabout is terrible for traffic in the evening No Park. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 164 Comment Road congestion during peak hours No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 is a serious bottleneck to traffic leaving the Chineham Business Park and needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. I work on the Chineham Business Park and the build-up of traffic on Crockford Lane is getting worse and adds well over 20 minutes See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 164 Comment to my journey home. It is caused by a more or less continuous No Park. stream of traffic northbound on the A33 preventing cars emerging from Crockford Lane. This traffic jam delays both car commuters and the courtesy bus service. Temporary Traffic Lights on the A33 northbound, operating perhaps only during the evening peak hours, may ease this problem. Well the traffic Que for normal office hours is getting ridiculously stupid, some times it take me 20 mins to get off of See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 169 Comment No the Chineham park estate. Something needs to be done to sort Park. this problem out. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 177 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 178 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 181 Comment Traffic out of Chineham business park! No Park. The current volume of traffic attempting to use the Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 at peak times (08:00-09:00 and 17:00-18:00)is causing unacceptable delays not only for the people who are employed on Chineham Business Park but also See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 195 Comment for the people attempting to commute to and from Reading, or No Park. even just attempting to get to the Chineham Shopping centre. This situation needs to be improved as adding anything from 20 to 45 minutes to a journey from the park to the town centre is an unnecessary addition to anybody's working day. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 197 Comment No from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Access to Chineham business park in the afternoon has to be See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 215 Comment improved, it takes over half an hour to get out of the park on to No Park. the A33 Access to the A33 from Chineham Business park needs to be See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 215 Comment improved it takes me over 30 minutes to get out of an evening No Park. which is just madness to drive less than a mile The Crockford Lasne roundabout on the A33 is in need of better traffic control. The current uncontrolled situation causes many problems for commuters entering and exiting the park, and also See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 225 Comment for local residents who need to pass through these areas at rush No Park. hour. The installment of traffic signals to control the flow at peak times would greatly improve journey times for both locals and workers. The ones that affect me, of course! - Crockford Lane in the See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 241 Comment No evening rush hour. Park. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 241 Comment Crockford Lane: S7/RT2 Old Basing: L144 and L145 No Park. The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 241 Comment from Crockford Lane is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. No Park. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who use the courtesy bus service. Surely this is a prime case for traffic management of some sort. Road condestion at peak times, particularly Black Dam and M3 See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 246 Comment No link and the A33 Redman roundabout. Park. BS Ref: S7, TAP Ref: RT2, A33 Crockford Lane Roundadbout. Improvements to this junction need to be made within the next couple of years. There is already significant evening time See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 246 Comment No congestion and long delays on leaving the park. If the current Park. empty buildings become occupied then the resultant increase in traffic will not be supportable by the current junction.

The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build-up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on to the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 246 Comment This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who No Park. use the courtesy bus service. In addition, the resedential area of Chineham is being impacted by the high volume of cars that seek an alternative exit route from the business park. This is both a nuisance and a safety issue. S1 RT12 A339 Ringway / A30/ M3 Junction 6 spur road: Black See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 249 Comment Dam rsbt and S7 RT2 A33/ Crockford Lane Roundabout No Park. (Carpenter's Down/Reading Road) The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 249 Comment No This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who Park. use the courtesy bus service. The Black Dam roundabout junction frequently experiences major delays, particularly at peak times, and urgently needs improvement. See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 251 Comment Traffic lights at the roundabout No Park. I drive to and from Basingstoke 5 days a week and would find it See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 251 Comment less stressful and time cinsuming if traffic lights are put at the No Park. red man roundabout to helpthe traffic run smoother See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 252 Comment Crockford Lane, A33 junction congestion at peak hours No Park. S7 RT2 Traffic flow at the Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved. I use the courtesy bus service from See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 262 Comment Chineham Business Park and frequently find that the queue to No Park. get across that roundabout takes longer than the whole journey should. “The Crockford Lane roundabout on the A33 needs to be improved during the evening rush hour. The build- up of traffic, caused by the lack of gaps for cars getting on the roundabout from Crockford Lane, is adding over 20 minutes to my journey. This traffic jam delays the car commuters and the people who See comment 3 above about improvemnts to Chineham Business Anon. 270 Comment use the courtesy bus service. “ It is also very dangerous trying No Park. to access entry onto the roundabout from Crockford Lane in the evening due to the high volume and high speed of vehicles circulating on the roundabout. It is only a matter of time before there is a serious accident and someone is either injured or killed. (2) East Hants District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case Object / comment / Respondent Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment number support

RT15 Pulens Lane/London Road junction top priority. Reservations about traffic calming in general - some may be counter-productive. RT38 Use it every day. Only problems are pedestrian safety on the rail bridge and egress onto Station Road where sight lines are very poor. RT47 Support inclusion of Lavant Street as far as Railway Station RT49 Dont understand "controlled parkin zone". Provision of blue badge supported (but open to abuse). Age Concern have requirement to drop-off adjacent to Winton House (conflict with Taxi Rank) RT51 Support improvements to Lavant St/Charles St junction PT8 Thought previous findings were that multi-storey car park was not feasible. Pedestrian Bridge at Level Crossing requires Elected considerable maintenance programme and is beyond the Councillor (East Comments are noted and additions and changes will be made to 20 Comment physical capabilities of some elderly - the perception is that the Yes Hampshire duration of come level crossing closures is extraordinary. the Schedule of Transport Improvements as appropriate. district council) CW26 One assumes that some landowners would resist this scheme. CW42 Not sure which junction is referred to. Pedestrian crossing of College Street to Grenehust Way is very difficult. Very difficult for cyclist and pedestrians to cross Tor way at Love Lane. CW48 Considerable potential. CW55 Residents to the W of Bell Hill and N of Winchester Road express strong concerns about the safety of people crossing the Winchester Road at the exit from the Stoneham Estate. I would seek improvements to the E-W pedestrian and cycle crossing of Charles St/The Spain/Swan Street junction. This route is a main route from the Town Centre to the Hospital, Doctor's Surgery and to the W of the Town. Elected There is currently no TCP list for East Hants. The Schedule of Councillor (East Personally I would welcome advice on the relationship between 20 Comment No Transport Improvements will effectively form the TCP list for the Hampshire this document and the TCP list. district. district council) Charity/ Ngo A significant number of schemes on the Schedule look to improve improving local bus services, bus information, encouraging (CPRE 276 Comment No infrastructure for public transport and are aimed at improving cycling and walking Hampshire) cycling and walking facilities. While road widening can generate more traffic there are certain Charity/ Ngo with everything except "capacity improvements", which implies instances where it is necessary to reduce congestion and thereby (CPRE 276 Comment No road widening, which will generate more traffic improve air quality, and access to services etc. ensuring economic Hampshire) viability. Charity/ Ngo speed reduction measures, actions to encourage walking and A significant number of schemes on the Schedule look to improve (CPRE 276 Comment No cycling cycling and walking facilities. Hampshire) Section 3.18 is a good summary of the challenges policy The County Council is not in control of the LEP's funding but is Charity/ Ngo makers face. CPRE Hampshire is concerned that LEP money is looking to influence spending on the most appropriate schemes. (CPRE 276 Comment in danger of being spent with no consultation with other No There is a strong drive currently, given the state of the economy, Hampshire) stakeholders, and indeed has a long shopping list of road to look to implement measures that will ensure jobs and eco expansion. Whilst delays have increased at Ham Barn Rbt, these are not Elected considered significant and are indeed much less than was Councillor (East Opening of Hindhead tunnel - now peak time problems in 87 Comment No anticipated. This junction is include in the Schedule of Transport Hampshire accessing Ham Barn roundabout from Liss Improvements and the Highways Agency are developing a district council) scheme to improv RT13 and RT27 will both improve the safety for pedestrians by Elected reducing the speed of the traffic by the schools and in the Councillor (East 87 Comment/ support village centres respectively. PT4 Will provide easier & safer No Agreed Hampshire access for bus users, and enforceable parking within the re- district council) vamped lay- Need to ensure the north of Petersfield bus Stagecoach No. 38 Elected Will highlight this issue with PTG, although bus services are is maintained for access from Liss to and from Alton and the Councillor (East provided by the bus companies and cut backs in subsidies has 87 Comment College. No mention of ways to improve the E-W transport links No Hampshire limited the help that the County Council can provide to services. across the county. S1 Ham Barn roundabout - requirement for district council) Consultation with local parishes will take place once fundign is the loc East Hampshire Infrastructure improvements for public transport are highlighted District Council the need for provision of public transport, reducing the within the Schedule of Improvements. However services are 63 Comment No (Community dominance of traffic through villages provided by the bus companies and we can only work with them to Access Officer) try and encourage the provision or retention of services. Cut back

All would be beneficial - It would be helpful to have clarity in the document on how prioritisation will take place on the various Prioritisation currently relates to available funding. Where East Hampshire schemes. AND an indication of which funding streams would schemes are primarily funded by S106 contributions, priotisation is District Council 63 Support be appropriate for each of the schemes. Also, some idea of No determined by which scheme most closely meets the terms of the (Community timescales around prioritisation, and how new schemes will be agreements. Where there are more than one appropriate Access Officer) managed into the prioritisation process. All seem to be at schemes prefeasibility stage- have any moved on beyond that yet? Paragraph 2.7 – also need to include a paragraph regarding East Hampshire Neighbourhood Plans, would probably go well after the Parish District Council 63 Support Plans paragraph. Neighbourhood Planning is a new way for Yes This is new policy and will be included (Community communities to decide the future development of the places Access Officer) where they live. Liss Parish Improvements to area around Junior and Infant schools in Hill Council 78 Comment Yes Will be added to the Schedule of Transport Improvements Brow Road, Liss (councillor) Infrastructure improvements for public transport are highlighted Liss Parish Would have been good to see more explanation of plans to within the Schedule of Improvements. However services are Council 78 Comment develop bus services - at the moment the wording is a bit No provided by the bus companies and we can only work with them to (councillor) 'woolly' try and encourage the provision or retention of services. Cut back Prioritisation currently relates to available funding. Where Rowlands Castle schemes are primarily funded by S106 contributions, priotisation is Document is very 'broad brush' and no indication as to how Parish Council 266 Comment No determined by which scheme most closely meets the terms of the priorities are to be established. (Clerk) agreements. Where there are more than one appropriate schemes Rowlands Castle Need to improve bus services; role of public subsidies; need for Parish Council 266 Comment No Comment noted. Statement includes reference to this better train frequencies. (Clerk) Rowlands Castle Parish Council 266 Support S1, RT46, PT8, No Comment noted. (Clerk) My observations are as follows. Options should be prioritised. Funding sources are not identified as funding is not available for Rowlands Castle The role of the price mechanism needs to be explored. Level these schemes. Where funding is available it is stated. The aim Parish Council 266 Comment and sources of funding are not addressed. The document No of the document is to provide a list of transport requirements that (Clerk) needs much greater attention to detail, proof reading etc. have been identified by both the county and district c Having establ This document does not specifically deal with the impact of the Document has been discussed with Local Planning Authorities Selborne Parish Bordon Eco Town on the parish. Nor does it specifically and who are supportive of it. It refers to Whitehill & Bordon Emerging 292 Comment No Council (Clerk) comprehensively address land use and development planning. Transport Strategy and Masterplan which deal in detail with the Lacks details to assist local planners. Eco Town and it's impacts on the area. Document refers to Whitehill & Bordon Emerging Transport Selborne Parish Impat of Eco Town and developments of area further south 292 Comment No Strategy and Masterplan which deal in detail with the Eco Town Council (Clerk) which will negatively impact this parish. and it's impacts on the area. Document refers to Whitehill & Bordon Emerging Transport Selborne Parish Impact of Eco Town development and further south 292 Comment No Strategy and Masterplan which deal in detail with the Eco Town Council (Clerk) development. and it's impacts on the area. Parishes have been contacted for input into the Schedule of Lacks significant detail. Input and consultation in any proposed Selborne Parish Transport Improvements. Detailed consultation on specific 292 Comment discussion insignificant to the parish e.g. S1,S3,S4 as well as No Council (Clerk) schemes will take place as and when funding comes forward to involvement. enable them to be developed. The document acknowledges certain problems that already Local involvement in schemes takes place as schemes are exist within the parish and immediate area e.g. B3006 - Selborne Parish brought forward. The document references the need to work with 292 Comment northern approach (3.2) A32S congestion and use of local road No Council (Clerk) local communities to address the issues of HGV's and the effect of network by inappropriate vehicles (HGV) (3.3) are not traffic on settlements. Objective 4 covers the effect of traffic and addressed in the document. Cyclist Touring On 6 July 2010 the Secretary of State attempted to revoke Club Right to Regional Spatial Strategies. This included he South East Plan. Ride 70 Comment No regional policy i.e. for South East was indicated No However in November 2010 following a legal challenge the High Representative Court ruled that the revocation was unlawful. As a result the South in East Hants East Cyclist Touring Club Right to Ride 70 Comment 4 main communities unclear, Cycle commuting opportunities No Unclear on comment. Cycling is highlighted within the statement Representative and infrastructure improvements are identified in the Schedule of in East Hants Transport Improvements. Cyclist Touring There is insufficient emphasis on increasing sustainable Club Right to transport and limiting car use. In this respect the document is Ride 70 Object not in line with the White paper listed in para 2.1. The EHDC Yes Representative Cycle plan is referenced but then ignored. Not even the listed Some of the EHDC cycle plan schemes have been listed but the in East Hants priority list will be reviewed. Cyclist Touring Club Right to As stated in para 3.11 cycle routes at present are short and Schedule of Transport Improvements will be updated to include all Ride 70 Comment disjointed. There is little in this paper that is likely to improve Yes priorities in the EHDC Cycle plan Representative that situation in East Hants Petersfield We support the improvement proposals but have set out Tomorrow - changes we believe are needed to clarify the projects and have Transport, Funding is sought from all available sources to deliver key 287 Comment suggested others more specific and perhaps more ambitious . No Movement and priorities. This group wish to see investment into Petersfield, to Public Realm encourage a more pedest Group

This groups detailed comments on the Draft Statement are sent under separate email to the HCC Transport Planning Group for this East Hants District. Where we have indicated in the online survey - Not Sure, this is because we seek clarity or believe changes are needed to the document and we have indicated these in our email. The space provided for comments where we disagree is only one line - not sufficient space. Our comments on the Improvement project table are, however, as follows: This P2M Transport group comment as follows; but have added three suggested other projects too. The list should able to be read easily, ie that areas such as Petersfield are put under an area/ town heading not subject . including Sheet. Larger point size needed for the table. Identified Improvement Projects. RT 47: Implement 20 MPH zone for the TC, this zone should be expanded, it is not functioning properly currently, nor properly designed or signed. RT 15 : This should not be restricted to junctions as is currently indicated but cover the whole street regarding its design, including a possible cycle network link. We consider the need for whole street design approach applies to the High street, The Square, Chapel St, Station Road and the Moggs Mead lead into Tor way. RT 51: We disagree on this solution – better street design is needed and to re prioritise the Station to Chapel street route including crossing Charles Street. Petersfield CW 30 should include Sheet and Steep routes to TC and to Tomorrow - Leisure centre. PT8. Should include linked in cycle access Transport, routes to Station from residential streets and local schools. RT Schedule of Transport Improvements will be updated to reflect 287 Comment Yes Movement and 46, We envisage a much larger phased project for the TC, and comments. Public Realm the Square in particular which includes more surfacing of the Group whole area of surrounding streets for a pedestrian biased place, this will require more significant funding. RT. 49 there is already a car parking controlled zone which requires better design and management to work, the principle is fully supported. Add. Petersfield Project : Create possible one way street with traffic calming/ street designs, car parking , servicing management and cycle parking for Lavant Street.

Add Petersfield Project: Create very pedestrian friendly space for High Street, Chapel Street, Lavant St. Explore vehicle access restriction times. Appendix A. Draft schedule of improvement list. We believe this list will be difficult to prioritise at this stage, this is due to possible CIL driven schemes, s 106 and S 278 secured projects in future. DFT criteria could also change. We understand any figures are therefore notional. However, we ask you to note that; this P2M Transport Movement & Public Realm Group, intends to continue to work with other Petersfield interest groups on various ideas and projects re possible design ideas for streets, some in order to illicit town discussions – placing these in the more public arena, and to include some possible details underpinning the objectives we fed into the HCC Transport Group earlier ( and appended ‘A’ to this Group’s Consultation response) . We expect to feed this into the Petersfield Town Neighbourhood Plan process. Yours Sincerely. Petersfield Tomorrow Transport Movement & Public Realm Group. The Group clearly consider a more specific, detailed access statement should be developed for Petersfield, perhaps this can Petersfield only be set under the future Neighbourhood Plan process. This Neighbourhood Plans are developed by local neighbourhoods and Tomorrow - is because of its likely role in the new SDNP and in order to form part of the LPA's LDF. Whitehill & Bordon has an Interim Transport, engage properly public views. (for example, we might expect a 287 Comment No Town Access Plan. It is then covered by the Emerging Transport Movement and similar view to be taken by Lewes residents in the east of the Strategy and Masterplan documents. Town Access Plans are no Public Realm NP). We therefore also believe, that the development of longer Group Whitehill & Bordon (W &B) should be dealt with using its own access plan and carried out in a proper sustainable manner with specific transport needs but here too, not in isolation.

Under settlements. 3.3 .This Group consider the reference to Petersfield is not adequate and should be amended to read as follows: After the first sentence ending – “in Hampshire”. Inset : The town has seen transport investment in the last 25 years, but not significantly since the A3 bypass Demonstration Project. The 20 MPH Zone introduced around this time for the Town Centre (TC) requires full completion, using better signage better placed, together with improved street design, as despite the previous work, there is through traffic dominance, parking problems for the centre and some residential roads near the station. There are speed issues on principally residential streets and within the TC. Greater provision of walking and cycling Petersfield links are needed to address likely SDNP visitor demands and Tomorrow - objectives of making the town a more pedestrian and cycle Transport, friendly environment, consistent with its burgeoning NP role. 287 Comment Yes The reference made to Petersfield will be amended Movement and Particularly so, East to West, and North - South linkages from Public Realm the Hangers section of the SDNP to the South Downs. Group The town railway station car parking take up levels are very high and will need re-assessment with a view to resolving existing problems of surrounding on street parking problems, and the expected demands via the towns SDNP ‘arrival point” role. Cycling. Opportunities exist to extend the cycling network both ‘on and off’ street on the existing street network. More shared space use of streets on schools and leisure routes and to the TC and Station, plus into the National Park countryside are called for. For example; links from the town station east to Durford road and leisure centre using the existing street network and the footway, then the bridleway to utilise the old dismantled railway alignment from the town to Midhurst. On-line form completed and hard copy sent in post. The group wish the hard copy to be their response as not enough space on form for comments. The group welcome the document but it needs to be more Petersfield focused and make more reference to the South Downs National Park (SDNP) objectives for Petersfield also they consider that Petesfield has had very little transport investment over the last 25 years. Specific Petersfield comments are summarised as follows 1) DS should include a Tomorrow - 1) There are no plans to produce any further TAPs. The Transport Petersfield focused section or preferably a Petersfield TAP Transport, Statements are providing the link between local and strategic comment 2)Whitehill Bordon should also have its own section 3) need to Yes Movement and issues. 2) Whitehill & Bordon has an interim TAP 3) effect of make clear the cumulative effect of developement especially Public Realm development is identified in Transport Assessments for idividual on residential streets 4)does not recognise SDNP polices/remit Group 5)update Petersfield Area Transport Strategy document 6)greater linkages to be made to the SDNP objectives for Petersfield as a gateway town 7)Extend the cycle network in Petersfield 8)Include Petersfield and Whitehill Bordon as named towns 8)set up a QBP for bus routes e-w from Petersfield 9)Petersfield and Whitehill Bordon need separate sections 10)update funding to include successful LSTF national parks bid 11) divide the schedule of schemes list into areas/towns to make easier to read and also divide the schemes into type of scheme 12)additional projects for list plus comments on several in table. (3) Eastleigh Borough Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support Whilst the statement makes reference to the emerging Local Plan, there are limited transport measures identified within the statement that link directly to the proposed Local Plan development sites. It is appreciated that the document is a Refer to ‘living document’, to be updated as and when required / Eastleigh EBC periodically, however, reference to this update of the schedule Suggested additional wording insert para 2.9 "It is acknowledged Borough Council emailed should be outlined to avoid confusion. Whilst the primary aim of that both the Transport Statement Table 1 and the Borough’s (Head of Comment Yes response the statement at the present time is for its utilisation as a tool Infrastructure Development Plan will require revision and update Transportation & sent for negotiating S106 developer contributions for relevant to reflect the outcomes of work being undertaken on the Eastleigh Engineering) 17/07/08 identified issues in the borough, the emerging Local Plan will undoubtedly raise further issues and it should be made clear that these will be added to the statement at the appropriate time (once the Local Plan is adopted) in order for contributions to be negotiated. Refer to Eastleigh The inclusion of the Botley Bypass within the list of schemes in EBC Borough Council Appendix A is welcomed. The Botley Bypass is a key element emailed (Head of Support of highway infrastructure within the EBC Local Plan, and the No Noted response Transportation & acknowledgement of the scheme within the Statement in order sent Engineering) to attract appropriate developer contributions is a positive step. 17/07/09 The statement is very road based. There needs to be a better explanation / demonstration of how public transport projects fit Refer to into the scheme of things otherwise the statement becomes one Eastleigh EBC which does not deal with transport as a whole but rather one Strategic schemes such as the rail proposals mentioned in the Borough Council emailed that just concentrates on roads. There is no mention of the comment will be investigated as part of the Transport for South (Head of Comment No response widely supported proposals for improvements / redoubling of Hampshire Long Term Strategic Implementation Plan. Once this Transportation & sent the Eastleigh to Fareham rail line and the construction of an has been adopted the list of strategic schemes listed in the TS will Engineering) 17/07/10 additional platform in Eastleigh station to facilitate the reversal of trains from Fareham and Portsmouth to serve Southampton Parkway. Whilst the schedule list is essentially the TSI (EBC’s Transport Refer to Eastleigh Scheme Inventory) / TCP (HCC’s Transport Contributions EBC Borough Council Policy), perhaps larger strategic aims such as improvements or The TS will be updated to take account of future transport emailed (Head of Comment supply of railway infrastructure or indeed additional bus routes No proposals linked to development (revised para 2.8) as well as what response Transportation & need to be mentioned. This is perhaps more akin to the larger comes out of the LTSIP (para 2.7, 5.5). sent Engineering) developments of the Local Plan which is yet to be adopted, but 17/07/11 could be better referred to in text. Appendix A – TSI 639. This scheme involves the re-opening of the Botley Road through route between the A3024 Bursledon Road and A27 West End Road as a public transport corridor. Refer to This should be for ‘all’ vehicle traffic. It is acknowledged that Eastleigh EBC the primary aim of the scheme is to reduce delays on bus The primary objective is to provide a public transport corridor and Borough Council emailed routes by avoiding Windhover roundabout. However by at this stage will be considered in this context. More detailed (Head of Comment Yes response opening up the route to all vehicle traffic there may be knock on assessments will be required to understand the impacts the bus Transportation & sent affects for (i.e.) Hamble Lane, as it will provide an alternative only link will have on the local road network. As part of th Engineering) 17/07/12 route for vehicles travelling to / from the west that currently use Portsmouth Road and Hamble Lane. This in itself could assist in reducing congestion on Windhover roundabout, and so all opening options need investigation.

Refer to Paragraph 3.30 and also TSI 586 in the schedule of schemes Eastleigh EBC refers to the Chickenhall Lane Link Road (CLLR). The Local There is a long standing proposal for the Chickenhall Link Rd Borough Council emailed Plan (unadopted) proposes that the link road is unrealistic (due which has been identified as necessary to deliver the River Side (Head of Comment No response to costs) and is therefore no longer proposed, with the need for development area, which is identified in the current EBLP. As the Transportation & sent safeguarding removed. As such, upon adoption of the Local transport statement is a living document this scheme and its i Engineering) 17/07/14 Plan, the TSI will need to be removed from the statement.

It is noted that within the schedule of schemes in Appendix A, TSI’s 640 and 641 refer to Park & Ride sites in the vicinity of Refer to Eastleigh both Windhover M27 junction 8 and Stoneham M27 junction 5 EBC There have been long standing proposals for P&R which has been Borough Council accordingly. EBC are not in support of either of these emailed a shared strategic policy intervention identified by the Transport (Head of Objection proposals, and neither is outlined in the emerging Local Plan. No response for South Hampshire authorities. Para 5.5 makes reference to the Transportation & As such, we would request the removal of them from the sent LTSIP and the use of the SRTM to review and fully evidence e Engineering) statement accordingly. In regard to the Windhover site in 17/07/15 particular, there are existing congestion and air quality issues, and the introduction of a P&R would exacerbate this further. Refer to Eastleigh EBC Borough Council Section 2.8 states that the EBC Local Plan is ‘expected to be emailed (Head of Comment adopted later this year’. It is in fact not anticipated to be Yes Date noted and amendment made to the transport statement response Transportation & adopted before late 2013. sent Engineering) 17/07/16 Refer to Eastleigh EBC Borough Council emailed Page 8 of the appendix – line 5 should read First 6 not 16 (Head of Comment Yes Amendment made. response (route number changed back in April but service is the same); Transportation & sent Engineering) 17/07/17 Refer to Eastleigh EBC Appendix A paragraph 3.29. It says Bishopstoke Road, Fair Borough Council emailed Oak Road & Allington Lane for corridor between Eastleigh & (Head of Comment Yes Reference to Allington Lane has been removed response Fair Oak. Query inclusion of Allington Lane as that goes from Transportation & sent Fair Oak to West End; and Engineering) 17/07/18 Refer to Eastleigh EBC Table 3 – Local Access Borough wide Schemes. Item 499 Bus Borough Council emailed shelter on Stoke Park Road by Colchester Avenue / Drake Scheme has been removed form the schedule of transport (Head of Comment Yes response Road junction. This bus shelter has been installed by improvements Transportation & sent Bishopstoke Parish Council. Engineering) 17/07/19 (4) Fareham Borough Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case Object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support Resident 51 Comment local traffic in Fareham No No detail to act on Resident 51 Comment local traffic in Fareham No No detail to act on st6 Station roundabout. the new use of bus lanes at station No roundabout is a joke. the traffic from quay St. roundabout up to station roundabout plus the exit west from west street makes traffic congestion terrible at times. Even on a Saturday I have queued the whole length of the town bypass. This is not good for safety and pollution with queuing traffic all trying to get into 1 lane from the flyover. The volume of traffic round station roundabout seems to have increased in both directions since BRT started. The BRT vehicles do not seem to carry more people, thus a32 to Gosport is probably just as congested, now with increased congestion on a27 west and Gudge heath lane suffering with no cut down in traffic. The other concern is possibly the number of vehicles trying to get round the problem Experimental bus lanes are scheme specific and not a Transport and putting more pressure on Highlands road system. Statement issue Resident 51 Object the west end of Fareham seems to be suffering from trying to relieve pressure from Gosport, but they never have used this road system. I understand from a comment from local councillors after complaints that the BRT routing was developed by computer. did anyone actually go out at peak times and see Experimental bus lanes are scheme specific and not a Transport Resident 51 Comment the difference it has made. No Statement issue

Local community The NCNF is subject to high level planning and Transport / environmental Assessment as part of the planning process. Whilst the District interest group Statement is aware of and recognises the NCNF mitigation (CPRE Not enough regard to the adverse traffic impact of the NCNF on measures cannot be subject to detailed interventions until some of Hampshire) 278 Comment Fareham and surrounding areas No the NCNF d

Local community / environmental The New Community North of Fareham (NCNF) is subject to high interest group level planning and Transport Assessment as part of the planning (CPRE Modelling of the traffic impact of NCNF not available yet, so process. Whilst the District Statement is aware of and recognises Hampshire) 278 Comment proper solutions cannot be planned No the NCNF mitigation measures cannot be subject to detailed inter

Local community The inclusion of the SDA (NCNF - New community North of The NCNF is subject to high level planning and Transport / environmental Fareham) at such a high level belies the importance of Assessment as part of the planning process. Whilst the District interest group recognising the impact of the traffic likely to be generated. Statement is aware of and recognises the NCNF mitigation (Fareham Without the planning detail required mitigation measures measures cannot be subject to detailed interventions until some of society) Object cannot be sensibly assessed No the NCNF d Local community / environmental Hampshire County Council currently spends over £5M per annum interest group Lack of buses outside core hours, except Eclipse , and lack of financially subsidising bus services across the county. Our aim is (Fareham regular, reliable, cheaper options, whilst County Council to ensure that all communities have a access to key services such society) object continues to withdraw subsidies Yes as shopping, banks, doctors, education and employment. A majo SDA is now known as NCNF - New community North of local authority Comment Fareham Yes Will amend document Required paragraph suggesting that Transport infrastructure will be coming forward following development of the preferred local authority Comment NCNF option. Yes Will amend document Level of expenditure and schemes are ambitious. There is no desire to reduce the scale of plans, just a desire to realise the local authority Comment ambitious nature of the extent No comments noted and agreed (5) Gosport Borough Transport Statement Consulation Response Summary August 2012 Case Object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / Comment Respondent number support The four overarching objectives of the Statement are supported. These are rightly focused on promoting economic growth within the Borough and enabling new developments through improvements in transport. The successful creation of new jobs within the Borough will depend upon the targeted improvements of highways, the expansion of the BRT network and a general improvement in public transport, cycling and walking through schemes as identified in the Schedule of Transport Improvements. These are necessary to tackle the chronic transport problems on the Fareham – Gosport peninsula and to improve travel choice and Gosport BC's support of the Distraict statement is GBC 1 Support accessibility for all. No welcomed Page 22 – para. 5.4 – This states that the schemes listed (in Table 1) are long term aspirations of HCC. They are in fact short, medium and long term aspirations of both GBC and HCC. Delivery will be subject to future prioritisation of the schemes with regard to their relative merits and funding opportunities. Further detailed feasibility studies are required in respect of many schemes, in addition to the development of business cases and appropriate consultations commensurate with the scale of the measures. Where schemes are funded by developer contributions delivery will in some cases depend upon the pooling of sufficient funds and the priorities GBCs point about joint prioiritys and timescales is well may need to be determined accordingly to ensure made. Their comments to be included in the district GBC 2 Comment the timely application of contributions. Yes statement I understand Table 1 is not an exhaustive list and will be subject to ongoing review and revisions by delegated officers to account for changing demands GBCs commitment to the future development of the and priorities. This a matter upon which the Borough tables and schedules is welcomed and officers will GBC 3 Comment would welcome further consultation. No ensure they are fully invovled in this process. WC25, ST3, PC8 – Various smarter choices initiatives, BRT bus stop improvements and real time information measures are included in the successful LSTF bid and a review of the funding provisions and shortfalls is required. Please consider if it is appropriate in due course to add some details of the The longer aspirations of the LSTF outcomes are work work packages proposed in the LSTF bid to the in progress. GBCs commitment to aid the delivery of GBC 4 Comment schedule. No the LSTF outcomes is welcomed. (6) Hart District Transport Statement Consultation Summary Response August 2012 Case object / comment / Respondent Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment number support What about road adoption on Elvetham Heath which is not on Resident (GU) 8 Comment No Adoption of roads is not a matter for the TS the contract for building the development. Resident (GU) 8 Comment Road Adoption No See above comment to Q1 Resident (GU) 8 Comment Road Adoption No See above comment to Q1 Resident (GU) 8 Comment Missing out on Road Adoption No See above comment to Q1 Long delays travelling to station or M3 from church Crookham The schemes identified form the Town Access Plan and the TS Resident (GU51) 22 Comment No end of Fleet. aims to reduce these delays I disagree with your priorities. The priorities are all about trying The priorities are not just about reducing the impacts of QEB and to reduce the impact of QEB and Eden Brook, both stupid Eden Brook. There is a wide range of proposals across the Resident (GU51) 22 Object No decisions in the first place, but the prioritised items will not have District which aim to improve transport in line with the TS an impact and are a waste of my money. objectives. Whilst the objectives are well intentioned the priorities are It is unclear why priorities are stated to be incorrect as they are Resident (GU51) 22 Comment No incorrect and are driven by poor decision making. established from current transport policy for the area. Recent developments will have been taken into account and the because it fails to reflect recent developments and residents Resident (GU51) 23 Comment No Town Access Plan included a detailed consultation process concerns providing an opportunity for residents to comment. It is appropriate to have some County polices which apply a county-wide policy is not appropriate when considering local Resident (GU51) 23 Comment No throughout the County and more localised ones which are included areas, in the priorities A north to south bypass could have some transport benefits, but environmentally is not likely to be acceptable. The proposals no attempt to fundamentally resolve traffic issues in Fleet - Resident (GU51) 23 Comment No include a series of measures that improve north to south there needs to be a N-S and E-W bypass movements such as S3 and S1. The strategic east- west and north-south because the improvements will not resolve the fundamental Resident (GU51) 23 Comment No It is not clear what these fundamental issues are issues affecting Hart District L32-L45 - far too much emphasis is being given to schemes These schemes have been developed through the Town Access Resident (GU51) 23 Comment which will not produce any noticeable reduction in traffic - most No Plan. There was a detailed and thorough assessment of these people for whom cycling is a real option already do proposals which will improve accessibility in the area. this seems to have been prepared without any regard for the As referred most of the Fleet area schemes are derived from the views of local residents - far too many of the proposals are Resident (GU51) 23 Object No TAP which included extensive consultations. Elsewhere there has being put forward as a matter of political policy rather than been extensive local input which includes local councillors. reflecting local views Transport assessments will be carried out for development very ad hoc with no real proposals to overcome for seen issues Resident (GU51) 24 Comment No proposals in the area and they will need to demonstrate that the due to over development in the area impacts can be accommodated. Not clear what the writer considers to be the critical issues, but the no real vision of what is required and how to overcome critical Resident (GU51) 24 Comment No TS considers the key transport issues and aims to address these issues with priorities and an extensive list of schemes. The TS identifies a range of public transport improvements, but delivering for example more buses requires subsidy for most Resident (GU51) 24 Comment Improved public transport. Less development in the area No services in the Fleet area, and there is a limit to funds being available for this. In terms of less development this is beyond th Allocation of new development is beyond the scope of the TS. We don't want or need any further development and extra cycle Resident (GU51) 24 Comment No Additional cycle facilities are only part of the requirements lanes will in no way address the issue necessary to address development impacts. Additional cycle and walking facilities are not expected to address Increased cycle and walking access will not address congestion all traffic congestion issues, but they are expected to make a Resident (GU51) 24 Comment No issues contribution as more people are expected to walk or cycle instead of driving. The estimated timescale of each scheme is specified in Table 1 Resident (GU51) 26 Comment not clear on time scale and priorities No when known. The TS provides a local transport statement and the Local Resident (GU51) 26 Comment lack of strategic plan for local areas No Transport Plan 3 from 2011 provides the strategic overview which inputs to the TS. Resident (GU51) 26 Comment cycling routes No Unclear of comment Cycling facilities proposed are extensive within the TS and notably Resident (GU51) 26 Comment cycling and local issues should be priority No for the Fleet area. Resident (GU51) 26 Comment cycling routes to Farnborough, Cove and out of Fleet in general No A cycle link to Farnborough, out of the area, is identified in L40. Hart District Many of the schemes are smaller scale, but there are also some Most of the measures in this document are small scale 'elaster Council 74 Comment No major schemes such as those identified as strategic transport plasts'. What the document should have.. (Councillor) improvements. New developments are not expected to be able to fund all the Hart District There will not be enough money from new developments to schemes. New developments such as those in the emerging Core Council 74 Comment No provide needed infrastructure strategy have yet to identify schemes that assist in (Councillor) accommodating their impact. Hart District It does not take an objective view of road and junction capacity. The TS aims to take a comprehensive and objective view of Council 74 Comment No (Wow an answer that fits in the spa congestion and what can realistically be done to help with this. (Councillor) Hart District HCC need to be more honest about what can be achieved and Council 74 Comment No It is not the County Council's role to say no to development say no to development were the impact can' (Councillor) So the problem is that we don't know what issues will arise out of new development and instead of having an exhaustive list we should be flexible and respond to the most pressing issues as they emerge. The list given is huge and will never be achieved but will almost certainly be used to justify some schemes which are actually less effective than schemes which The schedule of schemes can be modified for new development aren't yet on the list. TM7 should be a roundabout. Cycle Hart District related infrastructure if not already on the list. Specifically on routes: Need cycle routes which cyclists will use. Such as down Council 74 Comment No schemes in Fleet mentioned these have been through a thorough Reading Road South and across the RRS canal bridge. (Councillor) consultation. Scheme TM7 (Beacon Hill / Bourley Rd / Certainly do not waste money on the Durnsford Road foot Tweseldown bridge. If a cycle route can not be put down RRS then try to put one down Velmead Common. Far too much money is being proposed to be wasted on bus routes & cycle ways. More money should be focussed on better road junctions and safer routes to school. Such as from Humphrey Park to the new Tweseldown school. I really hope that this document is not going to be prescriptive for the x number of years. We need a flexible plan that will adapt to deal with emerging issues from new development. Hart District HCC need to be realistic and acknowledge that new The documents and the list will be flexible so new schemes added Council 74 Comment No developments are not going to be able to fund mitigating road and those delivered removed. (Councillor) infrastructure and be objective in guiding Hart to select development sites in the LDF that the existing road system is best able to support. While nationally there are initiatives to reduce traffic speeds; each Eversley Parish At a National level it fails to address initiatives to reduce road, street or lane needs to be considered on its local merits. The 288 Comment No Council speeds on rural roads and ...... schedule includes a number of speed reducing proposals such as L111a and L111b to reduce speeds and HGVs through Eve If there are transport impacts from neighbouring authority Eversley Parish At a Local level it fails to address the pressures of 288 Comment No developments then measures to ameliorate these impacts can be Council developments in adjoining authorities and ..... included in the schedule. Accept that many of the schemes on Table 1 are not funded. Eversley Parish The delivery priorities are unrealistic and, as shown in Table 1, 288 Comment No However, it is helpful to list schemes that are considered to assist Council for the most part unfunded, so ... with transport in the District. There is no listed priority to address the vast increase in traffic in Hampshire attributable to developments in Berkshire. Neither the 3,500 new houses at Arborfield Garrison nor the 2,500 new houses south of the M4 (not to mention the new key Impacts from neighbouring authority developments are a concern employment site) is shown on the Key Transport Issues and and measures should be identified where there are problems to Eversley Parish 288 Object Proposals Diagram (Figure 1). There is no listed priority to No accommodate these. Although in the comment above Eversley Council downgrade the A327 to a B or C road through Eversley. There Council are suggested that the schemes are unrealistic and in this are no innovative solutions to known problems such as comme downgrading highways, providing vehicle activated signs, creating an off-road cycleway network, addressing the "missing links" in the Rights of Way network, etc. This is a perverse questionnaire. It presupposes that consultees will agree with what the Statement sets out to achieve, but never asks whether it will be effective. The feedback boxes, in the case of disagreement, are painfully small, so the reasons for the "negative" responses are curtailed. The Statement is "road-centric" and fails to adequately address other options. For instance, there is no indication how the Statement interacts with the ROWIP or how that action plan is Eversley Parish The TS aims to improve the transport situation in Hart and has a 288 Object funded through this Statement. The Statement pre-empts the No Council practical list of schemes to help deliver this. Core strategy and is not founded on work associated with that document, such as the new traffic impact assessments. The Statement is not focussed and has no real vision or innovative solutions to known problems. It fails to give adequate strategic guidance, whilst going into the minutiae of site specific problems that may not be relevant by 2028. At a National level it fails to address initiatives to reduce speed on rural roads and effect real changes in transport choices.

At a County level it fails to adequately address the pressures of known developments in adjoining authorities and the need to divert traffic onto appropriate routes by the reclassification of inappropriate ones. It also fails to address the need to change the County policy on the use of Vehicle Activated Signs to reflect the latest evidence on their effectiveness in achieving long term benefits in rural areas. At a District level it fails to Eversley Parish The TS aims to improve the transport situation in Hart and has a 288 Object continued acknowledge the importance of local democratically developed No Council practical list of schemes to help deliver this. strategies such as Town and Parish Plans and Conservation Area Proposal Statrements. At a Parish level it relies too much on "patching" existing problems and fails to support innovative solutions such as downgrading highways, providing vehicle activated signs, creating an off-road cycleway network, addressing the "missing links" in the Rights of Way network, etc. Finally, the consultation has failed to engage with local Councils, interest groups and the general public, which may Eversley Parish 288 Object continued account for any shortfall in responses. Any shortfall in No Comments noted Council constructive suggestions can be attributed to the format of the response form. Hart District Ignores LDF evidence base, especially as FTAP was based on As development emerges the schedule can be modified to Council 291 Comment No past not future development include new schemes that accommodate new development (Councillor) Hart District LTP3 included mitigation of impacts from development. That is Objective 3 delivery priority bullet point 3 specifically refers to Council 291 Comment No ignored in this document. mitigation of forecast congestion from new developments. (Councillor) Hart District Calming of existing residential roads to deter rat running, A number of schemes in the schedule include these. Specific Council 291 Comment No improvement of other key junctions, etc additional a suggestions would be considered. (Councillor) Hart District The statement is a wish list with little strategy, delivery should Do not agree with this comment. Priority and delivery of schemes Council 291 Comment No relate to development timescales. will depend on a number of factors as set out in the TS section 5. (Councillor) FTAP is an insufficient basis on which to move forwards. It The FTAP is a very helpful document that included consultation Hart District took no account of future development, and the modelling work of the proposals. As development emerges the schedule can be Council 291 Object relating to West Fleet has not yet been completed, so how can No modified to include new schemes that accommodate new (Councillor) you know what is required? Also mitigation of rat running down development. side r It appears to be uncoordinated with other documents (LDF, Hart District LTP3) and just an ad-hoc wish list. As such it is wholly It has specifically looked at the LTP 3 and the emerging Core Council 291 Object insufficient as a document on which to base future plans. Key No Strategy Infrastructure Plan. (Councillor) issues (junctions, speed control, rat running) are missed out completely, an My Council does not like the way this "consultation" is being Crookham carried out by ticking boxes. Members have given me their Village Parish 54 Object No Concerns about the consultation are noted. views on the document and I shall be writing a letter setting out Council (Clerk) those views in detail. There is no opportunity in this "tick box" f Hart District Para 1.4 fails to recognise the interest and needs of residents Residents needs are also considered to be addressed within the Council (Parish 280 Object No which appear to be sacrificial. aim and objectives. Councillor) Hart District When Neighbourhood Plans are produced then these can be Para 2.6 fails to recognise a potential role for Neighbourhood Council (Parish 280 Object No taken into account. Para 2.6 specifies those documents produced plans as encouraged by the NPPF. Councillor) to date. Hart District The local road network is already overloaded and tinkering Highway capacity is generally restricted by the junctions, so Council (Parish 280 Comment No junctions will not be sufficient. focusing on these is the best way to reduce congestion. Councillor) Hart District Lack of emphasis on reducing adverse impact of traffic flows on Para 3.5 specifically refers to this as an issue and a number of Council (Parish 280 Comment No residents in the rural areas proposals are aimed at addressing this problem. Councillor) Dogmersfield Parish Council objects to Proposal L87 which is described as "Improve junction visibility by the public house. Investigating footway link across pub green for link to Dogmersfield school". We note this is only a prefeasibility study but any such work must include an in depth consultation with the residents and Parish Council for the following reasons: The current reduced visibility due to hedging and bushes together with the narrow bridge have a natural calming effect and Hart District The scheme is at an early stage. Before any scheme is brought reduces traffic speeds in the village centre thus making it safer Council (Parish 280 Object Yes forward consultation will take place with the Parish. Add to Table for pedestrians who are walking to or from the public house, Councillor) L87 that consultation takes places with the Parish on proposals. garages, Church and school. In our view any improvements to the sight lines and visibility at the junctions would increase traffic speeds and thus reduce the safety for pedestrians and other road users. We are not aware of an adverse accident history in this area. Creating any form of footpath across the Village Green is a very emotive local issue and in response to local demand the Parish Council has already agreed to systematically canvas local opinion. Some people including Dogmersfield school Governors consider that if a footpath is provided along Pilcot Road (L88 but within Crookham Village Parish) an extension of such a path through the centre of Dogmersfield will represent a valuable road safety improvement. Whereas others take the Hart District The scheme is at an early stage. Before any scheme is brought view that the Village Green has a firm, well drained surface and Council (Parish 280 Object continued Yes forward consultation will take place with the Parish. Add to Table there is absolutely no need to ruin the ambiance and street Councillor) L87 that consultation takes places with the Parish on proposals. scene of this rural hamlet by constructing a footway across it. The number of pedestrians that would use such a path is low especially as the school operates a kiss and drop scheme outside the school and parents are also permitted to park at the public house if they wish to walk up Chatter Alley to the school. Hart District Capping the space for comments on assessments to one line Council (Parish 280 Object No Concerns about the consultation are noted. has undermined the credibility of this consultation. Councillor) Local community / environmental interest group It is not a question of what the Statement sets out to achieve, Campaign to 289 Comment No Concerns about the consultation are noted. but whether it does achieve it. Protect Rural England, North East Hampshire

Local community / environmental interest group The statement overlooks the impacts of development in A comment about neighbouring authorities is being added to Campaign to 289 Comment Yes neighbouring counties. paragraph 2.7 Protect Rural England, North East Hampshire

Local community / environmental interest group The Statement overlooks the impacts of developments in A comment about neighbouring authorities is being added to Campaign to 289 Comment Yes neighbouring counties. paragraph 2.7 Protect Rural England, North East Hampshire

Local community / environmental interest group There are no realisable targets to address impacts on the Objective 4 and the priorities associated with it specifically Campaign to 289 Comment environment. Assistance in delivery is an inadequate measure. No address the environment. During the scheme delivery any Protect Rural It is delivery that is important. necessary environmental impacts would also be assessed. England, North East Hampshire Local community / environmental interest group In a document that looks forward 16 years, strategically, the list The scheme list aims to be flexible and regularly updated to add Campaign to 289 Comment of local schemes is inadequate to address all eventualities in No or remove schemes as required. Protect Rural that time-frame. England, North East Hampshire

Local community / environmental interest group CPRE NEH supports the submissions made by CPRE Campaign to 289 Comment No Comments are noted and refer to CPRE above responses Hampshire. Protect Rural England, North East Hampshire Formal ·(L96 of the TIS) Introduction of ‘Village Gateway’ entrance Ewshot Parish written Comment signs aimed at calming speed within the village – sited at No Scheme is in the TS and noted that a priority of the parish Council response Tadpole Lane, Church Lane, Ewshot Lane and Dares Lane · (L85 of the TIS) Extend range of speed calming measures (Antiskid lining and signage) along the A287 to include stretch from the junction with the B3013 (Beacon Hill Road) junction with Redfields Lane, thus addressing the difficulties associated Formal with crossing the A287 from Church Lane to Dora’s Green Lane Scheme is in the TS and noted that a priority of the parish. Ewshot Parish written Comment / Right turns onto the A287 from Church Lane. This sits well No Regarding the A287 /Heath Lane junction measures it is expected Council response with HCC highways already identified proposal for speed that these would form part of proposal L85 calming measures Job No C.J007293.01 dated April 2012 for the A287 Farnham Road JW with Heath Lane, Ewshot – which appears to be absent from the Transport Improvement Schedule. · (L90 of the TIS) We believe that narrowness of the lane, its poor state, its use by pedestrians and horses and short lines of Formal Careful consideration would be required of any road closure of Ewshot Parish visibility justify the immediate closure of Naishes Lane to written Comment Yes Naishes Lane. Recommend that L90 is modified so it includes Council vehicles (with the exception of emergency vehicles). This response consideration of road closure. should be included in the TIS with a short delivery timescale although there may be minor cost implications. (L107) This refers to surface improvements to Bridleway 44 in the Crondall Area with a prefeasibility estimated cost of 20k. We think this should mean Bridleway 744 in Ewshot (now that it is a separate Parish from Crondall. We believe that local Will check Bridleway number and assuming it is 744, then will Formal Ewshot parish contractors, who are familiar with the terrain and that particular apply this number. We welcome a suggestion for cost saving for written Comment Yes council Bridleway, could do the job to a good standard for less than half the scheme and will contact the Parish on this matter. (Please response that estimate. We therefore suggest that HCC review their note that some of these costs are very broad estimates). Include a tendering /pricing structure for contractors as we believe that in the current and foreseeable economic climate – profit margins for contractors and consultants appear excessive. In addition, we would like to see added to the TIS, proposals to Part of L90 (Ewshot Lane), L96 (Dares Lane). Traffic calming can Formal Ewshot parish introduce traffic calming measures for both Dares and Ewshot include the suggestion of white lining, but suggest that this is written Comment Yes council Lanes – possibly in the form of white line narrowing rather than added in. Include and modify the Table L90 & L96 with reference response physical barriers. to white lining. L82 of the TIS proposes CCTV monitoring of the junction between Beacon Hill and A287 at an estimated cost of £35k. It is not clear what this is intended to achieve but we believe that CCTV is intended to improve information for drivers. Noted that Formal Ewshot Parish actions should be taken to improve visibility to the right for request for improved visibility at the junction of B3013 / A287 written Comment Yes Council traffic entering the roundabout from Beacon Hill which would (Traffic entering from B3013 looking to right). Include and modify response considerably reduce risk at the junction. With the likely the Table, add as L82b for improved visibility at B3013 / A increase in traffic at the junction from local construction projects we view this as S/M L84 of the TIS gives the impression that the A287/Redfields Lane junction just needs monitoring. We do not agree. This is This junction has been the subject of extensive study and Formal a serious bottleneck during rush hours and high priority should discussions in recent years. The low cost accident remedial Ewshot Parish written Object be given to efforts to find ways to solve or mitigate the No measures have worked well in reducing accidents. Options to Council response congestion caused and the increased use of inappropriate local improve the junction would involved major environmental impacts lanes as ‘rat-runs’. Options identified in a recent consultation in a sensit by HCC are viewed locally as inadequate. 1. The main concerns of the parish council are with the Formal Hook Parish provision of public transport, particularly bus services, and it written Comment No We appreciate these concerns. Council accordingly concentrates on those aspects of most relevance to response those concerns. The parish council’s fundamental concern is that the draft Formal Concern about LTP noted. However it is understood the County Hook Parish Transport Strategy and the Transport Local Plan (TLP) from written Comment No Council have endeavoured to secure bus services, but there are Council which it derives completely fail to appreciate the current response limited resources available to fund those which require subsidy. position in north Hampshire. Bartley Wood in Hook in particular has become established primarily because of its close proximity to Junction 5 of the M3 and Hook railway station. However, congestion is already severe at peak times and this will get worse as the economy Formal Hook Parish improves and as Hook expands still further. Access by train for Comments noted and especially about bus improvements and written Comment No Council those who would prefer not to use their cars is only possible for refer to comment above on these. response those who live close to the main railway stations. There are many potential employees, however, not close to the railway who could take up employment here if suitable bus services were available. It does go on to say, however, that the draft Statement will be Formal Hook Parish reviewed and updated on a regular basis. For the reasons set written Comment No The schedule can be updated and reviewed as required Council out herein the parish council considers that a substantial review response is already necessary. In this context, the recognised relatively high car ownership in Formal The reality is that encouraging drivers to transfer to buses is Hook Parish the area should not be taken as an excuse to avoid taking a written Comment No difficult when there are dispersed travel patterns and bus services Council hard look as to how public transport can be improved to reduce response are rarely viable. car usage. In devising a long-term strategy and implementation Formal Hook Parish programme it also needs to be borne in mind that the proportion Yes, demand for buses may increase from more older people, but written Comment No Council of older people will increase and they will not want to, or be this is over a period of years. response able to, use their cars so much in future 1. The conclusions of Hook Parish Council are that the draft Transport Strategy provides an insufficient response to the The broader and more strategic transport issues are addressed in Formal changing transport needs which will apply over its proposed 20 Hook Parish the Local Transport Plan 3. This document is intended to be a written Comment year lifespan. It appears to be essentially more of the same with No Council statement and with it is a lengthy and practical list of schemes that response no fundamental rethink as to what will be required in practice is hoped can be delivered over the timescales referred. taking into account changing demographics and energy constraints and costs. 1. Little coherent thought has been given to the need for an Formal integrated public transport solution to meet the needs of both Public transport demand and needs have been considered and Hook Parish written Comment the residents and the workforce of north Hampshire, particularly No form a significant part of the schedule. Objective 2 and the Council response those settlements and substantial employment areas lying delivery priorities refer to public transport improvements. along the Basingstoke to Camberley inter-urban corridor.

1. An important element completely missing from the draft Strategy is any reference to cross-border considerations. Access to and from Basingstoke, Camberley (including The Formal Meadows shopping centre) and Reading is also important. Yet Cross border access between Hook and other areas by public Hook Parish written Comment there appears to be no understanding or analysis as to how No transport is not specifically referred to, but is included in the Council response residents and employees of Hook and the adjoining settlements objective 2 priorities to improve bus services. will be able to get to and from these places by quality public transport in conjunction with the policies of Surrey and Reading Councils. The Town Access Plan consultations have been checked and L10 Hart District L10 on schedule: Elvetham Heath / Crookham Rd. Location Email Comment Yes should read Elvetham Heath / Fleet Road junction. L10 to be Council requires clarification modified on Table 1. Formal It is considered that the HCC Transport Statement does not The LTP3 contains the strategic transport policy and this Hart District written Comment constitute a comprehensive local transport policy for the No statement provides a local transport strategy framework that Council response District. The Statement is, essentially, a list includes a schedule of schemes. It is considered that the Statement would be better if it just built on, as an addendum, the context set out in LTP3, rather than have the pretence of another strategic document. The Statement purports to set out the transport objectives for Hart District (paragraph 1.4), which are considered in the light of the Formal The LTP3 contains the strategic transport policy and this Hart District Hart policy context and local transport issues. The objectives written Comment No statement provides a local transport strategy framework that Council are to: i. promote economic growth by providing a well- response includes a list of schemes. maintained, safe and efficient highways network; ii. improve access to jobs, facilities and services for all types of transport; iii. improve access to jobs, facilities and services for all types of transport; iv. reduce carbon emissions and minimise the impacts of transport on the environment; Formal It is also considered that the Transport Statement does not set Hart District Schemes are listed together with timescales and funding written Comment out delivery priorities. It merely lists a number of potential No Council availability when known. response projects Formal The Transport statement does not provide a sufficiently robust Hart District The TS is not intended for this purpose. But it does have a role in written Object and sound basis for land use and development planning at this No Council assisting with infrastructure planning for the District. response time. Formal It is also considered that the Transport Statement, through the Hart District Welcome that it is helping with infrastructure planning, which is written Comment comprehensive list of potential projects in Table 1, does assist No Council part of its purpose response Local Planning Authorities with their infrastructure planning. Formal The Statement has briefly summarised several transport related Hart District It is unclear what other transport strategies could be included as written Comment strategies. However, there are numerous other transport No Council these have not been specified. response strategies that could be included The TS will include a comment about the Hart Transport At the local level, the latest iteration of the Hart Transport Formal Assessment and that the Schedule will be updated to Hart District Assessment could be listed or, alternatively, a note to the effect written Comment Yes accommodate this document. Add reference to Core Strategy in Council that it will be revised to take into account the Hart District TA response Para 1.2. Add a reference to the Detailed Transport Assessment when completed. being produced in para It is considered that this section does not fully reflect the context and extent of transport issues in Hart. However, as with Formal The TS aims to be a concise document and it is acknowledged Hart District the comments outlined above, in the light of both LTP3 and the written Comment No that it is difficult to summarise the transport issues within Hart. Council evidence work Hart is undertaking itself, it is considered that a response The TS has been developed in the context of the LTP3. more detailed but bulleted summary would suffice in subsequent iterations However, whilst the four objectives themselves could be Pleased that the four objectives could be supported. The rationale Formal Hart District supported, it is also considered, reflecting the response to is mainly derived from the LTP3 and other relevant policy. It is written Comment No Council Question 1, that the rationale behind the selection of these not normal practice to detail the rationale of objectives used in a response objectives is unclear. document such as this. Formal It is considered that it is the timely delivery of the right transport It is acknowledged that delivery at the appropriate time is Hart District written Comment infrastructure projects, from those listed, that is of most No important. The schedule of the proposed transport schemes as Council response importance, rather than the Statements themselves. suggested is probably the more important element of the TS. It is considered that the identification of delivery priorities should be for both HDC and HCC officers to continue to work Formal towards before the next iteration of the Statement, with a view Hart District Agree that HDC and HCC should work together to identify delivery written Comment to subsequently setting this out in the emerging Hart LDF No Council priorities and the emerging Infrastructure Delivery Plan. response Infrastructure Delivery Programme. This work will clearly need the full engagement of HCC and HDC Members and local Parish Councils. Formal It is considered that, as a piece of evidence work, Table 1 Hart District written Comment should be supported, subject to it being subsequently revised No Agreed that it is regularly updated as referred in para 1.2. Council response regularly. Formal Hart District It is considered that it would be helpful if at least an indication Schemes are listed together with relevant objectives, timescales written Comment No Council of priority level could be set out in Table 1. and funding availability when known. response It is unclear how the TS 'links to the economic priorities being developed by the LEP' - this should be clarified (paragraph 1.3); Suggest the substitution of the word 'facilitate' for 'promote' in Objective 1 (paragraphs 1.4 & 4.2); The proposals, if delivered, may contribute to creating growth through reducing congestion, providing greater accessibility for all and Regards the LEP comments in para 1.3, the TS is trying to be Formal Hart District regenerating the area (paragraph 2.1); At a sub-regional concise and does is not intended to extend to clarifying the role of written Comment Yes Council level, The M3 LEP will help has the aim of helping drive the LEP as this is available elsewhere. Objective 1 in par 1.4 is response forward economic growth within an area of North Hampshire considered to be appropriate. Agree in para 2.4 that LTP and West Surrey (paragraph 2.3) The reference to Part B of the LTP3 should be updated to reflect the recently revised Implementation Plan for the period (2012-15) (paragraph 2.4); Hart LDF Public Transport Study should also be included on the list (paragraph 2.6); Unclear about the reference to Local Transport Bodies (Para 5.2 (i) 2nd bullet); Paragraph 5.2(iii) - incorrect reference to Hart's Planning Contributions SPD; should be Community Regards the LEP comments in para 1.3, the TS is trying to be Formal Hart District Infrastructure Policy; Unclear about the reference to the ‘Ensip concise and does is not intended to extend to clarifying the role of written Comment Yes Council Station Improvement programme' (Para. 5.2(v)) Additionally, the LEP as this is available elsewhere. Objective 1 in par 1.4 is response please could HCC forward a copy of the Bus Interchanges Audit considered to be appropriate. Agree in para 2.4 that LTP Study, as referred to under transport scheme L125 (Hook rail station; pp.13). Formal Consideration will be given to remove some of these sites in when Odiham Parish We question whether or not CCTV for traffic monitoring at £35K written Comment No the Schemes are reviewed next as there is a concern about the Council per site is necessary or would represent value for money. response high cost of both CCTV and VMS signs. There is only one bus an hour to Basingstoke from Odiham and a limited number of buses to Alton. Consequently we see no Formal need for Interactive and real time passenger information. In Will consider this request and review with passenger transport. Odiham Parish written Comment fact, we question the need for this requirement overall in No However real time passenger information has been proven to Council response Hampshire but if it is felt to be beneficial it should perhaps be assist passengers and increase patronage. the responsibility of the Bus Operator to provide as well as to manage. Formal Odiham Parish Given the almost continuous one-side parking on this narrow written Comment No Unclear which road is referred to Council road it is thought that speed is self-limiting anyway. response It is widely recognised that without a major financial outlay in order to widen the road there is little that can be done to alleviate the situation. Due to the density of housing it is not Formal Odiham Parish feasible to ban parking along Pither Road as this would transfer Comments are noted about Pither Road (L143) and these will be written Object No Council the problem further down the road. The unintended passed onto relevant department response consequences of doing so may be the displacement of cars from Pither Rd to Churchill Rd which would then aggravate the Churchill Rd/Alton Rd junction issue. It would be unfortunate for there to be any loss of the rural feel to this lane. That said, it can be a rat-run and drivers do not Formal Odiham Parish always respect speed limits so the bends nearer the school can written Object No Unclear which road is referred to Council be dangerous. We are though not aware of any accidents. response There is no indication of the extent of the width of the proposed footway. This is a known accident hotspot with cars often travelling along the Alton Rd in excess of 50 mph. This is a concern to RAF Odiham as it not only affects the children transiting to and from school but also impacts on the safe exit from RAF Odiham. Formal Odiham Parish This is particularly noticeable at busy periods (Mon to Fri - Comments are noted about speeds on Alton Road past RAF written Comment No Council 0730-0830 and 1645-1745). It is suggested that the installation Odiham will be passed onto relevant department response of temporary road safety measures e.g. a speed camera or speed indicating signs would represent a low cost and beneficial traffic calming measure which could be made permanent at a later date. Currently children that transit from RAF Odiham to Robert Mays School utilise Firs Lane as this is the most direct route. At present this route is overgrown, dimly lit and has no form of footpath. It is also worth noting that the road is currently categorised as suitable for traffic travelling at National Speed Formal Odiham Parish limits. The preferred option would be to install a rural footpath L145 Firs Lane link. Comments are noted and will be passed onto written Comment No Council that is both sympathetic and in keeping with its location. relevant department. response Although this option would come at some cost it would provide a far greater level of pedestrian safety. If funding is not available, then it is suggested that the speed limit along that stretch of road be reduced to a level that reflects the level of footfall down that route. a) Introduce pedestrian crossing improvement ideally by installing controlled traffic lights for children to cross the Alton Rd from RAF Odiham to Firs Lane to link with L145. b) Make Formal road improvements from Alton Road to Church St (off Odiham Odiham Parish L145 and related schemes. Noted and will consider adding these written Comment High St) to overcome the parking of cars on this road which No Council schemes response interrupts traffic speed by reducing a two lane road to a single lane c) Slowing traffic access to Broad Oak roundabout particularly from the M3 which makes it dangerous for access/ exit of traffic to and from Broad Oak.. Fleet Town 271 Comment The Statement has summarised what may be considered the No Unclear of comment Council key transport related strategies, but it fai….{no further text] Fleet Town 271 Comment local public transport rail and bus, alternative transport No Unclear of comment Council The priorities themselves need prioritising. The primary issue Not consider necessary to prioritise the priorities. Mitigation of is to mitigate impact of development Fleet Town development is an important issue and this will be addressed with 271 Comment No Council the Core Strategy and development Transport Assessments. Some of the mitigation is likely to be on the TS Table 1 Table 1 the Schedule of Transport Improvements requires careful review. Some key improvements have not been included and some schemes are not clear. There is little or no indication of what evidence has or has not been included to justify inclusion of schemes in this schedule. There are important omissions in the Key Transport Issues and Proposals Scheme as shown in Figure 1. In fact there are several important details missing from this figure which I would suggest Welcome suggestions for Table 1. Figure 1 is a concept diagram should be included, including settlements and major and there is a limit to how much detail can be included. Some Fleet Town development sites which will have an impact on local highways 271 Comment No schemes on the schedule may appear not to be precise and this Council and transport needs. Some schemes identified in the schedule would be because they are at a concept stage and the proposed are not clear and no point of contact is provided to allow impr questions to be asked to identify the real details required. This includes some of the schemes identified in Fleet TAP. I would certainly suggest that Redfields Lane/A287 junction is one location that is needed for major or strategic junction improvement, and indeed other junctions that join onto the A287 south of Church Crookham and Fleet.

This junction is also omitted in the Fleet Town Access Plan, yet Windy Gap on the A323 is included although it is actually within Rushmoor Borough Council boundary. The Redfields Lane/A287 junction is busier than Windy Gap and local opinion is clear that this junction requires significant improvement too. It is only identified a L84 just as other proposals for the Fleet area and listed as medium long term project. In fact work has been carried out over the last 20 years that shows that this Redfields Lane comments are referred above and it is excluded junction is a serious and ongoing issue for local residents. from the Fleet TAP as it was outside the TAP area. The Beacon Fleet Town There are other sites that should be identified for junction 271 Comment Continued No Rd / Tweseldown Rd junction is include in improvements (ref L8). Council improvements as indeed have been identified from the QEB There are a number of other QEB funded local improvements on development yet these are not identified in the schedule either, Gal such as the Bourley Road/Beacon Hill Road/Tweseldown Road junction, Crookham Crossroads and Gally Hill Road/Aldershot Road/Sandy Lane junction. These may all require significant improvement following the QEB development. There may also be other local road improvements that prove to be necessary. Much the same may become apparent following the development at Edenbrook. This is why further regular review will be necessary. As a list this provides some useful information but it is very long and lacks in detail to help with identifying the real local priority sites. As I say, as major development sites come forward it will be important that this statement is reviewed on a regular (I would suggest annual) basis to make sure it is kept up to date and enables schemes to be highlighted to justify developer contributions that will be necessary to mitigate the impact of the The TAP schemes are listed in Table 1 and these had gone development. I was of the understanding that evidence was through a consultation process. The Table will be updated Fleet Town 271 Comment Continued necessary to justify inclusion as highways or transport schemes No regularly as referred in paragraph 1.2 and this should be at least Council and some indication of overall cost and level of priority. I would annually. The offer to run through the statement in detail is suggest this should be done in closer consultation with the welcomed. relevant local town and parish councils who will be much more familiar with the issues within their own areas. I would be very willing to go through this draft statement in more detail with officers in order to help bring this forward in readiness for review and hopefully eventual adoption.

The following is a list of specific comments related to Table 1 2. Local Access Improvements – Fleet and Church Crookham from FTAP a. L2 has been completed and needs to be removed from the project list b. L3 needs to be linked with L6 for a more strategic investigation into impact of development in west fleet feeding into the station junction and accessing the M3 via Cove Road. The priority needs to be raised to S/M c. L4 has been completed and needs to be removed from the project list d. L5 a) & c) L2 & L4: been completed and will be removed from the list. Fleet Town Fleet Town Centre one way systems needs bringing forward in b) L3 & L6 agreed that ideally should be combined for more 271 Comment Yes Council the programme to S/M and ranked as a more strategic project. strategic consideration, but leave in as two schemes as they can This was not an original FTAP approved project and Fleet Town be phased in. d) L5 Fleet one way review. Comments noted. Council request inclusion in any consultation to develop the project in detail. e. L10 is described as Elvethan Heath / Crookham Road Junction, where is the proposed project as the two roads do not meet? f. Requirement for traffic calming systems to reduce rat runs though side streets and other routes. g. Consideration should be given to right turn lanes on Reading Road South to relieve congestion from right turning traffic blocking the main traffic flow h. Long Term consideration should be given to the use of Fleet Services as Junction 4b to the M3 to act as a relief to Fleet Town Centre for traffic currently accessing J4A. An example of a Service Centre being combined with a motorway intersection exists at J15A on M1 2.1 Bus Proposals from FTAP 2.1.1 L24 Fleet Link bus g) Reading Rd South right turn lanes not clear where, but included service, formally known as Call and Go, is co-funded by Fleet Fleet Town in L1a, L1b preliminary schemes h) Use of Fleet services as an 271 Comment Continued Town Council, Church Crookham Parish Council and HCC. 2.2 Yes Council access to M3 would need to be agreed with the Highways Agency Rail Proposals from FTAP 2.2.1 L30 should include additional (and unlikely) i) L24 Call & Go service will add that also fu onsite parking. Inadequate funding is identified to provide significant additional parking. 2.3 Pedestrian and Cycle Proposals from FTAP 2.3.1 Losing employment sites in Fleet but adding housing will mean cycling and walking will have a limited impact 2.3.2 L46i and j have been combined into a single crossing point and is being implemented under the Kings Road Cycle Route. 2.3.3 L46m and n two centre refuges have been installed on Crookham Road 2.3.4 L46o and L50, the former crossing is redundant with the completion of L50 2.3.5 L47 should be reviewed in combination with L3 and L6. The whole road intersection in the vicinity of L46o will be removed from list. Agree that L47, the Fleet Rd/ Fleet Town the station entrance should be investigated holistically. 2.3.6 Waterfront Business Park crossing would be considered along with 271 Comment Continued Yes Council L51 completed as part of the Kings Road Cycle Route. 3. L3 and L6 and comment added in table. L51 is part of the cycle General Comments 3.1 No measures are identified for speed route, but retained. control. Consideration should be given to the use of average speed cameras within the

Crookham Members were increasingly frustrated at yet another “desktop” Village Parish Comment exercise – this appears to be a study for doing things to reduce No Comments noted Council (Clerk) traffic rather than credible measures to deal with traffic

This consultation has not used any of the evidence base in the Surrey County Council are welcome to comment on the document Crookham Surrey County Council LDF document; there is no co-ordination during consultation, but no comments have been received. Village Parish Comment No with schools; no dialogue with the bus operators; no dialogue However, many of the schemes have been developed in Council (Clerk) with the rail operators conjunction with schools and bus & rail operators.

Crookham 3. Members believe that the Surrey County Council Survey The Table is expected to be updated to accommodate new Village Parish Comment for Hart Council will need to be revisited in the light of the No development proposals identified from in the Hart LDF. Council (Clerk) revised LDF. Crookham Hart is a largely rural area and concentrating on cycleways and Village Parish Comment footpaths does not deal with the rural needs, only with the urban No The TS is not just concentrating on cycle and footway facilities. Council (Clerk) areas of the District. Crookham Members believe that the catchment areas of schools should be It is for schools to decide on their admissions policies, which is Village Parish Comment revised to minimise rush-hour traffic and minimise the number No beyond the scope of the TS. Council (Clerk) of families with children placed at 3 different schools. The estimated figures quoted for some of the proposals are The estimated scheme costs vary in accuracy depending on the Crookham sometimes totally at odds with figures already in the public extent of scheme development. Schemes at the concept stage Village Parish Comment No arena for costed initiatives. How much credibility can be given will have a broad estimate of cost compared to those about to be Council (Clerk) for other figures quoted in the document. delivered which will be more accurate. Fleet does tend to dominate, but this is mainly because the Town Crookham Too much is centred around Fleet Town Centre – Hart District Access Plan has recently been completed. Hopefully over the Village Parish Comment covers many square miles of rural areas as well as other major No coming years it will become more balanced with additional Council (Clerk) urban areas. schemes from elsewhere in the District. Basically, the problem is “congestion” which does not figure large in this document. Congestion is the problem, it needs to be analysed and then solutions put forward to resolve it. You Crookham Objective 1 and several of the priorities under this relate to have already received an extremely detailed response to the Village Parish Comment No reducing congestion. Priority 2 specifically states 'improve Fleet Station Travel Plan from this Council. Members stated Council (Clerk) capacity at congestion bottlenecks'. this Transport Consultation is also full of the same proposals as the Fleet Station Travel Plan rather than seeking to resolve the parking and congestion issues. Note comments on the TS which are not agreed. The Schedule The Transport Statement itself is disjointed and seemly lacking Hartley Wintney has some inaccuracies and we are endeavouring to correct these Comment / Objection in cohesion, with the Hart Schedule of Transport Improvements No Parish Council in the Draft Document. The Schedule will also be updated on a being both outdated, inaccurate and in need of re-drafting. regular basis. Project 121 was actually completed in 2008 and the district wide project L98 refers to a bus service which stopped L121: thank you for pointing this out and the Table will be Hartley Wintney Comment / Objection operating years ago. Other projects do not reflect the current Yes amended. L98 (now L99) thank you for this and we are aware that Parish Council situation particularly in relation to bus infrastructure and the service numbers referred to require revision. improvements. Additionally the plan does not look forward to the emerging LDF and the increasing population and resulting requirements of It is not the role of the TS to identify development locations. But Hartley Wintney Comment / Objection Hartley Wintney.e.g. project L116 contains replacement of bus Yes as the Transport Assessments covering developments are agreed Parish Council poles along the B3016, which would be useful if there actually a with proposals then these will be added to the Table. bus The centre of Hartley Wintney provides a crossroads for public transport, enabling access from Hook and Basingstoke along Hartley Wintney Providing bus services that are viable in and around Hartley Comment / Objection the A30 to the west and Camberley to the east along the A30 as No Parish Council Wintney is not easy and subsidies are being increasingly reduced. well as 'A' road links both north and south to Reading, Fleet and Alde Paragraph 3.1 of the Transport Statement notes the larger para 3.1 Hartley Wintney as described is a village set in a rural villages of Hook, Hartley Wintney and Odiham being rural Hartley Wintney location which is not considered to be incorrect. L115 VMS Comment / Objection (even though project L115 wishes to install city style variable Yes Parish Council proposals in a Conservation Area, is a reasonable concerns and message signs in a conservation area!) yet the district council this will be removed from the Table. under the LD Overall, the plan falls well short of adhering to HCCs overall Do not accept that the TS falls short of the transport aims. Yes, transport aims. How can the Transport Plan facilitate and the plan does rely on some developer funding for schemes, but Hartley Wintney Comment / Objection enable new development to come forward when it is heavily No there are some other forms of funding. It is considered helpful to Parish Council relying on developers to pay for any works with such a massive have a comprehensive list of schemes to help plan for shortfall in infrastructre. In tackling the shortcomings of the plan the Parish Council HCC welcome the opportunity to work with the Parish and Hart would be more than happy to meet with policy makers together Hartley Wintney District to update the schedule for the Hartley Wintney area. The Comment / Objection with Hart DC to consider how to create a coordinated approach No Parish Council Schedule will be updated regularly and it is recommended that this to improving transport facilities and redrafting the schedule of is addressed in the near future. Transpo Overview. In responding to the consultation document, Blackwater & Blackwater & Hawley Town Council is mindful one principal aim The assistance with CIL is an important element of the TS, but it is Hawley Town Comment / Objection was to assist HDC in preparing its Community Infrastructure No not just about that. Council Charging Levy (CIL) thereby ensuring local developers fully contribute towards Main Aims: B & H TC is firmly of the opinion this consultation Blackwater & document comprehensively fails in almost all respects given It is the LTP3 which provides the strategic policy for the area. The Hawley Town Comment / Objection specific aim of setting clear objectives and determining HDC No TS identifies the transport objectives and priorities for the Hart Council transport priorities over the period to 2028. It does not with a detailed schedule of schemes. constitut Transport Policy & Issues: Where is any reference to cross- Reference to cross border considerations is being added to the TS Blackwater & border considerations or a strategy towards airports, railways in section 2.6. The focus is not 'purely on roads' with objective 2 Hawley Town Comment / Objection even canals? Focus is purely upon roads when public Yes focused on access improvements for all modes of transport. Council transport needs are barely mentioned. We strongly support a However the problems of bus service provision are recognised. separate submission Key Objectives: Consultation asks do we support four key Blackwater & objectives to which our answer must be “of course” but are they Note the comments made about the objectives. Section 4.3 Hawley Town Comment / Objection our only objectives for this district, or merely a repetition of No delivery priorities does refer to working with community groups to Council objectives elsewhere and indeed throughout Hampshire? It provide essential transport accessibility. remains to Improvement Schedule: In so far as it goes, this is supported by Blackwater & B&HTC primarily as LDF evidence however we would prefer to Pleased that the schedule is supported and while detail is provided Hawley Town Comment / Objection have seen far more detail rather than inspirational platitudes. No where possible for some schemes this is not always possible as Council That so much has been omitted from the Transport Statement more information emerges as the scheme or study progresses. (e.g.. (7) Havant Borough Transport Statement Consulation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Officer response / comment Response / Comment Change Required Respondent number support H12 Southleigh Rd cycle scheme is part of HBC's cycle strategy. HCC have a policy to provide red painted cycle lanes across H13 - footbridge across railway at Warblington Station. H15 - junctions and sideroads when part of a cycle route. HCC do not removing no cycling order from footbridge between Third support removal of red painted cycle lanes on existing cycle Avenue and Eastern Road. Upgrading various pelican crossing routes which are part of the adopted cycle route network. to toucan crossings would be great. I don't know if this survey will give me a chance to comment on those measures I object to... H12 - I am dubious of any on-road cycle routes such as those small stretches of red that exist on Southleigh Road. I do not want more on-road cycle routes such as these. My opinion Resident (PO9) 219 Comment No is that they encourage cyclists to cycle on a dangerous part of the road (too close to side-roads, leaving no margin for error). They reduce cyclists' ability to negotiate with motor traffic: what if the cyclist wants to turn right, or swerve to avoid debris? The cars may be expecting him to remain on the painted red bits. What advantage do thse lanes have for cyclists seeing as cars are not prevented from entering them? (Even on the mandatory bike lanes on Havant Road Emsworth, cars use them as extra space for undertaking.) Rather than doing more random bits of red paint, please save the money for new railway bridge. Comment noted There were lots of nice surprises among the proposals in this statement. Having a bike hire scheme for Bromptons at the Resident (PO9) 219 Support station seems a very ambitious and fantastic idea. I feel proud No of our area because of the various bike lanes such as Farlington Marshes and those ones across Leigh Park and Cowplain. So clearly some great stuff can get done. It should be about safe, efficient and green transport and NOT Sustainable travel is central to the District Statement as is Resident (PO11) 220 Object No skewed to involve planning reducing the need to travel through planning. Not enough emphasis is put on encouraging a healthy lifestyle The Statement refers to HBC's adopted Active Travel Strategy. Resident (PO11) 220 Comment Yes i.e.walking and cycling Further development will only add to congestion, danger and The planning process will secure developer contributions to Resident (PO11) 220 Object No misery for road users mitigate the effect of new development on the road network. The schemes on the schedule of transport improvements list will accord with HBC's proposed cycle network which is regularly HA4 upgrade a safe, well marked zebra crossing to a pelican updated. Can not upgrade Hayling billy surface as this is a rural crossing Elm Grove by Hayling Billy PH. is a waste of money route under coastal management. with no advantage. HA5 install a pelican crossing by entrance to health centre is another waste of money as the road is narrow enough to cross in safety just look at the pelican Resident (PO11) 220 Object crossing Havant Road/Victoria being misused by 50% No pedestrians. The upgrading of the Hayling Billy Line to an all weather surface was not included although it is well used and would give the greatest benefits to all encouraging exercise to the individual,safety no matter the weather and green transport. The hardly used portion of the H.B. line from Langstone Yacht Club to Mill Lane has this surface! Comment noted HA3 the circular cycle route would be used mainly for Resident (PO11) 220 Comment No recreational purposes occasionally but an all weather surface Hayling Billy Line wouldd be used daily by many Nothing shown to improve Hayling's road on/off the island, how Cycle Hayling's aspirations which accord with HBC's proposed does that improve infrastructure when more housing is being cycle strategy will be included in the schedule of transport Resident (PO11) 239 Comment No imposed on Hayling? On page 25/26 many of Cycle Hayling's improvements list. Access to and from hayling island is aspirations seem to have been ignored. acknowledged as a key transport challenge. There is a strong local concensus that speeding is a major issue Comment noted Resident (PO11) 284 Comment No affecting pedestrians, cyclists etc I particularly support the improvements to the cycling Comment noted Resident (PO11) 284 Support No infrastructure. The schemes on the schedule of transport improvements list will accord with HBC's proposed cycle network which is regularly It's good to see some cycling provision in the Havant draft updated. Can not upgrade Hayling billy surface as this is a rural transport statements. I am concerned, however, that there is route under coastal management. nothing to address what I see as the most pressing local need: a safer north-south cycling route on Hayling Island. The Hayling Billy trail is useful (and I use it). It is, however, suitable only for trail bikes and - after wet weather - it is impossible for even trail bikers to use it without getting covered in water, mud Resident (PO11) 284 Comment and sand. When I use my road bike (or my wife uses her No hybrid) we are forced onto the A3023 or West Lane and then onto the back roads around Northney. None of these roads has a provision for safe cycling. It is not uncommon to see a trail of cars behind a cyclist which promotes dangerous overtaking manouevres by impatient motorists. Speeding is a serious local problem. Can I suggest the plan includes investigation and eventual implementation of either: 1) Provision to upgrade the Hayling Billy Trail to the same standard as the section leading up to Havant; 2) Provision of a North-South cycle route taking in the main residential areas. Resurfacing an existing cycle lane falls under maintenance and therefore can not be funded by developer contributions. However In April 2012 I wrote to Hampshire CC asking when the Havant this location is in a very poor state and has become a road safety Road cycle lane in Emsworth would be re-surfaced. Andrew issue. Other funding streams need to be investigated. Will add Wood - Principal Engineer for Havant- replied saying that, scheme to resurface the A259 Havant Road, Emsworth scheme although needed, it was currently too expensive to do this. to the schedule of transport improvements list. Need to investigate BUT, that there was widespread support for this proposal from other funding options. Resident (PO9) 286 Comment both the community and councillors. Given this widespread Yes support, why isn't this proposal mentioned in this Transport Statment? There are other high-cost proposals included in the Statement, after all. It seems silly to discuss spending lots of money on new projects when existing facilities cannot be maintained properly. Re-surfacing - or better re-designing - Havant Road Cycle lane in Emsworth is crucial for cycle traffic travelling between Havant and Emsworth. Charity/ NGO This is a public consulation open to local community groups. (CTC 279 Comment There should be provision for local community groups to No Portsmouth) propose and discuss transport solutions. Charity/ NGO The schemes on the schedule of transport improvements list will (CTC 279 Comment The proposed cycle infrastructure put forward for Hayling Island No accord with HBC's proposed cycle network which is regularly Portsmouth) was ignored updated. Charity/ NGO Access to and from hayling island is acknowledged as a key (CTC 279 Comment Single access road for Hayling Island - especially when the 600 No transport challenge. Portsmouth) extra homes are built Charity/ NGO Cycling schemes are included in the schedule of transport (CTC 279 Comment No improvements list Portsmouth) non-existing priority or funding for the cycling travelling option Charity/ NGO measures to improve the accessibility of Waterlooville town centre (CTC 279 Comment Yes form part of the successful TfSH LSTF bid and is included on the Portsmouth) Remove the ban on cycling in the Waterlooville precinct schedule of transport improvements list.. This is a public consulation open to local community groups. All text corrections accepted. Comments noted. There should be provision for local community groups to propose transport solutions. I can find no mention of local consultations which should have been introduced with the government’s Localism Bill. Safety - where is your policy/strategy on protecting and improving road safety for vulnerable road users, such as working with law enforcement bodies on speeding and reviewing and adjusting speed limits Charity/ NGO where appropriate, and implementing other safety measures? (CTC 279 object Yes No mention of the other ‘environmental’ problem of road noise. Portsmouth) Page 3, para 1.1, 4th bullet - Havant is a town replace with ‘Havant Borough’ so other parts of the borough feel included Infrastructure Planning. Page 4, para 2.1 - What proportion of the transport budget will target the National Priority ‘Carbon emissions will be reduced by encouraging greater use of walking, cycling and public transport’? This document gives the impression that the real priorities actual come from the LEP and similar bodies and are aimed at motorised traffic. Page 8, para 3.2 - CAP use to stand for Countryside Access Plan. Page 13, para 5.3 - Funding imbalance - why should cycling This is a public consulation open to local community groups. All work be so poorly funded? Is any portion of the government text corrections accepted. Comments noted. funding used on cycling infrastructure? Page 10/11, para 3.12 - Charity/ NGO Having listed the various ‘Key Transport Challenges’ what will (CTC 279 object Yes be done to meet them? E.g Traffic problems with the single Portsmouth) access road for Hayling Island - especially when the 600 extra homes are built. Also crossing the A(3)M - are any additional foot/cycle bridges proposed? The schemes on the schedule of transport improvements list will Local community accord with HBC's proposed cycle network which is regularly / environmental 213 Comment No updated. Access to and from hayling island is acknowledged as a interest group More attention to Hayling Island, its transport problems and key transport challenge. (Cycle Hayling) cycling as an ideal solution The Statement refers to HBC's adopted Active Travel Strategy. Local community / environmental 213 Comment No interest group (Cycle Hayling) Not enough priority given to active travel Scheme H18 lists improve access to Langstone bridge. Feasibility for this is scheme is currently underway by HBC. Completing this HA2 to HA8 inclusive Cycle Hayling feels that the cycling section of the route is a high priority for HBC and HCC.The aspirations that it submitted formally to Havant Borough schemes on the schedule of transport improvements list will accor Council in a document entitled "Hayling Island Cycling Facilites" have not been taken into account properly. In particular, Havant’s scheme list does not include our primary aspiration, which is the “Cycle route from North Hayling” identified in our Facilities document. As explained in this document, this route is a vital part of a Circular Island Route, and is also crucial to linking the north of Hayling to the schools, shops and seafront in the south of the island. It would also provide a route for residents in the south-east of Hayling to cycle to the mainland for work etc. Currently the only option is along the very Local community dangerous main A3023 Havant Road. The Hayling Billy track is / environmental 213 Object not an option, because it cannot be accessed easily or safely No interest group from most of the island and certainly not from the schools. (Cycle Hayling) Cycle Hayling in discussions with local landowners to find suitable route along existing tracks parallel to main road, and seeking funding under Natural England’s “Paths for Communities”.

We stand a real chance of success in creating a desperately needed route that would make a difference to island residents AND boost green tourism on the island. Without real support from our local authority and county council that success is in jeopardy. We therefore feel that this north-south route should be identified explicitly in the Scheme List for Havant Borough. Apart from this vital route, the List of Schemes makes no mention of improving cycle access across the Langstone Bridge or improving the surface of the Hayling Billy Trail on the Island. HBC provided suggested changes to the text and provided Comment noted and text amendments accepted. comments in the form of a letter. The on-line form was not Havant Borough completed. A summary of the main comments are a)HBC Support Yes Council support the TS. Iit outlines the current position, identifies leas partners and sets out funding opportunities. Support its use at planning appeals b) a major concern is the impact new development will have on The cumulative effect of new development on the network will be Havant Borough the highway network c) and concern with how essential modelled using the SRTM as part of the consultation on the LDF comment Yes Council improvements on the highway are funded as new developments allocations document. are implemented d) With CIL coming in force from Feb 2013 concern over the More accurate wording is required for CIL sections as HBC will Havant Borough comment funding of transport infrastructure schemes. Suggest amend Yes adopt the charging schedule in Feb 2013. Council text for the CIL para. This approach to spending the developer contributions along a e) Suggest introduce transport corridors. This can help assess corridor has been discussed with HBC officers and the Statement Havant Borough comment the cumulative effect of development on the network and Yes will be changed accordingly. Council aportion any financial contributions that may be required. F) suggest amend the scheme list to include corridors

(8) New Forest District Transport Statement Consulation Response Summary August 2012 Respondent Case object / comment / Response / Comment Changes required yes Officer response / comment number support / no Milford on sea Formal Comment We live in a rural area, which is not covered in depth, therefore No The document seeks to reflect transport policy for the district as a Parish Council written it is impossible to comment (County (local) level- no). whole from national to local level and it is felt that it sufficiently (Parish Clerk) response covers Local Transport Policy. Milford on sea Formal Comment Again much of our parish is not covered (disagree). No Question 3 relates to key local transport issues. It is felt that Parish Council written Milford on Sea is recognised under the 'coastal towns' statement (Parish Clerk) response and mention of the A337 in particular. It is felt the Statement accurately reflects the key local transport issues under 3.7

Milford on sea Formal Comment Point 4.3 Objective 2: Bullet point 4 should also include the Yes Agree that the A337 should be considered for development of safe Parish Council written A337 in additition to the A36 and A326. crossing points for pedestrians. (Parish Clerk) response Milford on sea Formal Comment Bullet point 6- County should take absolute responsibility for the No Bus shelters are not owned or maintained by the County Council Parish Council written repair, renovation and replacement of all bus shelters and try (Parish Clerk) response not to refer the responsibility to small towns and parishes who cannot afford such additional financial responsibilities (Improve access to jobs, facilities and services by all types of transport- no). Milford on sea Formal There are many other improvements that should be made in No Table 1 was produced in conjunction with New Forest District Parish Council written and around our rural village, therefore, we believe this section Council and is in line with the Transport Contributions Policy list (Parish Clerk) response is incomplete (3. local access schemes (borough/ district wide). held by the County Council. Any additional schemes can be considered for inclusion. Local Authority 15 Comment The Town Council is pleased to see within objective 2 that No Comment noted (New Milton town funding is to be secured to replace Community First New Forest councillor - minibuses, plus support to other communtiy transport providers, assistant town being services that our residents are highly dependent on. clerk) Local Authority 236 Comment There are a few schemes missing from the list, which should Yes Most of these schemes have been agreed since the District (New Forest also be included, listed below: Replacement ‘Call & Go’ bus for Transport Statement was drafted. HY MA TE/T/B and TE/T/69 district Council western area of district; FA/T/45 - Provision of footway on were deliberatly ommitted. All relevant schemes will be added to Transport corner of Fawley Road/Blackfield Road and widening of existing the final draft and FA/T/41 withdrawn |Planning Policy footpath including some localised road narrowing; HY MA TE Officer) /T/ B - A326 Dibden to Totton Western Bypass: Improvements to relieve congestion (Bus/multi-occupancy vehicle priority could be included). Likely to involve the widening of the A326 (single carriageway) to three lanes. (included in Core Strategy CS23 (c)); LP/T/46 - Central pedestrian refuge island to be provided just west of the junction of Bridge Road and Undershore Road to help pedestrians cross the road at this location; NM/T/45 - Junction improvement (possibly including provision of a roundabout) at A337 and Old Milton Road junction together with improved pedestrian crossing facilities; TE/T/69 - Totton A35 east of A326 – highway improvements, including bus priorities, to tackle congestion (included in Core Strategy CS23 (b));

Local Authority 236 Comment TE/T/77 - West Totton Cycle Routes: Improvement of lines, Yes Most of these schemes have been agreed since the District (New Forest signs and staggered barriers so that these consistent with Transport Statement was drafted. HY MA TE/T/B and TE/T/69 district Council Department for Transport guidance (LTN 2/08) Conversely were deliberatly ommitted. All relevant schemes will be added to Transport there has been comment from District Councillors that they do the final draft and FA/T/41 withdrawn |Planning Policy not support scheme ref FA/T/41 as such NFDC would like HCC Officer) to reconsider the inclusion of FA/T/41 in the District Statement. In general NFDC support the objectives of the District Statement and the schemes included which have been jointly agreed by HCC and NFDC in connection with the Council's Transport Contributions Policy. It is suggested further investigative work is carried out for the No Work on the Totton Western Bypass scheme is ongoing and will Totton Western Bypass (TE/T/42) improvement scheme to look at a range of options to improve trafic flow. determine the most feasible option for improvements. Additionally there has been some concern expressed by District No Comments noted. Hampshire County Council has no plans to use Councillors regarding the installation of ANPR, VMS and CCTV. ANPR or CCTV for road user charging and will assess each It is recognised that VMS linked to ANPR and CCTV would be location and scheme before deciding wether to use this technology appropriate to minimise congestion and better manage incidents such as road traffic accidents. We understand from recent correspondence between HCC and NFDC that HCC's ITS (Intelligent Transport Systems) group have identified locations within the County that would benefit from an ANPR / CCTV type approach to help minimise congestion as well as improving road safety and incident management. It was mentioned in HCC's correspondence that "the New No Comment noted Forest was one of the first to utilise this technology for the Lyndhurst Intelligent Routeing Strategy scheme. This scheme manages the road network in and around Lyndhurst by detecting congestion on the A337 Romsey Road and setting Variable Message Signs on the surrounding road network to divert traffic to use an alternative route. Hampshire County Council has no current plans to look at Road User Charging in the New Forest and will use the ANPR / CCTV for better management of the road network as demonstrated by the Lyndhurst scheme." Therefore providing the schemes are used in this context they would be considered acceptable.

Richard Taylor E-Mail Comment I have been looking at the New Forest Transportation Yes The Bluestar 10/11 service is only partly commercial so was Minstead Parish comment Statement - Consultation Draft with a view to making a originally ommitted. However the wording has been altered to Council via NFDC response from Minstead Parish Council - in section 3.10 I reflect tha these are frontline services rather than Commercial believe you have forgotten to mention the bluestar 10/11 service and has therefore been included.n 3.10. This will be service from cadnam to southampton which is one of the few rectified. bus services left in the forest (however you do have items in table 1 for upgrading the bus shelters on this route). Richard Taylor E-Mail Comment In section 3.9 all the transport interchanges/hubs are effectively Yes Agree that key transport interchanges within the National Park Minstead Parish comment outside the New Forest. Why are Brockenhurst and Sway not should have been included. Wording will be amended to reflect Council via NFDC included given their role as interchanges for rail/bus/cycle - key transport interchanges such as Brockenhurst. Others have environmentally friendly transport modes. Why are Ashurst and been ommitted due to timetables not being in sync and therefore Beaulieu Rd not targeted as potential train to bus/cycle can't be promoted as key interchanges between rail and bus. interchanges. Why is Lyndhurst not highlighted as a potential bus/cycle interchange. It appears that only interchanges in the NFDC area are included and NFNPA has rather passed the buck

Comment noted The transport policy at a national level as outlined in the NPPF is only a statement of principles and ambitions and it is impossible to say what they mean for us. At a Sub-Regional level the M3LEP information available on the website is so thin as to be meaningless at the current moment. It gives us no clue as to what the transport policy actually is. Hopefully this will improve as the new system finds its feet. No We believe the reliance on community transport to fill the gap No Comment noted left by the loss of bus services to be excessive. Community transport can fulfil a vital role in getting those without cars to medical appointments, shops, and social activities. However we do not believe it can fill the need for economically essential journeys to work. This hits young people especially hard given the exorbitant cost of running a car for them. More effort must be put into finding a solution for this unless the New Forest is to continue its journey to becoming an expensive retirement home. We believe one possible area for improvement would be to No The term visitor is used as this encompasses residents and those concentrate on cycle facilities for local people, not just visitors. from further afield. Clearly any additions to the Strategic Cycle Throughout this transport statement all references to cycling Network will benefit everyone not just 'Tourists' only mention visitors. Why do the local population not get a mention? Many journeys to work/college/school within the forest could be No Comment noted but about maintenance of routes and by bike if a safe continuous network existed. Why do no bus enforcement rather than requesting changes to the District stops have facilities to allow cyclists to safely secure their Statement cycles before continuing their journeys? Cycle lanes need to be properly respected and maintained. A vehicle parked across a cycle lane presents a potentially lethal situation. Most motorists just treat cycle lanes at the side of the road as part of the road. Debris from minor road accidents is just swept into the side waiting for a passing cyclist. Many separate cycle lanes are unusable due to overhanging vegetation and broken glass. Cycle lanes in towns and cities, which just finish at a junction with no clue as to where to go next, are pointless and dangerous. If cycling is to be taken seriously it needs more than fine words. Real cyclists need to be consulted (such as sustrans), cycle lanes need to be usable and properly respected/enforced. Perhaps it would help if some councillors and transport executives actually got on a bike and cycled the routes at rush hour to properly understand the problems.

Several references are made to improving information and No The comment regarding broadband speeds is noted but outside advice on transport choices. This will be difficult to achieve in the remit of this Transport Statement. Improving information and the New Forest whilst broadband speeds remain poor and advice for transport choices can be done without the need to use a mobile phone coverage (for smart phone transport apps) is computer. Such as Transport maps, simple timetable, transport patchy. More emphasis should be given to improving these if information points and real time information at bus stops. the gap between rural and urban communities is not to increase. Also perhaps some attention should be given to what information online systems need to give. It is very frustrating waiting for web pages to load totally unneccesary (but very pretty) graphics and logos. Perhaps those who design the systems should test them over one of our lines?

We are supportive of all the suggested schemes within this list No Cycle parking is an issue that requires further investigation however we would add the following specific comments:- regarding locations. Cycle parking has to be safe and secure Bus shelter improvements should include cycle facilities at key otherwise it won't be used. The comment on cycle facilities will be locations – Cadnam (CO/T/2 maybe), Lyndhurst (LT/T/6), and considered as part of a wider study to look at suitable options for Brockenhurst (BK/T/2). Also the bus service 56 and 56A is now additional cycle parking. No change to scheme list but further the 6! work will be undertaken to establish safe secure cycle parking We strongly support LT/T/5 which seeks to provide safer links opportunities as part of the Joint National Parks Local Sustainable for cyclists through Lyndhurst. Transport fund delivery programme. We have not commented on the Strategic Highway Schemes or the NFDC Local Access Improvements as we do not have detailed local knowledge on these. Jo Stannard Comment The Town Council supports the draft document. However, we No The Ringwood Town Access Plan referred to both documents Deputy Town are concerned that no reference has been made to the when it was produced and the District Statement has taken into Clerk Ringwood Ringwood Town Plan and Strategic Implementation consideration the Ringwood TAP. Reference to the 'Love it, Hate Town Council Programme, produced by the Town Council in 2008 following it' survey in the TAP as well as other issues raise locally are extensive public consultation. Both the District and County therefore considered here by association. A31 is the responsibility Councils are aware of the Town Council's strong views about of the Highways Agency and therefore whilst HCC will work in considering issues raised by the public and included in the partnership with the HA it cannot take developer contributions to Town Plan and SIP, and its views on the problems on the A31 fund this work and it is therefore not included. and the need for a relief road to the B3347. However, neither appear to have been considered. We would be grateful for an explanation as to why no account has been taken of the views of residents and the Town Council, as outlined in these documents. Whilst the A31 is mentioned in paragraph 3.7, there is no No The A31 is trunk road and therefore the responsibility of the reference to the existing congestion (as there is to other roads) Highways Agency. Hampshire County Council will continue to and the poor safety record on this road. Paragraph 4.2 shows work with the Highways Agency to resolve these issues but one of the delivery priorities "As part of a longer term strategy, ultimately the schemes listed here are looking to attract developer in partnerhsip with the Highways Agency, investigate capacity contributions so that HCC as Highways Authority can deliver the improvements for links on M3, M27 and A31." The Town improvements. Council recommends that this priority be amended to include a review of safety measures in order to reduce the accident rate.

This recommendation is supported by a Motion recently agreed No The A31 is trunk road and therefore the responsibility of the by the Town Council as follows: Highways Agency. Hampshire County Council will continue to That Ringwood Town Council, having deep concerns related to work with the Highways Agency to resolve these issues but the number of vehicle accidents on the urban stretch of the A31 ultimately the schemes listed here are looking to attract developer in Hampshire from Picket Post to the Ashley Heath interchange, contributions so that HCC as Highways Authority can deliver the and having regard to public opinion, petitions the Highways improvements. Authority to once again review, in consultation with this Council, measure which implemented, would have a beneficial impact on the accident rate on that section of the A31. The Council is currently preparing a submission to the Highways Agency in this respect. We would also request that priority for schemes within the New Forest Transport Statement be agreed in consultation with Ringwood Town Council and other local councils. I would be grateful if these comments could be taken into consideration when reviewing the draft document. (9) Rushmoor Borough Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Respondent Response / Comment Change required Officer response / comment number support There will be additional traffic in the area from the Aldershot Elected Urban Extension (AUE). A Transport Assessment (TA) is being Councillor undertaken which will include proposals to accommodate the 5 Comment Congestion, the Aldershot Urban Extension No (Hampshire transport impacts. The Schedule includes those AUE proposals county Council) from the Supplementary Planning Document and these will be updated from an agreed TA. Elected Councillor I support the measures in the Farnborough TAP and the 5 Support No Welcome the support (Hampshire Strategic Improvements., county Council) Elected Many of the schemes have been copied from the Farnborough Councillor 5 Comment It's mainly cut and paste from the Farnborough TAP ! No TAP. There is also the Aldershot TAP and some other schemes (Hampshire added that provide a comprehensive schedule for Rushmoor. county Council) Most of the suggested improvements would be welcome. From a pedestrian standpoint, emphasis should be placed on busy road crossing with environmental and cosmetic route improvements seen as a secondary consideration. I have commented on a small subset of the measures listed in Table 1 based on routes (especially pedestrian) which I take around Transport Farnborough only. S1 to S4 providing they are effective in Interest Group reducing current congestion problems. Note scheme S3 should Comments on S1, S4, S3,L21, will be forwarded to the relevant (Rushmoor 18 comment ensure that pedestrians are able to readily cross Summit No department. Pedestrian Avenue and Kennels Lane and their rights are not forgotten. In Forum) connection with Hartland’s park development cyclists and pedestrian should continue to have easy access to Fleet pond from Southwood. L21 Lack of bus service between prospect estate and town centre in the evening is often commented on, and will cut off many of the residents of the Prospect and Grange estates from the evening economy in central Farnborough as this expands in the future. L27 The Highgate Lane A325 junction is the natural route for pedestrians walking to Farnborough North station especially from North Cove. L31. This would be particularly useful as observation shows that the pedestrian desire line from the town centre and from the Railway station to Rectory road crosses the A325 at this point. L33,L35. Consideration should be given for Transport controlled crossing somewhere between Queens roundabout Interest Group and just North of the Netley street to cater for residents of Comments are noted on these schemes and will be forwarded to (Rushmoor 18 comment Queensgate and Maitlands Road as well as for cyclist from No relevant departments Pedestrian Cove to North camp who use the cycle path adjacent to the Forum) southern access road. L43, L45, L46, L47. Improvements to route between centre of Farnborough and Railway station are long overdue. Emphasis should be on Wayfaring signs and crossing of Union street on route to Elmsgrove road and Victoria road at or near exit of Elmsgrove. L71. This seems a topic which schools, parents or other stakeholders could initially tackle without excessive expenditure.

L72, and L73 are especially important in improving both pedestrian and cyclist routes from East Cove and Farnborough locations to the Canal at Pyestock and to the Southwood open space area due to the difficulties of crossing the A327 in the vicinity of the Ively roundabout. L74 is attractive in providing a more direct cycle/walking route to the canal following the Transport original route.The reason for producing the Transport Statement Interest Group The TS aims to be as concise as possible. The TAP is referred to and its purpose beyond the Aldershot and Farnborough TAPs is (Rushmoor 18 Comment No as inputting to the TS in para 2.6 and the Table 1 has a specific not fully apparent until paragraph 2.3.1 of the Farnborough TAP Pedestrian column with a TAP reference to allow cross referencing. is re-read. The introduction of this document should have Forum) assisted the reader in understanding why this Travel document is required as on first reading it seems to duplicate the TAP. Perhaps a fuller explanation of how this document sits alongside the TAP should be forthcoming. Table 1 could have been better integrated into the rest of the document. Note 5 in Table 1 is ambiguous.

The use of colour coding and grouping into areas in table 4.1 of the Farnborough TAP improves the readability of this table and perhaps the same could be adopted in Table 1 of this Transport document. Items where the source of finance has been Colour coding could assist with readability, but trying to limit the Interest Group identified or partially identified could be highlighted. Although use of colour for printing costs. Accept the point that not always (Rushmoor 18 Comment the list of improvements is fairly comprehensible it’s not No possible to understand all the schemes, but this is partly as many Pedestrian possible to give definitive judgement until the details of the are at the concept stage. Forum) proposals are made known, especially as Table 1 only gives a sketchy outline. It’s very apparent that many of the schemes do not have a suggested source of finance and hence imply that these improvements are unlikely in the foreseeable future. The Table includes a number of cycle schemes which will promote cycling. There is more to be done, notable in the Aldershot area Rushmoor Cycle 269 Comment Not sure that the proposed measures will promote cycling No (ref L110) which are being developed and the cycle forum Forum engagement will be important in these. As detailed schemes are identified then these can be added to the Table. Rushmoor Cycle Comments are noted and the majority of schemes are walking, 269 Comment Priority should be given to walking, cycling and public transport No Forum cycling or public transport. 1. we think implementation of selected 20 mph speed zones would reduce costs significantly while achieving the objectives 1. Will consider a wider application of 20mph zone and forward of the plan. For example items L4, L5, L7, L10, L35, L49, L52, suggestion to relevant department. 2. Links to neighbouring L55, L57, L58, L63, L67 and L75. The sum attached to these is authorities: A323 Aldershot to Fleet & Aldershot Guildford would Rushmoor Cycle £2M to £2.5M 2. we consider links to neighbouring districts to 269 Comment No be under L110 in developing cycle roues from the 2010 cycle Forum be a high priority, and are pleased that L25 and L75 address study. Hawley Lane cycle route is in the 2010 review and would this, but the following are not addressed: A323 Aldershot-Fleet; be part of L69. 3. L69 This is essentially applying the 2010 study A323 Aldershot-Guildford; Hawley Lane, Farnborough-Hawley; proposals, which it is understood that the forum has seen. 3. L69, we would like further information regarding your proposals. Campaign to Protect Rural It is not a question of what the Statement sets out to achieve, England, North 290 Comment No Concerns about the consultation are noted but whether it does achieve it. East Hampshire (CPRE NEH) Campaign to Protect Rural The Statement overlooks the impacts of developments in A comment about neighbouring authorities is being added to England, North 290 Comment Yes neighbouring counties. paragraph 2.7 East Hampshire (CPRE NEH) Campaign to Protect Rural Section 5 summarises the funding and delivery issues. The report Assistance in delivering is an inadequate measure. It is England, North 290 Comment No aims to be concise and it is not considered appropriate provide delivery that is important. East Hampshire detail on all the delivery mechanisms. (CPRE NEH) Campaign to Protect Rural In a document that looks forward 16 years, strategically, the list The scheme list aims to be flexible and regularly updated to add England, North 290 Object of local schemes is inadequate to address all eventualities in No or remove schemes as required. East Hampshire that time-frame. (CPRE NEH) Campaign to Protect Rural CPRE NEH supports the submissions made by CPRE England, North 290 Comment No Comments are noted Hampshire. East Hampshire (CPRE NEH) The Rushmoor Transport statement (RTS) provided a useful summary of the various documents both nationally and locally and a review of the likely sources of funding. What it does not do is to fully review the application of these documents in the local context. Such a review would have enhanced the Pleased that it is felt that it is a useful summary of various national Written Clive Andrews Comment document with the titles and links to the documents quoted as a No & local documents. With regards to sections 3 and 4 it is difficult response list of references at the end. By not doing this sections 3 and 4 to reference these and the document aims to be concise. are not adequately referenced and therefore it is not clear to what extent the transport context (section 3) or delivery priorities (section4) are derived from existing documents or are new ideas introduced by the writer.

In view of the likely difficulty HCC will have in obtaining funds for large capital projects the need to promote and expand sustainable transport as an important way of reducing local congestion could have been strongly featured in the report with the underlying national and local policy brought together in one Consider that walking and cycling routes have improved due to a section. In essence this would mean quoting from the white number of schemes being introduced. Interested to hear that that Written paper ‘Creating growth Cutting Carbon, Making Sustainable Clive Andrews Comment No there is a concern about an increasing severance effect from response Local Transport Happen’, from section 4 of the National increased traffic. Where this is apparent, then additional crossing Planning policy framework, and policy objective 12 of the LTP. facilities could be investigated. In general I would strongly dispute the statement of section 3. Walking routes in the borough has generally not improved over the last few years with increasingly busy roads such as the A325 and A327 acting as effective obstacles to people who wish to make more of their short journeys on foot! We are concerned about the use of S287 planning obligations to provide infra-structure support for this creates private roads and routes, which after planning permission have been granted, It is presumed that it means S278 agreement. Comments are Written create difficulties for comment from the community, as we are Clive Andrews Comment No noted about the use of S278, but these are required to secure response then dealing with a non public closed body. It is therefore transport improvements. desirable that priority should be given to S106/CIL (Community Infrastructure Levy) as a means of funding rather than leaving it to the developers to sort it out. The delivery priorities of section 4 seem to be extremely glib and although commendable may not sufficiently reflect local difficulties. Note that, in drawing up the document the subsections of the objectives 1 to 4(paragraphs 4.2 to 4.5) should have been individually indexed for ease of reference and not just bulleted. Rushmoor is already highly urbanised and Paras 4.2-4.4 replacing bullet points with number to ease even if substantial national or county funds were available references. Recognise concern about available land for transport Written (which they are not) the land for road infra structure Clive Andrews Comment Yes improvements. Where there are proposals any additional land response improvements is not generally available. Thus future schemes take is likely to be minimised and indeed traffic signals to manage are likely to be attempts to mitigate congestion problems by traffic better are expected to feature. traffic control measures and are unlikely to be more than partially successful. Government has placed emphasis on CIL receipts as a means funding infra structure support. However CIL is supposed to have a considerable local resident input into its use so may not properly fund the knock on effect of nearby development on adjacent already fully built up areas. There are also conflicts such as in attempting to deliver the priorities of Objective 1 (4.2) we find that we challenge the priorities of Objective 4 (4.5). In promoting sustainable transport with a call for bus lanes, extra pedestrian crossing points, and Written The TS is a concise document and the nature of transport Clive Andrews Comment speed reductions, we may find that we may not satisfy the need No response objectives and priorities can conflict. to reduce congestion by increasing traffic flow – so how are the priorities of different transport users to be resolved?. Section 3 in dealing with the transport challenges might have dwelt more on this. We would have liked to have seen the priorities resolved as follows:- In residential areas, especially those newly New developments such as Aldershot Urban Extension are developed the extension of 20mph and home zones should be expected to have excellent pedestrian facilities, some 20mph Written Clive Andrews Comment prioritised over measures just to improve traffic flow. On A No zones and walkable neighbourhoods. The proposals include those response roads passing through residential or urban areas, a 30mph that will reduce traffic speeds in residential areas such as L56, speed limit should be favoured with emphasis on the prevision L59, L62, L67, L76 and others. of safe crossing points for pedestrians and cyclist. Although a passing reference was made to the Manual for streets no specific priorities were mentioned in section 4 with respect to encouraging a modern approach to new developments and city centre revitalisation schemes that embraces concepts such as shared space, reclaiming the Written street, and 20mph zones. Such concepts attempt to understand As referred above these will be included and the document is Clive Andrews Comment No response the difference between a street where there is a strong sense of trying to be concise. place and a road intended primarily for the movement of traffic. The manual for streets have replaced some of the older concepts in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, and a commitment to encouraging the newer ideas could have explicitly mentioned as an objective. Section 4 would have been enhanced if the group delivery priorities had been placed under conventional transport objectives. For example:-Objective 1: To provide a well maintained safe and efficient highway network as would promote economic growth; improve access to local Written employment, and facilitate new development locally. Objective Clive Andrews Comment No Objectives 2 and 3 are also important. response 4: Encourage all forms of sustainable transport to promote reduction of green house gas emission, reduce the impact of transport on the environment, and encourage more to use walking and cycling as a healthy way of making short to medium local journeys. The other objectives then become redundant. In view of the number of main roads passing near or through the Borough I would have thought that a strategic lorry strategy Where appropriate there are restrictions on lorry movements. A Written Clive Andrews Comment for the borough should have been suggested. This would No lorry routing strategy does not exist for the Borough, but could be response recommend heavy vehicle routes and attempt to direct such considered for the future. vehicles away from residential or un-suitable roads. Like the Farnborough TAP, the core substance of the statement consists of a list of possible improvement spots on the highway network. Unlike the TAP some effort has been made to try and identify funding sources. In most cases there is either a shortfall Comments noted, but it is more than a wish list. As funding Written Clive Andrews Comment or no funding available, so what practical importance can be No becomes available it is useful to have schemes that are known to response placed on this list is uncertain. The list should therefore have be needed. been viewed as a wish list rather than a schedule for future works. The difficulty of funding is correctly identifies in section 5.4 Unfortunately the list does not give sufficient detail to judge the entries on merit. For example L35 where we were disappointed to learn that only an uncontrolled crossing was intended after see this entry in the Farnborough TAP we expected a proper light controlled crossing here. For pedestrian and cycling Agreed that car should be taken to ensure that proposed Written Clive Andrews Comment facilities, we have always felt that such details are best No improvements coordinate with others. The cycle strategy for the response identified by first identifying a route based on popular usage area will for example help to ensure this is the case. and then identifying the problems along the way. Although this may have been done the list presents itself, with respect to pedestrian improvements, as a collection of piecemeal suggestions and lacks coherence. The lifetime of the LTP and presumable also this document stretches to 2027. It would be foolhardy to expect table 1 to be the only active improvement list over this period and we feel Written that flexibility should be applied with extra items added when Clive Andrews Comment No As referred in paragraph 1.2 the Table will be updated regularly. response the need for these becomes apparent. For example public consultation on the AUE is yet to occur and this will no doubt, raise various items either not included in table 1 or the details in item 1 are challenged. From a pedestrian standpoint, in the absence of funding to cover all desired items, priority must be placed on busy road Written crossing with environmental and cosmetic route improvements Clive Andrews Comment No Thank you for providing these detailed comments by scheme. response seen as secondary considerations. I have commented on a small subset of the measures listed in Table 1 based on routes (especially pedestrian) which I take around Farnborough only. S1 to S4 We agree with these providing they are effective in reducing current congestion problems, and adequate pedestrian crossing facilities are provided. In particular scheme S3 should Written ensure that pedestrians are able to readily cross Summit Clive Andrews Comment No Comments are noted response Avenue and Kennels Lane and their rights are not forgotten. In connection with Hartland’s park development cyclists and pedestrian should continue to have easy access to Fleet pond from Southwood. L21 Lack of bus service between prospect estate and town centre in the evening is often commented on, and will cut off many of the residents of the Prospect and Grange estates from the evening economy in central Farnborough as this expands in L21 bus services to Mayfield & Grange. Providing adequate bus Written the future. This needs strong consideration. A similar situation Clive Andrews Comment No services is difficult in these times when savings in subsidies are response exists for the residents of East Aldershot, including Heronwood having to be found. and Northtown, who have no public transport facilities during evenings and on Sundays. It should be remembered that the citizens of these area, which contain a high percentage of social housing, may not always have ready access to a car. L27. The Highgate lane A325 junction is the natural route for pedestrians walking to Farnborough North station especially L27 comments noted and a scheme to provide improved Written Clive Andrews Comment from North Cove using the new cycle track through QE No pedestrian crossing facilities is exactly what the prosposal is response recreation area. A pedestrian phase in the traffic lights at this aiming to do. junction is required. L31. This would be particularly useful as my observation shows Written that the pedestrian desire line from the town centre and from Clive Andrews Support No Support noted response the Railway station to Rectory road crosses the A325 at this point. L33,L35. Consideration should be given for controlled crossing somewhere between Queens Roundabout and just North of the Written L35 is the proposed improvement for pedestrians north of the Clive Andrews Support Netley Street to cater for residents of Queensgate and No response Queens roundabout on the A325 Maitlands Road as well as for cyclist from Cove to Northcamp that use the cycle path adjacent to the southern access road. L43, L45, L46, L47. Improvements to route between centre of Farnborough and Railway station are long overdue. Emphasis Written Clive Andrews Support should be on Wayfaring signs and crossing of Union Street No Support noted response when on route to Elmsgrove road and Victoria road at or near the junction with Elmsgrove. L71. This seems a topic which schools, parents or other Written Clive Andrews Support stakeholders could initially tackle without excessive No Comment & Support noted response expenditure. L72, and L73 are especially important in improving both pedestrian and cyclist routes from East Cove and Farnborough Written Clive Andrews Support locations to the Canal at Pyestock and to the Southwood open No Comment & Support noted response space area, due to the difficulties of crossing the A327 in the vicinity of the Ively roundabout. Written L74 is attractive in providing a more direct cycle/walking route Clive Andrews Support No Comment & Support noted response to the canal following the original route. Additionally we feel the following could usefully be added to the list: 1) An Island crossing should be provided just west of the one-way street in Cove so users of the Cove brook path can 1) Island added to Cove would be part of L67; safely cross from Highgate path into the section adjacent to 2) A323 / east of North Lane add a pedestrian phase to signals. Hazel Avenue. This link would complete that path. 2) A This already has a pedestrian phase, but consideration in future to Written Clive Andrews Comment pedestrian phase should be placed in the sequence of the No be given to adding a pedestrian phase to the next junction to the response traffic lights east of the junction of North Lane and Ash road east which is Blackwater Way. 3) (A323) as would be useful for students of Connaught school Northmead in Farnborough to become 20mph zone: This can also walking or cycling from North town. 3) A 20 mph zone should be considered for inclusion in future. be considered for Northmead as part of the Farnborough town centre improvements. A review and monitoring process will be carried out during the life A system of monitoring progress during the life time of the Written of the TS. Regular liaison will mainly be carried out with Clive Andrews Comment document, including measures taken to consult with local No response Councillors, but larger schemes would be part of a wider stakeholders and the public at large, is required. stakeholder consultation. (10) Test Valley Borough Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support The main text refers clearly to mechanisms for obtaining funding The Test Valley Transport Plan is very strong on facilitating through local development (S106/CIL etc) . The schemes greater and more efficiant transport movement around the schedule caters for mitigation measures for existing and Charlton Parish Borough but very weak on the impact of more traffic and committed development in the Borough. The list and transport Council - email comment No development, and in the main text has virtually no mention of statement text are 'living' documents and so will be updated as Chairman mitigation measures to reduce the impact on the environment and when new development comes forward so that appropriate and on peoples living areas. mitigation measures for local communities and the environment impacted by development can be met. Charlton Parish Council has instigated an investigation into speed, volume and density of traffic in Charlton Village in the Charlton Parish Test Valley. Early results show a rapid growth in traffic, and an Council - email comment inability of previous traffic calming measures to make the No Comments noted and received at site meeting in May 2012 Chairman village a safe environment for those who live there. (90% of traffic on some roads exceeds the speed limit and the 85th percentile is 42mph in a 30mph limit). The Parish Council has invested £4,000 in an intelligent Speed Indicating Device to provide this data and is now considering Charlton Parish joining Speedwatch sponsored by hampshire Police. Meetings Council - email comment have taken place with HCC and TVBC and it has been No Comments and actions noted. Chairman recommended to the Parish Council that the Transport Statement is the best vehicle to take forward further measures to improve the environment and access in the village. A footway from the village to Cemetry would be approximatly 2km in length. This could cost upwards of £100,000 works cost only Charlton Parish Extension of footpath from Charlton Village to Charlton and be subject to additional costs for land, drainage and public Council - email comment Cemetary and Sports Clubs to promote healthy living and No utility diversions. Further investigations need to be undertaken Chairman reduce vehicular traffic. before this scheme can be considered for inclusion to the scheme list. Extensive traffic calming scheme already implemeted circa 2004/5. Some opportunities for further measures given recorded Charlton Parish speeds but could have limited impact.The 2012/13 TM Provision of physical traffic calming measures in Hatherden Council - email comment Yes programme includes a review of the speed limit on Hungerford Road, Foxcotte Road, and Charlton Road in Charlton Village. Chairman Lane between Hatherden and the roundabout at the Foxcotte Lane junction. Include as scheme ref ATAP016/RT1.8 The County Council is to undertake a trial of 20 mph speed limits in residential areas at a number of locations across the county this year. These sites are being shortlisted by the Executive Member on 11 September 2012. Charlton is not one of the locations being considered on the shortlist.

The purpose of the trial is to assess to how effective these speed limits are in terms of their impact on driver behaviour and how they are received locally. The outcome of this will help us to Charlton Parish determine whether 20 mph speed limits should be used on a wider Provision of 20mph limit and appropriate crossing for the users Council - email comment Yes basis. of the community hall and pre-school. Chairman ITS have assessed provision of controlled crossing in this location and further south near Tesco Express and neither site meet guidance for provison - too few pedestrians and site contraints. Uncontrolled options could be pursued near the community hall. Reject 20mph speed limit request until outcome of "20mph residential pilot" study is known and 20mph policy is formulated - expected 13/14. In the meantime include provision for uncontrolled crossing near community hall in TS schemes list as schem ref ATAP053/CW3.19 Provision of uncontrolled pedestrian crossing (refuge island) required on London Rd north of the junction with Wolversdene Andover TAP Rd. Existing island at junction of Wolversdene Rd also requires NA comment Yes Include in TS schedule as ATAP053 and CW3.18 at cost of £20k progress meeting upgradin/renewal to include tactile paving a widening. This would provide an enahcement to the walking route to the town centre. The School Crossing Patrol site (for Halterworth primary) on Botley Rd near Montford college appears unsafe and has received many complaints from parents and SCP officer. This site can be added to the TS schemes list as RTAP037 for Vehciles don't know if children are crossing in two movements, Yes piroritisation of assessment/new measures. Email via overcrowding the refuge island or just one. This requires a re- HCC road assessment/ and or other measures to facilitate crossing in this Local resident safety comment popular location. The Borough Council has now had an opportunity to look at the draft and is of the opinion that the District Statement accords with 3 Access Plans which the Borough has adopted as Supplementary Planning Documents. The 3 Access Plans reflect current policy, local circumstance and development for all modes of transport in the Borough. The Council is in the unique position of having the entire Borough covered by access Test Valley Email letter Comment/Support plans which form a part of the Local Development Framework. Borough Council The access plans will later refer to the emerging Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule and it maybe necessary to amend the Access Plans and the District Statement when the charging schedule is adopted by the Borough Council. The transport schemes set out in the District Statement are cross referred to those in the Access Plans, avoiding any duplication and to ensure clarity and consistency between the two and this is welcomed and supported. No Comment and support only, no change required (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support The information available, relevant and appropriate with respect to large scheme development sites is included in the Transport makes very glib, high level statements regarding impact of Resident (SO22) 3 comment No Statement. As strategic development sites are identified and their proposed large scale developments transport impacts and proposed mitigation measures become known then the Transport Statement will be updated. WC0040 Andover Road Improve pedestrian and cycle movements along Andover Road at the Railway Bridge location. This is a key access route to the city centre and Resident (SO22) 3 comment No noted station, but just improving the bridge is pointless and a waste of funds - need to improve cycle route right along Andover Road, otherwise you have a pointless piecemeal solution. WC017 - Park Road - pedestrian improvements. This should not be to the detriment of making traffic faster. The narrow bridge is an effective slower of traffic and a separate foot bridge would risk traffic speeding through. WCCS16 Andover Road Andover Road between Park Road and Wellhouse Lane - Resident (SO22) 3 comment No noted upgrade existing footway on E side for shared use. Again pointless if the whole of Andover Road is not improved, else you are forcing cyclists onto the road just where it gets busy. There is land available for a cycle path all along Andover Road on one side or the other. The objectives in the TS are overarching and are aimed at addressing the current and likely future transport issues. The The objectives do not tie anyone to any action. Nothing will schemes listed are identified as collectively and individually Resident (SO32) 6 comment No happen unless timescales are firm. working towards delivering these objectives. The delivery of these schemes will be subject to securing the necessary funding, for which it is not possible to set specific timescales. Resident (SO32) 6 comment Swanmore. Nothing proposed will be ESPECIALLY beneficial. No noted

The schemes listed in table 1 present a range of local transport This paper is toothless. The Objectives tie no one to any improvements aimed at addressing local transport issues in Resident (SO32) 6 object action. The key areas of lowering speed limits in villages and No Winchester. A number of the schemes relate to reducing vehicle limiting heavy traffic to heavy traffic routes, are ignored. speeds and improving the environment for vulnerable road uses, including ref WC0021, BW0003 and TW0004. I welcome the improvements at Swanmore College and the Resident (SO32) 9 support No support noted introduction of the cycle lane from Bishops Waltham (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support I am concerned that the congestion around Swanmore Primary school and pre school has been neglected. With the increase in congestion in this area around school drop off and pick up This issue will be assessed and added to the Transport Statement Resident (SO32) 9 comment times and the inadequate car park opposite the church, plus the No list if appropriate. loss of local pub car parks for the overspill, the walk to and from school up Church Road to Vicarage Lane is treacherous and is an accident waiting to happen. Empty homes must be done up for rent or sale before building Comment is relating to local planning matters, which need to be Resident (SO23) 17 object No on greenfields is even considered!! directed to Winchester City Council Hampshire County Council currently spends over £5M per annum Bus services in the evenings to bishops Waltham stop at 6.50 financially subsidising bus services across the county. Our aim is or 6.25. This is ridiculous! Concessionary passes should be to ensure that all communities have a access to key services such scrapped (even though I am entitled to one, I don't use it), as shopping, banks, doctors, education and employment. A major Resident (SO23) 17 object No instead people over the new retirement age of 65 and people consultation exercise was carried out during the Bus Subsidy with disabilities (including myself) should pay a half fare, Review of 2011, and the majority of respondents indicated their enabling the bus companies to keep running. main priority was bus services during the day to access the fore mentioned services. Table one of the transport statement lists over 200 individual Elected transport improvement schemes which have been identified and Councillor 7 comment This is aspirational and not specific need clearer aims No contributing to delivering the four key objectives of the transport (Winchester City statement. The four objectives have also been aligned with the Council) HCC Local Transport Plan priorities. Elected Councillor The North Fareham SDS and West of Waterlooville, North 7 comment No noted (Winchester City Whiteley Development - Speeding in Villages Council) Elected Junction 10 is not in the Winchester district area. This junction and Councillor M3 junction 9 and M27 junction 9 but junction 10 should also be 7 comment the impacts of the SDA traffic upon it will be assessed and the (Winchester City looked at with the development of the Fareham SDA Fareham Borough TS updated accordingly. Council) The Countywide assessment of speed limits on the A and B road Delivering Safe and reliable ways of getting around will require network has involved more than 1200km of route. All the high sensible speeds but there are no objectives to supporting the priority routes have been assessed against national guidance in Elected enforcing and lowering of speeds. Speeding remains one of the relation to injury-accident rate, the character of road, road side Councillor top issues in villages in the Winchester District. Villages used 7 comment No development, average traffic speeds and the volume/composition (Winchester City as cut throughs and having to accommodate large vehicles that of traffic that the road carries. The overall aim is to provide route Council) are unsuitable for the narrow country lanes have not been consistency and to ensure that the traffic management regime for addressed and the increase village lanes will have to endure a route presents drivers with clear messages about the with all the new development in the South of the District. appropriate speed and driving style for a route. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support The document refers to a range of transport options for rural areas, however acknowledges that for rural areas including Elected conventional bus services, the dominant transport option is the Councillor Assumes that rural transport may concentrate on the elderly, private car. It is therefore a priority to ensure that for those unable 11 comment No (Winchester City which makes those communities unsustainable to use a car or do not have access to a car whether that is due to Council) age, disability or social reasons that there is a public transport option available to them, albeit with some reliance on bespoke community transport options. Elected Councillor Importance of providing jobs, and access to jobs & education 11 comment No noted (Winchester City from rural areas Council) Elected Councillor To have any but a 9-5, Mon- Fri job is impossible without a car 11 comment No noted (Winchester City if you live outside conurbations. Council) The Transport Statement includes a comprehensive list of local This paper does not address the needs of those living outside accessibility improvements and access to countryside schemes in Elected city & suburbs. It fails to capitalise on the opportunity the rural settlements of Winchester district. HCC will continue to Councillor 11 object represented by the National park, and makes no practical steps No liaise with the local parishes on local transport issues. The (Winchester City to address air quality issues in the cites. It also goes a fair way successful Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF) bid for the Council) to creating those problems in the towns SDNP will provide opportunities for transport improvements in the national park area. Owslebury Many statements are misleading to what is offered in practice. Parish Council 12 comment No noted Practice does not achieve objective. (Clerk) The transport statement focus is at a local borough/ district level Owslebury and it is intended to give an overview of the relevant national/ sub A number of national & county policies which include transport Parish Council 12 comment No regional policy as opposed to going in to detail. More detail on matters have not been referred to. (Clerk) specific national policy documents can be obtained via accessing the documents referenced in the TS. The delivery priorities relate to the HCC LTP3. They have been Owslebury Many of the delivery priorities are contrary to what has been listed to highlight how the TS objectives link to the LTP3. In turn Parish Council 12 comment No agreed for Owslebury the TS objectives are shown in relation to the specific transport (Clerk) interventions listed in table 1. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support There are no transport improvements for Owslebury. Virtual Hampshire County Council currently spends over £5M per annum pavements to improve highway safety for the children walking financially subsidising bus services across the county. Our aim is to school and the elderly have been refused; bus services have to ensure that all communities have a access to key services such been cut meaning there is no public transport to enable children as shopping, banks, doctors, education and employment. A major Owslebury to attend after school activities, young people to attend college, consultation exercise was carried out during the Bus Subsidy Parish Council 12 object No young adults to attend full time work, all resulting in an increase Review of 2011, and the majority of respondents indicated their (Clerk) in carbon emissions for those with the financial backing able to main priority was bus services during the day to access the fore afford their own vehicle. Large vehicles and commuters mentioned services. HCC is happy to liaise with the parish council continue to cut through the village at an increasing speed, to discuss local transport issues in Owslebury and transport increasing the danger for parishioners. schemes will be added to the list where appropriate.

Statements in the consultation draft that do not apply to Owslebury include: - * 2.5 "This chapter recognises the issues facing the district, especially how transport improvements can support the rural economy, provide access to jobs, services and leisure activities..." Bus cuts to the village mean that those Owslebury without a car cannot access employment outside the village; Parish Council 12 object No see above children cannot remain at school for after school clubs. 3.3 (Clerk) "Those who can afford to live in the district can choose to travel outside to seek higher-paid employment or to widen their employment options". Owslebury supports a significant number of people living in social housing - yet we have no public transport to enable them to access employment.

3.18 "Winchester city has a well-established and frequent urban bus networ, most of which is commercially run.....These are complemented by secondary, mostly supported local and rural services". Yes we appreciate our services are supported but they have just been cut meaning people are forced to use cars to access work, thus increasing the carbon footprint. If services were increased and costs cut, to a level it is cheaper and easier Owslebury to use public transport, they will be used. 3.21 "A range of Parish Council 12 object community transport schemes operate in the district including No see above (Clerk) Taxi-share, dial-a ride and wheels to work". Our elderly residents do have access to dial-a-ride but we are not aware of any community transport schemes in Owslebury for our young people or adults without their own transport. More for Owslebury please to support Objective 5. Objective 7 "Ensure that travel from home to school affordably serves changing curriculum needs, underpins sustainable schools and maximises individula opportunities for education and training" (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support We have already mentioned the inability of children to access after school clubs or for students to access/return from any of the local colleges, or for young adults to access employment or training using public transport. This is particularly important to address please with the Rising of the Participation Age. Table 1 - Schedule of Transport Improvements. It is noteworthy that not one improvement relates to Owslebury. Objective 2 - Owslebury "Improve access to jobs, facilities and services" including Parish Council 12 object No see above "Maintain and improve good transport access to main (Clerk) employment areas" and "Work with bus companies to improve access to services, especailly for poeple in rurual communities". As a result of public service cuts to Owslebury students attending college and young adults in work who used to use the bus have been forced to learn to drive and purchase a car. We are concerned for those without the finance or ability to enable this.

Objective 4: "Reduce carbon emisssioons" including "encourage the use of passenger tranport through continued delivery of improvements" But not in Owslebury! Policies that form a backbone to the requirement of transport to enable young people to participate; enjoy and achieve; continue in education, achieve economic wellbeing; etc. as well as advocate the involvement of young people in decisions Owslebury regarding services include: "Every Child Matters: change for Parish Council 12 object No see above children"; "Transport Guidance: Supporting access to positive (Clerk) activities"; "Hampshire's Children and Young People's Plan" and "YPLA Transport Partnership Funding Guidance". Whilst written over a span of years, many including guidance rather than requirement, transport policies and their associated statements need to be seen to support Hampshire Priorities. With the Raising of the Participation Age this is a particularly important consideration at this moment in time.

The Table for Twyford is out of date and incorrect. Some of the Twyford Parish Noted - the table has been updated where required taking acocunt 19 comment items listed are already complete, some are listed 3 times and Yes Council (Clerk) of Twyford Parish comments. others are missing. This will be detailed in a separate e-mail. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support A number of schemes are developed and listed in the transport statement which deal with improving accessibility for vulnerable Page 11 refers to use of local roads by inappropriate vehicles road users in locations where there is severance attributable in Twyford Parish which discourages walking and cycling but the documents part to the make up of the road traffic. Specific restrictions and a 19 comment No Council (Clerk) contains no clear strategies for reducing the use of local roads strategy to deal with inappropriate vehicles on the local road for such vehicles. network is always going to be challenging to address due to the need for access to be maintained and enforcement being a matter for the Police. The transport statement focus is at a local borough/ district level Droxford parish and it is intended to give an overview of the relevant national/ sub Council 21 comment Insufficient information re national policy. No regional policy as opposed to going in to detail. More detail on (Councillor specific national policy documents can be obtained via accessing Chandler) the documents referenced in the TS. Droxford parish 20mph areas are currently being reviewed by HCC with pilot areas Council 20 mph in built-up areas & villages, side roads. Manage tourists 21 comment No to be considered shortly. SDNP improvements for access is being (Councillor in SDNP, increase provision for old people considered as part of the Local Sustainable Transport Fund. Chandler) Droxford parish L111 DR0002 Droxford shared space traffic management Council 21 comment scheme It would help if this could be expedited prior to North No Noted. Delivery is subject to funding being available. (Councillor Fareham development initiative Chandler) Although the economic climate currently prevents many of the Droxford parish schemes going ahead, consideration should be given to using BRT provides the most cost effective option for a high quality Council 21 comment existing waterways and construction of light railways, especially No transport system linking to Fareham and the additional phases of (Councillor between North Fareham development and Fareham town this are being explored presently. Chandler) centre/railway station The Winchester District Transport Statement fails to include Transport several schemes included in the Winchester District Cycle Interest Group Noted - the table will be updated where required - HCC officers strategy agreed by the City Council on the 4th July 2012. Work (Winchester 28 comment Yes will feedback directly to the Winchester Cycling Working Group to needs to be done to ensure all of the schemes agreed by the Cycle Working explain which schemes are included and explain any omissions. City are in the District Transport Statement. Estimated cost- Group) £400k Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Parish awaiting feedback from WCC/ HCC. Shared space type. Finance, Policy written comment No Noted - WCC / HCC will be consulting with the parish shortly. Traffic management scheme for High St. Estimated cost- £400k and Resources response Committee

Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Parish support pedestrian/ crossing point on Corhampton road Finance, Policy written support to serve footpath to Free street as defined in travel plan No noted and Resources response Estimated cost- £20k Committee (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Parish support traffic management in Free Street and Hoe road Finance, Policy written support No noted to reduce vehicle speeds around school. Estimated cost- £50k and Resources response Committee

Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Parish support shelters- complete timetable info and seating at Finance, Policy written support No noted bus stops. Estimated cost- £50k and Resources response Committee

Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Parish support Upgrade footpaths in vicinity for improved Finance, Policy written support pedestrian access to schools/ village centre. Plans with rights of No noted and Resources response way. Estimated cost- £50k Committee

Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Parish support Enhance pedestrian provision by widening Finance, Policy written support splitter islands on approach to roundabouts. Estimated cost- No noted and Resources response £20k Committee

Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Not a priority/ necessary - Missing link footway on the B3035 The parish view on this scheme is noted. HCC will continue to Finance, Policy written object Lower Lane from roundabout towards Beaufort Drive. Estimated No liaise with the parish on local priorities and the development of and Resources response cost-£100k local transport schemes. Committee

Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Part of Sainsbury's development proposals. Signalised Finance, Policy written comment No noted controlled crossing on the B2177 Winchester road at Texaco and Resources response Committee The scheme was identified as a Safe Routes to School scheme so Bishops crossing improvements are aimed at improving access to the local Waltham Parish - Formal school. Scheme is at prefeasibility stage therefore no details Finance, Policy written comment clarification required. Enhance crossing points on Copice hill No available on the type of crossing or the precise location. HCC will and Resources response liaise with the parish council as and when this scheme is Committee developed. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Finance, Policy written support Parish support Bus stop upgrades/ shelters in vicinity No noted and Resources response Committee

Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Parish support and notes inclusion in STP. Ridgemede Junior Finance, Policy written support No noted school - new pedestrian access to the rear of the school and Resources response Committee

Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Parish support. Deployment of journey planning kiosk and bus Finance, Policy written support No noted departure screens village centre and Resources response Committee

Bishops The scheme aims to provide new crossing point to link residential Waltham Parish - Formal areas on both sides of Winchester road. Scheme is at Request for clarification. Pedestrian crossing point on Finance, Policy written comment No prefeasibility stage so crossing type and location is to be Winchester Road and associated parking layout amendment and Resources response determined and HCC would liaise with the parish as and when the Committee scheme is progressed.

Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Parish support Pedestrian crossing on Hoe Road, Near to Finance, Policy written support No noted recreation ground and Resources response Committee

Bishops Waltham Parish - Formal Parish support. Cycle route between BW and Swanmore Finance, Policy written support No noted college of technology and Resources response Committee

Bishp's Waltham Formal The proposal will be assessed and added to the Transport Re-instigate a traffic management plan (include Parish Council's written comment No Statement list if appropriate. Bishops Waltham Parish Council will pedestrianisation) forward plan response updated in due course on the outcome. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support Hampshire County Council currently spends over £5M per annum financially subsidising bus services across the county. Our aim is to ensure that all communities have a access to key services such Bishp's Waltham Formal HCC to provide public transport to local towns, especially in the as shopping, banks, doctors, education and employment. A major Parish Council's written comment No evening consultation exercise was carried out during the Bus Subsidy forward plan response Review of 2011, and the majority of respondents indicated their main priority was bus services during the day to access the fore mentioned services. Bishp's Waltham Formal Schemes relating to the promotion of cycling are included in the Parish Council's written comment Encourage more cycling No transport statement scheme list. forward plan response

Bishp's Waltham Formal Investigate more car parking in the town and initiate proposals Parish Council's written comment No Proposal has been passed to WCC. to WCC forward plan response

Bishp's Waltham Formal Parish Council's written comment Facilitate car sharing groups No Noted forward plan response There are a considerable number of local transport schemes There is too much emphasis on facilitating the movement of Resident (SO23) 93 Comment No aimed at improving accessibility and safety for vulnerable road vehicles at the expense of pedestrians users. Dear HCC We object to the proposal to introduce two way contra flow traffic on the section of Station Road, Winchester, from Gladstone Road to St Paul Bridge. On a point of information the part of the road from Newburgh Street to the bridge is still part of Newburgh Street and not Station Road, as stated in your report. The reasons we object are: There is a major pedestrian flow across the bridge from the residential areas to the west of the railway into the city. Pedestrians cross Objection noted. Scheme is at prefeasibility stage and the in front of 9 Newburgh Street where the road narrows. It is Resident (SO23) 93 Object No concerns raised will be considered as and when the scheme is sometimes quite difficult to cross with the high volume of traffic investigated in more detail. coming up Upper High Street, which moves quite quickly. Introducing two way traffic at this point would be threatening to pedestrians using this crossing point, many of which have young children or are elderly. Introducing a right turn on to the bridge from Newburgh Street would be geometrically difficult as St Pauls Bridge is angled and pavements would have to be narrowed to achieve convenient and safe turning. This would be at he expense of pedestrians. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support There would be a loss of much needed car parking spaces for residents of zone Q (i.e. to the front of 6-9 Newburgh Street). The car parking to the front of 6-9 Newburgh Street provides a buffer for residents and helps to reduce the noise and disturbance from traffic. Removing this car parking to facilitate Resident (SO23) 93 Object two way traffic would adversely affect the residential amenity of No see above residents. This is a conservation area and this part of Newburgh Street and Station Road is a main pedestrian route from the railway station to (and from) the city. It is totally dominated by traffic. The balance needs to be addressed to favour the pedestrian and not the motorist. Micheldever Parish Council 77 Comment Enforcement of traffic regulations by the police. No This is a matter for the police. (chair planning) Micheldever Parish Council 77 object A difficult consultation form to answer due to poor design. No noted (chair planning) L97 CU0002 CURDRIDGE, L98 CU0003 CURDRIDGE, L99 Curdridge Parish 285 Comment CU0005 CURDRIDGE, L100 CU0006 CURDRIDGE, No noted Council (Clerk) L101CU0007 C In general we can agree with the overall policy aspirations being set by HCC. With regard to local issues for the Parish and its local road network, we particularly support initiatives and policies that “Address problems caused by the inappropriate use of the local road network by HGVs” as itemised in the HCC as Highway Authority is not responsible for determining the summary of challenges (Section 3, page 15, Winchester locaitons of development however HCC does work with the Local Curdridge Parish District). The lanes that form a major part of our Parish road 285 Comment No Planning Authorities to ensure development is located in Council (Clerk) infrastructure are inappropriate for HGV use. Let alone suitable accessible locaitons and the development related transport for the siting of businesses with HGVs; we would suggest that impacts are mitigated appropriately. policies should be strengthened to prevent the siting of such businesses in locations that use such lanes for access to assist with creating a safer place to live. With regard to infrastructure directly affecting our Parish we would wish to make the following comments: (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support L96 CU0001 CURDRIDGE Upgrade old disused railway line linking to Bishop's Waltham 200 Prefeasability 0 200 2 L: The Parish Council at its meeting of 21 June 2012 reaffirmed its commitment to the development of the Bishops Waltham to Curdridge Parish Botley Trail as a policy. It would like to see taken forward in the Scheme is currently long term in light of the funding and issues 285 Comment No Council (Clerk) medium term rather than the longer term if possible due to the regarding access over 3rd party land. traffic and road safety issues/impacts of proposed major development in/near the parish in the Local Plans of Winchester and Eastleigh especially with consideration to pedestrians and horse riders.

L97 CU0002 CURDRIDGE Continue the footpath from the top of Gordon Road into Lockhams Road to the seat and bus stop. 20 Prefeasability 0 20 2 L L98 CU0003 CURDRIDGE Station Hill - a pedestrian crossing - from Woodview Park (mobile home site) to cross the A334 to the nearby garage/store and to Botley Railway Stat30 Prefeasability 0 30 2 L. .The same reasoning for L96 also applies to the proposed crossing at Station Hill, however due to road safety issues, and considering Curdridge Parish 285 Comment the estimated cost of £30,000 we would suggest that this needs No Noted Council (Clerk) to be addressed in the shorter term, and certainly before any cycle link between Curbridge and Botley Station is commenced. L99 CU0005 CURDRIDGE Safeguarded land in local plan for Bypass 30000 Prefeasability 0 30,000 1,2,3 L ; L100 CU0006 CURDRIDGE A3051/A334 Junction Improvements 2000 Prefeasability 0 200 1,3 L; and L101CU0007 CURDRIDGE Provision of a cycle route between Botley Station and Curbridge 1500 Prefeasability 0 150 2 L.

The provision of a bypass for Botley we consider to be an essential piece of infrastructure required at an early stage to resolve the issues of Air Quality and Traffic Volume at A3051/A334 Junction and Botley High Street (to mitigate the in- combination effects with Eastleigh Borough Council’s development plans for Botley, Woodhouse Lane and Boorley The Botley Bypass remains a long term policy aspiraiton of Green as well as WCC’s North of Whiteley). The in- Hampshire County Council. HCC will work with EBC and WCC as Curdridge Parish 285 Comment combination effects of WCC’s SH3 (North of Whiteley 3000+ No they progress their strategic development site proposals, Council (Clerk) dwellings) and the Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC) 2700 especially with respect to understanding how these development dwellings around Botley/Boorley Green do not support the sites will impact on the local road network. assertion as promoted by WCC in their Local Plan Pt 1, with the current 77% car usage and 80% of Whiteley residents working outside of Whiteley, that an infrastructure improvement of a mere £0.1m (as detailed in WCC in their Infrastructure Study) at the junction of the A3051/A334. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support We agree that £2M is more appropriate. However with regard to L99 and L100 we consider that a much earlier timescale than 10 years is required for both these essential pieces of infrastructure if the proposed major local development is to take place. The Parish Council would also like to make the following points with direct regard to the North of Whiteley connections to the local road network and in particular with reference to the Curdridge Parish 285 Comment A3051 a. Air Quality is identified as being a significant risk to No Noted Council (Clerk) the SPA as the A3051 abuts the designated site at the bridge of Curbridge (WCC’s HRA 4.11 and 4.12). This is in breach of the requirements of the Habitats Directive Article 6 for the European sites;Department for Transport Guidance as expressed in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB, Volume 11 Environmental Assessment, Section 3 Environmental Assessment Techniques, Part 1: Air Quality)

states that the first process in determining air quality impacts from road schemes is to determine whether the road in question is an ‘affected road’ which is defined as, among other criteria, if it will experience an increase in flows of more than 1,000 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT). The A3051 will experience at least such an increase from this proposed policy SH3 and needs to be utilised in assessing the impact of this Curdridge Parish The transport assessment work associated with the North Whiteley 285 Comment proposal and resultant mitigation. b. The expressed aspiration No Council (Clerk) development is ongoing. by WCC in their Local Plan Pt 1 to “complete Whiteley Way at an early stage of development, in …[a] manner which does not …encourage traffic from adjoining areas to use the new route to gain access to the strategic road network” is in complete opposition with causing ‘nil detriment’ from the development and will only exacerbate the air quality issues at the border of the SPA and the A3051; (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support

the development should be positively designed to take vehicles off the A3051 and away from the SPA; and c. Transport/Traffic: To take the traffic and potential increase in visitors away from the SPA/SAC/Ramsar site, to improve air quality - positive action to remove traffic away from the A3051 at Curbridge and onto the new road network created by the Policy SH3 particularly HGVs and commuter traffic – no direct access to Curbridge from either of the planned 2 exits from North of Curdridge Parish Whiteley, for all forms of transport including pedestrians (in line 285 Comment No Noted Council (Clerk) with Thames Basin Heaths travel to SPA buffer zones). To comply with, amongst others, Habitats Directive Article 6; Birds Directive Article 4 protocol 4; Adopted PUSH Green Infrastructure Strategy, Objective 5; Solent Wader and Brent Goose Strategy; Solent Wader Disturbance and Mitigation Study (research findings phases 1 and 2); Adopted UK National Policy for Waterbirds that are SPA designated Features (SPA Review 2001); and the Planning Inspectors findings Thames Basin Heaths (for the lawful protection of the European designated habitat).

As a living document the TS will be updated to take account of the Local community various transport assessments undertaken individually and / environmental collectively that will assess the transport impacts associated with Not think enough regard has been paid to transport implications interest group 277 Comment No the strategic development proposals in south Hampshire. A key of the development in South Hants (CPRE piece of work will be the Transport for South Hampshire Long Hampshire) Term Strategic Implementation Plan that will review and properly evidence the priority strategic transport interventions. I see that there is a transport statement proposing a crossing point in Wales Street. I walk the children to and from school everyday from Garbett Rd and find that crossing Wales Street is very dangerous, even for an adult, as we sometimes have to stand for over 10 minutes waiting for a safe time and place to cross the road. Not only is the road particularly busy but the bends in the road make it hard to see the traffic from both The information is noted and will be considered when the scheme emailed directions and even then the speed at which the cars travel is investigated in detail. This will be subject in the first instance to Local Resident response comment (even with speed restrictions) is not acceptable. I have spoken No securing the necessary funding. As part of the study the local 15.07.2012 to other residents/parents and the opinion is that there should schools would be consulted as this is a safe routes to school be a safe crossing put in place somewhere along the road scheme. between the First in Last out pub and the Ship. My son is coming to an age where he wants to walk to school on his own but i feel that the road is too dangerous for him to do this. There are other families in Winnall with children that go to St Bede's and those that i have spoken to all agree that proper safety measures need to be taken. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support I would be very interested to know if this proposal to create a crossing point (that stops the traffic) is likely to go ahead. If necessary, I would be happy to collate names and addresses of emailed residents that feel this is an essential safety improvement for Local Resident response comment No see above this area. I understand that this is a long running issue that has 15.07.2013 been brought to your attention before but please can you let me know if there is anything that can be done to ensure that the plans for the crossing will go ahead?

Winnall Community Forum would like to give its support to the Winnall School safety measures as outlined in L4 of the Local Access Improvements in the Winchester City area. A crossing in Wales Street could not only improve the safe movement of pupils and staff of Winnall primary school, but also those pupils attending other schools and colleges in Winchester, including St.Bede’s primary school, the Westgate school ( the secondary Winnall emailed school that Winnall primary school feeds into) and Peter Community response support No n/a Symonds College. A crossing could not only increase the Association 15.07.2013 safety of these pupils on a daily basis, but also have the potential of encouraging more pupils to walk to and from school, rather than use other forms of transport, if their journey was made safer. It could also enhance the safe movement of residents generally in Winnall to and from major destinations such as the River Park Leisure Centre, the railway station and the Discovery Centre. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support

The A3051 will experience at least such an increase from this proposed policy SH3 and needs to be utilised in assessing the impact of this proposal and resultant mitigation. b. The expressed aspiration by WCC in their Local Plan Pt 1 to “complete Whiteley Way at an early stage of development, in …[a] manner which does not …encourage traffic from adjoining Hampshire County Council currently spends over £5M per annum areas to use the new route to gain access to the strategic road financially subsidising bus services across the county. Our aim is network” is in complete opposition with causing ‘nil detriment’ to ensure that all communities have a access to key services such emailed County from the development and will only exacerbate the air quality as shopping, banks, doctors, education and employment. A major response comment No Councillor Porter issues at the border of the SPA and the A3051; the consultation exercise was carried out during the Bus Subsidy 15.07.2014 development should be positively designed to take vehicles off Review of 2011, and the majority of respondents indicated their the A3051 and away from the SPA; and c. Transport/Traffic: To main priority was bus services during the day to access the fore take the traffic and potential increase in visitors away from the mentioned services. SPA/SAC/Ramsar site, to improve air quality - positive action to remove traffic away from the A3051 at Curbridge and onto the new road network created by the Policy SH3 particularly HGVs and commuter traffic – no direct access to Curbridge from either of the planned 2 exits from North of Whiteley, for all forms of transport including pedestrians (in line with Thames Basin Heaths travel to SPA buffer zones). To comply with, amongst others, Habitats Directive Article 6; Birds Directive Article 4 protocol 4; Adopted PUSH Green Infrastructure Strategy, Objective 5; Solent Wader and Brent Goose Strategy; Solent Wader Disturbance and Mitigation Study (research findings phases 1 and 2); Adopted UK National Policy for Waterbirds that are SPA designated Features (SPA Review 2001); and the Planning Inspectors findings Thames Basin Heaths (for the lawful protection of the European designated habitat).

HCC Elected emailed To improve deliverability of bus services, a new breed of bus HCC Passenger Transport Group will feedback these comments to County response comment should be developed- perhaps a 30 seater, with low carbon or No the local bus operators. Councillor 15.07.2015 electric technology. HCC Elected emailed HCC works closely with developers and bus operators to To improve possibilities for new development, bus companies County response comment No determine where there may be opportunities to deliver new bus must work with developers to deliver. Councillor 15.07.2016 routes and secure funding to subsidise new services. To improve affordability, bus companies and train companies HCC Elected emailed should try more innovative schemes, especially to fill up HCC Passenger Transport Group will feedback these comments to County response comment emptier services, and for young people aged 16-19, particularly No the local bus operators. Councillor 15.07.2017 now there is a mandatory situation to attend training or education up to 17. The Winchester city cycle strategy provides a detailed list of proposed cycle route improvements which has fed into the list of HCC Elected emailed To improve cyclablity of routes, more should be done to create cycle improvements set out in the TS. As part of the Local County response comment bike lanes, and cycling proficiency offered to pupils at primary, No Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF) there is funding allocated Councillor 15.07.2018 secondary, sixth form and at Winchester Uni. specifically for cycle training, which residents can now apply to take part in. HCC Elected emailed Congestion at Andover Road/Worthy Lane is very bad- and County response comment leads to frustrating queues. This has to be dealt with in future No noted Councillor 15.07.2019 Barton Farm applications. The study has been completed by HCC ITS and is awaiting HCC Elected emailed Junction 9 is frustrating: the modelling has been done, but to comment from the Highways Agency. The scheme has been County response comment No date: no action. submitted by the HA for Pinch-point funding. If successful the HA Councillor 15.07.2020 will take on the delivery of the scheme. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support The two major schemes (costing £32m) given priority are designed to increase the traffic flow at motorway intersections and will encourage car use. The 10% national decline in car use The two schemes referred to have not been given priority. They emailed since 2005, if continued as appears likely, may well soon are schemes recognised as improving the delay at this junction. WINACC response comment No dispense with the need for these schemes. We are equally There is a good mix of local transport schemes, with a large 13.07.2012 disappointed that most of the £1.8m worth of minor funded number of local cycle link improvements. schemes in Winchester City are junction and traffic management improvements. However we would like you to make explicit reference in the vision to the need to minimise greenhouse gas by adding the emailed italicised words: To deliver safe, efficient and reliable ways to The reference in the vision to a "sustainable area" is intended to WINACC response comment get around, minimising the emission of greenhouse gases, and No encompass the need to minimise greenhouse gases. 13.07.2013 helping to promote a prospering and sustainable area. We believe prosperity and well-being are extremely important, but actively tackling global warming is even more so.

We welcome the statement’s reference to the importance of reducing carbon emissions in national policy, the clarity with which it sets out the function and nature of the range of local relevant planning documents. In particular we hope that the emailed Town Access Plan will be successful in its focus on improving WINACC response support No noted accessibility, air quality, and reducing city centre traffic levels to 13.07.2015 improve local congestion and the long-term vitality of the town as a place to live, visit and work. We fully agree that a reduction in traffic levels and local congestion will result in greater long-term vitality.

We would like some account to be taken of the ‘peak car’ effect by which the number of car journeys has declined by up to 10 per cent since 2005. Furthermore, we would like a reference to Peak car is not a term that the HCC recognises. The reasoning be added to the modal transfer of 6% of the goods imported emailed behind the reduction in traffic flows is yet to be fully evidenced through Southampton Docks from road to rail since the higher WINACC response comment Yes and understood and could be related to the downturn in the gauge route was opened early last year. These two significant 13.07.2016 economy. The reference to the rail freight has been included trends imply that the usual assumption that road congestion will (Para 3.5). inevitably continue to increase is no longer a safe one. The proposed works at M3 Junction 9 in particular may no longer be necessary in a couple of years. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support

We welcome the summary of the focus of WTAP (para 3.6) and the descriptions (para 3.7) of the measures required in a possible Barton Farm master plan. We would like to know if concrete schemes for reducing city centre traffic levels, and for encouraging cycling and walking from Barton Farm to the city The TS is a living document and will be used to inform emailed centre both along Andover and Worthy Roads and via off-road development masterplans but also be updated to take account of WINACC response comment routes will be added to future iterations of this statement. It is No strategic masterplan proposals and the associated information 13.07.2017 significant that there are no such significant schemes in this derived from development transport assessments. iteration. We hope the County Council and Winchester City Council will be able to press for minimising the provision for private car-parking and garages in the development and for the grouping of such facilities at a distance from the dwellings, to encourage other transport modes.

emailed On Silver Hill (para 3.8), we would like to see some explicit The transport statement will be updated in conjunction with details WINACC response comment commitment to ensuring that the site be fully permeable for No associated with this development proposal. 13.07.2018 cyclists and pedestrians.

We feel that the Winchester District Cycling Strategy has had an important role in introducing a coherent approach to emailed developing cycling facilities in the district. We feel that two This would not be something HCC could resource however HCC WINACC response comment companion strategies on walking, and on public transport would No would be happy to discuss pedestrian improvements with WCC 13.07.2019 introduce a similar coherence of schemes, and we would and local interest groups. welcome working with Hampshire County Council, Winchester CC, and other stakeholders in the joint production of these.

We welcome the acknowledgement (para 3.16) of the shortcomings in facilities for walking and cycling, and the many cycling schemes included in the appendix. It is worrying that there is currently a lack of money for such schemes, and that the timescale for implementation is generally about ten years. emailed Although the list of schemes includes many cycling initiatives This would not be something HCC could resource however HCC WINACC response comment there is a conspicuous shortage of schemes designed to No would be happy to discuss pedestrian improvements with WCC 13.07.2020 enhance walking facilities, particularly good pedestrian routes and local interest groups. into and across the city. Above we have suggested a Winchester District Walking Strategy and believe that our participation and the participation of other stakeholders would ensure the emergence of many positive walking initiatives that could be added to future iterations of the list. Para 3.19’s commitment to maintaining and extending quality emailed bus partnerships is welcome, as are the schemes listed in the WINACC response comment No noted appendix for real time information along some of the bus 13.07.2021 corridors. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support We would welcome greater clarity on what types of improvement will be brought about through ‘solar power’ and This relates primarilly to solar technology to power bus shelter and emailed precisely how new technology will reduce bus emissions. The bus stop lighting and information. Technology to reduce bus WINACC response comment No adoption of DfT low emission bus standards and hybrid buses emissions is relating primarilly to ongoing developments in 13.07.2022 would certainly ensure that passenger/km emissions would cleaner/ greener engines and alternative fuel technologies. remain considerably lower than even the latest electric cars.

Improvement in bus facilities is rightly mentioned. We welcome the real time information initiatives. We would like to add emailed secure cycle storage facilities at key district bus stops (outside Specific schemes can be proposed to HCC which will be WINACC response comment No Winchester City) and to suggest a number of additional considered for inclusion in the TS table 1 13.07.2023 schemes for the schedule, ideally as part of a linked Winchester Public Transport Strategy already mentioned..

Nothing is said about improving bus services themselves, nor identifying gaps in service. The recent doubling of frequency Hampshire County Council supports any introduction of new and speeding up of route 64 was an example of good practice. services and increased frequencies on existing routes. This A similar improvement could be achieved from Winchester to support may come in the form of providing new road side Fareham if a bus were introduced along the direct road, infrastructure, real time information display screens, travel emailed interconnecting with the (very) slow bus at Bishop’s Waltham information guides and Quality Bus Partnerships. Whilst there is WINACC response comment (hopefully this could be funded as part of the South Hampshire No currently no HCC funding for increasing frequencies on existing 13.07.2024 Sustainable Transport Fund initiative and implemented by services, or new services, potential developer funding can be used Transport for South Hampshire and the Partnership for Urban to provide transport for new developments where specifically South Hampshire (PUSH)) as part of the proposed Better Bus identified. Area. This would help modal transfer from car to public transport of the major potential ridership in Colden Common, Fair Oak, Bishop’s Waltham and Wickham.

Elsewhere, we would like to see some concrete ideas in this emailed document demonstrating how Hampshire County Council hopes HCC Passenger Transport Group will feedback directly to WINACC response comment to catalyse district bus service improvements in partnership No WINACC on this matter. 13.07.2025 with service providers and better co-ordination of fare inter availability and information. To avoid confusion, the references to bus routes in the appendix should be revised in the light of the change in route emailed numbers following reorganisation last October (e.g. between WINACC response comment Yes noted and bus service numbers will be updated where required. Alresford and Winchester there is no longer an X64 and the 64 13.07.2026 now takes the route the X64 used to take; the 67 now takes the route formerly taken by the 64). We welcome the proposals (para 3.20) to improve access to and facilities at railway stations but can find only one such Improvements at rail stations will be lead by Network Rail and the emailed scheme in the appendix. Improvements at Shawford and franchise holder e.g. SWT. The development of station travel WINACC response comment No Micheldever would seem more urgent than even further plans provide a sound basis for identifying and developing specific 13.07.2027 improvements at Winchester. We also feel that these sorts of improvements. proposal go by no means far enough. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support

We would like Hampshire County Council to adopt our proposal for a Southampton Metro service, at least in outline. This would encourage modal transfer from the M3/M27 and obviate the need for M3 improvements. It could have a major impact on reducing congestion in Winchester city centre. We are pressing for an all-stations all-day half-hourly all-stations stopping service from Winchester to Brockenhurst. One train each hour could use underused trains that currently run, but would add emailed stops. Some work might be required to increase track capacity. The proposal has not been evidenced or justified sufficiently for WINACC response comment No While HCC may not have direct powers, it is viewed by Network inclusion in this document. 13.07.2028 Rail and the Regulating Authority as an important stakeholder. Now is the time to begin lobbying for schemes to be included in the transport secretary’s High Level Output Specification (HLOS) for control period 6. A commitment in this document to our proposal would be a good place to start. Other regions are busy lobbying (Bristol, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, West Midlands) and the M3 corridor / Solent Area should not miss the opportunity to campaign for potential funding.

emailed We are pleased to be mentioned in para 3.29 but feel it would WINACC response comment be more appropriate if the paragraph were moved to the section No Noted and para has been moved 13.07.2030 below on climate. emailed We very much welcome objective 4 but feel it should be given The document makes no reference to a priority given to the WINACC response comment overriding importance. As objective 4, at the bottom of the list, No objectives. 13.07.2031 there is a danger it will be treated as an afterthought.

In section 5.3v it would be appropriate to acknowledge the The proposal has not been evidenced or justified sufficiently for potential of the transport secretary’s High Level Output inclusion in this document. TfSH is currently reviewing strategic emailed Statement for considerable funding for rail schemes. As transport schemes and will be using the SRTM to properly WINACC response comment No mentioned above, identifying schemes now (e.g. Southampton evidence and prioritise schemes. The TS will be updated following 13.07.2032 Metro) and promoting them as a transport authority could mean this work and priorities set with respect to any bids for central they would be adopted for ‘control period 6’. government funding. emailed We would hope to be one of the ‘key partners’ (para 5.5) WINACC response comment No noted involved in identifying schemes for progression. 13.07.2033 (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support Two strategic schemes have been identified which have a We are disappointed, however by the lack of funding and the combined estimated cost of £32m - this is not an allocation of long timescale for most schemes. We are deeply disappointed funding. The table states no funding is allocated to these projects emailed that despite the excellent policy framework of this document currently. The table also highlights that the WTAP schemes total WINACC response comment £35m has already been allocated to schemes that will No £9.3m of which £1.3m has been allocated to projects. Timescales 13.07.2034 encourage car use, and only about £1.25m allocated to are indicative and will be subject to the funding being available. schemes designed to encourage walking, cycling, and public Certain schemes may be delivered sooner, if funding, especially transport use. We would like to see this ratio reversed. associated with development comes forward.

The schedule on its own does not make for easy reading, and it is often difficult to discern the underlying strategy behind the schemes. As mentioned above, we would welcome a district emailed walking strategy and a district public transport strategy to The schemes listed are cross referenced to the TS policy WINACC response comment complement the district cycling strategy that appears to have No objectives. At this stage it is not possible to produce more detailed 13.07.2035 been extremely useful for developing thinking on what can be maps beyond what is currently shown. done. In addition a set of maps would help ensure even and appropriate development across the district and improve understanding of the contiguity between schemes.

We assume that many of these schemes will have to await developer contributions. It seems a pity therefore that some important schemes in the Cycling Strategy (e.g. Winchester – emailed Wickham cycle route) have been omitted and we hope they can The cycling strategy schemes will be reviewed and any omissions WINACC response comment be restored/adopted. We would like to see a splicing together of No that are appropriate for inclusion in the TS will be included. 13.07.2036 the two sets of cycling schemes so that this document includes all schemes in both documents. I attach an annotated schedule showing which schemes in the Winchester cycling strategy appear to have been omitted.

We are pleased that the North – South, East – West cross of cycle routes in Winchester Centre has been taken forward in emailed principle. However the descriptions make it difficult to see how WINACC response comment No Production of more detailed maps is not possible at this stage. they would connect, and many changes have been made to the 13.07.2037 cycling strategy list of schemes. An overall description and map of each through route would be extremely helpful. . We welcome the commitment shown to spreading real time information (RTI) on bus routes outside the city centre and emailed across the district. Route numbers need to be updated to take WINACC response comment No noted - bus service numbers have been removed account of recent changes, especially to the 67 and 64, and the 13.07.2038 demise of the X64. It would be good to add other key routes such as the 86 and 68. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support RTI is especially important on less-frequent routes for emailed maintaining traffic levels. It is especially important to know WINACC response comment No noted when a bus has been cancelled if you have to wait two hours for 13.07.2039 the next one, or if it is the last bus of the day. We cannot welcome the proposals for more information kiosks. The MIRACLES report in 2006 noted that they were poorly used, and there is no evidence that they are better used now. emailed The one at a prime site outside Winchester Railway Station is WINACC response comment completely ignored, and has been out of use for long periods No noted 13.07.2040 (most recently while its keyboard was replaced). Anybody likely to want to use them will by now have an internet phone or tablet of their own with all their favourite information apps. Better to concentrate investment on real time information. we wish to reiterate our support for local improvements that will enhance the safe movement of our pupils and staff to the school. Specifically, these measures include those to; Improve safety for children crossing Wales Street in the vicinity of emailed Winnall Primary Ebden Road and Colson Close; and Improve road safety in response comment No noted School Garbett Road by reducing traffic speeds in tandem with revising 09.07.2012 parking arrangements. We note that both these measures feature in the statement’s schedule of proposed local access improvements and complement the recent designation of these roads in the NCN Route 23. In respect of the second scheme, we would further point out that traffic and parking pressures have grown in the area since the opening of the Sparklers Children’s Centre in 2009. The current proposals to increase the current admissions number at emailed the school by 50% will also impact on vehicle and pedestrian Winnall Primary response comment numbers in future. Opportunities to address this by No noted School 09.07.2013 implementing a shared space approach in Garbett Road, encompassing the school entrance, Children’s Centre/ Community Centre and Local shops, could satisfy a number of local objectives consistent with the aims of the Transport Statement. (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support Upham Parish Council would like to make a comment that in the Road Safety Section 3.26 you state that you continue to promote road safety as one of your priorities. Although we are pleased that the speed limit will be reduced from Fishers Pond to Mortimers Lane to 50 mph we have been campaigning for some time for a 30 mph speed limit through Lower Upham. This stretch of the The pedestrian crossing request will be investigated and has been emailed Winchester Road is always busy and vehicles go too Upham parish added to the transport statement list. HCC traffic Management will response comment fast, children have to cross this road to catch the School Yes Council continue to liaise with the parish with respect to speed limit 28.07.2012 buses and the elderly also find it very difficult to cross the changes. road. Upham Parish Council have asked for an island in the middle of the road for pedestrians to use when crossing the road, a gateway to show where the built up area of Lower Upham is and a 30 mph speed limit. We feel that finance would be better spent on providing these measures than reducing other speed limits near to the area.

Error: L163 - TW001 - Cycle Lane.. The Parish Council wishes to see a cycle lane from Hockley to Twyford on the B3335 and emailed Twyford Parish then turning down Church Lane and then onto either footpath response comment No noted Council (Clerk) 10 and 12. This is the only safe route through the village. The 28.06.12 B3335 through Twyford is narrow and will always be unsafe and not feasible for an cycle route. Error:L164 - TW0002 - Pedestrian Crossing The Pedestrian Crossing North of the village I believe is currently at feasibility emailed stage. Its location either neat Bourne Lane or Shipley Road is Twyford Parish response comment not important - although near Shipley Road would be preferable No noted Council (Clerk) 28.06.12 due to the amount of residents living in Northfields, which cross the road to either catch buses or use footpaths 10 & 12 to safety walk into the village. emailed Twyford Parish Scheme was originally requested by Twyford Parish Council. response comment Error:L165 - TW004- Park Lane Remove from the list Yes Council (Clerk) Scheme will be removed from list. 28.06.12 emailed Twyford Parish Error:L166 - TW005- Upgrade bus facilities Not deemed a response comment No noted Council (Clerk) priority for the Parish Council 28.06.12 emailed Twyford Parish Error:L167 - TW006 Not deemed a priority for the Parish response comment No noted Council (Clerk) Council 28.06.12 (11) Winchester District Transport Statement Consultation Response Summary August 2012 Case object / comment / Response / Comment Change Required Officer response / comment Respondent number support emailed Twyford Parish response comment L168 - TW008 - Support for Lay-by on Hazeley Road No noted Council (Clerk) 28.06.12 emailed Twyford Parish Error:L169 - TW0010 - New crossing at Searles Hill Already response comment Yes noted - scheme removed from list Council (Clerk) completed (2012) 28.06.12 Both locations were identified for specific crossing improvements emailed Twyford Parish Error:L170 - TW0011 - New crossing facilities at Shipley Road and will be considered as part of a HCC study to see what is response comment Yes Council (Clerk) (duplicate of L164) feasible. The two schemes will be merged in the transport 28.06.12 statement list. Proposed new scheme: Pedestrian pathway on Norris Bridge - Lining the bridge for a pedestrian walkway will improve emailed The proposal will be assessed and added to the Transport Twyford Parish pedestrian safety by reducing the traffic on the bridge to single response comment No Statement list if appropriate. Twyford Parish Council will be Council (Clerk) file on a priority system. This bridge is walked regularly for 28.06.12 updated in due course on the outcome. accessing Twyford Meads / Berry Meadow and residents walking to Shawford Train Station. Proposed new scheme: Proposed new scheme: Widen the emailed The proposal will be assessed and added to the Transport Twyford Parish footpath on the B3335 by Twyford House - Very narrow, barely response comment No Statement list if appropriate. Twyford Parish Council will updated Council (Clerk) can use footpath on foot. Cannot be used by buggies or 28.06.12 in due course on the outcome. mobility scooters. emailed Proposed new scheme: Improvement works on the turning from The proposal will be assessed and added to the Transport Twyford Parish response comment the B3335 into Hazeley Road - (Improved bollards to prevent No Statement list if appropriate. Twyford Parish Council will updated Council (Clerk) 28.06.12 access by unsuitable vehicles) in due course on the outcome. emailed Proposed new scheme: Improved bus shelter (to Winchester) The proposal will be assessed and added to the Transport Twyford Parish response comment on the B3335 by Northfields - improved bus shelter to provide No Statement list if appropriate. Twyford Parish Council will updated Council (Clerk) 28.06.12 shelter from road spray for pedestrians in due course on the outcome. Proposed new scheme: Improvement to the exit from Shipley emailed The proposal will be assessed and added to the Transport Twyford Parish Road when turning left onto the B3335 - Turning very tight and response comment No Statement list if appropriate. Twyford Parish Council will updated Council (Clerk) frequently causes cars to mount pavement or swing out into the 28.06.12 in due course on the outcome. road on the wrong side of the road.