Ticehurst Parish Council

Notes made at a ‘Traffic Calming’ meeting held in Ticehurst Village Hall at 19:30. on 12 September 2007

Present: Andrew Vidal ©, Cllrs. Hastings, Langdown and Rigby. The Clerk.
Sixteen members of the public present.
Philip Handrihan from ESCC Heathfield – road design engineer.

Andrew Vidal opened the meeting, thanking all those present for attending. He explained that he had been asked by the existing Parish Council to continue his work towards traffic calming in the three wards following his retirement from the Parish Council in May 2007.
Mr Vidal read the response from ESCC Highways department that had been received at the end of July, covering various points within the Parish.

Rosemary Lane: This explained that Rosemary Lane has no prohibition order and is therefore open to all road users.
Wallcrouch and the Hawkhurst Road: Speed limits have been requested and certain criteria have to met to activate such limitations. A survey in Wallcrouch has recently been completed to see if it complies with the criteria set down by ESCC. The Flimwell to Hawkhurst road will also be assessed. The letter explained that the erection of signs does not necessarily result in a reduction in speed unless drivers can perceive the necessity of slowing down. Speed limits must adequately reflect the environment through which the road passes. All villages in E. Sussex are being investigated due to a central government requirement for assessments towards lowering speed limits.

Thirty mile per hour roundels at a cost of £80-£120 each can be commissioned at the four main entrance points to the village. Monies have been put aside by the Parish Council to do this during this financial year. Questions were asked about whether or not they are effective in slowing traffic. Transport research laboratories show that they have had some impact and that the police are responsible for enforcing the law. Cllr. Langdown informed those present that temporary speed traps tend to be erected as a result of the public ringing the police and complaining about speeding traffic. Crackdown leaflets were handed out by the Clerk to this effect.
There have been no major accidents in the village which means that the Parish Council will need to fund what ever scheme is decided upon.
Build Outs – Rough estimated cost would be £5000 to £8000 per build out – the Parish would have to budget for this as Ticehurst Parish is not a prioritised village at the moment.
Mr Vidal introduced Mr Handrihan who addressed the meeting and said that he could provide comparable costs from other villages and give the names of suitable companies who could carried out the necessary consultancy work to put forward realistic projects to slow the traffic. He has been asked by ESCC to look at the eastern and western approaches to the village. Schemes such as a ‘build out’ at Hilbury Gardens are currently being looked at (commissioned by B Banks through Handrihan). The roundels could also be implemented. The eastern approach proves more difficult as the speed limit would need to be changed.
It was pointed out that allowances would have to be made for agricultural vehicles.
It was noted that Speed Cameras are now independent of the County Council. The meeting was informed that speed cameras cost in the region of £25000.00 but it was unknown as to whether the revenue gained could be allocated for local traffic calming initiatives. The opinion of the police is that flashing signs are not terribly effective. The cost of replacement bulbs/LED’s is also prohibitive.
Sid Units – The meeting was informed that villages such as Ringmer used this system but offending drivers initially received s first and then second warning letter before any action is taken. Furthermore the system is causing problems between residents and ‘safe’ spots have to be identified for the volunteers to run the units.
Matthew Lock a County Councillor lead member for Transport had informed Mr Vidal that considerable amount of central government money (£7500 annually) has been committed towards helping the villages but this is still distributed on a priority basis.
Villages can combine their resources which is being done in some areas.
The Clerk asked those present if a £32000 increase in local precept – about £10 per electorate would be acceptable if it meant that four build outs were built in Ticehurst next year and two in Stonegate and two in Flimwell in the following financial year. The show of hands indicated a unanimous approval of this suggestion. It was further suggested that a voluntary fund would also be acceptable.

Mr Handrihan reported on progress with the buffer zones – He said that the statutory consultation with the buses and emergency services would be undertaken, and that the legal team were working on drafting the order and the legal consultation period (over 21 days). The works could then go ahead. He hoped that the two buffer zones would be completed within the financial year. The sites were just before the Priory and at Upper Platts. There was some discussion about the effectiveness of ‘gateway entrances’ A lot of people felt that the ‘gateway entrances’ do have an impact on drivers.

ROUNDELS – Mr Vidal asked whether or not those present would like these painted on the roads. It was felt that the money would be better used to move towards the provision of ‘build outs’. It was resolved to recommend to the Parish Council that the money be used to commission the services of a qualified approved consultant to cost and design build out schemes.

Mr Vidal thanked all those for attending – the buffer zones at the eastern and western approaches will continue through ESCC and there was an indication that the roundels could also be provided from their resources.