Hag Hill Traffic Consultation
Summary of results
 The aim of the consultation is to inform the Parish Council of the views of the residents, to enable us to recommend a
scheme to Transport for Bucks.
 The final details of the scheme will be proposed by Transport for Bucks, once they have carried out a feasibility study and
calculated final costings.
 The consultation was circulated by hand to all households on Hag Hill Lane, Hag Hill Rise, Cavendish Close, and Green Close,
as well as properties on Bath Road with a driveway on Hag Hill Lane, and residents of Taplow Road close to the junction
with Hag Hill Lane.
 The total circulation was c.230 households.
 69 responses were received.
 The response rate was c.30%.
 Questions we aim to answer with the consultation:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Which of the proposals would be received favourably by residents?
What is the popularity of each of the proposals?
What concerns do residents feel should be taken into consideration with each of the proposals?
What other proposals and comments did residents raise?
 Recommendations at the end of the report are draft and will be discussed with residents at a meeting on
Wednesday 16th March at 6:30pm in Burnham Park Hall. All members of the public are very welcome to attend.
Which of the proposals would be received favourably by residents?
Strongly agree
Median average scores
10
9
8
No strong opinion
7
6
5
4
Strongly disagree
3
2
1
0
Speed cushions
Chicanes
Close Hag Hill /
Hitcham Road
junction
20mph speed limit Limited residentsonly parking
Blanket residents- Double yellow lines Modified one-way
only parking
on Hitcham Road
road layout
 Median score calculated by taking the value separating the higher half of the results from the lower half
i.e. ranking all the scores in order and taking the value for the 35th score.
 Median score shows whether a proposal has more or fewer people in favour of it.
 For example, with Proposal 1: Speed cushions, 35 respondees scored it a 3 or below meaning that the majority of respondees
were not in favour of it.
 Results show that the proposals with the backing of the majority of residents are:
20mph speed limit
Double yellow lines
Modified road layout on one-way section of Hag Hill Lane
 Results show that proposals for either residents-only parking scheme received a lack of majority support
What is the popularity of each of the proposals?
Strongly agree
Total score
700
600
567
500
456
No strong opinion
446
400
343
325
317
300
215
192
Strongly disagree
200
100
0
Speed cushions
Chicanes
Close Hag Hill /
Hitcham Road
junction
20mph speed limit Limited residentsonly parking
Blanket residents- Double yellow lines Modified one-way
only parking
on Hitcham Road
road layout
 Maximum total score possible: 690.
 A proposal scoring 5 from every respondee would score a total of 345.
 Results reflect the general pattern of the median score results.
 Results show marginally more support for limited residents-only parking than blanket residents-only parking.
What concerns do residents think should be taken into consideration with each of the proposals?
Proposal 1 and 2: speed cushions and chicanes
 Cushions would not be sufficient to slow traffic (2)
 Cushions should also be installed on Hag Hill Rise to stop traffic cutting through
 Speed tables should be included in the proposal
 Speed and / or traffic volumes are not an issue (5)
 Cushions will damage cars
 Both options would create noise and pollution
 Both options would spoil the look of area
 Chicanes not needed as the road is already narrow (2)
Proposal 3: closing Hag Hill Lane / Hitcham Road junction
 It will create more congestion and safety concerns elsewhere – especially at the Taplow Road junction (17)
 Customers and staff of the Bishop Centre would still park on Hag Hill Lane (2)
 It could cause problems for some residents using garages
 Access at both ends of Hag Hill Lane needed
(X) = number of similar comments received
Proposal 4: 20mph speed limit
 It should be extended to include Taplow Road
Proposal 5 and 6: residents-only parking
 Residents shouldn’t have to pay for parking permits (10)
 Limited resident-only parking would move issues further down road (2)
 Parking restrictions should be at weekends only
 They should be used as a last resort
 Implementing resident-only parking throughout Hag Hill Rise would be chaotic
Proposal 7: double yellow lines on Hitcham Road
 Bollards on pavement would be more effective than no-parking signs
 Double yellow lines should be extended along length of road (9)
 Parking restrictions on Hitcham Road could push more parking onto Hag Hill Lane
 Yellow lines could spoil the look of the rural area
 Include zebra crossing for pedestrians (2)
(X) = number of similar comments received
Proposal 8: modified one-way junction at Hag Hill Lane and Taplow Road
 The proposal should include parking restrictions on corner of Taplow Road (2)
 The entry to Hag Hill Lane at Lent Rise Road should be narrowed as well
(X) = number of similar comments received
What other proposals and comments did residents raise?
 The Bishop Centre entrance on Hitcham Road should be entrance-only or left-turn-only exit (4)
Response: This is at the discretion of the owners of the Bishop Centre and hasn’t been acted on before. However, the Parish
Council are willing to pursue these, and other concerns listed below, with the owners and tenants of the retail park.
 Little action needed (3)
Response: the consultation shows that at least 30% of the households in the area feel some measures are required.
 Tesco should provide staff car parking (5)
Response: the Bishop Centre has been looking at ways of increasing parking capacity. Staff parking is allowed on-site and unit
tenants should make adequate provision. It is also down to staff to ensure that they park legally and responsibly. It is the
District Council responsibility to ensure planning applications include sufficient parking.
 There should be a footway along the whole of Hag Hill Lane (9)
Response: it would be extremely expensive to install a footway along the entirety of Hag Hill Lane and the budget would only
allow for a very short section. The available money would have a greater impact on safety if spent on alternative measures.
 There should be more rubbish bins and more frequent litter collection
Response: this is outside the scope of the funding. South Bucks District Council are responsible for litter collection and street
cleaning, and all issues should be directed to them or your district councillors.
(X) = number of similar comments received
 Option 1b of last consultation should have been included in the consultation(2)
Response: option 1b proved to be unpopular at the previous consultation so wasn’t included.
 There should be more policing of parking on the pavement (2)
Response: the neighbourhood policing team have reported that they are continuing to regularly patrol Hitcham Road for cars
causing an obstruction.
 There should be “no parking on footway” signs throughout the area
Response: this is outside the scope of the funding and is an issue for the County Council as the local highways authority. In this
area it’s not an offence to park on the pavement unless it causes an obstruction. Only the Police have the power to carry out
enforcement on vehicles causing an obstruction.
 One-way flaps should be installed on the exit of the one-way section
Response: we’re not aware of one-way flaps being used on a public highway. The Parish Council has them installed at the
George Pitcher Memorial Ground and although they are an effective measure to prevent traffic going the wrong way, they are
very noisy and wouldn’t allow for emergency vehicle access.
 More street light should be installed on the footpath by children’s play park area
Response: this is outside the scope of the funding. Installing additional street lighting is expensive and beyond the budget of
the Parish Council. Requests can be raised directly with your county councillor, although it is unlikely that they will be installed
due to budgetary restrictions at the County Council.
(X) = number of similar comments received
 The grass verge along the west side of Hitcham Road should be reinstated
Response: this is the property of the Bishop Centre and it is their responsibility to manage its upkeep.
 Resurfacing Hag Hill Lane area
Response: this is outside the scope of the funding and is the responsibility of the County Council. Any resurfacing issues should
be raised directly with your county councillor.
 Disabled parking spaces should be included in the residents-only parking scheme
Response: this can be considered if the resident-only parking scheme is taken forward.
 The street lights at Bishop Centre entrance on Hitcham Road need repairing
Response: these will be reported to the owners of the Bishop Centre.
 The money should be shared out equally between residents as compensation
Response: this is outside the scope of the funding. The money is provided through a section 106 agreement which restricts
how the money. It can only be used on traffic calming and parking restriction measures.
 Dropped kerbs for houses on Hag Hill Lane
Response: this is outside the scope of the funding. Households requiring a dropped kerb can apply directly to the County
Council.
(X) = number of similar comments received
Final recommendations
The Parish Council is recommending the implementation of the following proposals:
1. Double yellow lines on Hitcham Road
These would include the following stipulations:
 as much length as possible along the road and marked parking bays where parking is safe and reasonable.
 a zebra crossing for pedestrian access to the Bishop Centre.
 “No parking on footway” signs.
2. Revised one-way road layout
We will ask Transport for Bucks to investigate including the following elements as part of the scheme:
 Double yellow lines around the junction.
 Modifications to the entry of Hag Hill Lane at the junction with Lent Rise Road.
3. 20mph speed limit
We will include investigations into whether Taplow Road should also be included in the scheme.
4. Residents-only parking on lower end of Hag Hill Lane – experimental order
Extended double yellow lines on Hitcham Road could push more parking onto the bottom end of Hag Hill Lane. Therefore, the
need for a limited stretch of residents-only parking at the bottom of Hag Hill Lane would increase. The median score of 5
suggested that the scheme was not undesirable to most residents, and the scheme could deliver a large benefit to affected
residents. If the affected residents are willing to pay for the parking permits, we would suggest that it is a trialled as an
experimental order, in order to assess the impact on parking further up the road.