Recurring concern
Unsafe road width for vehicle passage
First reported 15 Nov 2013•Latest report 3 Feb 2022
What this concern includes
Includes deficiencies in the width or directly associated constrained geometry of roads, tracks or carriageways where the condition creates a material risk that vehicles will leave the roadway, collide or otherwise be unable to travel safely; include the anchor's extremely narrow bridleway and comparable narrow carriageways.
Not included
- Excludes barriers, gates, lighting, visibility, markings, speed limits and other controls unless insufficient road width is itself the unsafe condition.
- Excludes generic road hazards or poor design where inadequate width or constrained carriageway geometry is not identified.
- Excludes pedestrian, cycleway and shared-path narrowness unless the assertion specifically concerns vehicle passage.
- Excludes the underlying outcome of a collision or vehicle departure without an identified unsafe road-width condition.
- Reports
- 7
- Individual concerns
- 7
- Date range
- 2013–2022
- Stated actions
- 8
Distinct published reports
A report can raise multiple concerns
First to latest report issue date
Described in published responses
Reports over time
Reports over time
Reports about this concern issued each year.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
-
Concerns raised1
Insufficient central-reservation width for large vehicles
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
General widening of the central reservation is not feasible because it would require extensive carriageway realignment and is complicated by adjacent land levels.
Stated by National Highways
-
Concerns raised1
Restricted ability for vehicles to pull fully out of the live lane
This report raised 9 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Insufficient length and width of both filter lanes on the A40
This report raised 4 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Narrow entrance to Howards Lane causing cars to cut the corner
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Erect a marker post in the footway to prevent vehicles from overrunning it when turning into Howard’s Lane.
Stated by Dorset County Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
The fatal site investigation found no highway-related factors contributed to the fatality.
Stated by Dorset County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Narrow carriageway
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Programme a scheme to reduce the road’s speed limit to 50 mph.
Stated by Kent County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Narrow two-lane road with houses in close proximity
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Extremely narrow and acute bridleway track
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.6
-
Action
Notify relevant organisations and residents about identified safety issues and seek their input and required consents for proposed works.
Stated by Peak District National Park Authority -
Action
Commission and complete a survey assessing river-bank stability, hydrological issues, track widening, and potential safety engineering measures.
Stated by Peak District National Park Authority -
Action
Develop a detailed works specification by appointing replacement specialist engineering expertise and coordinating required safety, gabion, and design input.
Stated by Peak District National Park Authority
-
Action
Commission technical tender documents and invite at least three appropriately qualified contractors to bid for the proposed works.
Stated by Peak District National Park Authority -
Action
Continue pursuing required consents from partners during specification development and tendering.
Stated by Peak District National Park Authority -
Action
Investigate external funding streams and liaise with Derbyshire County Council about incorporating the proposed safety works into its programme.
Stated by Peak District National Park Authority
Data last updated 7 September 2026