Local government · English county council. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.
Reports
6
Naming this recipient
Published responses
83%
Found for named reports
Concerns addressed
6
Across all linked responses
Stated actions
28
Described in responses
Reports over time
Reports over time
Reports naming this recipient by issue year.
Evidence profile
Report topics
Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.
83%published responses found
28stated actions described
Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.
Concerns and recipient responses
Statements from Hertfordshire County Council linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
Hertfordshire
Concerns raised1
Excessive speed limit on the specified stretch of Sarratt Road
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
Action
Maintain the current speed limit at this location while focusing on systemic road-safety improvements.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 5 September 2025.
Action
Review the Speed Management Strategy, including area-wide rural approaches and rural speed-limit requirements.
Stated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 5 September 2025.
Respondent positions A position is what this recipient says about the concern when it does not describe a specific action.2
Position
Available evidence indicates excessive speed was not a cause; visibility and reaction time were the key contributory factors.
Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Position
The current speed limit will be maintained because it remains consistent with evidence, police advice and applicable speed-management strategies.
Existing arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Hertfordshire
Concerns raised4
Failure to implement planned reforms to ASD assessments
Failure of bridge safety measures to meet current guidance for preventing pedestrian jumping or falling
Delays in ASD assessments
Lengthy waiting times for ASD assessments in Hertfordshire
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
Action
Use the inspection findings to assess the feasibility and costs of raising or replacing the parapets and consider the appropriate improvement options.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 17 April 2025.
Action
Liaise with Network Rail and undertake Principal Inspections of both bridges to assess their structural condition.
Stated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 17 April 2025.
Respondent positions A position is what this recipient says about the concern when it does not describe a specific action.3
Position
Parapet heights cannot safely be raised until inaccessible structural areas are assessed using up-to-date condition information.
Unable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
Closing the footbridge is not considered a safer response because diversion could increase unsafe pedestrian crossings and exacerbate isolation.
Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Position
Bridge inspections require Network Rail permission, railway closure and overhead power isolation before feasibility of parapet improvements can be assessed.
Unable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Hertfordshire
Concerns raised1
Permission for heavy goods vehicles to stop and unload while blocking the southbound carriageway
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
Action
Promote a Traffic Regulation Order prohibiting loading and unloading along the affected highway section.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 September 2023.
Action
Engage NuYard to establish safer systems of work for servicing the site.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 September 2023.
Hertfordshire
Concerns raised1
Lack of working lights on a pedestrian refuge
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Add the site to the asset inventory and inspect and maintain its bollards and beacon every 20 days, attending to faults when necessary.
Stated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 24 February 2023.
Respondent positions A position is what this recipient says about the concern when it does not describe a specific action.1
Position
The refuge beacon is not designed to provide lighting for crossing users; it only identifies the island for motorists from a distance.
Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Hertfordshire
Concerns raised2
Failure to regularly cut back plant growth at road junctions
Plant growth severely restricting drivers’ view at a junction
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.5
Action
Clear vegetation at the A505 Slip End Farm junction within the central reserve safety barrier.
Stated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 29 April 2016.
Action
Assess similar junctions between Baldock and Royston to identify locations requiring additional vegetation clearance.
Stated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 29 April 2016.
Action
Revise highway safety inspectors’ remit to identify vegetation requiring corrective action on this length of road.
Stated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 29 April 2016.
Action
Clear vegetation at six identified junctions between Baldock and Royston beyond cyclical grass-cutting maintenance.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 29 April 2016.
Action
Revise the vegetation maintenance regime so tree, shrub and plant-growth cutting is coordinated annually with grass cutting on this length of road.
Stated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 29 April 2016.
Pin
Request correction
Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations