Local government · English unitary authority. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.
Reports
2
Naming this recipient
Published responses
100%
Found for named reports
Concerns addressed
2
Across all linked responses
Stated actions
9
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.
100%published responses found
9stated actions described
Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.
Concerns and recipient responses
Statements from North Somerset Council linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
Avon
Concerns raised2
Insufficiency of visual inspection for identifying deteriorating rescue chains
Lack of formal assessment of changes in use triggering Port Marine Risk Assessment review
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
Conduct annual risk assessments and review the assessment when specified trigger events, including changes of use, occur.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 19 January 2024.
Action
Update the Port Marine, Portishead risk assessment to formalize annual assessments and reviews triggered by specified changes, including change of use.
Stated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 19 January 2024.
Respondent positions A position is what this recipient says about the concern when it does not describe a specific action.2
Position
The evidence does not show that change of use lacked formal assessment or that current circumstances create an ongoing risk of further deaths.
Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Position
Existing risk assessments, audits and review triggers, including annual review and changes of use or incidents, are considered sufficient to manage the area’s risk.
Existing arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Avon
Concerns raised1
Failure to provide the planned footbridge
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.6
Action
Obtain Network Rail’s current bridge design requirements and convey them to the prospective planning applicant.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 26 May 2019.
Action
Meet Network Rail to seek bridge funding and agreement to interim improvements identified for the existing crossing.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 26 May 2019.
Action
Determine any planning application submitted for a new bridge within 13 weeks of submission.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 26 May 2019.
Action
Meet Persimmon Homes regarding its obligations to construct the bridge under the section 52 agreement.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 26 May 2019.
Action
Provide advice before submission of a new-bridge planning application to identify potential issues.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 26 May 2019.
Action
Seek agreement with Network Rail and Persimmon Homes on a draft project plan for delivering a new bridge.
Stated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 26 May 2019.
Respondent positions A position is what this recipient says about the concern when it does not describe a specific action.4
Position
Network Rail is expected to resolve crossing safety issues, review risk assessments, contribute bridge funding and use compulsory purchase powers for required land.
Redirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
Position
Persimmon Homes is responsible for constructing the bridge under the section 52 agreement.
Redirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.
Position
The Council lacks the authority or power to build the bridge itself.
Outside remitThe respondent said that this matter was outside its role or authority.
Position
Building a bridge at the previously approved or an alternative location would not necessarily result in closure of the Corondale Crossing.
Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Pin
Request correction
Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations