The Current "Hybrid" Proposal
Having first backed a full closure as the only viable fix in their own options appraisal, the Council has now lurched toward a populist compromise. This half-baked plan ignores the safety issues identified in their own technical reports, opting for a "stage-managed" reopening that offers nothing but a false sense of security. Even the commissioned external expert report warns that these new measures won't stop the show.
- 6 x Round-Top Road Humps: 75mm high, spaced at 50m intervals.
- Substantial Physical Gates: To be manually or remotely closed during high water.
- Variable Message Signs (VMS): Automated warning signs on approach roads.
- CCTV Monitoring: Intended to monitor behaviour, though experts warn this often encourages exhibitionists.
The Behavioural Blindspot
The Council-commissioned external consultants (BWB) admit that engineering alone can't stop a determined driver. Their technical notes reveal a deep-seated skepticism about whether these "fixes" will actually work in the real world.
Intentional Misbehaviour
The 2025 report acknowledges a blunt reality: you can only influence drivers who want to be influenced. For those seeking a social media thrill, the new infrastructure is practically irrelevant.
"It should be noted that, whilst the potential schemes aim to influence driver behaviour, there is a risk that anti-social behaviour will continue due to drivers which are intent on driving through the ford at speed."— BWB Technical Note (2025), Paragraph 1.6
The 4x4 Bypass
The experts also highlight a glaring physical flaw: road humps are far less effective on 4x4s. In short, the very vehicles causing the most dangerous "spectacle" splashes are the ones least affected by the Council's solution.
"...there is a risk that speed humps will not assist in reducing the speed of 4x4 vehicles or motorcycles, particularly those deliberately travelling at speed to create content for social media."— BWB Technical Note, Section 3.67
"Beat the Barrier and Trash the Camera"
The report warns that new barriers and cameras may actually become a magnet for the very behaviour the Council claims to be stopping.
"There is the possibility that some drivers may look to damage or vandalise any equipment that is put in place if it would allow them to continue as before."— BWB Technical Note, Section 1.6
A Waste of Public Funds
The Council's original assessment was clear: full closure was the "only financially feasible option that would guarantee ending the anti-social behaviour."
But now the new council want to waste more than a quarter of a million pounds of council tax payers money on an experiment that experts warn won't work, will be a target for vandalisation that will cost you even more every year.
Chronology of a U-Turn
The shift in the Council’s position is clear when you examine the official reports in chronological order:
- October 2023: The original recommendation concluded that permanent closure was the only viable solution.
- August 2025: Despite a 2023 study already dismissing traffic calming, an internal Task Order reveals a directive from the Council Leader to "re-consider" traffic calming as a potential solution.
- September 2025: An external technical report is commissioned, which, as we've seen above, explicitly flags serious concerns about the effectiveness of this new approach.
- October 2025: The Council releases a final report proposing a "hybrid solution" to reopen the ford, effectively sidelining two years of safety-led expert advice.
Convenience must never override public safety.
The only way to stop the behaviour is to remove the stage.