RISK ASSESSMENT FORM
Who can be Harmed?
And how?
5 10 15 20 25 Unacceptable Stop
4 8 12 16 20 High Urgent Action
3 6 9 12 15 Medium Action Required
2 4 6 8 10 Low Monitor
1 2 3 4 5 Trivial No action
*If the risk is trivial (see below) then there is no need to do anything further. If the risk is low, monitor and seek to improve at the next review or if there is a significant change.
1, 4 1 4 3 1 3
2, 3 2 6 3 1 3CCTV recommended with

3,Poisoning and chemical harm 4 1 4 4 1 4
4, 4 312 4 1 4
5, 2 3 6 2 1 2
Who can be Harmed?
And how?
Noted still outstanding requirement
to fit new door closure to gents
door.
Likelihood
Risk*
Severity
Likelihood
Risk*
vandals and children put at risk
from vandals
car park users, cleaners and
contractors
Collisions between vehicles and
pedestrians
Only parking spaces marked on the car
park surface
Severity
E.G. Employees, Volunteers,
Contractors, Service Users, Public,
Neighbours. Are there any
vulnerable groups e.g. disabled, young
people etc.
Hazards
Risk Rating
(without controls)
(Existing) Control Measures
Residual Risk
Rating
Further Control Measures
Location Village
Centre Car park and Public Conveniences
Present
Graeme Woodcock,
John Price Michael Hockley
Hazards
East Bergholt Parish Council
Risk Assessment for:
Operation of the Car Park and Public Conveniences
Risk Rating
(without controls)
Assessment Date
26th February 2024
Next Review Date
January 2025
Contractors and others carrying out works in the Car Park or Public Conveniences are not covered by this
risk assessment and will need to carry out their own risk assessment
Further Control Measures
Cleaners have locked cupboards for any storage
required
signs stating that the car park is
monitored to deter antisocial
behaviour
The give way markings that were in place prior to the
resurfacing in 2021, could not be enforced and the give
way marking next to the gate to the BT property, was
inappropriate because it gave priority to traffic
emerging from a gated access. Safer to encourage the
BT gate to be closed such that traffic had to stop to
open and close the gate
Wall around public loos, also a footway from the
highway to the car park separates pedestrians and cars.
Feeling of a shared space should enhance slow driving,
previously give way markings would have encouraged
cars in a priority position to speed up thereby
increasing risk
(Existing) Control Measures
Residual Risk (with
existing & further
control measures)
Keep surface free of road markings
to encourage pedestrian friendly
and considerate driving
Public convenience doors banging and
crushing fingers People, particularly children
using the public conveniences
Slow door closures fitted, but gents door faulty
Hygiene diseases from accidents and
abuse of toilet facilities
People using the public
conveniences
Toilets cleaned daily
e.g. cleaning chemicals with COSHH
requirements
Open aspect visible to others, responsive car park
management, car park kept in clean good
condition but no CCTV
Anyone walking in the car park
Inappropriate use by persons unknownand
antisocial behaviour.
Page 1

5 10 15 20 25 Unacceptable Stop
4 8 12 16 20 High Urgent Action
3 6 9 12 15 Medium Action Required
2 4 6 8 10 Low Monitor
1 2 3 4 5 Trivial No action
6,Tree branches falling 4 2 8 4 1 4
7,Risk of electrocution 5 1 5 5 1 5
8, Occupants of vehicles 3 2 6 3 1 3
Collision with other vehicles
9,Slips, trips and falls Pedestrians in the car park4 2 8Car park swept (slippery leaves) as required4 1 4
Many elderly Public loos cleaned daily
Light maintained
Litter picked up monthly
10,Visibility in the car park Car park users 3 2 6 3 1 3
Possible obstruction by vegetation
Risk of collision
12,Ponding, ice in winter car park users 4 2 8 4 1 4
13,parking not as planned 1 4 4 1 3 3
scoring Severity 1; (inconvenience) 2; (cuts and bruises) 3; (serious injury) 4; (hospitalisation) 5; (death)
Likelyhood1; (very rare, once in many years) 2;(yearly) 3; (monthly) 4; (daily) 5; (hourly)
*Regarding item 8 above, a discussion was held regarding should the give way markings be reinstated as they had been before the car park was resurfaced. It was decided it would be wrong to give priority to
traffic from the gated BT access. If traffic in the car park stopped in case traffic was emerging from the BT site, then the car park traffic would still not be able to see into the BT site to check if it was safe to
proceed and it would encourage the BT traffic to believe they could drive out of the BT site expecting other traffic to stop for them. The safe way is for traffic emerging from the BT site is for them to stop or slow
before entering the car park vehicle lane and to proceed when they have full visibility and a clear road. This means that the BT traffic should give way to car park traffic. However if this was marked with give way
markings, car park traffic may increase speed because they can see that they have priority. The discussion concluded that the best approach was not the have road markings. This then follows believed normal
practice where raods have what is termed “shared space”. The intention being to encourage vehicles to proceed carefully and cautiously and to seek to ensure that pedestrians and other vehicle users are aware
of each other before making vehicle movements.
Blocking coach parking, partial blocking
access to the Red Lion yard
Parking places clearly marked with white lines
Periodic and regular electrical inspections
Shrubs, hedges and flower borders maintained as
required
Drainage replaced with new drains (2021) and
gullies and catchpits maintained.
If issues arise, consider guidance signs
for car park (subject to Landlords’s
consent.
Anyone walking in the car park
Regular inspection and tree surgery when
necessary
vandals and people mis-using
the lights, heaters
car park and adjacent property
users
Site lines checked, no issues found
Additional sweepings are made
when necessary by contractor
Michael Hall.
No current issues of ponding.
Contractor Michael Hall engaged to
clean the gullies and catchpits
Risk*
E.G. Employees, Volunteers,
Contractors, Service Users, Public,
Neighbours. Are there any
vulnerable groups e.g. disabled, young
people etc.
Severity
Likelihood
Risk*
Severity
Likelihood
Visibility for vehicles emerging out of the
BT property
Hedge neatly clipped back. *
See note below
Surfaces to be maintained to the same standard as
Suffolk County Highways do for footways
Check with the Clerk that the
electrical certificte is current.
Page 2