Network Rail and DfT crossing closure plans.

[Snow1964]

The DfT published new guidance yesterday on closing level crossings

Level crossing operators can apply to a local authority for a level crossing with a public right of way to be closed or diverted under the Highways Act 1980 (HA 1980). In the majority of cases, this is achieved through dialogue between the level crossing operator and the local authority.

Under certain exceptional circumstances, level crossing operators can apply directly to the Secretary of State to resolve applications.

This guidance covers:

• the circumstances set out in S120(3) and (3A) of HA 1980 for escalating an application
• what is needed in an application
• the timelines for the Secretary of State’s decision

Escalating the closure or diversion of level crossing applications under the Highways Act

How to escalate the closure or diversion of a level crossing with a public right of way under the Highways Act 1980.

www.gov.uk

Looks like DEFRA is involved, which suggests many are likely to be rural farm crossings and footpath crossings

 

[dmncf]

Diamond Geezer has written a blog article about these crossing closures, which includes links to Network Rail webpages: https://diamondgeezer.blogspot.com/2022/08/how-to-close-level-crossing.html

Power granted to close crossings in Essex, Thurrock, Hertfordshire and other authorities

The Secretary of State for Transport has granted Network Rail the power to close or modify 37 crossings as part of wider plans across Anglia to reduce risk and create a safer, more reliable railway.

www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk

 

[Magdalia]

Diamond Geezer has written a blog article about these crossing closures, which includes links to Network Rail webpages: https://diamondgeezer.blogspot.com/2022/08/how-to-close-level-crossing.html

Power granted to close crossings in Essex, Thurrock, Hertfordshire and other authorities

The Secretary of State for Transport has granted Network Rail the power to close or modify 37 crossings as part of wider plans across Anglia to reduce risk and create a safer, more reliable railway.

www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk

Thanks for the Network Rail link. 11 of these crossings are on the Liverpool Street-Cambridge line between Roydon and Audley End (those with the CM19-23 and CB11 postcodes). Camps, Ugley Lane and Elephant are User Worked Gates, the others are footpath crossings.

Johnsons is just north of Bishops Stortford, in an urban area, and has had fatalities.

Girl, 15, killed at Bishop's Stortford railway crossing

A 15-year-old girl was killed when she was hit by a train at a foot crossing in Hertfordshire, say police.

www.bbc.co.uk

The Notes to Editors at the end of the Network Rail news release gives links to the closures in Cambridgeshire and Suffolk that were announced in 2020.

 

[357]

Quite a few of them are on routes I sign and I've only ever seen one of them being used.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Quite a few of them are on routes I sign and I've only ever seen one of them being used.

If you're a driver, I'd hope nobody was using any of them at a time you can see them!

 

[357]

If you're a driver, I'd hope nobody was using any of them at a time you can see them!

You know what I mean !

 

[baz962]

If you're a driver, I'd hope nobody was using any of them at a time you can see them!

Quite often on the Romford to upminster line I'm informed. You quite often see people crossing between Trent junction and Beeston, in view of trains.

 

[Cowley]

Morning everyone.

Should you wish to argue about the rights and wrongs of these closures and whether in fact Health and Safety has ‘gone mad’. You will find the perfect place to vent those feelings here:

Should level crossings and foot crossings be closed for health and safety purposes?

The Railway Magazine reports that "approval from the Secretary of State for Transport will allow Network Rail to close or modify 37 crossings in Essex, Hertfordshire and the London Borough of Havering. Where a crossing is closed users will be diverted to a suitable alternative route". How far...

www.railforums.co.uk

For technical information on progress, how this will be done etc, please post here.

Thank you very much!

 

[Magdalia]

I did some further research on Johnsons Crossing, including reading the RAIB Accident Report on the 2012 fatality, which is here.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/547c8fd0ed915d4c0d000169/R272012_121213_Johnsons.pdf

This states that the crossing was closed in August 2012, following completion of a footbridge that was already in development at the time of the fatality.

So the inclusion of Johnsons Crossing in the new Network Rail list appears to be a formal recognition of something that actually happened 10 years ago. The Network Rail News Release includes Johnsons Crossing in the list of 9 closures that can take place immediately.

 

[Bald Rick]

I did some further research on Johnsons Crossing, including reading the RAIB Accident Report on the 2012 fatality, which is here.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/547c8fd0ed915d4c0d000169/R272012_121213_Johnsons.pdf

This states that the crossing was closed in August 2012, following completion of a footbridge that was already in development at the time of the fatality.

So the inclusion of Johnsons Crossing in the new Network Rail list appears to be a formal recognition of something that actually happened 10 years ago. The Network Rail News Release includes Johnsons Crossing in the list of 9 closures that can take place immediately.

Thats correct.

I do wonder how the leader of the local campaign to stop the installation of the footbridge at Johnsons manages to sleep at night, given that the campaign delayed installation of the bridge until after the fatality (which was not the first there).

 

[alf]

I do wonder how the leader of the local campaign to stop the installation of the footbridge at Johnsons manages to sleep at night, given that the campaign delayed installation of the bridge until after the fatality (which was not the first there).

The RAIB accident report says in black & white that Network Rail had “not developed a proposal to install a footbridge to replace the crossing, after an analysis undertaken in 2007 had shown that the benefits of so doing would exceed the costs.”

 

[Bald Rick]

The RAIB accident report says in black & white that Network Rail had “not developed a proposal to install a footbridge to replace the crossing, after an analysis undertaken in 2007 had shown that the benefits of so doing would exceed the costs.”

It also says, in black and white, para 63 (my bold).

A further positive cost-benefit analysis was signed off by the new ORA in November 2010 following a census and ALCRM assessment in December 2009, and a site visit by the ORCC in June 2010. Witnesses report that there is now a clearer path to obtaining funding for level crossing mitigations. This later cost-benefit analysis led to a project to install a footbridge and close the crossing that was in progress at the time of the accident (the footbridge subsequently opened on 1 August 2012).

and, para 55:

Local opinion had historically been split between those who said ‘something must be done’ about Johnson’s footpath crossing and those who did not want a bridge. A newspaper article in April 2012 quoted some Bishop’s Stortford town councillors as stating that the installation of MSLs and audible alarms in 2003 provided sufficient protection if a crossing user was reasonably careful. The design of the bridge which has now been installed was also reported to have been criticised by members of the town council, on the grounds both that the structure was ‘too large and inappropriate’ and that the ramp was too steep and too narrow.

 

[Annetts key]

I do get one point that I think is valid. Often it is the footpath or right of way that gets diverted. Or where the money is found, a footbridge or road bridge is provided.

It’s perceived as rare that the footpath or right of way stays on the same level and stays as a ‘direct’ route and instead the railway (or motorway/dual carriageway etc.) changes level instead (be it via a bridge, or tunnel or similar structure).

And their is clearly double standards in play between what is considered acceptable between normal roads, dual carriageways, motorways and railways.

On a main road in my town, and in the nearest city, two different footbridges over main roads have been dismantled and pedestrian crossings installed in their place. So going in the opposite direction to what’s happening on the railways…

 

[geoffk]

There are many crossings on the ECML between Arlesey and Retford, and others further north, many on a 125mph line. I assume that removing these would have the highest priority.

 

[Bald Rick]

There are many crossings on the ECML between Arlesey and Retford, and others further north, many on a 125mph line. I assume that removing these would have the highest priority.

The highest priority goes to removing those with the highest risk, and/or those that can be removed cheaply. It’s about getting best value in terms of risk reduction for the limited amounts of cash available.

Typically it costs about £50k to close a footpath or private crossing. Building a bridge to remove a highway crossing is well into the tens of millions (Kings Dyke, just open end, was £32m in open country). You can close a lot of small crossings for the cost of one big one.