OBJ/148/W 005 E05 CROSSING, FULLERS END THE PROPOSED NETWORK RAIL (ESSEX AND OTHERS LEVEL CROSSING REDUCTION) ORDER PUBLIC INQUIRY, 18 OCTOBER 2017 DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT REFERENCE: TWA/17/APP/05 OBJECTION BY THE RAMBLERS TO CLOSURE OF E05 CROSSING, PARISH OF FULLERS END PROOF OF EVIDENCE of Alan Goffee of Turnberry Cottage, Bacon End, Dunmow, Essex CM6 1JW Introduction 1. My name is Alan Goffee. I am the Ramblers Footpath Secretary covering the District of Uttlesford. I have held the post for 10 years. I have been a keen walker for over 40 years. I have lived in Uttlesford for 12 years and I have regularly walked the local footpath network. I have walked this crossing in the past and have visited it 5 times recently. 2. Essex County Council, district councils, and unitary authorities regularly consult the Ramblers about proposals to alter the path network. The Ramblers has a procedure to decide how to respond to such consultations. So that it can respond effectively the Ramblers Essex Area Footpath Committee meets regularly. Proposals to alter the rights of way network are allocated to a committee member or members on a basis of geography, availability, experience and knowledge. Each proposal is subject to detailed review by the Footpath Secretary to establish its convenience, safety and enjoyment to the public. Typical factors considered are the length of diversions, terrain, surface, traffic conditions, flooding and ease of access particularly for those with mobility problems. Enjoyment includes views and tranquillity. Once the review has been completed and the alteration (e.g, diversion) has been OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 1
compared to the present right of way a conclusion (e. g, no objection) is sent to the authority. 3. My evidence represents the views of the Area Footpath Committee and the Area Council in respect of the proposal to close E05 Fullers End. 4. The Ramblers objects to the proposal to close E05 crossing because of a loss to the local community of an easy, safe and secure way of crossing the railway. In addition, it is an important link in connecting the network of footpaths that lie each side of the railway. In the Ramblers view, the proposed alternative route is inadequate and unsuitable. The existing route 5. Crossing E05 is on Tye Green Road and links to Elsenham Footpath 70. It cuts in half Fullers End. The route that this lies on was in existence before the railway came, and was an ancient highway connecting Takeley and Elsenham to the Great Cambridge Road. The crossing was a road crossing and hence its approaches are tarmacked and useable in all weathers. The crossing is level and only 10 metres across. The crossing is illuminated by a street lamp and the proximity of houses makes it safe and secure to use at night and during winter months. OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 2
Fullers End crossing 6. Network Rail s figures state that the crossing was used 400 times during a 9- day period 1. This is the third highest usage of the crossings under this order, behind only Paget and Maria Street. Network Rail states that the majority of the users were adult but fails to identify the age range. From my own observations, there are elderly people who use this crossing. 1 Network Rail s Statement of Case (inquiry document 26, p.52) OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 3
7. This crossing is not one of those crossings in the middle of a field, used only by the occasional rambler. It is continually used by local residents on an everyday basis. It allows Fullers End to function as a real community. A crossing has been on this site since the railways arrived and has been an essential part of Fullers End since then. 8. The consultation undertaken by Network Rail took no account of any request to maintain and upgrade the existing crossing function. Network Rail has stated that the installation of locking gates, in addition to flashing lights, would not to be possible because there would be no space for a safe run-off area should a person be on the crossing when the gates were locked. This cannot be justified. There is space each side of the gates to create such an area, and with the short distance between the gates, time to reach this would be minimal. This or similar upgrading arrangements could be done to maintain a true local amenity. And in their letter of response 2 Network Rail appear to acknowledge the physical possibility of gates and flashing lights, but cite to expense as the prohibiting factor. This crossing is a well-used, true local amenity. In our view, such provision is worth the investment. Uncertainty regarding the new development 9. It was only in the response letter that Network Rail acknowledged that the original Sawmill Industrial site is to became a residential development. Network Rail s Statement of Case had a map of the site showing the Sawmill and a number of lock-up buildings. This is the only document showing the route of the proposed path. It is difficult to make any judgment when no details of the position of the path with the new residential development have been provided. It is not clear if the path would be part of the road to the houses, or on a separate pavement; or if it will be fenced. It is not even clear that it will be usable 24 hours a day, or fully compliant with disabled requirements, or an actual public right of way. 2 To Nicky Philpott, 4 September 2017, OBJ/148 APPENDIX 4. OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 4
The proposed alternative route 10. The route proposed by Network Rail fails to show any understanding of the importance of the crossing to the residents needs. The existing route is safe, secure and flat. The proposed alternative runs through an area with a newly built mansion-type house, is routed in front of lock-up workshops, crosses a field isolated from any housing and features a considerable change in levels, namely a drop (or ascent) of over 5 metres, in order to reach the underpass. It is also over 250 metres longer than the existing public right of way. This cannot be said to compare in any way will the existing route 3. 11. The area identified on Network Rail s drawing as containing Elsenham Sawmill is now being developed for residential occupation. The large mansiontype house and its outbuildings require a different solution to that proposed. The relationship of the path to the new property and its owners has not been addressed by Network Rail. As a result, the Ramblers are unaware how Network Rail expects the alternative route to work with the new development. 12. The proposed route of the path, as identified on the drawing in the Statement of Case, through the old sawmill area, is shown as passing in front of a number of lock-ups. These remain on site, and without other information, we assume they will not be removed. The proposed path will be subjected to parking by the lock-up users, and to possible damage from work that may be undertaken by them. Network Rail have failed to provide details on how the alternative route will coexist with these lock-ups. Inadequacy and unsuitability of the proposed alternative 13. Network Rail's Statement of Case gives no indication as to how the difference in height between the level of the crossing and the underpass is to be solved. There is a 5 metre drop over a distance of 120 metres. At the far end of the old sawmill area, this is to be sharp drop; but there is no mention of any proposed 3 See map included in Network Rail s Statement of Case (inquiry document NR26) OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 5
steps. There is no indication that the path will be disabled-friendly, or that the slopes and gradients of the paths provided will be of the same standard as those of bridges on other parts of the rail system. The fact that the paths could be used by wheelchairs, prams, buggies or residents with walking difficulties has not been taken into account. 14. Network Rail s Statement of Case also states that the proposed path surface with not be solid, but will be of Tarmac planings. These are waste road surfaces and will provide a loose surface. This is not wheelchair-friendly or pram-friendly. In light of the path s slope, this material could become dislodged if the path were to be used by cycles and affected by rain. 15. The claimed additional distance of 250 metres, for the proposed route, would take a considerably longer time to walk compared with the existing route. With the proposed surface, that would be longer still in wet weather. That extra distance and time must be considered in the context of the use of this path namely within a community to access local amenities. 16. The Network Rail proposal makes no provision for the needs of local people. It makes no attempt to mitigate the loss of the crossing which is an important part of community life. This is not a simple amenity, it is a long-standing right which should be respected. 17. Furthermore, the Ramblers believes that the deleterious effect on the path network that would be caused by Network Rail s plans for this crossing is not justified by Network Rail s desire for increased train journey speeds. Network Rail have the opportunity to install bridges or make crossings safer without so adverse an effect on pedestrians. When given the opportunity to do just that, as here in Fullers End, Network Rail has failed to show the appropriate willingness to respect local people s needs. 18. For the reasons detailed above, the Ramblers does not consider that the proposed alternative route for this crossing is suitable or adequate. As a result, the Inspector cannot be satisfied that a proper alternative right of way OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 6
has been provided by this scheme, as required by section 5(6) of the Transport and Works Act 1992. 19. We, therefore, ask the Inspector to recommend the retention of this crossing. I believe the facts stated in this witness statement are true. ALAN GOFFEE 18 SEPTEMBER 2017 The old sawmill site at Fullers End OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 7
The old sawmill site at Fullers End The old sawmill site at Fullers End showing part of the drop from the industrial park to the underpass OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 8
Fullers End crossing Fullers End proposals the underpass, showing its isolation and lack of lighting OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 9
Fullers End proposals the underpass, showing its isolation and lack of lighting Fullers End the climb which people will need to make from the underpass OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 10
Fullers End, showing the climb from the underpass to the crossing Fullers End, showing the climb from the underpass to the crossing OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 11
Fullers End, showing climb from the underpass to the crossing Existing stile, seemingly to be used on the alternative route by people with mobility problems OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 12
Fullers End the field to be used Fullers End the field to be used OBJ/148/W 005 PROOF OF EVIDENCE E05 CROSSING 13