Walking Forum
Main Boards => General Walking Discussion => Topic started by: Ridge on 12:07:23, 17/07/20
-
On our walk yesterday we came across 4 temporary footpath closures which may become permanent. All 4 cross the A41 which, at this point, is a very busy dual carriage way.
The council have closed the crossings for safety reasons as you had to take your life in your hands and make a run for it. They say that they can close them permanently and not provide an alternative way of crossing as there is no ROW across the road though the paths leading to it are ROWs.
This sounds very dubious to me. Any suggestions as to how to fight it?
-
What is the continuity of way? Give us a map reference, maybe the answer is a footbridge :2funny: the council will love that, these things were not planned for with the original level of road usage. Not enough attention has been given to the economic value of the footpath network. Building up a picture of distant destinations may provide additional impact to short sighted closures of bought on by poor analysis.
-
There is a road bridge, which is where we crossed the A41 at496651 208013
There are 2 paths crossing the A41 NW of this and 2 more SE. The council are saying that they don't need to provide foot bridges because there is no right of way on the embankment or across the carriage way. They can just decide to permanently close the crossings and this would effectively close most of the paths that lead to them as they then become useless.
-
I would most definitely fight it if you find the means. Local pressure from the likes of the local Ramblers group. They should have a paths secretary, who will know where to feed the information. Also residence groups may eventually get a bridge in place or at least a viable diversion. There will also be a formal route threw the council web-sight. Certainly in Cornwall there is a well established route from the County definitive map site, that provides a conduit for words and photos/documents to be routed to the right people, I have even received feed back, so it works here. I would not hold your breath though these things take time. . When the A 30 was duelled across Bodmin moor some of the RoW were and still are, simply cut in two with no viable means to cross. Most were diverted to the nearest road bridge. I know of none where a bridge was put in place specifically for walkers. Though I do know of a couple that cross the A 30 to access Dartmoor.
Hope there's some thing useful in my ramblings. :)
-
A few years ago I highlighted a similar situation on this forum, also on the A41 in Hertfordshire, to the S of Berkhamsted at SP 9738 0731, where a bridleway is interrupted by the busy 4 lane highway with a crash barrier on the central reservation and no means of crossing the road safely.
PS: It is rumoured that the A41 was upgraded into such a good road to ease the PMs access to Chequers.
-
There is a road bridge, which is where we crossed the A41 at496651 208013
There are 2 paths crossing the A41 NW of this and 2 more SE. The council are saying that they don't need to provide foot bridges because there is no right of way on the embankment or across the carriage way. They can just decide to permanently close the crossings and this would effectively close most of the paths that lead to them as they then become useless.
What are the two OS prefix letters. The A 41 appears to run from London to Birkenhead. ;)
Edit the A41 is longer than I thought.
-
Just occurred to me, on the lighter side of things. Tell them the local Bats need to cross the road at that point. Then they will provide a bridge for sure. O0
-
What are the two OS prefix letters. The A 41 appears to run from Wolverhampton to Birkenhead. ;)
SP
The reference that fernman gives looks to be the furthest SE of the ones that I am talking about, it would appear that the barriers have been there a long time though the sign I saw was dated 7th May 2020. I had not walked between Berkhampstead and the A41 before so had never had to try any of the crossings.
-
Very big picture of the council letter
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/nn129/Birkhouse/20200716_160144.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) (https://app.photobucket.com/u/Birkhouse/a/4c7f18a7-ce80-4544-ae2c-47f3b09ccc7a/p/ffc34f75-ba84-4258-99f4-d1f150fceeb5)
-
SP
The reference that fernman gives looks to be the furthest SE of the ones that I am talking about, it would appear that the barriers have been there a long time though the sign I saw was dated 7th May 2020. I had not walked between Berkhampstead and the A41 before so had never had to try any of the crossings.
I'm struggling with your grid point convention.
I think you mean
SP 96641 08012 or SP 966080 in common terms
But I have been wrong before.
I use this site to look them up FYI.
https://gridreferencefinder.com/ (https://gridreferencefinder.com/)
Edit. That is one rude letter. Basicly says we know it was a RoW once but that changed because some one built an A road so stuff you crossing user. It's not our problem.
-
I think you mean
SP 96641 08012 or SP 966080 in common terms
I do.
I use this site to look them up FYI.
https://gridreferencefinder.com/ (https://gridreferencefinder.com/)
So do I, if you but the eastings (496651)and northings (208013) in you should get a bridge over the A41
-
Edit. That is one rude letter. Basicly says we know it was a RoW once but that changed because some one built an A road so stuff you crossing user.
Yes. As I point out in my email to them, that is not quite how ROWs work.
From gov.uk an ROW exists if
the land was used as a public right of way in the past - check old maps and documents
the land was accessed by the public for at least 20 years and nobody has asked them to stop
-
I do.
So do I, if you but the eastings (496651)and northings (208013) in you should get a bridge over the A41
We have contact. Oh the joys of standards and conventions.
So looking at the map, they have done exactly what they have done on the A30 across Bodmin moor, diverted the RoW via the nearest safe road bridge. I think you are stuck with that decision. It makes perfect sense in the grand scheme of things, even if it's a bit of a pain for walkers.
I commented in other threads on how we had been able to get out and walk several local RoW during the early part of lock down, that are otherwise unsafe due to level of road traffic at crossing points. I can see such notices appearing on those at some point. But for now walkers here are still permitted to take their own risk and cross the A road.
-
I had not walked between Berkhampstead and the A41 before so had never had to try any of the crossings.
Sorry, going off topic a bit, if you do walk from Berkhamsted there is a road tunnel under the A41 at SP 9775 0695, a bit further south of the bridleway I mentioned. Worth the effort to see the ruins of Marlin Chapel to the west.
(My grid refs are from Memory-Map.)
-
Sorry, going off topic a bit, if you do walk from Berkhamsted there is a road tunnel under the A41 at SP 9775 0695, a bit further south of the bridleway I mentioned. Worth the effort to see the ruins of Marlin Chapel to the west.
We walked past Marlin Chapel Farm but I didn't notice the ruins, we will have to go back again.
-
If the temporary/permanent closure is based on a safety assessment of the road crossing then the is surely a further step that should be taken. In order to lessen the probable event of someone crossing the road and as the alternative safe crossings are a short distance away along the field margins it should be made clear that temporary permissive ways are the option for the shortest distance to the alternatives. There are clearly rights of way to the unsafe crossings, so both landowners and council could be seen to be negligent for not putting obvious alternatives in place.
-
If the temporary/permanent closure is based on a safety assessment of the road crossing then the is surely a further step that should be taken. In order to lessen the probable event of someone crossing the road and as the alternative safe crossings are a short distance away along the field margins it should be made clear that temporary permissive ways are the option for the shortest distance to the alternatives. There are clearly rights of way to the unsafe crossings, so both landowners and council could be seen to be negligent for not putting obvious alternatives in place.
That is the bit I did not like about the notice. It did not say those things were in place or would be sorted in due course. It simply referred it to another department. If you look on the OS map there is a Safe RoW to the bridge a few hundred yards away.
Had the council fenced off the dangerous route across the road? I had assumed they would have. Though from the tenor of the note that may have been the responsibility of yet another department.
-
I agree and having run into H&S as self employed it riles me that bureaucrats can feel exempt from the basic consideration of risk assessment. Surely there should be a piece of paper somewhere in that department with a corresponding date, assessing the risk of their notice.
Perhaps they consider that they have closed down the risk to person by crossing a main road, but what is the alternative.
Scenario; group of young teens, returning for evening meal, caught late and faced with turning back, retracing their steps knowing they will be late. Plenty of family homes north side, open countryside south side. What is the chance they might take the risk of a gap in the traffic against being late and perhaps owning up to have been out of bounds.
Too much churlish, poorly assumed authority within that notice.