Network Rail wants to close the pedestrian gate at Foxton Level Crossing, on the Barrington Road side. This will create a far more dangerous environment for everyone. To respond please click here and choose (click) ‘C06 Barrington Road’.

Here is what I have submitted:

Consultation Response: ‘C06 Barrington Rd’ level crossing, Foxton

The rationale for Network Rail’s preferred option appears to be based on a mistaken assumption that all A10 traffic is headed for Foxton Village on the east side of the A10. It seems to have been forgotten that many users of C06 Barrington Rd level crossing are travelling through Foxton on foot or bicycle, on the path that runs along the western side of the A10. This path runs all the way from Cambridge, through Harston and Foxton, finishing at the Frog End junction Shepreth. Foxton is a mid-way point along that path. For many years C06 Barrington Rd level crossing has been the safe crossing point for pedestrians continuing north or south along that path. Recently Cambridgeshire County Council has received Dept for Transport funding to upgrade the path to a 2.5 metre wide dual use pedestrian/cycle path, specifically to encourage more people to travel other than by car in the A10 corridor.

The Cambridge area is experiencing high population growth and increased road traffic congestion, and the upgrade of the A10 off-road path is designed to mitigate against increased congestion. The chief qualification for successful Department for Transport funding for the new A10 cycleway is the potential to achieve a modal shift in cycling to work. The villages directly along the A10 north and south of Foxton are high employment centres and the new cycleway, currently under construction, is strongly supported by over 100 local businesses, including Melbourn Science Park, AstraZeneca and Cambridge Biomedical Campus. Option 1 – closure of C06 Barrington Rd level crossing – would require through pedestrian and cycle traffic to make two crossings of the A10, putting those pedestrians and cyclists in conflict with drivers and increasing risk for all those groups, twice over.

As Chair of the Meldreth, Shepreth and Foxton Rail User Group and Foxton County Councillor, I have been actively involved in seeking a safer overall environment at Foxton Level Crossing. Network Rail have been highly engaged with this endeavour and recently published a feasibility study to close the entire crossing, to be replaced with a bridge or underpass along a small bypass to the west of the A10. This would have allowed a complete redesign. You will be aware that that project has been deemed unaffordable at the present time, and placed on the back burner. Local stakeholders – the County Council, Parish Council and Rail User Group – have continued to work closely with Network Rail on other possible safety improvements to the overall environment. At many meetings on site at Foxton Level Crossing, closing C06 Barrington Road level crossing was never raised as a possible scenario for improving safety. The overwhelming objective at this complex junction, on a very busy A Road, is to keep traffic – trains, vehicles, pedestrians, cyclist – segregated. C06 functions as a key component in maintaining that segregation.

From May-December 2015, C06 Barrington Rd level crossing was closed due to a persistent fault on the self-locking gate. During those 7-8 months, through pedestrian and cycle traffic on the A10 path had to cross the A10 twice over, exactly as would be the case with the proposed Option 1. It was obvious from that period that the overall level crossing environment was much more dangerous for everyone, due to lack of segregation. The attached photograph illustrated the problem. The new current gate was installed in December 2015 and is functioning successfully.

Please can you provide all Risk Assessments for C06 and all other information referenced in compiling the Option 1 proposal.

Please note that in your consultation response form, respondents are asked to tick Option 1 or Option 2. It is not made clear anywhere that there are two options, or what Option 2 might be – this is confusing.

   1 Comment