Response from Diane Clarke, Network Rail
1. Diane Clarke, Network Rail : 20 Feb 2018 09:12:00
Please make your comments in the box below:
As you are aware Network Rail is a statutory consultee for any planning applications within 10 metres of relevant railway land (as the Rail Infrastructure Managers for the railway, set out in Article 16 of the Development Management Procedure Order) and for any development likely to result in a material increase in the volume or a material change in the character of traffic using a level crossing over a railway (as the Rail Network Operators, set out in Schedule 4 (J) of the Development Management Procedure Order); in addition you are required to consult the Office of Rail and Road (ORR).
The proposal area includes or is close to several level crossings:
Kents Bank
Grange Over Sands Footpath
Bailey Lane
Bathing Pool
Cart Lane
The policy mentions:
5.17.8 There is interest in making additional extra care housing provision in Grange-over-Sands as part of developments that might come forward. Provision within Grange-over-Sands will not only address these needs but will provide new jobs in the Parish, a key component of this Neighbourhood Plan
5.17.9 The site at Berner’s Pool, excluding the Lido site, provides the ideal location for this as it has many advantages for people who would live here:
• It is within easy walking distance of Grange-over-Sands Town Centre, a key component of Policy 1 and on the local circular bus route connecting to the main bus service into Kendal and Barrow, for Westmorland General Hospital and Furness General Hospital (Policy 2)
• With easy links to the town centre, local people moving to this facility will be enabled to maintain their social networks and support, particularly if they move from other properties in Grange
• In addition, the site (excluding the Lido site) is adjacent to an accessible, level, traffic-free route along the Promenade to the railway station and the shops, the ornamental gardens and cafes at the Yewbarrow Terrace end of town. This would enable ease of access for those with mobility scooters, walking aids or limited walking ability
• The proposed site at Berner’s Pool is also a short, level walk to Kents Bank Rd for daily shopping needs, churches, cafes, convenience foods, hairdressers and chemists
• The wider allocated site includes a recently developed Medical Centre, which provides easy access to key health services
THE Neighbourhood Plan also refernces the aging population of GOS:
“2.6.2 The Parish has a notably ageing population with an age profile differing significantly from both the district as a whole and England, with a larger older population and smaller younger population
Grange-over-Sands South Lakeland England
2.6.3 The percentage of residents who said their day to day activities were limited a little or a lot due to health problems or disability was 9% higher than the SLDC average and 10% higher than the England average
2.6.4 Just over 14% of the population of Grange-over-Sands said they provided some level of unpaid care, considerably more than the SLDC and England average
2.6.5 82% of households have access to at least 1 car, significantly more than the England average
2.6.6 Over a quarter of all households in Grange-over-Sands are one-person pensioner households
2.6.7 Over 33% of residents classed as “economically active” were officially retired, 20% higher than the England average.”
In light of the above, Network Rail would comment as follows:
(1)
In relation to your comment regarding the use of Bathing Pool Level Crossing:
Bathing Pool Level Crossing is of Accommodation status with only one authorised user, South Lakeland District Council (SLDC). The accommodation crossing is governed by an agreement dated 1987, which was entered into with SLDC, for works that had been agreed with the British Railways Board (BRB) to widen and improve the crossing. SLDC sought agreement from BRB as they needed an improved access onto their promenade for maintenance purposes with wider vehicles than the previous crossing could accommodate.
There are no public rights of way scheduled over the crossing. The public footpath which is scheduled adjacent to Bathing Pool Level Crossing, does not cross the railway on the level. It was scheduled to cross over the railway by way of the former footbridge. This footbridge was owned, maintained and removed (in 2006), by SLDC.
No use of Bathing Pool Level Crossing can be made in relation to any development. If there was a requirement for the public to have access onto the promenade and Lido development at this location, then this has to be via a new footbridge.
(1) The responsibility to reinstate a footbridge, would rest with SLDC.
(2) The level crossing must be securely gated or closed prior to the residential extra care facility being occupied.
(3) Appropriate engineering and property agreements to be agreed with Network Rail. Early engagement is advised.
Below is a link to the page on Network Rail’s website which includes the Shared Value policy. This may be relevant to the Neighbourhood Plan, where a developer requires rights to cross the railway to access/serve a development site. See last document under the heading ‘Brochures and Documents’.
https://www.networkrail.co.uk/industry-commercial-partners/network-rail-property/network-rail-property/development/
(2)
Developments within the neighbourhood area should be accompanied by a TS/TA which includes consideration of the impact of proposals upon level crossings with mitigation implemented as required. We would encourage the Council / neighbourhood forum to adopt specific policy wording to ensure that the impact of proposed new development (including cumulative impact) on the risk at existing level crossings is assessed by the developer(s), and suitable mitigation incorporated within the development proposals and funded by the developer(s). We would encourage the Council to adopt specific policy wording to ensure that the impact of proposed new development (including cumulative impact) on the risk at existing level crossings is assessed by the developer(s), and suitable mitigation incorporated within the development proposals and funded by the developer(s).
TS/TAs should be undertaken in conjunction with the local highways authority with advice from Network Rail.
Contributions will be sought where proposals impact on level crossings to mitigate the impacts of those developments. Wherever possible level crossings will be closed, and either replaced with a footbridge or by a diversionary route.
Councils are urged to take the view that level crossings can be impacted in a variety of ways by planning proposals:
• By a proposal being directly next to a level crossing
• By the cumulative effect of developments added over time in the vicinity of a level crossing
• By the type of level crossing involved e.g. where pedestrians only are allowed to use the level crossing, but a proposal involves allowing cyclists to use the route
• By the construction of large developments (commercial and residential) where road access to and from the site includes a level crossing or the level / type of use of a level crossing increases as a result of diverted traffic or of a new highway
• By developments that might impede pedestrians ability to hear approaching trains at a level crossing, e.g. new airports or new runways / highways / roads
• By proposals that may interfere with pedestrian and vehicle users’ ability to see level crossing warning signs
• By any developments for schools, colleges or nurseries where minors in numbers may be using the level crossing
• By any proposal that may cause blocking back across the level crossing
• By any proposal which may see a level crossing impacted by the introduction of cycling or walking routes
• By outside party proposals where there is an increase in the number of ‘vulnerable users’* (see below).
(3)
Should the development of any of the plots identified with the neighbourhood plan require any land interests or rights from Network Rail, then such will be subject to the prior approval of all relevant rail industry consents. Additionally the appropriate property documentation and engineering agreements would need to be agreed and entered into with Network Rail prior to any use of any such land or rights.
(4)
Consideration should be given in Transport Assessments to the potential for increased footfall at Grange-Over-Sands Railway Station as a result of proposals for residential development, employment areas within the Neighbourhood Plan area. Location of the proposal, accessibility and density of the development, trip generation data should be considered in relation to the station. Where proposals are likely to increase footfall and the need for car parking at Grange-Over-Sands Railway Station, the council should consider developer contributions (either via CIL, S106) to provide funding for enhancements.
Any proposed development at this location should include a Transport Assessment that takes into consideration the level crossing with the developer fully funding any mitigation measures.
Regards
Diane Clarke AssocRTPI
Town Planning Technician LNW
Network Rail