Long Rock depot, Penzance - facilities, improvements & incidents (merged posts)

[whole diary]

[chrisoates]

Crossing to be closed until further notice.

[folrmc]

It is reported on SWRG that the 150121 2C47 1353 Plymouth-Penzance service has hit a person in the Longrock area,
Mainline Trains are starting and terminating at St Erth. However St Ives trains are being cancelled. Has the St Ives train been canceled so the mainline return service can run?

Edit: What I meant was, why were trains on the branch canceled when the person was hit on the mainline?

Now NR^» (Network Rail - home page) wants to close the crossing.

Edit note:   Quote marks moved to clarify.

[bobm]

Welcome to the forum folrmc.  I've just tidied up your opening post to clarify the quote and your post.  Have you a view on the crossing remaining open or being closed?

[chrisoates]

Welcome to the forum folrmc.  I've just tidied up your opening post to clarify the quote and your post.  Have you a view on the crossing remaining open or being closed?

I used the crossing a lot - at minimum if re-opened it would need to be light controlled which would be very simple as there is a controlled crossing nearby
Sighting of 'down' trains is poor there as the up and down lines merge to single track -  the single line appearing from around a bend where the 'W' board is sited.
I've had a close one there when I didn't hear the horn of a 150.

[grahame]

It is reported on SWRG that the 150121 2C47 1353 Plymouth-Penzance service has hit a person in the Longrock area,
Mainline Trains are starting and terminating at St Erth. However St Ives trains are being cancelled. Has the St Ives train been canceled so the mainline return service can run?

Edit: What I meant was, why were trains on the branch canceled when the person was hit on the mainline?

Now NR^» (Network Rail - home page) wants to close the crossing.

Edit note:   Quote marks moved to clarify.

Is "folrmc" one for our abbreviations list - "Friends Of Long Rock Mexico Crossing"?

Note of caution - I don't personally know the area, so comments made will be general and in the form of questions ...

History.   Accident on crossing, October 2011, pedestrian killed.  Not the first fatality there - a number of near misses reported in recent years, and if you look back to 1972 you'll find another fatality.  At the December 2012 inquest, the coroner recommended the closure of the foot crossing, with a suggestion that people use a level crossing further down the line. However, users and businesses say that this makes for more problems, with people having to risk their lives walking on a dangerous road instead, and also that the (current temporary) closure is having a massive negative effect on the area served by the crossing. Network Rail now proposes permanent closure.   Is that a correct summary?

It strikes me that there are three options
a) Close the crossing permanently
b) Take measures which will make it safer
c) Leave it "as is" open.

Observations

* Any crossings of a railway line (level, bridge; foot, vehicle) are going to cost more to provide and support than a stretch of straight track, so it's in the infrastructure provider's financial and operation interest to eliminate as many of them as possible.

* We put a very high priority onto rail safety, even though (for most categories) rail is much safer than road. If the lady in question had died as a result of being hit by a road vehicle on the neighbouring road, I doubt whether the accident would have made such headlines, nor would it have resulted in footpath or vehicle closure of that road.

* There's often a temptation to react with an expensive solution where alternative lower cost ones are available.

Discuss 

[LiskeardRich]

What would the costings be of a footbridge to install, assume this would be a lot cheaper than a lights system which would need electrical circuits in the track.
Should the crossing not reopen, can I ask what is wrong with the pavement along the main road, which is normally shielded from the traffic by a row of parked cars. I therefore dont see the objection of the busy main road as a valid objection.
I was at Long Rock and used the level crossing on Thursday, so these are fairly recent observations.

The foot crossing is down the lane where the "keep clear" markings are on the road here http://goo.gl/maps/CGznZ follow the road to where the level crossing is.
The level crossing is down this road. http://goo.gl/maps/Se56D all are within a 30mph zone, (nice shot of the night riviera loco here as well)

[Chris from Nailsea]

The proposal to close this foot crossing is not new: from the Rail Accident Investigation Branch report on the sad death of Jeanette Nicholls:

Other reported actions

132 Network Rail has applied to Cornwall Council to have Mexico footpath crossing closed, diverting users to the nearby Long Rock CCTV^▸ (Closed Circuit Tele-Vision) crossing, where they would be fully protected from the railway by barriers when trains are approaching. Historical information held by Network Rail indicates that:
- Mexico footpath crossing had been a vehicular right of way until 1961. When the crossing was closed to vehicles at that time, Cornwall County Council said that there was a prescriptive right of way through the crossing and that it could not be closed to all users.
- British Rail had applied again to close the crossing in 1991, but this was rejected by County, District and Parish Councils.

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the Falmouth Packet:

Request to stop people using Longrock rail crossing

Network Rail has formally applied to asked to close the Long Rock pedestrian level crossing at Mexico Inn, in the interests of public safety.

Cornwall Council is carrying out informal consultation with a range of groups with an interest in the future of a footpath across the main line railway following the request.

Section 118A of the Highways Act 1980 gives specific powers to relevant authorities, such as Cornwall Council, to make public path orders to close public rights of way where they cross railways.

The grounds for making a Rail Crossing Extinguishment Order are specific and apply where it appears to be in the interests of public safety.

Before it determines whether or not to exercise its power to make a Rail Crossing Extinguishment decision, the Council has written to a number of organisations and individuals including emergency services, utility companies, Ludgvan Parish Council and people who have previously contacted the Council.

The purpose of this letter is to carry out informal consultations and to seek information which will assist it in determining whether the crossing should be closed on these grounds.

[bobm]

There has been quite a campaign to save the crossing



When I was there in March there were similar signs on all the lamposts/telegraph polls leading up to the closed crossing



The alternative is the road crossing at the end of the Long Rock depot.



The diversion is less than five minutes walk but does mean swapping a stroll along the sea front for one along a busy road.

[LiskeardRich]

The diversion is less than five minutes walk but does mean swapping a stroll along the sea front for one along a busy road.

The busy road does have a pavement and a row of parked cars between the pavement and the traffic.

[bobm]

Agreed - but still not as appealing as the other route.

[Chris from Nailsea]

To be fair - those "arrogant bullies" ( ) at Network Rail are simply following a recommendation from the coroner,

After a jury at the inquest had recorded a verdict of accidental death, coroner Barrie Van Den Berg made the recommendation that the crossing is closed in favour of a level crossing further down the line.

Speaking after the inquest, Mrs Nicholls' family said they were delighted with the outcome. Her daughter, Vanessa Webster, said: "The family is very pleased with the verdict of accidental death following today's inquest and especially heartened by the coroner's recommendation to close the crossing.

"We hope that Network Rail and the relevant councils progress this closure as soon as possible to prevent further tragedies. It is the second death that has happened on the line, five near misses and two other incidents reported since 2007. It's an accident waiting to happen."

and an invitation from Cornwall Council,

A spokesperson for Cornwall Council added: "We would welcome the invitation from Network Rail to investigate the closure of the crossing. Any proposed closure would be first subject to consultation."

[Chris from Nailsea]

From The Cornishman:

Cabinet to consider Long Rock crossing closure order

The decision to close the pedestrian crossing in Long Rock will go before a meeting at County Hall next month.

Cornwall Council's Cabinet will decide whether the August 14 extinguishment order should go to the Secretary of State for approval.


Councillor Roy Mann at the 'extinguished' Mexico railway crossing.

The crossing was closed at the request of Cornwall's Deputy Coroner in December 2012 following the death of Jeanette Nicholls at the spot.

Ludgvan councillor Roy Mann requested the closure be brought to the Cabinet, and said: "This is the fairest way to make this decision. I've always supported the reopening of the crossing. Indeed, myself and my family have used it. Accident stats say it has a 1 in 11 million chance of an accident. I'd say there's a greater chance of an accident on the roads in Long Rock. Ninety-eight per cent of residents support the reopening of the crossing. Local support should be respected if localism means anything."

The decision to close the crossing permanently was delegated to Peter Marsh, the council's director of environment, after he inspected the site earlier in the year.

Following more than 100 objections to the closure order, if the council wishes the order to be made permanent it is legally obliged to send it to central Government for confirmation.

However, Cornwall Council has the power to overrule the extinguishment order before the Cabinet meeting.

Those who formally objected to the order have been told by letter that the meeting will take place on November 27.

Rob Nance, chairman of the Friends of Long Rock Mexico Crossing (FLRMC), said the impending Cabinet discussion was welcome news. "This is what we wanted," he said. "We hope they look at the order again and see that the statistics have been wrongly interpreted by Network Rail. We're 99 per cent sure that if the decision went to the Secretary of State, we'd win. It would be a complete waste of time to do it. We welcome members of the Cabinet to come and see the site. I think they will revoke it."

FLRMC plans to attend the council meeting en masse, with the hope of being able to put questions directly to the members of the Cabinet during the 15 minutes allowed for this. Questions must be submitted in advance by e-mail to cabinet@cornwall.gov.uk and must be received a full two days before the meeting.

Those unable to attend can watch the meeting via a live webcast on the council website at www.cornwall.gov.uk

[old original]

Can't see it myself, but.....

http://www.cornishman.co.uk/Ministers-lobbied-pound-146-million-Cornish-rail/story-21152768-detail/story.html

[LiskeardRich]

The Cornishman has excelled itself with this story, it's a recycle of a story they ran a few months ago.

From march http://www.cornishman.co.uk/Government-urged-London-train-depot-Penzance/story-20846889-detail/story.html