LOAF_Paper4_DalwhinneCrossing

CAIRNGORMS LOC­AL OUT­DOOR ACCESS FOR­UM PAPER 4

CAIRNGORMS LOC­AL OUT­DOOR ACCESS FORUM

Title: Dal­whin­nie Rail­way Cross­ing: Clos­ure by Net­work Rail Pre­pared by: Adam Streeter-Smith, Out­door Access Officer Purpose: 

1. To inform mem­bers as to the circumstances.
2. To con­sider and agree the impact of clos­ure on out­door access.
3. To prompt advice from the LOAF about the steps to be taken to find a suit­able solution

Back­ground

1. Net­work Rail has closed the ​“private cross­ing” on the Inverness to Perth main line south of Dal­whin­nie Sta­tion on the 28^th of July. While CNPA is not entirely clear as to what pre­cip­it­ated this clos­ure, we are aware the decision was taken by NR prin­cip­ally on health and safety grounds.
2. The clos­ure pro­cess was con­duc­ted over an extremely short times­cale with only 5 days between Net­work Rail noti­fy­ing High­land Coun­cil of the inten­tion to action­ing the clos­ure. CNPA was not con­sul­ted and High­land Coun­cil were the only party form­ally noti­fied. Most stake­hold­ers have observed that a) insuf­fi­cient was time allowed for an under­stand­ing of the con­sequences to devel­op; and b) as a res­ult, no pre­par­a­tions could be put in place such that likely prob­lems might be avoided.
3. The clos­ure has been accom­pan­ied by a pro­posed diver­sion, with sig­nage, that involves walk­ing along the A889 to use an under­pass fur­ther south, a jour­ney of approx­im­ately 1.5 miles.
4. Both the estate and the Com­munity Coun­cil are firmly opposed to this clos­ure as the cross­ing is seen as import­ant for pub­lic access. Dal­whin­nie Com­munity Coun­cil is cam­paign­ing for the route to be re-opened.

CAIRNGORMS LOC­AL OUT­DOOR ACCESS FOR­UM PAPER 4

1. The High­land Coun­cil are dir­ectly involved on the basis recor­ded Pub­lic Right of Way HB78 is affected and as such the Coun­cil are under­stood to be examin­ing wheth­er there exists a coun­ter­mand­ing leg­al pos­i­tion in respect of their duties around uphold­ing access to Rights of Way.
2. The issue has promp­ted con­sid­er­able pub­li­city at a nation­al level, for example https://​www​.bbc​.co​.uk/​n​e​w​s​/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​s​/​c​q​n​6​8​2​e​j3p30
3. Ram­blers Scot­land has ini­ti­ated a cam­paign urging Net­work Rail to re-open the cross­ing. The online cam­paign has gained more than 5,000 sig­na­tures since its launch and is sup­por­ted by many recre­ation­al user groups includ­ing Moun­tain­eer­ing Scot­land, Cyc­ling UL/​Scotland and Scot­ways https://​www​.ram​blers​.org​.uk/​n​e​w​s​/​l​a​t​e​s​t​-​n​e​w​s​/​2​0​2​1​/​a​u​g​u​s​t​/​s​t​a​t​e​m​e​n​t​-​o​n​-​t​h​e​-​u​n​a​c​c​e​p​t​a​b​l​e​-​c​l​o​s​u​r​e​-​o​f​-​d​a​l​w​h​i​n​n​i​e​-​l​e​v​e​l​-​c​r​o​s​s​i​n​g​.aspx

Leg­al context

1. Land Reform (Scot­land) Act 2003: The issues to do with rail cross­ings and out­door access are com­plex and have been dis­cussed before at Nation­al Access For­um, without neces­sar­ily find­ing a solu­tion the can apply in all cases. Access rights do not apply to rail lines. Like­wise nor does the Access Authority’s powers to remove obstruc­tions. Mat­ters of pub­lic safety are of course paramount.
2. A leg­al review was pre­pared by the Scot­tish Law Com­mis­sion and Law Com­mis­sion. Mem­bers are dir­ec­ted to read Part 5 of the fol­low­ing doc­u­ment: Joint Report on Level Cross­ings (LC 339; SLC 234) (scot​law​com​.gov​.uk) with key detail around inter­pret­a­tions of the LRA and rail­way cross­ings giv­en on Pages 167 to 169 and there­after to Page 174. In 2018 Min­is­ters decided not to intro­duce legis­la­tion to imple­ment the 2013 joint Report on Level Cross­ings. Instead, admin­is­trat­ive changes were pro­posed that were in the spir­it of the recom­mend­a­tions. https://​www​.scot​law​com​.gov​.uk/​n​e​w​s​/​g​o​v​e​r​n​m​e​n​t​-​n​o​t​-​t​o​-​l​e​g​i​s​l​a​t​e​-​f​o​r​-​l​e​v​e​l​-​c​r​o​s​s​i​n​g​s​-​r​e​form/ . We will seek fur­ther clar­ity on these points as part of our review of the options avail­able going forwards.
3. Rights of Way Des­ig­na­tion: The route across the level cross­ing is recor­ded in CROW as right of way HB78. Scot­ways are cur­rently check­ing the case­file, but it appears it was asser­ted by Perth & Kinross Coun­cil circa 1993; with the route going over the level cross­ing at Dalwhinnie.
4. Private Rights: Ben Alder Estates retains ped­es­tri­an and vehicu­lar access rights over the crossing.
5. There is a core path up to the rail­way line bound­ary, UBS 35, that can be viewed on map 20 here CorePathsPlanFinal150727.pdf (cairngorms​.co​.uk).

CAIRNGORMS LOC­AL OUT­DOOR ACCESS FOR­UM PAPER 4

Implic­a­tions for out­door access There are sev­er­al implic­a­tions for access in the clos­ure of this crossing:

1. The cross­ing forms part of ​“claimed” right of way ​‘The Thieves Road’ towards Loch Ericht. (See Her­it­age Paths — Search for Paths by Map)
2. There are cross bound­ary (CNPA and THC) core paths at this location.
3. It is the main access point for the nearby Corbett the Fara and provides for access to sev­er­al pop­u­lar Mun­ros includ­ing Ben Alder.
4. It forms part of the Dal­whin­nie Com­munity Paths Leaf­let- Dal­whin­nie Trails_screen-res (cairngorms​.co​.uk)
5. Users would be expec­ted to avoid the cross­ing and walk a fur­ther 1.5 miles as described in sec­tion 3 above.

CNPA cur­rent position

1. CNPA is dis­ap­poin­ted not to have been con­sul­ted on this issue in advance of a decision being taken by Net­work Rail.
2. CNPA wrote to Net­work Rail on 12^th August 2021 seek­ing fur­ther inform­a­tion on the clos­ure and ask­ing them to recon­sider or find a more suit­able altern­at­ive. We do not think cur­rent arrange­ments are sat­is­fact­ory and there is risk that vis­it­ors will con­tin­ue to use the crossing.
3. CNPA offered to facil­it­ate a loc­al meet­ing between inter­ested partners.
4. CNPA invited NR to dis­cuss the issue at the LOAF meet­ing on 25^th August 2021 and to sup­ply fur­ther inform­a­tion about the rationale, the options con­sidered and altern­at­ives going for­wards. At the time of writ­ing this paper a response was awaited.

Advice sought from LOAF

1. Mem­bers are asked to con­sider and advise on:

• The impact of clos­ure on out­door access.
• Advise on steps to be taken to find a suit­able solution

Pro­posed next steps

• CNPA to press Net­work Rail to sup­ply fur­ther inform­a­tion about rationale and options and con­firm when they will meet with stakeholders.
• Fur­ther dis­cus­sion with LOAF once fur­ther inform­a­tion becomes available

August 2021