Crossing objections quashed

The Scottish Government has decided a closed level crossing three outdoor groups would like to see re-opened should remain shut.

A two- day hearing had to be held in Blackford earlier this year after Perth and Kinross Outdoor Access Forum, Ramblers Scotland and Scotways refused to withdraw their objections to the old crossing at Panholes being stopped up.

They were unhappy Network Rail closed the crossing and replaced it with a stepped footbridge they say disabled people are unlikely to want to use before a proper stopping- up and diversion order was confirmed.

A reporter working for the government’s Planning and Environmental Appeals Division has now dismissed their concerns saying Network Rail had the right to act the way they did, people had been risking their lives using the old crossing and the suitability of the footbridge was out of her hands.

Frances McChlery said in her report recommending a stopping up order be confirmed: “The objectors take issue with the conduct of Network Rail in physically closing the crossing before the order has been confirmed. However most statutory undertakers operate under a range of statutory enabling powers ... designed to allow them to fulfil their functions.

“No principle of law, nor any factual circumstances were cited by the objectors to the effect that Network Rail were incorrect to use the respective planning permissions granted to them ... to take action to fence off and close the Panholes crossing ... nor that the council was wrong to confirm that these powers were available.”

Ms McChlery continued: “I am satisfied from the evidence supplied ... to conclude that the Panholes pedestrian crossing, as it was, presented a degree of public safety risk to any user, even an able bodied one.

“The risk to the user is accompanied by risk to the train network and its users.

“There is government policy support that uncontrolled or unsupervised level crossings have some inherent risk, and that wherever possible and expedient, that risk should be eliminated or substantially reduced.

“Although I was unable to observe the original Panholes level crossing itself in operation, from my observations of the location and the rail traffic on the line, I consider that the crossing presented some risk to any users because of the sightline distances and the speed of the trains.”

And she went on: “Much of the objections concern whether the design and specification of the footbridge, now constructed and in use, is suitable.

“The objectors say this is the wrong development, and that Network Rail should have constructed an all abilities design.

“This is a criticism of the developer’s choice of design, and council’s decision to approve the design by granting planning permission.

“It is well established that the merits of the planning permission decision cannot be revisited in the consideration of a stopping up order.”