On local TV news on 23rd June there was an item about Network Rail’s intent to hold a “referendum” of local residents. Reportedly, they are to be asked to choose between the level crossing being replaced by a footbridge (no mention of cycling), and the level crossing being closed with no replacement at all; NR would use the result of the referendum as input to discussions with local government.
Parents of children at the adjacent primary school are objecting to the retention of the present half barrier crossing.
If cyclists views are to be considered it would be wise to obtain the views of cyclists living in the Petersfield area.
From a cycling perspective The questions seem to be:
- Is it worth campaigning to retain cycle access along School Lane either by using a full barrier crossing or with a bridge with a cycle gully?
- What is the best option for a crossing of the railway in School Lane? There is probably not room for a fully ramped bridge and the bridges with gully's that are being supplied are not to national standards and can be difficult for cyclists to use.
- If School Lane is closed what are the best alternatives?
Considerations might include:
- When cycling north south through or around Petersfield there are several moderately good routes and none need to bring cyclists into School Lane.
- The east west cycle routes out of Petersfield are not good. School Lane might be useful for example when cycling from East East Meon to Liss as both significant hills and the town centre can be avoided. School Lane can however be avoided.
- A possible way of improving cycling across north west of Petersfield would be to rededicate Footpaths 504 and 505 Harrow Lane so that it could be cycled. Also it might help if footpath 27 or BOAT 32 could be cycled.
- A cycle map of the town might help.
The official Hampshire County Council map of rights of way in the area is here.
I'd like to hear your views - particularly if you live in or near the Petersfield area. You can contact me here.
A CTC Right to Ride Representative