Introduction
Members of Selby Green Party have joined a community-led campaign fighting to reclaim a popular and valued footpath. The path runs east from South Milford, and forms part of a network of paths connecting South Milford with Sherburn and with Monk Fryston, as well as being part of well-used, safe, circular, recreational routes. Or would do, if it hadn’t been closed by a series of temporary closure orders more or less constantly since about 2014.
The history
The original closure was put in place to allow Network Rail to improve the standard of a pedestrian crossing over a fairly lightly used railway running north-south just a couple of hundred metres east of the edge of South Milford.
What makes the situation all the more puzzling is that Network Rail is now saying that that very crossing is too dangerous to remain open, and therefore suggested that the footpath be diverted to run south along the western side of the railway and onto Common Lane (a single track road with humpback bridges) instead of the almost 1km of the original footpath which would no longer be accessible.
So, what’s changed?
There are three pertinent things that have changed in the nearly 10 years since those original improvement works were carried out.
1. Network Rail's Embankment Work: Network Rail carried out embankment work on the TransPennine route this footpath runs alongside, which encroached on the footpath for a matter of metres. Network Rail therefore drew up and submitted plans for a very minor diversion into a field to skirt around the embankment work, but this diversion work was never carried out.
2. Reduced Railway Usage: The number of trains using the north-south line reduced with the closure/reassignment of local power stations.
3. Increased Traffic on Common Lane: Traffic on Common Lane has increased considerably — from just a few farm and residents’ vehicles to many articulated and other large vehicles — because Network Rail has opened up facilities along there.
What's being done about it?
When Network Rail proposed this diversion, a meeting was held between Network Rail, North Yorkshire Council, and the local Parish Council (represented by their Green Party councillor) and attended by a representative of the Ramblers Association as well as interested local residents.
At that meeting, the Network Rail Liability Advisor stated that their view of the safety of the crossing had changed because of a survey they did identifying the use of the crossing by ‘vulnerable’ users. The local representatives were puzzled by this since the footpath had been mostly closed for so long that they found it hard to believe that many people would have realised the path had reopened for the short amount of time when the survey apparently took place, and very surprised to hear who Network Rail define as ‘vulnerable’. As well as the usual dog walkers, people with children and the elderly etc, they also included anyone wearing earpods – and sunglasses! When challenged on this the Liability Advisor actually said they included ‘basically anyone who wasn’t a 30-something white male’ (so long as he wasn’t wearing earpods or sunglasses)!
Despite being asked on several occasions, the evidence for this survey has never been forthcoming.
North Yorkshire Council were of the opinion that diverting walkers onto Common Lane was not a safe option, and that — along with objections from the landowner across whose land the diversion would go — meant they were not prepared to approve the proposed diversion. Network Rail’s position was that as there were no other financially reasonable alternatives they would apply for the footpath to be extinguished. They were only considering ways of making this now apparently unsafe, previously safe, crossing safe again.
North Yorkshire Council’s preferred option was to approve the extinguishment, on the grounds that Network Rail are the experts on rail safety. This, however, sounds rather reminiscent of the Post Office scandal: Network Rail calling for the footpath to be closed only to then call themselves in as the experts to provide the evidence.
North Yorkshire Council further stated, at the local meeting, that by extinguishing the path rather than approving the diversion, the council would not be responsible if pedestrians then chose of their own free will to walk along Common Lane. We have our doubts whether a court of law would agree with them, in the event of an accident along Common Lane involving a pedestrian.
On publishing the proposed extinguishment, North Yorkshire Council received several objections, from the Parish Council, the Ramblers, and a number of local residents and path users. Initially, they said that this therefore meant they would have to refer the matter to the Secretary of State for determination.
The Ramblers Association had to point out to them that this was not actually the case, that they could rescind the order, just as they could have chosen to reject it in the first place.
It is now therefore going to be discussed in a meeting on 22nd February, to which objectors have been invited to attend remotely, and will be given the opportunity to speak, but not to listen to the deliberations, which will just be between 2 members of the Council. North Yorkshire Green Party Councillor Arnold Warneken has asked to also attend the meeting, in the hope that he will be able to contribute to efforts to persuade the council that they should be supporting local residents to keep this footpath open.
The liability officer for Network Rail, when asked directly at the local meeting, had also said that if they had their way they would close every single pedestrian crossing of railways throughout the country. This case is therefore not only important to the residents of South Milford, Monk Fryston and Sherburn but to all recreational walkers and active travellers nationwide.
The path forward
It is now going to be discussed in a meeting on 22nd February, to which objectors have been invited to attend remotely, and will be given the opportunity to speak, but not to listen to the deliberations, which will just be between 2 members of the Council. North Yorkshire Green Party Councillor Arnold Warneken has asked to also attend the meeting, in the hope that he will be able to contribute to efforts to persuade the council that they should be supporting local residents to keep this footpath open.
The fight to save South Milford's footpath is a testament to the community's resilience and commitment to safeguarding access to public rights of way and green spaces. As discussions continue, the hope remains that a solution can be found that preserves this vital pathway, ensuring it remains a treasured resource for going forward.
The liability officer for Network Rail, when asked directly at the local meeting, had also said that if they had their way they would close every single pedestrian crossing of railways throughout the country. This case is therefore not only important to the residents of South Milford, Monk Fryston and Sherburn but to all recreational walkers and active travellers nationwide.
