Environmental Statement volume 4 - Chiltern Evergreen3

access route to Middle Farm in lieu ofaccommodation rights – although theproposition in terms of accommodationrights is feasible, the bridleway diversionwould be lengthy and the existingNorthfield Farm bridge needs to bereplaced due to insufficient clearancebeneath the bridge (see above).6. Close crossing without replacement –unacceptable impact on bridlewaynetwork. Impact on private rights couldbe mitigated by upgrades to alternativeaccess routes.Name: Gosford and Water EatonNo. 4OS Grid Ref.: SP 50407 12376Railway Ref.: OXD 27m 28chType:Public FootpathProposal: Close crossing and divertfootpath via alternativeroute running alongnorthwest side of A34 tolink with A4165immediately to north ofbridge over A34 fromnorth side of A34 to A4165.This proposal alsoeliminates an at-gradecrossing of A34 dualcarriageway.1. Replace crossing with footbridge tosimilar alignment to proposed crossing –railway is elevated at site of crossing andcrossing intersects proposed site ofrelocated stone sidings meaning verylarge structure would be required. Thiswould have a significant visual impactwhich, together with the cost, is difficultto justify given the low levels of use.2. Replace crossing with footbridge onalternative alignment, clear of proposedsidings – the only suitable alternativealignments would still cross the railwayat a point where it is elevated, resulting insignificant visual impact.3. Retain and upgrade crossing – notpossible as crossing intersects proposedlocation for relocated stone sidings.4. Provide new crossing on alternativealignment – undesirable due to increasedsafety risk resulting from increased speedand frequency of trains, especially givencurvature (and hence poor visibility) overthis section of route. Also, safetyapproval for the creation of a newcrossing would be difficult if notimpossible to obtain.5. Close crossing and divert public footpathvia bridge to be provided in replacementof Water Eaton No. 5 crossing – wouldresult in lengthy diversionary routecompared to proposed solution.6. Close crossing without replacement –unacceptable impact on footpathnetwork.Name:OS Grid Ref.:Railway Ref.:Type:Proposal:ColtsNot known (not found onsite)OXD 27m 42ch (fromhistoric records)Accommodation (disusednot found on site)Confirm all rightspreviously extinguished.None.Name: Gosford and Water EatonNo. 10OS Grid Ref.: SP 49810 112611. Retain and upgrade crossing -undesirable due to increased safety riskresulting from increased speed andfrequency of trains, especially givenENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENTC25CHILTERN RAILWAYS