Trivia: Level crossings that are unlikely to ever be removed

PTR 444

Member
Joined
22 Aug 2019
Messages
928
Location
Southampton
It is endeavoured that as many level crossings as possible should be closed permanently to improve safety and reduce congestion. While many have been successfully closed or replaced with a bridge, there are still many where doing so would be problematic or impractical for one of the following reasons:
  • The road passes through a built-up area where building a bridge would require extensive demolition.
  • The road passes through a National park or AONB, and hence permission for a new bridge is unlikely to be granted.
  • The road sees so little traffic that the case for a bridge would be very weak. Same for crossings with only a small handful of train movements per day.
In terms of crossings that are least likely to be removed, I would imagine most of the valid examples would be those in the first two categories. For the third category, the road could alternatively be severed on each side but this would depend on whether there is a suitable alternative route in the vicinity.

I will begin with the level crossing at Brockenhurst. Busy A-road, no suitable alternative route for traffic to divert to and right in the middle of a national park.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

ANDREW_D_WEBB

Member
Joined
21 Aug 2013
Messages
525
Bridge Street, Bradford on Avon. River on one side of the road, tunnel on the other. Road is a residential dead end beyond the crossing.

Sheen Lane and White Hart Lane, both east of Mortlake, simply because the land values would be too big to entertain a bridge for either.
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
5,251
Location
Leeds
In some areas, such as East Anglia and mid-Wales, there are so many level crossings that you can reasonably predict that some of them will remain for a very long time, even if you can't be certain that any particular one will remain.
 

SteveM70

Established Member
Joined
11 Jul 2018
Messages
1,802
The one in the middle of Lincoln, unless they pedestrianise the road
 

norbitonflyer

Member
Joined
24 Mar 2020
Messages
667
Location
SW London
Lincoln. Although the High Street is now closed to through traffic it is still available for access to premises outside shopping hours - it also has a heavy pedestrian footfall, despite the footbridge. The Brayford crossing would also be very difficult to replace, although it, like the High Street one, is now on a one way street.
 
Last edited:

mmh

Established Member
Joined
13 Aug 2016
Messages
2,950
Deganwy Station and Deganwy Quay crossings. The only way they'll ever be removed is if the line was closed.
 

Snow1964

Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
1,097
Location
West Wiltshire
North Sheen station, would require property demolition on south side to allow a road ramp (the property on north side, a Homebase store, is about to be demolished so would be easy to realign road)

I would add others on same line like Mortlake, due to too much property
 

ANDREW_D_WEBB

Member
Joined
21 Aug 2013
Messages
525
The one in the middle of Lincoln, unless they pedestrianise the road

High Street, Lincoln is virtually pedestrianised with very limited vehicle access, plus it has a lift equipped footbridge alongside, so could be closed with relatively little inconvenience. On a recent visit I was surprised how busy the line was. One closure lasted over 10 minutes.
 

Darandio

Established Member
Joined
24 Feb 2007
Messages
9,750
Location
Redcar
Red Cow crossing at Exeter is unlikely to depart any time soon.
 

Llanigraham

On Moderation
Joined
23 Mar 2013
Messages
5,211
Location
Powys
Marches Line:
Onibury, due to it's proximity to a road junction, housing and the River Ony road bridge.
Marshbrook, due to it's proximity to the A road, housing and a road junction.
Leominster, as Marshbrook.

Cambrian:
Llanidloes Road, housing, road junction proximity.
Abermewl, housing, industry, road junction proximity.
 

SteveyBee131

Member
Joined
28 Oct 2017
Messages
530
Location
Grimsby Town
5 within a quarter of a mile either side of Grimsby Town station. All are on busy town centre streets with no space for an alternative due to the area being heavily built up.

EDIT: beaten to it! :lol:
 

Meglos

Member
Joined
19 Dec 2020
Messages
66
Location
london
Sheen Lane and White Hart Lane, both east of Mortlake, simply because the land values would be too big to entertain a bridge for either.
You can add Vine Road in Barnes just after the Hounslow loop splits from the Richmond line. A double crossing where it's extremely rare to get across both crossings without getting caught by at least one of them. Any bridge would be at least 100M long, and would prevent access to the Vine Road Recreation Ground. As a child I remember it being operated as two manually operated crossings.

Also West Barnes Lane (twice) once in Raynes Park and once again at Motspur Park station. Both due to lack of space.
 

geoffk

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2010
Messages
2,009
Smithy Bridge, near Rochdale, where the road rises across the railway then over the adjacent canal. The gradient of the road and proximity of the canal in a built-up area would rule out both a bridge and an underpass. It would be hard to justify a bypass and hard to see where it would go without demolition.

The crossing on the north side of Paignton station would be another.
 

32475

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2019
Messages
217
Location
Sandwich
St Dunstans in Canterbury adjacent to Canterbury West station.

Richborough Road level crossing just outside Sandwich. If a bridge was built to replace it, it would hit the underside of the road viaduct which carries the A256 over the railway and the River Stour!
 
Last edited:

Acfb

Member
Joined
12 Aug 2018
Messages
40
Furness Vale.

Kingsknowe would be problematic as well as it is next to the union canal.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
13,280
Location
Another planet...
Dodworth. Now that the bypass has opened (getting on for a decade ago now) road traffic is minimal, so it probably isn't worth removing the crossing unless there's a spate of misuse, or if the long-term aim of a second hourly service is ever met. Though I suppose with the bypass now being open, retention of the through route is less critical, so in theory the crossing could close without the need for a bridge to replace it subject to local objections.
 
Last edited:

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
11,824
Location
Airedale
Cononley.
Not sure about Crosshills (on a far busier road, but would be awkward).
There are some quiet ones East of Knaresborough and on the Scarborough line.
 

sjm77

Member
Joined
8 Jan 2020
Messages
94
Location
Manchester
Bridlington Quay & Filey. Both built up areas but with road junctions very close to the Level Crossing itself. Also the very low speed that trains cross at reduces the risk and the seriousness of any potential 'encounter'.
 

Nova1

Member
Joined
26 May 2021
Messages
175
Location
Stratford-Upon-Avon
Not sure why but this crossing just off Chartham station has been there a while and for some reason won't be going anytime soon. Might be due to the close proximity to houses and the very limited visibility approaching the crossing.

1630620703630.png
It's a personal favorite of mine, when I was a little kid living here the operator in the signal box let me pull the levers a few times :)
 

mmh

Established Member
Joined
13 Aug 2016
Messages
2,950
I think we've proved there are countless ones which will never be removed. Coincidentally, I will shortly be campaigning for NR to reopen a foot crossing they illegally closed. I will start a new thread for that though :)
 

Ant158

Member
Joined
5 Apr 2013
Messages
108
Low Moor level crossing in Clitheroe, Lancashire. The only way they’d could close that one permanently would be to build a link road to the A59 from that side of Clitheroe.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
16,033
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Marches Line:
Onibury, due to it's proximity to a road junction, housing and the River Ony road bridge.
Marshbrook, due to it's proximity to the A road, housing and a road junction.
Leominster, as Marshbrook.

Cambrian:
Llanidloes Road, housing, road junction proximity.
Abermewl, housing, industry, road junction proximity.
At least the A49 now bypasses Leominster to the east of the railway, so it's just town traffic that's left.

Further north, I can't see the crossings at Gobowen and Wrexham being closed.
Gobowen's is between the station and signal box in the middle of the village, and Wrexham's is next to Croes Newydd North Fork box in a heavily built up area, some of it hospital premises.
The retention of a good many remaining manual signal boxes is determined by the need to control an adjacent un-closeable level crossing.

I wonder how long those level crossings of the 4/5/6-track ECML north of Peterborough will last?
 

RPI

Established Member
Joined
6 Dec 2010
Messages
1,421
Red Cow crossing at Exeter is unlikely to depart any time soon.
Was going to say this, whilst sat there last night waiting for 3 trains to cross i was looking around designing an alternative in my head.... and there isn't one, seems impossible to replace.

Eggesford another, surprised there aren't more pile ups when a car is waiting to turn right over the crossing whilst waiting for a train to pass.

The three in close proximity between Camborne and Redruth.

Lostwithiel

Quintrell Downs
 
Last edited:

Top