The main road out of our village is completely shut for six weeks while they dig it up to lay pipes to new houses.

For a week or so the residents were happy enough to use a nearby alternative: Bluebell Lane, a mile long single track road with passing places.

But then the council in its infinite wisdom decided that route was “too dangerous” (despite no actual accidents) so they shut that road too for “safety reasons” – leaving us with no way to exit the village heading north and instead having to head west on a five mile detour… …which involves driving through two other villages to get to another road, which is also single lane in parts! 😕

So far so silly. But it got worse…

They deployed police on Bluebell Lane to catch and fine the locals ignoring the “Road Closed” signs. And the police are also turning back and threatening to fine cyclists.

So now we have the wonderful situation where cyclists are being told that a closed traffic-free road is “too dangerous” to use, so instead they have to take a five mile detour on roads that are abnormally busy with diverted traffic and hasty angry drivers.

I’m tempted to get run over just to prove a point! 😉

Sounds like the Police and/or Council can’t do proper risk assessments.

What’s the legality of walking on a closed road? Can you just push your bike if the Police are there?

Publicise it, and make it an easy local TVnews hook by getting loads of children on bikes looking scared and vulnerable as 30 tonne artics Thunder past on the main road. Get a statement from both the Chief Constable and the leader of the Council.

They deployed police on Bluebell Lane to catch and fine the locals ignoring the “Road Closed” signs. And the police are also turning back and threatening to fine cyclists.

I’d be more than happy to call their bluff and say right, fine, I’ll see you in court, and let’s see how you handle the publicity you get in the national press, the Daily Mail will make a meal out it.
I honestly can’t see how they can enforce stopping cyclists, as bikes don’t need a metalled road.

Seems like a good use of police resources.

Realistically, they are not going to be putting a police patrol there every day for the next six weeks. So I would carry on. If you encounter a copper, you just joined the road beyond the closure signs from an offroad route. 🙂

It did get written up in the local paper after much frothing on the local Facebook groups – but it was a standard “Angry People in Local Newspapers” write-up and didn’t even mention cyclists.

It’s not the biggest issue in the world – it’s just the stubborn bureaucracy of it that bemused me.

The final irony is that the biggest problem the locals saw on Bluebell Lane was caused by the construction companies own lorries and vans using it to access the job site! 😆

Does a local councillor own a property off Bluebell Lane perchance?

Don’t think so, but it does intersect with the private access roads for a prestigious golf resort.

Coincidence I’m sure.

Spoken to your councillor?

Yeah the local parish council have been involved, but have not been very effective.

Several locals, including me, wrote directly to the roads guy who took the decision to close it. I suggested it could be left open one-way for cars (and both ways for cyclists) to relieve the pressure on the diversion routes.

We all got the same stock reply that said they couldn’t do that because people would just ignore the signs – despite the obvious fact that they already have police deployed to catch people that ignore the other signs!

Don’t think so, but it does intersect with the private access roads for a prestigious golf resort.

So it’s Northumberland County Council. That explains a lot. Corrupt bunch of twunts.

Very likely that the Golf Club is the source of the problem. It seems to be run like a mates club and if your name is Percy you can build what you want, where you want.

Daft question…….
Have they actually done a TRO ?
Or
As is often the case just put up “Road Closed ” signs ?

No TRO, no closed road.

( TRO – traffic restriction order ) and as far as I know a copy needs to be posted at all access points to affected road

Go and check the council order closing the road and see what it says.

They have to have a TRO and can only enforce what it says.

edit:Bah. Beaten like a the proverbial red headed offspring of a second spouse.

They had proper TROs for the main road closure – which people didn’t object to (even though six weeks seems a chuffin long time to lay 20 yards of pipe) because they thought they would still be able to use Bluebell Lane.

Then, to quote the roads guy’s reply:

“The subsequent closure of Bluebell Lane was carried out on an emergency basis due to the safety concerns identified on site. It was therefore not possible to carry out advance notification of this closure.”

In the interests of fairness, here’s the council road blokes full reply that we all received:

Good afternoon,

We have received a number of emails and telephone calls regarding the concerns of local residents following the emergency closure of Bluebell Lane. This response has been prepared in order to answer all of the issues raised therefore may refer to a number of issues that you have not personally raised. We hope that this combined response will help to quickly address all concerns.

The council has a duty under the Traffic Management Act 2004 to minimise congestion and disruption on its roads through its network coordination function which includes managing all highway works, both Council and utility roadworks. The closure on Holeyn Hall Road was requested by Wearmouth Construction in order to install a large diameter (1m) sewer for the new housing development. As trenches need to be excavated along a 60m length of the road a full road closure is required. Coordination includes ensuring that signed diversion routes are suitable for all vehicle types including HGVs. This said, traffic will inevitably use other routes known locally to avoid the closure.

One of the local routes being used was Bluebell Lane which joins the south end of Holeyn Hall Road at the full road closure necessary to accommodate the works. This route is a single track road that is not normally heavily trafficked. The intention was to leave this road open to accommodate residents in the immediate area of the works but unfortunately traffic reached a level that increased risk of accidents. To try and counter this, the council requested that the contractor increased signage in order to deter traffic from using this route, however these were ignored and vehicles continued to use this route. The route is unsuitable for high volumes of passing traffic, both cars and larger vehicles. We had reports of vehicles turning in residents driveways and difficulties being caused by the passing 2 way traffic. A site inspection found that 100 cars drove through the advisory signage in a 30 minute period.

Due to the safety concerns identified the county council as Highways Authority decided to legally close this road from the access to Close House, allowing access for residents only from the south end of the closure . However again drivers have continued to ignore the signage in place, laying down the signs, moving cones and violating the Temporary Traffic Regulation Order. The police are now supporting the council in enforcing those who continue to ignore the closure. We have to consider the risks and whilst there have been no accidents reported we would not want to be reacting to a situation after it has happened given the level of concern that we already have.

For clarification, access for emergency services is maintained at all times. Should an emergency services vehicle need access they will simply remove any signage and cones in order for them to drive through.

There have been a number of suggestions made by local residents that we have considered. Below is a list of those put forward and our response;-

Can you amend the closure to allow local cars through but ban HGV’s? Whilst removing HGV’s from the route would remove some risk It is clear from the evidence gathered by both ourselves and the Police over the past few days that it is the volume of general traffic that is the greater cause for concern.

Can you implement a one way system for cars going out north on Bluebell Lane in the morning and coming in south in the afternoon? This would be both confusing and complicated to communicate through signage due to changing direction part way through the day, and in itself lead to further safety concerns. We have also given consideration to the implementation of a one way in either direction only. Given the recent behaviour of some drivers ignoring the signage and that this restriction could only be controlled by signage itself, this causes us significant concern regarding the risk of vehicles not complying and potential issues with conflict with unexpected on-coming vehicles.

The diversion to use Horsley Road is no less of a safety risk than using Bluebell Lane. This is not the signed diversion route however local traffic will naturally use a number of local minor roads. The reason why volumes were so great on Bluebell Lane was due to the proximity to Wylam which then increased the risk on this very narrow road.

Can traffic lights be used to control the north and southbound traffic on Bluebell Lane? In order to control traffic using traffic lights, the lights heads would need to be placed at either end of Bluebell Lane, a distance of 1100m, resulting in excessive time being required to clear the lights between changes. This could result in significant queueing traffic at either end of the lane.

Who should I speak to regarding compensation? The closure of Holeyn Hall Road and the related closure of Bluebell Lane is as a result of the development being carried out by Wearmouth Construction on behalf of Gentoo Homes. There are no mechanisms for compensation from the County Council in relation to temporary road closures.

Is there a process in order to appeal against the closure of Bluebell Lane? There is no legislation that allows for appeals against Temporary Traffic Regulation Orders

Lack of communication about closures. The closure of Holeyn Hall Road was applied for within the required timescale (6 weeks) and advertised in the press. Signs were placed on site in advance notifying drivers of the impending closure. The subsequent closure of Bluebell Lane was carried out on an emergency basis due to the safety concerns identified on site. It was therefore not possible to carry out advance notification of this closure.

A Gentoo spokesperson has informed us that progress during the first 2 weeks of the closure has been slower than expected. This has been mostly due to the contractors having to hand dig around existing services (high voltage electricity cables, high pressure water main and BT services), rather than using heavy plant for excavation. There was also a requirement to provide pedestrian access around the rear of the closure to ensure a footpath connection through for the properties on Holeyn Hall Road to the north of the site.

We acknowledge that the closure is difficult for the local community and is causing considerable inconvenience but that unfortunately it is necessary given the works that are being undertaken and the safety on the roads affected.

Regards,

[Redacted]
Network Co-Ordinator

That response seems fair enough to me, annoying as I’m sure it is.

It’s understandable to close it to motor vehicles. There’s no reason why it needs to be closed to pedestrians or cyclists though.

The route is unsuitable for high volumes of passing traffic, both cars and larger vehicles

That’s very telling. In the eyes of the council there are only two groups using the road. People in cars and people in larger vehicles.

I’d go back and push the cycling point specifically because they don’t even seem to have acknowledged it.

There’s no reason why it needs to be closed to pedestrians or cyclists though.

It’s only closed to vehicles.

Technically a bike is a “vehicle” but common sense would suggest cycles should be allowed to continue to use it. However, due to the anti-cycling, you all jump red lights, don’t pay road tax and should have a number plate brigade, they are closing to bikes as well. Boils my piss and I don’t even live there.

Even if it’s legally closed to bikes, I fail to see how they can stop you from pushing one. You’re then a pedestrian, no different to if you had a baby buggie.

The route is unsuitable for high volumes of passing traffic, both cars and larger vehicles

I’m not seeing how that applies to bikes either.

Ride across the golf course

Ride across the golf course

Take a spare inner tube in case you get a hole in one.