Tallington Northern Bridge - Route & Slope Justification
This proposal is to allow Network Rail to close the crossing and provide a bridge and road alternative. Taking the fact that Network Rail said that the angle of the slope from the edge of the bridge over the level crossing to the corner of Searson Close was physically & technically viable then an improved road/bridge design is now on offer.
With reference to the drawings supplied, these are the basics: A=Manor corner, B=West r/bout, C=West end of bridge,
D=East end of bridge, F=East r/bout, G=Farmshop corner,. Whilst X=Searson Close, Y=Barriers & Z=Bridge Height
The 80 metre road length X to Y to rise up 5 metres to Z gives the steepest slope possible and Zc=Clearance Height.
Doubling the road length to 160 metres gives an average half of that steep incline with quite a bit of flexibility. So, if 200 metres is allowed from the roundabout (B) to the bridge edge (C), it should comfortably fit in. The distance between the bridge edge D to the east roundabout E is at least 230 metres. Therefore, by reversing the original 2012 slope, and going a nominal 40 metres on the flat from B then rising towards C, Zc and on to D it will give a slightly sloped bridge for drainage, max. height at D, then returning to ground level nominally 40 metres before E, will give a consistent incline and fall both sides and minimise the view of it from Searson Close properties.
The new section of road from A to B would initially carry all A1175 traffic in both directions, an inevitable consequence of no public funding being available to fund the whole bypass route to start with. Once the bypass is built then that section could change to allow vehicles to exit the village and just buses, cycles and agricultural vehicles to enter it.
All ordinary traffic to enter the village via Casewick Lane roundabout to minimise rat-runs to Bainton Road. The short section of Barholm Road F to G would need to be improved to an A road standard from declassified. Note: Vehicular access may need to be made under the end of the bridge at C for agricultural vehicles.
Access will be needed under the end of the bridge at D for internal vehicles, a fence and a diverted public footpath.
By providing a footpath alongside the road over the bridge and DDA slopes back to the crossing on both sides of the railway C-Y and D-G then the current footbridge could be removed or left as is. Otherwise DDA ramps could be attached to the current footbridge as per drawings previously prepared by Ken Otter in 2012.
This proposal is just for costing purposes. Only then can logical decisions be made as to the final design of any solution.