CAMPAIGNERS have won a key battle in their fight to stop the ‘unfair’ closure of a Saddleworth level crossing.
But the future of Moorgate Halt now rests with the Government, namely secretary of state for transport Louise Haigh.
Network Rail insists closing the foot crossing, which lies on Dark Lane in Uppermill and is on a right of way, is the only way the TransPennine Route Upgrade – which will see the line electrified over the coming years – can deal with what is classed as a ‘major intervention.

The body told a meeting of Oldham Council’s Highway Regulation Committee on Thursday, July 18 replacing it with a footbridge, which previously received planning permission, would cost in the region of £4.5 million because of a unique design needed.
Using another footpath was ruled out after one of the landowners would not allow work on it, while a second fell for similar reasons.
Installing miniature stop lights (MSL) was priced at £1.2 million while leaving it as it is would increase the risk of collisions by 80 per cent.

However, arguments against closing the crossing, which has been in place since 1845 and the right of way which has been there since the 14th century, won out.
Cllr Peter Davis said: “All the years that crossing has been there, people have crossed it on a regular basis – they use it all the time and are reliant on it.
“Network Rail provides the service and part of what they need to do us keep what’s already there.
“You can’t just say, ‘We don’t want to pay the money, we want to close it off and there’s no alternative,’ and people are just inconvenienced by it.
“I don’t think it’s right. I don’t think it’s fair.

“They need to either make the crossing adequate or put a bridge there, which as agreed previously but they seemed to have changed their mind on it.
“It’s not fair.”
Cllr Max Woodvine added: “In Saddleworth, we pride ourselves on our footpaths and this is a very important and popular route, which I’ve walked along many, many times.
“The simple fact is if Network Rail’s not got the money to put a bridge in place, they should leave the footpath as it is and allow people to use it freely.”
Network Rail detailed why it had concluded the best thing was to close Moorgate Halt.
Documents stated: “Due to new signal positions following the completion of this phase of the TransPennine Route Upgrade project, a pedestrian footbridge would not be suitable at this location.

“The erection of a footbridge here would block signal sighting for oncoming train drivers and would affect the running of the operational railway.
“These signals cannot be moved since the distance between these and other signals must give train drivers sufficient notice to start braking before a red signal.”
And Vicki Bentley, liability negotiations advisor for Network Rail, told the meeting: “During the detailed design process, various engineering difficulties came to light, which drive the cost from £1.5 million to approximately £4.5 million.
“As a public body, Network Rail must adhere to the treasury’s managing public money principles and consider more cost-effective options.

“A rights of way officer and I walked along a footpath that uses a bridge south of Moorgate and it has since been agreed this route is treacherous, steep, unstable in places and would require significant improvement work to bring it up to a suitable standard.
“We’ve written to the landowner, whose land this footpath traverses, asking if they would agree in principle to some improvement works, but they were reluctant to agree as they felt it would change the nature and use of the path to their detriment.
“We were asked to explore a possible diversion via Den Lane. We did, including meeting with affected landowners, but one would not agree to this.
“Network Rail has a duty of care under managing public money principles and the significant cost to the taxpayer cannot be justified.
“Therefore, the extinguishment of the restricted byway over the level crossing is then only option to close the level crossing and keep the public safe.”
However, John Walton, footpath secretary of Oldham Ramblers, countered a ‘more simple design’ could be used for the bridge.
He said: “The initial cost was used for a Rolls Royce bridge, which in my opinion was way over the top compared to other footbridges I researched.
“I’ve redesigned the bridge using other material, which would bring the overall cost down to about £85,000.
“This level crossing has been in place since 1845, so we can wait another two years to see how a new team can look at all the options, including a cheaper bridge.
“I propose this closure be refused.”
Mr Walton’s views were backed by Roger Blackmore, of Saddleworth Parish Council, and Kevin Lawton, of the Wednesday Walkers group.
The parish authority says it is ‘encouraged’ by the decision after its members unanimously agreed to fight and continue to fight for an alternative safe crossing.
It also says Network Rail ‘failed to analyse fully the case for warning stop lights to be integrated with the signalling system at a much lower cost and conveying modern safety benefits to pedestrians.’
Chair of the Parish Council, Cllr Barbara Beeley, said: “The danger in approving the closure of the crossing is that Network Rail or its successor will be in the position of not having to pay for any safe solution to the detriment of local people.
“We must do all we can to make sure this does not happen.”
And Cllr Mark Kenyon said: “Purely by blocking it up, considering the amount of traffic there, it’s not going to stop it being used.
“It might solve Network Rail’s liability for people crossing it but it’s not going to stop people using the crossing.
“Presumably Network Rail has always known it’s there, so they should’ve had plans to deal with it, not just get rid of it because it’s an inconvenience.”
Chair of the panel, Cllr Graham Shuttleworth, admitted he believed there is a ‘safety concern’ around the application.
But now it has been refused, Network Rail can apply to the secretary of state for permission for Moorgate Halt to be closed.
I use this crossing on a fairly regular basis and if they wont put a footbridge in place than this will involve either crossing the lines somewhere else that’s far more dangerous or making a detour of at least about a mile.
Closing the crossing will therefor massively increase the, (very small,) hazard not decrease it.
One again; if it isn’t broken, (and it isn’t,) then don’t fix it.