Dear Mr Groom

Reference : KTRO/23/003

I would like to comment on the proposed permanent traffic restriction on the U7003.

In brief I believe this restriction is both unnecessary and undesirable.  My reasons are set out below :

1. The decision to classify Rough Crag as a hazard to Road users appears to be based on inadequate evidence.  We have extensively questioned United Utilities and the Council about the extent of the investigations that they have undertaken and the findings of these investigations and they have shared with us a report prepared by Jacobs.  What is clear is that there has been no physical inspection of Rough Crag by suitably qualified Rock Slope Engineers. What has taken place is a drone has been used to take photographs of Rough Crag from some distance and these photographs have been examined by Jacobs’ staff sitting at a desk in Manchester.  Their conclusion was simply that there did appear to be some areas of loose rock and vegetation on parts of Rough Crag that appeared to have been there for a long time. No assessment has been made of the extent to which this material threatens road users (likelihood of this material falling - together with likelihood of the material reaching the road - together with likelihood of someone being under Rough Crag at that moment).  The Jacobs report findings have been seriously misrepresented and exaggerated by United Utilities, to the extent that UU now represent that the whole of Rough Crag is unstable and a major threat to the area. In the past 20 months no material has fallen on to the road from Rough Crag.  During Storm Arwen (one of the most severe weather events to hit the area in decades) one tree became dislodged from Rough Crag and fell on to the road, bringing down in its roots some small fragments of rock.  This tree fell from only 6 metres above the road an area that could easily and inexpensively be inspected and if necessary dressed using a cherry picker. 

2. No risk assessment has been undertaken to consider the actual risk to road users and neither has a comparative risk assessment been made to consider the relative risk of forcing cyclists to use the A591 as a diversion.  All of our work on this matter clearly indicates that any risk to cyclists travelling along the road beneath Rough Crag is far far smaller than the risk to cyclists from using the A591 along the east side of Thirlmere. We have notified the Health and Safety Executive of this matter and await their response. 

3. After 20 months of prevarication and exaggeration there is still no access to or through route along a considerable stretch of the U7003.  This road is a vital safe and enjoyable route for walkers, cyclists and motorists, the loss of which is having a seriously detrimental impact on safety, access and recreation. The history of closures along this road is appalling and reflects very poorly on the landowner *(United Utilities) and the Highways Authority. Is there any other public road in the Country with a worse closure record ? 

4. The root cause (pun intended) of the problems with the road is the extent of forestry that has been allowed to grow unmanaged along the road corridor.  Many of these trees were planted by Manchester Water Corporation in the early 20th century to deter public access to Thirlmere Reservoir.  The trees have been allowed to grow to excessive height whilst rooted on shallow soils and steep slopes as despite being mostly conifers they have not been harvested.  As a result, each time there is a storm, trees blow down across the road with monotonous regularity.  United Utilities then take many many months to clear fallen trees from the road and they don't bother clearing many other fallen trees blocking footpaths to and from the road (the path from Launchy Gill to the Tottering Stone is a good example of this). It took United Utilities 16 months to clear fallen trees from the road after the February 2018 storm referred to as “The Beast From The East”. If the forestry along the U7003 were better managed, clearing the excessively tall conifers from the road corridor and replanting with native deciduous species, the tree fall problems (together with the impact on rocks into which the tree roots have grown) would be removed. 

5. United Utilities are being allowed by Cumberland Council to erect fences, barriers and signs along the public road.  These fences and barriers are ineffective at keeping out walkers and cyclists determined to continue to access this area and avoid the treacherous diversion along the A591.  Yet the fences and barriers do create dangers for these road users as climbing over or around them (particularly with bikes) is hazardous. For decades there have been standard road signs beneath Rough Crag warning road users of the risk of rock fall.  These allow road users to make their own decision as to whether to proceed or not.  Why are such signs no longer considered adequate ? In many other mountainous regions in Europe there are regular rock falls on to public roads, particularly in the spring when ice thaws.  Such rocks are cleared and roads quickly reopened.  In extreme situations measures are taken to prevent such rock fall on to the road (such as dressing rock slopes, installing netting, erecting barriers etc).  If the risk of Rough Crag was assessed as high enough, some such measures could be taken.  Permission would not be withheld (or arguably even required) by Natural England if the measures were needed on the grounds of Health & Safety, as such considerations take precedence.  

6. The U7003 serves as an excellent route for walkers, cyclists and vehicles to access the area along the west side of Thirlmere Reservoir, along a safe, peaceful and beautiful road corridor.  The safety record of this stretch of road is excellent, with no recorded accidents at all. The A591 to the east of Thirlmere is by contrast a very dangerous road with a history of multiple road traffic accidents (RTA) and daily near misses. When the A591 is closed following a RTA or land slip the U7003 serves as a vital diversion.  It proved its worth following Storm Desmond when the A591 was blocked by land slips but the U7003 remained useable by emergency service vehicles, local residents, school buses and construction vehicles. Without the U7003 the diversion would require routing around Ullswater or the M6, both impossibly long and arduous diversions. 

7. People with limited mobility rely on the U7003 to access beautiful areas and take a scenic though route.  Closing this road would prevent such users from enjoying this route.  I understand the proposal to close this road to vehicles in 2010 was defeated on these grounds in 2010.  What has changed since then ?

8. The permanent closure of the road over the Thirlmere Dam to vehicles strikes me as ill thought through, very poorly consulted on and very little attention was brought to that proposed TRO at the time.  This closure was justified on the basis of the Dam road being narrowed (yet it remains wider than parts of the alternative route) and even that waves blowing up the Reservoir could threaten motorists !  The closure was even justified on the basis of undefined Covid-19 measures and this explanation still appears on the road signs at the junction of the Dam Road and the A591.  This Dam Road closure makes access to and egress from the U7003 at the North junction with the A591 very dangerous. Indeed it is totally unclear whether turning into the U7003 at this junction from the North or leaving the U7003 to the South by crossing the central reservation of the dual carriageway is permissible or not. If it isn't permissible to cross the central reservation, new road signs are required. And the alternative would require a U turn somewhere on the A591. Could the Highways Department please clarify what they believe to be the appropriate safe routing for motor vehicles at this junction ? 

9. United Utilities recently proposed to build a Cycle and Pedestrian track along part of the west shore of Thirlmere Reservoir as far away from Rough Crag as they could manage.  This would have involved a steep track from the U7003 down to and back up from the water and a causeway to be built along the edge of the reservoir. This track would have presented many additional risks to route users including the risk of falling trees, navigating steep slopes and being adjacent to deep water.  Again this strikes me as a poorly thought through, costly and unnecessary diversion. Is this idea being pursued ? 

You should be aware that a Petition has been started objecting to the proposed U7003 road closure and that within 24 hours this petition was signed by over 1,500 people.  The extent of objection to, anger at and resentment of the proposed road closure is substantial.  To date I have found no one who believes the total closure of this route is either desirable or necessary, other than United Utilities staff and Cumberland Council.  If you would like to view the petition and read the objections, here is a link to it : https://chng.it/xYFsLP8H 

Please do not allow this route to be closed.  Please do everything you can to see it reopened as soon as possible.  And please let me know of any future consultation on or investigation of this matter.

I remain available for any discussion about these matters and would happily share the evidence that we have gathered.  Please do not hesitate to contact me at any time by any means.

Yours sincerely

Mark Hatton
Ambleside
email : mhatton304@aol.com