REPAIRS and improvements have been carried out in and around Barnard Castle cemetery following complaints to the town council.
Last month, Cllr Roger Peat, chairman of the services committee, reported that concerns about potholes and mud on the approach to the cemetery from Victoria Road had been raised.
Meanwhile, inside the graveyard, a pile of soil and boulders had been dumped against the wooden boundary fence and this had been the subject to a separate complaint.
Both have now been addressed.
Durham County Council’s clean and green team moved quickly to remove the soil and boulders.
And despite question marks over who is actually responsible for the approach road, the town council stepped in with Cllr Peat and a group of volunteers spreading hardcore over the pock-marked surface in an effort to improve the track.
Durham County Council insisted it is not responsible for the track, but Cllr Peat said the important thing was to get the work done so hearses and other vehicles were not jolted as loved ones were taken to their final place of rest.
With other graveyards adjacent to the approach road as well as the town cemetery, Cllr Peat said Durham thought the responsibility may rest with the churches – however, no-one knows for sure.
“A question mark remains as to exactly who is responsible,” he said.
On maps, the track is simply labelled “unmarked road” .
“The town council had some hardcore left from another job we were doing on paths so we could get on with the job,” added Cllr Peat.
“We had got ten tons as it was a cheaper option than getting dumpy bags.”
He added: “Well done to the county council for tidying up inside the cemetery in such a timely fashion.”
![A COUNTY councillor is backing a campaign to get a pedestrian crossing in Staindrop. Frustrated parish councillors in the village summoned their county council representative Cllr George Richardson to their latest meeting to discuss several issues, including the call for a safe way to cross the A688. Earlier this year their request for a crossing was turned down by the county council’s highways officers. Parish council chairman Jonothan Raper described the reasons for the refusal as “spurious” and called on Cllr Richardson to support their campaign. He added: “One of the arguments they made was there is no clear line of desire when they studied the village – well this isn’t a clear line of desire because there isn’t a crossing, people cross whenever they can. “When the lollipop person was there, one of the things I noticed was people would walk all the way down to the lollipop person to cross the road to go to the shop or to go to the school.” He added a problem of parking at the primary school is exacerbated because people are too afraid to walk their children across the road. Cllr Richardson said he had supported previous attempts for a crossing point with the first being made about 15 years ago. He added: “We went fairly well down the road with that and they looked into it. The only recommended place was where the bus stop is and to get the visibility splays, people on the other side of the road would lose their parking. “That didn’t go down well so it just died a death.” Cllr Raper said he suspected the real reason for the officers’ refusal was the cost of installing a crossing. He added that much of the cost could be recovered from savings made on not having to employ a lollipop patrol. Cllr Raper said: “A lollipop person only provides a benefit of crossing for three hours of the day. You are getting 21 extra hours of crossing time [with a pedestrian crossing].” Cllr Richardson said he would raise the issue with the county council’s cabinet member for highways, Cllr John Shuttleworth.](https://teesdalemercury.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/georgeR-120x86.jpg)
