Hamsterley road closure plan won’t derail forest plans

County officers want to permanently close the main road into Hamsterley but say it will not have any impact to a proposed £32m tourism development at the nearby forest.

The C31 Crakehill Bank to Hamsterley was initially closed in December 2022 when the road began slipping towards the River Wear.

About £1.7m was budgeted to reinforce the road but officers say further slippage made that unviable, and realigning the road would now cost about £10m.

Durham County Council’s cabinet will consider the road closure next week.

In a report to the cabinet, structures manager Andrew Lough said: “The option to realign the highway is not financially viable, the cost far outweighs any benefits gained.

“This high-cost solution prompted the consideration of an alternative which would involve permanently closing the C31 Crakehill Bank and utilising the current diversionary route, which is via the A68, Toft Hill, Diddridge Lane, Daniel Lane and the C30 as the main access to Hamsterley village from the A68.”

He added that closing the road and making improvements to the diversion route would cost about £1.7m.

Regarding Forestry England’s development plans, he said: “Planning have reviewed the impact of closing the C31 Crakehill Bank permanently on the Hamsterley Forest, Forest Holidays/Go Ape planning applications and have confirmed that the closure would have no material impact.”

Coincidently, last week the county council’s highways department offered no objection to the development.

Forest resident Andy Richardson, who is campaigning against Forestry England’s plans, has challenged the highways authority’s decision not to object, and says the report proposing the closure of the C31 confirms it as a major route to the forest.

He said: “This report makes the issue much clearer.

“The council itself identifies the C31 as an access route to the forest and proposes permanently transferring traffic onto the alternative network.

“It also accepts that Linburn Beck Bridge requires additional road-narrowing signage.

“Against that background, residents are entitled to see the evidence supporting the conclusion that permanently losing the C31 has no material highway impact on the new development.

“The issue is whether the remaining rural roads can safely accommodate existing traffic together with the additional visitor, servicing and construction traffic generated by the development.”