Log In

Reset Password
BERMUDA | RSS PODCAST

Railway Trail: pedestrian tunnel plan rejected

Railway Trail near Winton Hill Lane(Photograph by Mark Tatem)

Plans to construct a tunnel on a section of the Railway Trail in Hamilton Parish have been rejected after the National Parks Commission expressed concerns.

The planning application, submitted by the Ministry of Public Works, proposed erecting a pedestrian tunnel north of 19 and 21 Winton Hill Lane, where a rock cut has been deemed a risk to those using the trail. While temporary fencing has been erected at the site, the ministry stated that remediation work should be carried out quickly to protect the public.

The proposed tunnel would have been made with reinforced concrete with backfill composed of compacted soil connecting the structure to the rock cuts.

According to planning documents, the National Parks Commission (NPC) expressed concerns about the project and its impact on the trail. Documents stated: “The commission unanimously expressed their preference for a non-tunnel option as they felt the tunnel would lead to a decrease of trail use, would create a perception of lack of safety (particularly among women) and it would create more maintenance for the Government of Bermuda.”

While a local engineering firm offered several alternative schemes — including the instillation of retaining walls, gabion walls and rock netting — Public Works argued that none of the alternative plans would work on the site. It said that netting would not work as there was not sufficient anchorage in the rock face, while the proposed walls would not be enough to retain the cliff face if it were to collapse.

“The NPC admitted that they did not have the engineering expertise to ascertain between the two conflicting options,” the documents stated. Therefore, the NPC objected to the proposal based on the perceived detrimental impact that the tunnel would have on the Railway Trail.

“The Bermuda Plan 2008 Planning Statement requires the support of the NPC and, as they have objected to it, the application is therefore recommended for refusal.”

The application formally went before the Development Applications Board on September 2, and was refused planning permission.