[ First Message Last | Table of Contents | <- Digest -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

msgSender linesSubject
1 John Upham [J.E.Upham@re32BOAT in Windlesham, Bagshot under threat
2 alan kind [alan@highwaym23Re: Why claim BOAT
3 USER [john.o'reilly@virg22Re: BOAT in Windlesham, Bagshot under threat
4 John Upham [J.E.Upham@re29Re: BOAT in Windlesham, Bagshot under threat
5 Brian Lewis [brian@limb.18ratione tenurae
6 Richard Brownlee [10136026Re: BOAT in Windlesham, Bagshot under threat
Majordomo About the digest
------------------------------ [ Message 1 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 970507 -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]


Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 11:15:18 +0100 (BST)
From: John Upham <J.E.Upham@reading.ac.uk>
Subject: BOAT in Windlesham, Bagshot under threat

Hello,
   An article in my local paper last Thursday reads as 
   follows:

   "Moves to downgrade Vicarage Lane, Bagshot, from a byway open
    to all traffic to a bridleway are in hand, members of
    Windlesham Parish Council have been told. It is hoped this can
    be done through the magistrates court."

    I don't have a street atlas with me today but I'd guess that
    this lane is at around
  
    SU929638 since that is where the church is and I am using
    Landranger sheet 186(B3) to guess from. This area is also
    on sheet 175. 

    Do people from this group try and stop this kind of downgrading?

    Best Wishes,

    John

John Upham, Department of Construction Management,
University of Reading, Berks., RG6 6AW, UK.
Email: j.e.upham@reading.ac.uk,
WWW URL: http://www.rdg.ac.uk/~kcsupham/
Voice: +44 1734 875123 x7179, Fax: +44 1734 313856

------------------------------
[ <- Message 2 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 970507 -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 08:53:37 +0100
From: alan kind <alan@highwayman.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Why claim BOAT

In message <970505163618_-1064621914@emout05.mail.aol.com>,
Tilbo@aol.com writes
>Hi
>Speaking to Paul Wells of the Dorset LR+RR club.  He proposed that instead of
	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 9 lines)]
>Thoughts anybody?
>DT

>From ADK
There is a story, possibly apocryphal, that Dorset did indeed do this
some few years ago (then made a s116 order!). Wiltshire has done it
quite happily. Northumberland is currently doing it - not on 1929 info,
but on the basis that the road in question is incontrovertibly a pre-
1835 maintainable highway (which is what counts). Short article coming
up in B&B soon.
A
-- 
Alan kind

------------------------------
[ <- Message 3 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 970507 -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 16:18:43 +0100
From: USER <john.o'reilly@virgin.net>
Subject: Re: BOAT in Windlesham, Bagshot under threat

John Upham wrote:
> Hello,
>    An article in my local paper last Thursday reads as
	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 28 lines)]
> WWW URL: http://www.rdg.ac.uk/~kcsupham/
> Voice: +44 1734 875123 x7179, Fax: +44 1734 313856

Hi John

Yes we do!!

Can you please supply the address for the County Councils and Telephone 
number.

Thank you for the infomation

Cheers John

------------------------------
[ <- Message 4 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 970507 -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 17:58:34 +0100 (BST)
From: John Upham <J.E.Upham@reading.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: BOAT in Windlesham, Bagshot under threat

On Tue, 6 May 1997, USER wrote:

> John Upham wrote:
> > Hello,
	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 42 lines)]
> Thank you for the infomation
> Cheers John
  Is http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/

  of any help?

  Tel: 0181 541 8800
  fax: 0181 541 8914
  email: webmaster@surreycc.gov.uk

  Good luck!

  John

John Upham, Department of Construction Management,
University of Reading, Berks., RG6 6AW, UK.
Email: j.e.upham@reading.ac.uk,
WWW URL: http://www.rdg.ac.uk/~kcsupham/
Voice: +44 1734 875123 x7179, Fax: +44 1734 313856

------------------------------
[ <- Message 5 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 970507 -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 21:13:56 +0100
From: Brian Lewis <brian@limb.demon.co.uk>
Subject: ratione tenurae

Hi All 
Can anyone give me the true meaning of the classification

Ratione Tenurae (RT)

There are a number of roads in the Yorkshire Dales with this
classification, the explination that was read of the Maps in
Northallerton Office said 'open to all traffic but maintained at the
landowners expense with reductions to his rates in lue'

Is this correct?

Brian 

------------------------------
[ <- Message 6 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 970507 -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: 06 May 97 19:19:45 EDT
From: Richard Brownlee <101360.3273@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Re: BOAT in Windlesham, Bagshot under threat

Hi John

Thanks for the information.  I will get onto the council tomorrow to see what is
up.

The grid refs for this lane (RoW 170 - Vicarage Lane) are SU 893641 to 906631.
The lane's status after reclassification from RUPP is BOAT / Bridleway.  The
first 630 metres from the church is BOAT (up to approx 902636) with the rest as
Bridleway.  I don't know what happens to the status of the lane after it crosses
the Berkshire border.

I have never driven it so cannot comment on it's use.  

Don - are there any records on the database for use of this lane?

Regards

Richard
Surrey RoW rep - AWDC

                 

------------------------------
[ <- Message 7 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 970507 -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

  END OF * LIST DIGEST 
 Input:  messages 6 lines 310 [forwarded 80 whitespace 89]
 Output: lines 231 [content 158  forwarded 13 (cut  67) whitespace 63]
[ First Message | Table of Contents | <- Digest 970507 -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]