msg	Sender	lines	Subject
1	TimLARA@aol.com	26	Re: Gates on RUPPS
2	Chris Marsden [Byway@com	36	Re: S116 on Byways @ Llandovery, Carm.
	Majordomo		About the digest

------------------------------ [ Message 1 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 970520 -> | Search Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 07:04:33 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Gates on RUPPS

There is no specific minimum width for a gate on a RUPP (or if there is, I
have not found it). What there is, is a minimum width of ten feet for a gate
on a carriageway, so for all those RUPPs which turn out to be carriageways
these gates are illegal obstructions. For the others, they may well still be
obstructions unless they were there when the DM was prepared and were noted
in the 'statement' as a limitation. An HA can authorise a new gate on a
footpath or bridleway, if land is being brought into use for agriculture,
etc, but not just at a whim, and in any case they must be authorised in
writing, and when so authorised, noted on the statement by due process.
Putting a new narrow gate across a RUPP is prejudging the reclassification
process, and so prejudicing it. Not the action of an HA with a duty to assert
and protect, do you think?
If the HA has changed in the unitary process, it might be possible to get
them to admit that the previous authority was over-enthusiastic in allowing
gates (or perhaps did not even know about them), and to get something done.
It is easier to say They got it wrong than We got it wrong.

Let us all know how you get on...

Cheers, tim

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 11:23:50 -0400
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: S116 on Byways @ Llandovery, Carm.

> 1. Don't be a gentleman.
> 2. Abate obstructions if they're not not removed fairly soon after your
> complaint.
> 3. USE IT OR LOOSE IT!!! (No use is no use at all in the Magistrates
Court.)
> 1. Don't be a gentleman.

Yes sound advice, but I seem to be the only one willing to abate a
nuisance.

I am doing this slowly at Stockton Ride with 8 x  5ft gates to go.

The bollards I remove at Roman road come back bigger than ever as soon as I
remove them, so that is now back to H&WCC legal dept

I sometimes wonder if it is better not to start a complaint unless we are
able to pursue it all the way.

Westhope coalbunker is more of a problem.  They are looking at ways of
avoiding the problem.  I am cutting the trees down, most gone three to go, 
  I will put a note through door, then if I can get some one to help, I
will winch it out of the way if I can, but that might be a bit
confontational. They are never there when I call.

CC are still putting 5ft gates on IA public CRs.  where they are on map as
bridleway. They know this, and threaten to take ten years if we ask them
nicely to put it on as a BOAT.

Yup weekend good and enlightening.

CU

------------------------------

  END OF * LIST DIGEST 
 Input:  messages 2 lines 81 [forwarded 5 whitespace 17]
 Output: lines 116 [content 42  forwarded 5 (cut  0) whitespace 16]