[ First Message | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ Message 1 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Ian Boddison" <mbcx4ib1@mail1.mcc.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 09:42:55 BST
Subject: Re: They're at it again
.....
> Links up nicely with Temple Balsall lane to Piercel End, and
thus is a
> neccessary route for the public.
And it just so happens that I am in Coventry this weekend for a GLASS
committee meeting :-)
Might just take a look if I get time.
Cheers,
Bod
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 2 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 99 11:05 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorset problem
In a mail, TS states
<<< And how it contradicts the claim made under oath, by Mr Slade of DCC,
that theUCRs in Dorset will continue to be available for recreation. (this
was atanother s116 case. DCC are making a habit of this).>>>
Exact reference please for the other 116 please Tim it will help to pin
him down.
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 3 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 06:37:38 -0500
Subject: Re: widths
> Do you submit? You want more do yer?
Where do you get them from?
Yes I can use any amount of them. Will some one send that last one to
Solihul?
Chris
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 4 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 06:37:35 -0500
Subject: Byways
for info.
Dear Mr Marsden
I must apologise for not responding sooner to you.
Firstly, one of the issues you raised by way of complaint was the fact that
you were not consulted about the TRO on Roman Road. Having investigated
the
matter, we are satisfied that you were given an assurance by the former
County Council that you would be consulted but it appears this assurance
was
not communicated to officers of the new Council. We apologise for this.
Fortunately, you discovered about the TRO from other routes and have been
able to express your views.
Secondly, you complained about the fact that we have not properly consulted
with organisations. We are satisfied that we did consult in line with the
statutory requirements though we accept that a larger list of organisations
could have been consulted. We are now developing a list of all the
organisations we wish to consult when considering the making of a TRO.
Matters relating to the lane at Leysfield and Roman Road are progressing.
I
understand you will be seeing the Director of Environment, Mr Steve James,
in April and that he will no doubt be in a position to let you know the
outcome of our investigations at that time.
Yours sincerely
Duncan Forbes
Legal Practice Manager
Herefordshire Council
Tel: 01432 260299
Fax: 01432 260206
e-mail: dforbes@herefordshire.gov.uk
Not a lot of comfort or regret for not having consulted as per promises or
as per the DETR guidelines.
Chris
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 5 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 06:37:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Re(2): Cycling on footways
> >> two occasions. Both
> >> were on organised events on private land, (called
> >> 'diversification' by the
> >> farmer)
> Not my experience in the Yorkshire Dales, Derbyshire
> and Wales. Increasingly it's the 2 wheeled trail
> motorbikes that are becoming popular and causing
> environmental damage, noise and pollution.
Having listened to the drone of two large tractors extracting beet for the
last three days 1/2 mile away, - No complaint mind you - and having seen
them chew up an easement across our land, then going out to Wapley Hill
fort For some peace and quiet on Monday, but listening to private aircraft
every 6 mins or so from Shobden, and yet more tractors when their noise
subsided, I would be quiet happy to hear a group of trail bikes every week
or two, come and go. What I do not want, and it can be difficult to tell
the difference at a casual glance is illegal, uninsured, noisier scramble
bikes, riding anywhere, round and round, probably fast to avoid challenge.
Now how do you know which you heard, or caused your environmental damage
and pollution?
> >> When you consider that recreational vehicles account
> >> for about 1 mile out
> >> of every 3,000 travelled off the surfaced road, I get
> >> the distinct
> >> impression, it is a case of I Can't / Don't want to,
> >> so no one else should?
> motorbikes that are becoming popular and causing
[ truncated by list-digester (was 12 lines)]
> >> so no one else should?
> Where does this figure come from?
Look at it which ever way you like. Try to come up with cogent evidence to
cast doubt!
How many Thousands of Landrover 130's, and 110's do the Electricity Boards
own? They do not buy them for posing in the Kings Road! And the Water
Board? And the Gas Board ok, Transco, And BT have 1 or 2 (thousand), And
the environment Agency. And the local Council. Oh and dont forget the
[spamkill: [Mm]erchant input: %s] Police have a few. Then there are the
Vets, seed merchants,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 6 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "TRF" <trf@trf.freeuk.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 14:56:18 -0000
Subject: Re: widths
From: Dave Tilbury <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
>Do you submit? You want more do yer?
Interesting reading that, yeah, give us some more.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 7 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 12:07:58 EST
Subject: Re: Re(2): Cycling on footways
In a message dated 25.3.99 11:46:00 GMT Standard Time, Byway@Compuserve.com
writes:
<< Don't forget th sixth power rule for increasing
damage with weight. >>
To be picky, the formula I remember says it is the fourth power. For those
whose calculator batteries have gone flat, this means that if you double the
weight of a vehicle it does 2x2x2x2 times as much damage, ie 16 times as much.
The average tractor is at least twice as heavy as the average recreational
4x4.
Knowing this, I do not know how they have the gall to charge Mopeds with Road
Fund Duty.
Tim Stevens
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 8 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 12:07:57 EST
Subject: Re: Byways
In a message dated 25.3.99 11:40:03 GMT Standard Time, Byway@Compuserve.com
writes:
<< Not a lot of comfort or regret for not having consulted as per promises or
as per the DETR guidelines.
>>
But a lot better than the four-letter then three-letter reply you would get
elsewhere.
Tim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 9 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 16:12:05 -0000
Subject: Re: NF
Referring back to one of the earlier mails, there are quite a number of
railway crossings, so the Railway Maps could be a very good source of
information.
Yes. These railway bridges are all Definitive bridleways - with no
definitive path leading to or from.
The Verderers (the New forest commoners) are not too chuffed at having
their powers usurped. They will fight for sure.
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 10 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 99 19:46 GMT
Subject: Best Free Entertainment today.....
I just came away from, well, lets protect the *innocent* by saying that it
was a Local Govt meeting 'somewhere in mainland Britain'. A
self-confessed GLEAM member had to have explained to him _before_ the
meeting that vehicles were not allowed to drive on Footpaths (this seemed
to be a revelation to him) and it had to be explained to him _during_ the
meeting that Byways were *P* RoW....
He seemed to be speaking from a prepared sheet in front of him, obviously
primed up, Id have given a *lot* to know who wrote it out for him.
So much free entertainment I'm glad I missed Crossroads for it.. ?Whats
that? tonights edition wasn't on? Oh, must have been ruined by those 4x4
Johnnies.........;-)
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 11 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: geoff@cix.co.uk (Geoff Campbell)
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 22:45 +0000 (GMT Standard Time)
Subject: Re: NF
> The Verderers (the New forest commoners) are not too chuffed at having
> their powers usurped. They will fight for sure.
And we should be fighting alongside them. Who knows, just maybe, if we
fight for their rights, they might start fighting for ours.
Regards,
Geoff
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 12 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 20:30:39 -0500
Subject: Alleged Public Carriage Road/Public Footpath M168 : Heronfield to
Chadwick Lane,
I note it is only an alleged Pubic CR.
The questions were:-
Will you please supply further details of your proposed actions on the
Public Carriage Road from Heronfield to
Chadwick Lane (also known as Public Footpath M168), and whether we should
be gearing up for a fight or not.
At this early stage, and as your email is probably not included within you
mail monitoring system, please
a) acknowledge receipt,
b) advise of your stated response time scales
c) advise of your Monitoring Officer's name and contact details
d) supply forms for BOAT DMMO applications, unless you wish standard
pro-forma sheets to be used.
What does he mean by N/A for Monitoring Officer. Is he, does he not have
one? Is he saying (he thinks) we have no cause for complaint?
What are the recommendation to cttee?
====================================
Subject: Alleged Public Carriage Road/Public Footpath M168 : Heronfield to
Chadwick Lane, Solihull
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 14:21:45 -0000
Dear Mr Marsden
(a) I acknowledge receipt of your e-mail of 24 March 1999.
(b) Response time to letters - 5 working days. Definitive response
depends
on question asked.
(c) N/A
(d) We do not have a form for BOAT DMMO applications.
It is envisaged that the matter will be reported to Committee on 12 April
1999.
G.W.Kenneth
Mary Poxon
jdt Contract Monitoring
Solihull MBC - Environment Services
0121 704 6550/6432
Thank you for your response.
1 Could you please advise if this road is on the List of streets?
2 Do you consider Roads shown on the List of Streets to be vehicular?
3 What are the recommendations to Commitee?
4 Is this in the Landowners interest, is he/she in favour of this, and
will it be of benefit to him/her?
5 Is the affected landowner underwriting the costs of this application?
6 I asked if you would please "c) advise of your Monitoring Officer's name
and contact details" You say "N/A", does this mean the council does not
have one? If so would you have a form of complaint to the LG Ombudsman, I
might use please?
7 Have you considered the actions that other councils have taken recently
following s116 applications, and also the possibility it is contrary to
Government advice.
8 I do intend this is either dropped, or it IS in the public interest. If
not I will make my 'dissatisfaction' of you carrying out a duty, before a
power, which is patently UV, heard.
9 Can you please advise in what way this is in the public's interest?
10, The sooner this can be settled, the less closer inspection to other
instances of dereliction of the duty of the council is made.
Is ths a tad strong?
Chris
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 13 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 20:30:43 -0500
Subject: Week in week out BBC1
> Last nights program focused on the Right to Roam and on disputed ROW.
> The main voice for the land owners and the CLA was non other than Julian
> Salmon. He did not give any impression that he himself was against
> access in the countryside and just spoke out against the RTR. He could
Actually that very very nice Mr Fish is as keen on access as the next
obstructor. He must be, he is on the Powys RW forum.
He has A UCR running through hs Fm, Hoddle Farm. But you may have to remind
him. he keeps forgetting
He said he had no knowledge of it once or twice when we went there. He
gets his Mrs to stand out making it obvious that she is writing your number
down, and the branches in te lane are 'just how they fell' Every time.
The CLA did force him to remove a 5ft gate and put back a 10 ft gate.
Four years earlier he appiled for a 16. It was thrown out. But he keeps
forgetting.
I do have sympathy with the view, how do you exclude people from non F2R
areas, and I made that point in a response.
Chris
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 14 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
[spamkill: user@ input: %s] Return-Path: <user@rsltd.softnet.co.uk>
[spamkill: user@ input: %s] From: Adrian Pickersgill
<user@rsltd.softnet.co.uk>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 15 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 22:32:49 -0000
Subject: Re: Best Free Entertainment today.....
Info for the name and shame page please?
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 16 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 22:50:43 -0000
Subject: Re: widths
An extract from:
"LEVEL 1 - 1 OF 1 CASE
Brand & Another v Philip Lund (Consultants) Ltd.
Chancery Division
HEARING-DATES: 18 July 1989
18 July 1989
Moving to the next map. twenty years later in 1898 came a new edition of
the Ordnance Survey. The road is now called Ramscote Lane. Further, the
section of Lund Consultants' land called Ramscote Wood has appeared on an
area of over 18 acres. previously designated as arable. Similarly with the
section now known as Garretts Wood. Another feature clearly shown on this
map is a gate across the Lane, near the Chesham Vale end. The existence of
such a gate, unless locked, is not inconsistent with the existence of a
vehicular highway. It may simply be a means of restraining cattle and
horses."
~~~~~~~~~
Extract:
Carriageways, Bridleways and Driftways
The English Common Law recognises three classes of highway: ·
Carriageway/Cartway · Bridleway · Footway
The common law does not recognise 'driftways' or 'drove roads' as a
'stand-alone' class of highway, although such can exist in law in Scotland.
The common law is silent on whether or not a public right of driftway (i.e.
driving cattle – in the sense of stock – from public place to public place)
can attach to a public bridleway. The General Highways Acts of 1773 and
1835 do not throw any significant light on this.
The answer is that all public cart roads include the right to drive stock.
In Suffolk County Council v. Mason [1979] AC at 710, Lord Diplock states:
'A full highway, or 'cartway' is one over which the public have rights of
way (1) on foot, (2) riding on or accompanied by a beast of burden and (3)
with vehicles and cattle. A 'bridleway' is a highway over which the rights
of passage are cut down by the exclusion of the right of passage with
vehicles and sometimes, though not invariably, the exclusion of the right
of driftway…'.
ADK
~~~~~~~~~
Defoe:
"The cross-roads, which are generally narrow, are yet broad enough in most
places for two carriages to pass; "
"Middlesex. There lies through this large parish the greatest road in
England, and the most frequented, especially by cattle for Smithfield
market; this great road has so many branches, and lies for so long a way
through the parish, and withal has the inconvenience of a clayey ground,
and no gravel at hand, that, modestly speaking, the parish is not able to
keep it in repair; by which means several cross-roads in the parish lie
wholly unpassable, and carts and horses (and men too) have been almost
buried in holes and sloughs; and the main road itself has for many years
lain in a very ordinary condition, which occasioned several motions in
Parliament to raise a toll at Highgate for the performance of what it was
impossible the parish should do, and yet was absolute necessary to be
done."
"Besides these, there are cross-roads, bye-roads, and lanes, which must
also be looked after; and that some of them may be put into condition,
others may be wholly slighted and shut up, or made drift-ways,
bridle-ways, or foot-ways, as may be thought convenient by the counties."
Full text available on the hants lanes web site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
King James 1 being wont to spend much time at Royston kept up acrimonious
correspondence with Justices of Peace on Condition of highways especially
those he would pass. In 1609 James Norton Surveyor of the King's Highways
seems to be first to hold that office, and in 1619 granted fines for
non-amendment of highways for life. In 1622 the use of 4 wheeled carts
or waggons was forbidden, no 2 wheeled carts should be loaded with 20cwt or
drawn by more than 5 horses. Whilst other roads were equally execrable.
"So utterly neglected were some of the roads at this time that on occasion
a stretch of road would degenerate into such a state that it was completely
impossible for any sort of traffic to make its way along it, and another
track had to be beaten out alongside. This was a perfectly legal
proceeding, for although the King and his people possessed nothing more
than the right of free passage along the highway, that at least they did
possess, and if it could not be obtained, they could seek it else-where,
even though by so doing they might destroy crops or pasture."
"In 1626 the Earl of Dorset was obliged to send a peremptory message
through Sir John Danvers to the Surveyors of the Highways in the parish of
St Martin in-the-Fields. He forcibly expressed 'his just dislike that
nothing is done towards the repair of the highway between the West Gate of
St James Park and the stone bridge at the edge of Chelsea fields. If a
satisfactory account be not given before 8 o'clock the next morning, the
Earl will conceive it a continued contempt, which he will proceed to
censure, and punish as in his wisdom shall seem fit.' "
~~~~~~~~~~~~
"erecting a gate across a path even if it is not locked or fastened ...is
a public nuisance at common law" James v Haywood 1630) [bb194]
~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks to all those on the list who pass this kind'a stuff this way.
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 17 -> | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
END OF * LIST DIGEST
Input: messages 16 lines 838 [forwarded 46 whitespace 0]
Output: lines 603 [content 482 forwarded 42 (cut 4) whitespace 0]
[ First | Table of Contents | <- Digest 990326 -> | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]