[ First Message | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ Message 1 -> | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Sue Jeggo <derek.sue@virgin.net>
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2000 10:42:57 +0000
Subject: Re: Public Inquiries Inquiry
One thing that comes to mind is the quality of questions on the 'user evidence
forms'. For most people, (i.e.casual users) its the one and only time they'll
ever see a form. If there was one standard form, used nationally and produce by
the P Ins which had all the questions on it that were relevant, and worded
correctly, it should make the Inspectors job easier, and reduce the risk of
information being ommitted and/or questions not answered correctly. Also, if the
evidence forms had a map on them showing clearly the route under consideration
it would help.
Anything to make life easyier.
Sue
TimLARA@aol.com wrote:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 2 -> | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "John O'Reilly" <JOR@oreilly69.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2000 14:54:54 -0000
Subject: Ignorance is alive and well in Hertfordshire
Following is a copy of a set of minutes from the Colney Heath Parish Council
meeting held on 8th December 1999.
Colney Heath Parish is in the District of St. Albans, Hertfordshire.
Present : Cllr C. Brazier
: Cllr D. Crump from 8.15p.m.)
: Cllr Mrs S. Defoe
: Cllr F.S. Ellis
: Cllr Miss A. Thomas
: Cllr Mrs. J. Jeffery
: Mrs C. Pluck - Clerk to the Council
: plus 5 residents (I do have the names)
7. Open Spaces
c) Footpaths & Bridleways
Received Cllr. Brazier's report on footpaths in the parish.
Cllr. Brazier reported on problems with footpaths 51 and 51a, which run from
Roestock Lane to the A414. Local 4-wheel drive groups had been using the
paths which were designated as BOATs (Bridleways open to all traffic) and
causing disturbance to nearby residents and possible danger and security
hazards for the adjacent Girl Guide camp.
Cllrs. were also concerned that the vehicles were gaining access onto the
A414 at the end of the Footpath despite the Highways Agency being opposed to
ant official exits of the dual carriageway.
RESOLVED to write to the CDC Footpaths Officer suggesting possible options
to resolve the problems over usage of the footpaths.
Now the facts Footpath 51 is a RUPP and the Council have confirmed on
several occasions that this route IS vehicular.
Footpath 51a is a BOAT, there are no TRO's or section 116's on either route.
RUPP 51 was featured in a four page article in LRW whilst trying to abate an
illegal obstruction I was offered physical violence by an ex Cllr. in full
view of the press and a council officer.
Boat 51a was reclassified as a BOAT during a round of non-connotes reviews.
Both these way form parts of an old Road "Old Man's Lane", the Dual
carriageway mentioned in the minutes cut the old road in half.
The Highways Agency is at present improving the access points from the Dual
Carriageway.
The Access Officer for St. Albans has been contacted by me as has Mrs Pluck
who wrote the minutes. I am currently awaiting the nest set of minutes as
the points as above that I submitted to the Parish were due to be discussed.
I have offered to meet with the Cllrs. at any time.
Regards
John O'Reilly
Vice Chairman of GLASS
& GLASS Area Rep for Hertfordshire.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 3 -> | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: Charlietrf@aol.com
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2000 16:55:19 EST
Subject: Re: Copy of: Abergwesyn BW diversion
Chris,
In a message dated 04/02/00 you wrote:
<< RE: Copy of: Abergwesyn BW diversion. A notice recieved today for a
small diversion of a bridleway at SN 846 519. >>
Which bit is this? The east-west (ish) bit is a dual-status UCR/exRUPP (now
Bridleway - reclassified a year or two ago) - uncoloured on the FA1910 maps,
but that didn't convince the Inspector. The south-northeast bit was shown on
the FA1910 maps with broken ties. (Both on PRO ref: IR 131/1/366)
Regards
Charlie.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 4 -> | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2000 21:56 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: Public Inquiries Inquiry
Sue says
<<<One thing that comes to mind is the quality of questions on the 'user
evidenceforms'. For most people, (i.e.casual users) its the one and only
time they'llever see a form. If there was one standard form, used
nationally and produce bythe P Ins which had all the questions on it that
were relevant, and wordedcorrectly, it should make the Inspectors job
easier, and reduce the risk ofinformation being ommitted and/or questions
not answered correctly. Also, if theevidence forms had a map on them
showing clearly the route under considerationit would help.
Anything to make life easyier.>>>
These commenst are very valid, and the projected 'National Green Lane
Database' - which still may or may not happen - will address this issue.
The All Wheel Drive Club have a form which at first sight is overly
complicated but which goes a long way to being the 'universal shoe'. Sue,
could you email Clive Westwood AWDC < clive@cnweng.clara.net> who is the
custodian of the AWDC database for a copy - hack it around and turn it
into something suitable for BHS use as you see it - and why not bring it
to Tims on 27th February ;-)? We need BHS input.
Regards
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 5 -> | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2000 23:38 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: Ignorance is alive and well in Hertfordshire
Nice one, JOR, are you sure that you're in the right GLASS
sub-committee?........
Regards
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 6 -> | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
From: "David Goode" <david@west-malvern.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 00:37:45 -0000
Subject: Info required on Devon lane
Can anyone tell me anything about the following lane, or about Devon CCs
(it's not in the national park) stance on UUCRs?
There's a lane from SX886775 - 903791 shown as ORPA on the Explorer 110.
At the NE end at 903791 there's a locked barrier and standard Forest
Enterprise signs saying no access due to timber operations and that
temporary diversions and closures have been obtained wherever necessary (I
am checking with Devon CC). No sign of any legal notices. I tried a couple
of adjoining forest tracks but couldn't get through to the proper route so I
tried the other end.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 7 -> | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
At 893783 there's a farm cum scrap yard where the route is not obvious, as I
nosed up to a gate to have a look a tractor blocked me in from behind and we
had a chat that began with farmer insisting that he was going to report my
registration no. to the council. He declined my offer of pen and paper and
eventually refused to take my registration no. though I encouraged him too.
There are 2 bridleways and a footpath that also meet at that farm and he
acknowledged their existance but not the ORPA. Furthermore (he was a
carriage driver and had been told that he couldn't drive along any of the
unsurfaced local lanes (and this seemed to be his motive in stopping 4x4s).
However, the track did not appear to go from the gate where I was and,
surprise, surprise, the tractor was parked such that I could not get along
to where I think the route went, but only back the way I'd come.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 8 -> | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]
END OF * LIST DIGEST
Input: messages 7 lines 0 [forwarded 3 whitespace 0]
Output: lines 261 [content 194 forwarded 3 (cut 0) whitespace 0]
[ First | Table of Contents | Search Archive Index | <-
Browser -> ]