Teesside Trail Riders

Find us on facebook: Teesside Trail Riders, The Golden Jubilee, Healaugh Park, Yarm, Cleveland, TS15 9XN

Latest topics

» Find us on Facebook
Mon Aug 03, 2015 9:31 am by Admin

» Next meeting August
Sat Aug 01, 2015 11:44 am by Admin

» Monthy Meeting May
Tue May 12, 2015 7:21 pm by rikidooos

» Track near Blakey Lion- Do Not Use. Permissive rights withdrawn.
Thu Mar 19, 2015 10:21 am by rikidooos

» Supreme Court rules against Dorset County Council in rights of way dispute
Wed Mar 18, 2015 3:27 pm by rikidooos

» KTM-IGNITION-LOCK-TANK-PLUG-KEYS
Wed Mar 18, 2015 1:33 pm by rikidooos

» Round 1 of the 2015 NE-XC 29th March. Great Ayton
Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:38 am by rikidooos

» DEADMANS HILL
Sat Feb 28, 2015 9:03 pm by Rod

» New member just joined
Sun Feb 01, 2015 11:58 am by 2wheeldiver


    WE NEED YOUR HELP West Horsley Surrey Byway 538-539

    Share
    avatar
    rikidooos
    Admin

    Posts : 538
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2010-02-16
    Age : 26
    Location : The Great Outdoors

    WE NEED YOUR HELP West Horsley Surrey Byway 538-539

    Post  rikidooos on Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:35 am

    We are in danger of losing our rights to ride road legal motorcycles on these 2 byways in Surrey.the outcome may affect byways throughout the country if the traffic regulation orders (TROs) are successful. We need as many people to object to the TROs as possible and time is short. Please circulate the suggested proformas to your staff / group members and ask them to submit either the long or abbreviated objection attached. Objections need to be sent to Hannah Gutteridge case officer Surrey CC by e-mail or letter by the end of this month.

    Thank you for all your help to date but we must keep trying.


    Ron lumley ( Surrey TRF )

    avatar
    rikidooos
    Admin

    Posts : 538
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2010-02-16
    Age : 26
    Location : The Great Outdoors

    Objection letter Long.

    Post  rikidooos on Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:35 am

    Name

    Address


    Hannah Gutteridge
    Countryside Legal Team
    County Hall
    Surrey County Council
    Room 365 County Hall,
    Penryhn Road,
    Kingston,
    Surrey KT1 2DY
    hannah.gutteridge@surreycc.gov.uk


    Dear Ms Gutterridge

    Re TRO on Byways 538 and 539: Ref: DS/HG/3/1/72/, Objection

    With reference to the TRO on the Byways 538 and 539, now currently under an impending TRO, I would like to object to the reasons for the TRO’s as stated in the joint SCC/LGBC meeting on 23rd June, 2010, where this order was proposed:

    1. There have been no reported accidents or injuries on these lanes, and there is no significant danger to users of the lanes as stated, in their current condition.

    2. By imposing TRO on these lanes, their condition will not improve by virtue of being closed and deterioration will not be prevented. Maintenance is what is required and this is available according to the RoW officer for SCC. In a recent press dated 16th July 2010 the SCC acknowledges their duty to maintain, and that funding is available.

    3. Prevention of danger. Usage of the lanes is very light by all traffic, as indicated by the residents of West Horsley’s own survey. Due to the infrequent usage of these lanes, it is not at all definite that any such danger exists at all, and therefore the risk of future reduction of danger does not arise.

    4. Prevention of Damage to the road or any other building nearby In Silkmore Lane there are 2 houses only at the one end of the lane, both set well back from the road- Usage of this lane, Byway 538, presents no danger to the buildings in any way. Damage to the surface is exacerbated by lack of maintenance, and simply closing it will not help in any way. Fullers Farm Lane, byway 539, has only one house nearby, also well set back and again, closing this lane would not in itself improve the surface. Statutory maintenance is the only answer to erosion by water and SCC have admitted that funding is available for this work.

    5. Existing character of road or adjoining property: As stated above there are a total of 3 properties only on both lanes and current level of usage in no way alters their character. The reference to vehicles being of ‘unsuitable kind’ is incorrect as these vehicles are roadworthy, insured, taxed and MOT.’d. In respect of the reference suggesting vehicles are ‘not suiting the character of the roads or surrounding properties’, I believe some of the residents drive 4 wheel drive vehicles which I presume are also deemed unsuitable.

    6. Preserving the Roads for persons on horseback or foot: There are statutory rights to preserve rights of way for all users. There are many specific footpaths in this area, and many specified dedicated bridleways. Horse riders and pedestrians all currently co-exist with the vehicles quite sensibly and amicably on these lanes, and have done so for many years. There is no reason to change this now in favour of one or two specified user groups especially as this is against the SCC policy on ROW, against statutory policy and against section 122 of the Highways Act 1984. The inherent character of these two BOATS is in fact well suited for vehicle and horse drawn carriage use, contrary to the reason for TRO as stated.

    7. Preserve Amenities for the area: The council has not demonstrated how amenities would be preserved or improved, or even altered in any way, by ceasing vehicle usage. Additionally it is not clear as to how these amenities are being harmed. Why do the SCC arguments only pertain to part of the lane.

    8. Unreasonable Prejudice it appears that there is unreasonable prejudice by some local residents and undeclared interest by some West Horsley Parish Councillors.


    9. Should the joint committee of SCC/LGBC persist in this TRO enforcement in the face of contradictory evidence a public enquiry would need to be held to ensure that there are no undeclared interests.

    Please acknowledge receipt of this objection.

    Yours sincerely







    Last edited by rikidooos on Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:36 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    rikidooos
    Admin

    Posts : 538
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2010-02-16
    Age : 26
    Location : The Great Outdoors

    Short Objection Letter

    Post  rikidooos on Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:36 am

    Name

    Address:



    Date:

    Hannah Gutteridge
    Countryside Legal Team
    County Hall
    Surrey County Council
    Room 365 County Hall,
    Penryhn Road,
    Kingston,
    Surrey KT1 2DY
    hannah.gutteridge@surreycc.gov.uk



    Dear Ms Gutteridge

    Ref DS/HG/3/1/72

    I am writing to object to the proposed TROs on Byways Open to All Traffic 538 and 539, Silkmore Lane and Fullers Farm Road, West Horsley.

    The reports presented to the Guildford Local Committee in June and December last year, drafted by the professional Rights of Way officials, both recommended that TROs were not made and other action taken.

    The reports make clear that there is insufficient evidence to support the making of the TROs. No impartial or substantiated evidence has been presented which to support the reasons for making the TROs.

    Given: the Officer’s reports, the large number of objections, that the TROs are not in line with Council Policy, and that there is insufficient evidence to support the making of the TROs, I object to the TROs being made.

    If the Committee wish to proceed with the making of these TROs I request a public inquiry is conducted.

    Please acknowledge receipt of this communication

    Yours sincerely





    petergj

    Posts : 45
    Points : 85
    Join date : 2010-02-18

    Re: WE NEED YOUR HELP West Horsley Surrey Byway 538-539

    Post  petergj on Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:42 pm

    My reply from Hannah (in fairness, at least I received a written response after I complained that the out of office reply was not acceptable) :-

    Thank you for your comments.

    They will be included in the report to Guildford Local Committee in March.

    Kind regards,

    Hannah


    Hannah Gutteridge
    Countryside Access Officer
    (County Hall)
    Tel: 020 8541 8941

    avatar
    rikidooos
    Admin

    Posts : 538
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2010-02-16
    Age : 26
    Location : The Great Outdoors

    Re: WE NEED YOUR HELP West Horsley Surrey Byway 538-539

    Post  rikidooos on Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:46 pm

    I got a similar reply. From what I hear hanah is on the trail riders side and trying to keep the row open.

    petergj

    Posts : 45
    Points : 85
    Join date : 2010-02-18

    Re: WE NEED YOUR HELP West Horsley Surrey Byway 538-539

    Post  petergj on Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:08 pm

    Some of you may have received an e-mail from Hannah Gutteridge on this topic but it looks like a positive outcome based on the following excerpts from the e-mail .....

    Key Issue
    Members are asked to consider whether the making of Traffic Regulation
    Orders for Byways Open to All Traffic 538 and 539, West Horsley should be
    processed in light of the 1018 letters of objection and 53 letters of support
    received. In making this decision Members must take into account the
    objections and representation received following the publication of the County
    Council’s intention and modified intention to make such orders. Letters of
    representations will be available on request or in the room before the
    committee meeting.

    8 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
    8.1 The request for TROs for both Fullers Farm Lane and Silkmore Lane does
    not meet County Council Policy. Members are therefore asked to approve
    the use of other management solutions and the withdrawal of the
    proposed TROs.


    There is an interesting comment in Section 10.2 .....

    10 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
    10.1 If Members agree with the recommendation not to proceed with TROs
    because they do not meet County Council policy, other management
    options will be applied. These include repairing Silkmore Lane and
    actively monitoring both byways.
    10.2 Should Members decide to proceed with a TRO for either or both byways
    substantiated grounds for closure referred to in paragraph 1.9 of this
    report must be put forward and minuted given the likelihood of further
    challenge. Members will also be asked to consider whether or not to
    include motorcycles in that restriction.


    Regards,
    avatar
    rikidooos
    Admin

    Posts : 538
    Points : 1070
    Join date : 2010-02-16
    Age : 26
    Location : The Great Outdoors

    Re: WE NEED YOUR HELP West Horsley Surrey Byway 538-539

    Post  rikidooos on Wed Mar 02, 2011 6:34 pm

    I also got a reply yesterday. Let's hope we did some good with our objection.

    Sponsored content

    Re: WE NEED YOUR HELP West Horsley Surrey Byway 538-539

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Oct 20, 2017 1:40 pm