Cradle Lane Hants

[Richard Simpson]

I'm not local to it, but check out

http://www.saynototro.com/cradle%20lane.html

Objections close on Oct 28, so get to it. All the info you need is there.

[Gavinskii]

I've emailed an objection letter tonight, it took me 10 mins tops.

It doesn't matter that these byways may not be local to you, we need to stand shoulder to shoulder and fight these TRO's or it will be your local lanes next

[hornet]

WTF only one other forum member has posted that they have bothered to object

Done took a couple of mins

I suggest the rest of the byway users of this forum do likewise or you can all kiss your doorstep adventures goodbye

ps gavinskii +1 to you mate

hornet

[Gavinskii]

WTF only one other forum member has posted that they have bothered to object

Done took a couple of mins

I suggest the rest of the byway users of this forum do likewise or you can all kiss your doorstep adventures goodbye

ps gavinskii +1 to you mate

hornet

Only 2 days left to send an email....

Got to say everyone seems to have the time to arse about having a laugh about whether their mag has arrived or not, yet something as fundamental as keeping our hobby alive in the UK gets virtually no views or responses.... :unsure:

I'm no crusader, but find that very concerning, especially on such an off road focussed forum



Rant over

......that feels better....and relax

[hornet]

spot on mate

hornet

[Dodgygeeza]

Hi all,

FAO Gavinskii & Hornet,
Not everybody feels the need to announce that they`ve sent an objection, signed a petition etc. After all, this thread is not a petition, its just a pointer to something which maybe of interest and concern to the readers.

As for the lack of views, maybe a more appropriate title may draw more attention.

**HELP SAVE CRADLE LANE FROM POTENTIAL TRO**

[Sopwith Camel]

All done Gavinskii

[Gavinskii]

Hi all,

FAO Gavinskii & Hornet,
Not everybody feels the need to announce that they`ve sent an objection, signed a petition etc. After all, this thread is not a petition, its just a pointer to something which maybe of interest and concern to the readers.

As for the lack of views, maybe a more appropriate title may draw more attention.

**HELP SAVE CRADLE LANE FROM POTENTIAL TRO**

I see Hornet has picked up the mantel on the title

Well done to all those that have objected + I do hope a load more will too.

Around my way (Surrey TRF) we sucessfully fought and won against a councillor whose property was at the entrance of a lane, ended up at a big public meeting and the councillor was effectively shown that they had abused powers and were just a NIMBY and had effectively wasted a load of tax payers money fighting their own private cause

Never lose the faith by objecting when things aren't fair and reasonable.

+ Don't be shy about letting people know!

[Gavinskii]

Another great result thanks to the involvement of individual motorcyclists and the collective weight of the TRF

Message flagged Wednesday, 25 January 2012, 13:56

Dear All

I am writing to you further to your response to HCCs intention to impose a Traffic Regulation Order against motor vehicles on Cradle Lane, advertised during October last year. We received a very high level of response to this formal consultation with 184 objections to the proposal and 58 expressions of support. Owing to the very strong feelings on both sides of this debate, HCC has considered all the points raised very carefully, weighing them against the Council's TRO policy and the provisions of section 1 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

There is clearly a lot of concern from non-motorised users of this route about the impact, in terms of both surface damage and noise, from motor vehicles using this lane. However, the fact remains that this route is recorded as a Byway Open to All Traffic and motorised users have a right to use such routes, unless restricted by TRO. TROs can only be imposed where other measures to manage the problems that exist have proved ineffective and there is sufficient justification to apply a restriction under both Council's TRO policy and the provisions of section 1 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

It is clear that excessive and inappropriate use by four wheel drive vehicles has caused significant damage to this route in the past and, given the narrowness of the route and the fragile clay subgrade, it appears to be generally accepted that the use of four wheel drive vehicles on this route is unsustainable. However, there has been much debate about whether a responsibly ridden motorcycle actually would do any significant damage to the surface of this lane in light of the high standard of the recent repairs; no evidence has been presented to suggest that they would.

A meeting was held in January 2012 involving the local County Councillors, representatives of Headley and Kingsley Parish Council and representatives of the motorised users that would be affected by the proposed TRO. At the meeting three options were considered;

1. Reopen the lane to all motorised traffic.
There has been a significant amount of local objection to this option from non-motorised users of the route and local residents. Officers are of the view that the level and nature of motorised use previously seen on this lane is not sustainable and would result in a reoccurrence of the damage previously seen. It is unlikely that funds could be made available to carry out further repairs in the foreseeable future.

2. Impose a permanent restriction against motor vehicles with three or more wheels to protect the surface of the lane from further damage, and a seasonal restriction on two wheel motorcycles to preserve the character of the lane, as proposed. A very significant level of objection was received to this proposal from motorised users. Whilst it appears to be generally accepted that use of this route by four-wheel-drive vehicles is inappropriate owing to the narrowness and character of the lane, Officers are of the view that the restriction of motorcycles does not adequately comply with the Council’s TRO policy. In particular, there is currently no evidence to suggest that motorcycles will have any significant impact on the surface of the lane following the extensive repairs that have been made, and there is a possibility that less restrictive options to manage motorcycle usage might be trialled.

3. Impose a permanent restriction against motor vehicles with three or more wheels to protect the surface of the lane from further damage, but impose no formal restriction on two wheel motorcycles. Set up a local team to monitor the impact of motorcycle usage of the route, and work with motorcycle user groups to promote responsible behaviour. Officers are of the view that this option complies with the Council’s TRO policy in that it represents the least-restrictive solution that will effectively resolve the issue of significant damage being caused to the surface of this route. This TRO will be combined with a robust system of monitoring the condition of the surface of this lane in consultation with the parish councils and the relevant user groups to accurately assess the impact of the various user groups.

At the meeting it was agreed that Option 3 (above) would be an acceptable solution to all those present.
In light of the above, it is now proposed to seek a permanent TRO against motor vehicles with three or more wheels to prevent further damage to the newly-repaired surface. A robust system of monitoring the condition of the lane will be put in place to accurately assess the impact of the other user groups on this lane to inform future reviews of the TRO.

Many Thanks

Vicky Bowskill
01962 846891
Countryside Access Development Officer
Countryside Service
Culture, Communities and Business Services
Hampshire County Council
Mottisfont Court, High Street, Winchester SO23 8ZF
http://www.hants.gov.uk/countryside/row/

[beddowsm]

with 184 objections to the proposal and 58 expressions of support

goes to show, sometimes they listen to majority votes!

Good result.