There are now TEN temporary closures in Hampshire

[stevent]

I've just trawled through HCC's website, there is a tool for searching for TROs. There are TEN temporary TROs in Hampshire now, (if we exclude the Ringwood one, which Dave T thought was justified and is off our patch). On behalf of Surrey TRF I plan to get in touch with HCC to raise our concerns about the growing number of TROs. A few of us are working with the other TRF groups to work out what we should do about all these TTROs.

1. Selbourne 66
2. Crondall and Crookham Village
3. Hook and Winchfield
4. Grayshot
5. Hawkley
6. Sway
7. Bentworth and Wield (4 BOATs) (this is where the experimental permit TRO has been proposed)

Details

Selbourne BOAT 66
Reason: “to prevent the likelihood of danger to the public or serious damage to the road due to heavy flooding”
Duration: From 5 June 2013 until 8 November 2013 or until the route is
safe to be reopened, whichever is sooner.
HCC Notice - http://www3.hants.gov.uk/pnadetail?noticeUID=1509.
Question for HCC: is this being renewed or will the route reopen on or before 8 November?

Crondall BOAT 37 and Crookham Village BOAT 12
Reason “to allow for works in connection with surface improvements.”
Duration: From 1 November 2013 for a period of six months or until
completion of the works, whichever is sooner.
HCC Notice: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/pnadetail?noticeUID=2015
Query – the HCC search only indicated the route being closed for 10 days between 21 Oct and 31 Oct, whereas the PDF shows from 1 Nov for 6 months.
Question for HCC: when are the work scheduled to be completed?

Hook BOAT 1 and Winchfield BOAT 14
Reason: “to allow for works in connection with surface improvement.”
Duration: From 1 November 2013 for a period of six months or until
completion of the works, whichever is sooner.
HCC Notice: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/pnadetail?noticeUID=2012
Question for HCC: when are the work scheduled to be completed?

GRAYSHOTT BOAT 13
Reason: “to prevent the likelihood of danger to the public or serious damage to the road, considers that the closure to the road as specified below should come into force without delay”
Duration: From 21 October 2013 for a period of twenty-one days or until the path is considered safe, whichever is sooner. An Order will be made to enable the closure
to remain in place until the route is considered safe.
HCC Notice: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/pnadetail?noticeUID=2008
Questions for HCC:
When are the work scheduled to be completed?
Is it the case that the closure is due to a Councillor requesting it be closed, as they hurt themselves?

HAWKLEY BOAT 745 (adjacent to Old Litten Lane)
Reason: “to prevent the likelihood of danger to the public or serious damage to the road”.
Duration: From 7 August 2013 until 17 January 2014 or until the route
is considered safe, whichever is sooner.
HCC Notice: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/pnadetail?noticeUID=1848
Questions for HCC:
What criteria will be used to judge when the route will be considered safe?

SWAY BOAT 15
Reason: “to prevent the likelihood of danger to the public or serious damage to the road”
Duration: From 13 June 2013 for a period of six months or until
completion of the works, whichever is sooner.
HCC Notice: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/pnadetail?noticeUID=1532
Question for HCC: When are the work scheduled to be completed?

BENTWORTH BOATS 23, 27 & 28
Reason: “to prevent the likelihood of serious damage to the road.” / “This byway has recently been resurfaced, and Hampshire County Council considers
that it should remain closed to enable the newly laid surface to settle and harden.”
Duration: From 15 May 2013 for a period of six months.
HCC Notice: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/pnadetail?noticeUID=1375
Question for HCC: when will the route be reopened to motor-cycles with permits?

WIELD 17
Reason: “to prevent the likelihood of damage to the road.”
Duration: From 30 May 2013 for a period of six months.
HCC Notice: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/pnadetail?noticeUID=1364
Question for HCC: when will the route be reopened to motor-cycles with permits?

RINGWOOD BOAT 84
Reason: “owing to the likelihood of danger to the public attempting to cross Wattons Ford”
Duration: From 22 May 2013 for a period of six months.
HCC Notice: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/pnadetail?noticeUID=1386

[Dave]

IT'S ALL BEING TAKEN AWAY

[Billy]

IT'S ALL BEING TAKEN AWAY

TRO = Trail Riders Only ?

[G-Bru]

It seems to me that the councils always use the old "due to damage and potential danger" chestnut! As far as I am concerned we need to not give them a reason to use this statement any longer.
We all know who is responsible for 90% of the damage to our lanes and that is 4x4's!!!!
Whilst they have as much right to use our Byways as we do the unfortunate truth is that 4x4's have a massive impact to the Byways condition especially come wet winter season. Temporary TRO's are enforced and then permanent TRO's are implemented not long after, due to (perhaps) a minority of users smashing locks and gates to gain access and tear up the already damaged lane and spoil it for everyone.

G

[Dave]

I haven't met a lane yet I'd label dangerous.

And whilst I agree with what your saying Grant, I don't feel their right to use the byways should be taken away permanently just because of some wreckless users some pedestrians want to walk on the road.

Oh look, the road is too dangerous to walk your dog in it, better close it down.


It would be much cheaper to slap one of these on it!


In all seriousness though, fk them, I don't care as long as I get to travel the lanes on my motorbike and so do future ppl.

[Simon Watson]

Got this from them, great excuse maybe we could hold a raffle for them at the curry night!
Dear Simon

Thank you for your email.

At present, we do not have a schedule for this repair work, but it is currently unlikely that the work will take place before the end of the financial year.

Kind regards

Miss Rohan Seeliger-Morley
Administrative Officer (Order Making)
Countryside Access Team, Countryside Service
Hampshire County Council, Castle Avenue, Winchester, Hampshire, SO23 8UL
Telephone: 01962 846981
www.hants.gov.uk/countryside

[stevent]

(deleted, duplicated post)

[stevent]

All

We have been liaising with HCC on all of the closures. I've posted up details of their latest letter, in the Members area: https://surreytrf.gigatech.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=755.

The current list of temporary closures - and links to StreetMap - are as follows:

Bentworth 23, 27, 28 Wield 19, 20 15-Nov-13 to 06-Jan-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=46 ... &A=Y&Z=120 and http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=46 ... &A=Y&Z=120

Wield 17 30-Nov-13 to 30-May-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=46 ... &A=Y&Z=120

Grayshott 13 11-Nov-13 to 21-Apr-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=48 ... &A=Y&Z=120

Crondall 37, Cookham Village 12 04-Nov-13 to 01-May-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=47 ... &A=Y&Z=120

Hook 1, Winchfield 14 01-Nov-13 to 01-May-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=47 ... &A=Y&Z=120

Hawkley 745 11-Sep-13 to 17-Jan-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=47 ... &A=Y&Z=120

If you want to know more you can search on their list of order: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/publicnotices.htm or on the on-line maps http://localviewmaps.hants.gov.uk/LocalViewmaps/Sites/ROWOnline/#.

A few of us may try to do some site visits to see what is what and gather some facts and evidence which may be useful to try to argue for routes to be reopened.

It appears the Temporary TRO on Selbourne 66 has not been extended so we can use that again; and also Sway (though that's well off our patch). Will be interesting to see if they renew Bentworth on Monday and the Hawkley one, which are due to expire.

[stevent]

All

We have been liaising with HCC on all of the closures. I've posted up details of their latest letter, in the Members area: https://surreytrf.gigatech.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=755.

The current list of temporary closures - and links to StreetMap - are as follows:

Bentworth 23, 27, 28 Wield 19, 20 ------ 15-Nov-13 to 06-Jan-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=46 ... &A=Y&Z=120 and http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=46 ... &A=Y&Z=120

Wield 17 --------- 30-Nov-13 to 30-May-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=46 ... &A=Y&Z=120

Grayshott 13 ---------- 11-Nov-13 to 21-Apr-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=48 ... &A=Y&Z=120

Crondall 37, Cookham Village 12 ------------ 04-Nov-13 to 01-May-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=47 ... &A=Y&Z=120

Hook 1, Winchfield 14 ------ 01-Nov-13 to 01-May-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=47 ... &A=Y&Z=120

Hawkley 745 ----------- 11-Sep-13 to 17-Jan-14
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=47 ... &A=Y&Z=120

If you want to know more you can search on their list of order: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/publicnotices.htm or on the on-line maps http://localviewmaps.hants.gov.uk/LocalViewmaps/Sites/ROWOnline/#.

A few of us may try to do some site visits to see what is what and gather some facts and evidence which may be useful to try to argue for routes to be reopened.

It appears the Temporary TRO on Selbourne 66 has not been extended so we can use that again; and also Sway (though that's well off our patch). Will be interesting to see if they renew Bentworth on Monday and the Hawkley one, which are due to expire.

[Billy]

Went to look at the Beacon Hill (Grayshott) lane today. No notices or barriers at either end, if you were not a TRF member and looked regularly on forum how would you know about a TRO. Is this why there is so much illegal riding going on, throwing fuel on the anti`s fire. We really have no chance if they are not going to play by the rules....................................

[Dave]

There should be signage. If there's not then people are going to make mistakes, yeah. I swear i remember reading somewhere that we're expected to check with the local authority, every time we want to potter down the shop and get some milk and eggs, if there are any TRO's on route. The emphasis always seems to fall on us to do as we're told or suffer penalty.

Maybe i'm thinking cynically, but it always seems like an up hill battle against selfish ramblers and dubious authorities.

[stevent]

Guys
I've just had a look at my cyclemeter route from the post-Christmas run I was on. I'm still learning routes around Hindhead so did not realise this was on the Temporary TRO List.
I think you make very powerful points.
I've rechecked the notice, which is here: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/pnadetail?noticeUID=2009
It says: "PERIOD OF CLOSURE: From 11 November 2013 until 21 April 2014 or until the route is considered safe, whichever is sooner."
The notice is still live on their website and I've had no emails to tell me the route is now considered safe / open to use.
So I agree with you it is virtually impossible for us to know whether we can use this route or not and (as far as I'm concerned) I don't think that is not acceptable. I don't think its reasonable that we should have to check on the website before we use the network (I don't have check online which streets are one way streets in London when I go to work). I think you're right that if we're expected to not use routes which HCC have closed by a Temporary TRO, then they have to do more to communicate that, and also communicate when they're open again. The signs suggestion makes a lot of sense but the risk here is that the council start putting up the signs and not getting around to taking them down as quickly as they legally should do; or they make the temporary TRO "From 11 November 2013 until 21 April 2014 Full Stop".
Thank you for this feedback, this is what I need to represent us.
I'll get onto HCC about this next week.
Steven