TRF Forums

It is currently Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:57 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Chapelgate TRO reminder
PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:36 am 
Offline
400 cc

Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:44 pm
Posts: 1463
Just to remind you guys that we still urgently need responses to the Peak District National Park Authorities Chapelgate closure consultation. We have had some excellent responses so far but we need to really up the ante. We've got another couple of weeks before the consultation ends and we need to get as many additional objections in as possible.

If there's anyone reading this who hasn't objected yet please do and if you know anyone who you think would but may not be aware please pass on the message.

I know that writting objection letters isn't necessarily easy for everyone, it isn't easy for me but it's not like writing a school essay or something. It's not a test, no one will be marking you, you won't have to stand up and read it out or anything :D . Don't worry about your spelling or stuff like that.

Remember there's no magic formula, just write in your own words that you strongly object to the proposed experimental order and to the possibility that it might be made permanent etc.

If you want to write a lot and get it off your chest then go for it :twisted: on the other hand if you'd rather keep it brief thats fine as well. Do what feels right for you but remember, your objection will only count if you actually send it in.

And just to remind you all, the postal address for objections is,

Mike Rhodes
Access & RoW Manager
Peak District National Park Authority
Aldern House
Baslow Road
Bakewell
Derbyshire
DE45 1AE

the Email address is,

mike.rhodes@peakdistrict.gov.uk


Cheers

Richard


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Chapelgate TRO reminder
PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:39 am 
Offline
400 cc

Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:44 pm
Posts: 1463
Ohh, and for anyone who's not sure where it is, it's here,

http://www.bdcc.co.uk/XMarksTheSpot.htm ... 1019783557

and yes, I know that shows it as a bridleway but the map is out of date. It is defintely a byway (confirmed by the authority) and is signed as such on the ground.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Chapelgate TRO reminder
PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 4:07 pm 
Offline
80 cc

Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:24 am
Posts: 31
This link http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/chapelgate may be better.

_________________
Ted
http://walks.ndrw.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Chapelgate TRO reminder
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 5:19 pm 
Offline
125cc

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 8:28 pm
Posts: 177
Here's what I've sent to mike.rhodesatpeakdistrict.gov.uk, (swap the "at" for "@" for the proper email address)

Feel free to copy bits if you want, but mix it up if you do, so that it doesn't look like a duplicate.



Hello,

I regularly visit the Peak District from my home in Staffordshire, enjoying walking, motorcycling, mountain biking and other outdoor activities with friends and family, as well as enjoying the cafes, pubs, shops and amenities in Castleton, Hope and the surrounding areas.

I am a regular user of Chapel Gate Byway, and feel that I must object to the proposal quoted below.

"The Peak District National Park Authority is proposing to make an experimental traffic order for the purposes of preserving amenity and conserving the natural beauty of the area through which the route passes. The proposal is to make an experimental traffic order that will have the effect of prohibiting use by recreational motor vehicles at any time along the route known as Chapel Gate for a period of 18 months."

Could you explain how a TRO would improve the BOAT, given that you accept that the damage is caused by poor drainage and a poorly planned and underfunded historic attempt at repair?

Without carrying out any repair to the drainage, a TRO would not help in preserving the amenity (the BOAT). This is stated in your Chapel gate Route Management plan

"Natural erosion is now the main source of damage especially at the Edale end."

and

"Water erosion has taken over from wheeled vehicles where passage by the latter is no longer an option and scouring will continue the deterioration in wet periods. It is imperative to ameliorate the drainage problem "

Simply removing all vehicle use from the route will have no impact, as it will not stop the continued water erosion. It should also be noted here that no evidence was shown that wheeled vehicles led to deterioration in the first place, although it could be expected to be a contributory factor. I don't believe that the council could justify the cost of a full, proper and sustainable repair for the route, which you estimated in 2008 to be in the region of £200,000, and so do not see the benefit of stopping users using the ROW as it stands.

I believe that money would be better spent in signage and advertising, advising that all users use only the ROW, and are appropriately advised of the condition that it is in.

A second alternative may be to create a footpath or bridleway to the side of the ROW, which would allow continued cycle, horse and walker use, whilst allowing the quad bikes and motorbikes to continue to use the existing ROW.

The BOAT in no way detracts from the natural beauty of the area, it is part of the appeal of the area, and it allows access for more people to enjoy the area.

The Local Access Forum Subgroup made some proposals of potential solutions. I would be interested to hear why the following has been discounted in your proposed solution?

"Attempt to involve users in a form of 'joint venture' with DCC, to undertake restoration of the route"

I would certainly be willing to help restore and maintain this and other such routes, and I believe that, if approached, user groups such as the Trail Riders Fellowship would be keen to help, as they have done in other areas of the country. Volunteers from all user groups would not only reduce labour costs, but also having user groups working together could help with preventative maintenance on this and other routes in the county, helping to cut or even avoid altogether future expensive repair bills. What has been done to help facilitate this co-operative option?

Your second point in the proposal above, regarding conserving the natural beauty of the area through which the route passes, is is extremely subjective.

What is your definition of what makes the area beautiful? The geography of the surrounding land is rugged and dramatic, with much exposed rock and weathering visible, which to me would seem to well describe the Chapel Gate BOAT too, with it's rocky, eroded and weathered appearance. The route seems entirely within the character of the area. A strip of tarmac cutting down the hillside, as was laid during your repairs of 1990, would seem to be far more out of place.

If, as stated, vehicular use is no longer a contributing factor to the degradation of the route, then vehicular rights should be maintained until such a time as they need to be curtailed for the safety of those working on the maintanence of the route. There has been no evidence to suggest what the benefit of a TRO would give, or indeed what it is about vehicles that are an issue here.

The drainage appears to be the biggest issue here, and until such time as work can be carried out to ensure proper drainage, a TRO does not need to be imposed, as there is no benefit to it. The drainage situation will not change as a result of vehicular access and use of this BOAT.

As a regular visitor to the Peak District, I hope that you will fully consider and respond to my points, and that you will indeed only impose a full TRO as a last resort, bearing in mind that exemptions can be made to TRO's to allow continued motorcycle access. This might be appropriate in this case.


That's just mine, a much shorter one will be just as valid, even 2 lines is good.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Chapelgate TRO reminder
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 5:28 pm 
Offline
400 cc

Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:44 pm
Posts: 1463
Spot on mate, an excellent and well argued response.

Remember folks, the clock is ticking. Object now or don't complain when its gone!

Cheers


Richard


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group. Color scheme by ColorizeIt!