Another TRF victory

Richard Simpson · **Joined:** Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:08 pm **Posts:** 1624

Splendid!

jonpaul1st · **Posted:** Fri Feb 24, 2012 11:44 am

BobStammers wrote:

I attended Kingsley Parish Council meeting last evening along with three other "innocent" members of the public, Maureen Comber and three other "antis".

The antis went with "motorcycles are dangerous" especially a horse might be spooked and rear up; they complained that the lane had been wrecked by 4x4s whose drivers had been rude and they complained that "that motorcycle outfit" had conspired to gang up and overwhelm the January meeting.

I redressed the balance by pointing out that motorcycles are not unsafe, if anything it was horses that should be banned; that rude people were rude people and that although the original ground for attempting to ban motorcycles was surface damage, the evidence was that motorcycles do not damage the surface. The council's Rights of Way rep agreed that a recent inspection (after illegal motorcycle use) revealed no damage.

The antis of course remain anti. The councillors adopted a much more balanced view, I have no doubt that the "monitoring" will be fair and reasonable.

What did come as a bit of a surprise (and I didn't follow it up) was the rep's statement that nothing has changed since last June and motorcycles will be allowed back on after 31st May "for the summer" after which the position would be reviewed. Locals have been asked to look out for evidence of damage by anyone and to report illegal use to the police.

It was also very noticeable that, amongst the councillors as well, there was a general sense that the TRF had carried out a sort of unfair, undemocratic, guerilla action in convincing the highway authority to not ban motorcycles. Having been a recipient of Maureen Comber's emailed call to arms last June trying to drum up support for a vehicle ban, I take the protests about the TRF's effectiveness as sour grapes.

I'm now highly suspicious that another illegal Temp TRO will be placed on Cradle Lane as was placed on Harrow Way.

hut1 · **Joined:** Tue Sep 15, 2009 7:32 pm **Posts:** 236

Excellent news.
Good decision.

StevenT · **Posted:** Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:27 pm

Dear all

Bob - excellent report. Thank you. I note there were only 3 other as well as Maureen. That says a lot. My latest understanding is that the recommended decision will still be to NOT make the bike STRO. The report is out on 1 March and the decision is going to be taken on 8 March. I shall be attending that to represent our views to the decision maker.

Re-opening of the route to motorcycles will be subject to us promoting voluntary restraint. There will be a monitoring process put in place.

I am confident they will not just put on another TTRO (unless the situation changes).

There is also going to be a public meeting on the matter, to explain the outcome and I've agreed to represent us at that too. Details to be confirmed. See the following which I received today:

From: HCC Countryside Service
Subject: Cradle Lane

Dear everyone
I wanted to write to acknowledge the great deal of correspondence which has been circulating about Cradle Lane , and update you on what is happening.
It would be naïve to suggest that this is anything but a difficult issue for everyone involved. What the County Council is seeking to do is achieve a plan for managing Cradle Lane which ensures that the lane can be used safely, responsibly and in a way which protects it for future generations. It is my understanding that this is very similar to what everyone else is seeking to do for the lane (whatever side of the debate they may be on), although there are clearly very different views on how best these outcomes may be achieved.
You are all likely to be aware that a report is due to be taken to the Executive Member in March (on the 8th) to seek permission to prohibit vehicles with three or more wheels from using the lane. As far as I am aware, everyone on this mailing list is supportive of the proposal that such vehicles should be prohibited.
The issue which remains is that of how best to manage the use of the route by motorcycles. I recognise that this is something which is causing a great deal of local concern. To that end, I agree that it is only right and proper to hold a public meeting to outline the facts of the case, explain fully the County Council's proposals and ensure that people have an opportunity to air their views and concerns.
I have asked Vicky Bowskill to arrange this meeting and we will circulate proposed dates and venue as soon as we are able.
I am aware that the mailing list for this subject has grown long, and I therefore apologise if I have omitted names from this list - please feel free to forward this e-mail to any interested parties.

Countryside Service
Culture, Communities and Business Services
Hampshire County Council

DS650 · **Joined:** Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:41 pm **Posts:** 129

So much for the quad riding members then.... :cry:

jonpaul1st · **Posted:** Sat Feb 25, 2012 12:35 am

DS650 wrote:

So much for the quad riding members then.... :cry:

TRO's for 3 wheels or more can exempt quadbikes - quadricycles are a seperate and distinct legal class of vehicle. I have objected to their inclusion in the TRO.

There does come a point when quad bikers have to start fighting for their rights. If more joined the TRF and got involved they would stop losing access.

19col58 · **Joined:** Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:30 am **Posts:** 9

Hants CC tend to use the number of wheels for "targeted" TROs, which bans quads and sidecars. Surrey CC use width limits which don't, don't know why but it doesn't seem right to me!

Colin

jonpaul1st · **Posted:** Sat Feb 25, 2012 12:10 pm

19col58 wrote:

Hants CC tend to use the number of wheels for "targeted" TROs, which bans quads and sidecars. Surrey CC use width limits which don't, don't know why but it doesn't seem right to me!

Colin

As quadricycles are a seperate class of vehicle all that's needed is a minor modification to the order and an advisory sign - "Except quadricycles"

Axle width is limited on quadricycles so the room to pass argument is weaker than for 4x4.

Quadricycles offer the same (almost) degree of access for the less able that use 4x4's.

Older TRO that restrict more than 3 / 3 or more wheels, arguably aren't valid for quads, if they were imposed before the quadricycles class was created in 2002, unless the TRO has been subsequently reviewed.

DS650 · **Joined:** Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:41 pm **Posts:** 129

Older TRO that restrict more than 3 / 3 or more wheels, arguably aren't valid for quads, if they were imposed before the quadricycles class was created in 2002, unless the TRO has been subsequently reviewed.

err, come again...are you saying that any TRO imposed before 2002 may not apply to quads???
By virtue of a technicality?.....I can't see many local authorities revisiting old TROs to update them for quadricycles.

And....I accept the point about quad riders joining, most quad forums are quite insular but to be fair the TRF has always been seen as a 2 wheeled organisation, I still come across a few sideways glances at meetings cos I choose to ride four wheels.

jonpaul1st · **Posted:** Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:48 pm

DS650 wrote:

Older TRO that restrict more than 3 / 3 or more wheels, arguably aren't valid for quads, if they were imposed before the quadricycles class was created in 2002, unless the TRO has been subsequently reviewed.

err, come again...are you saying that any TRO imposed before 2002 may not apply to quads???
By virtue of a technicality?.....I can't see many local authorities revisiting old TROs to update them for quadricycles.

And....I accept the point about quad riders joining, most quad forums are quite insular but to be fair the TRF has always been seen as a 2 wheeled organisation, I still come across a few sideways glances at meetings cos I choose to ride four wheels.

Highway authority has a duty to regularly review TRO's to evaluate effectiveness in the TRO meeting it's statement of reasosn for imposition.

So when a new class of motorvehicle is created then the HA should've reviewed relevant tro's to establish if they should've included quads.

TRF Forums

Another TRF victory

Who is online