On Dec 14, 4:10 pm, "Phil L" wrote:
JimK wrote:
Next spring I'm going to have to revisit the access track/bridleway
which is deteriorating again despite regular topping up with MOT.

So thinking of casting in situ two 18 inch wide concrete "tank tracks"
for 150m!

Challenges will include:

1 keeping costs down.. mixing own concrete, doing a "section" at a
time.... or sod it and try and do 4m3 runs at once with small ready
mix trucks?

2 Keeping access open (incl vehicles) during concrete cure stages:-
Road forms or equivalent pegged for sides and a (possibly bolted down)
steel plate top for wheeled traffic whilst initial curing takes place
- how thick a plate? thinner is cheaper and easier, but at what
thinness will it bend/buckle and backfire??

3 Shaping the concrete to avoid sharp corner edges (horses etc) -
perhaps some sort of curved top (in section) road forms, or similar or
fabricate something to do the job... or will I be able to simply knock
the sharp edges off with a big hammer after a few days curing when
"mould" removed?

4 Do i need reinforcement? plan on 4inch average concrete depth for
cars, tranny vans, small oil tankers.

5 Any way I could easily replicate (or just give a passing impression
of) stone flags as I cast it? (other parts of the track have these
still in situ - it would be "nice" to give a nod to the vernacular..)

what does the group think? do-able? what've I
forgotten/underestimated/ failed to appreciate etc--- you get the
picture - Help!!

Cheers
JimK

You could dig out one track the full length of the pathway (assuming you
are using a digger?) in the AM, get 7.5m3 of readymixed poured in the
afternoon and cast the whole track in one pour, preferably at dusk (is it
used at night at all?) it'll be cured enough to drive over within 24 hours.
If the path belongs to you, you can close it off completely, but this means
the postman, milkman etc would have to leave your deliveries somewhere else

mmm yeah - xcept there are a few issues that make that un/hard
workable - not least the bridleway status - can you shut a bridleway
for 24 hours without notice? what's the penalty?

Cheers
JimK

JimK wrote:

mmm yeah - xcept there are a few issues that make that un/hard
workable - not least the bridleway status - can you shut a bridleway
for 24 hours without notice? what's the penalty?

Cheers
JimK

I think your first port of call should be your district council, they may be
able to help you with legal notices in the local rag if they are required,
or even chip in towards it's upkeep.

I certainly wouldn't be spending thousands without checking some basic facts
first

--
Phil L
RSRL Tipster Of The Year 2008

In message
, JimK
writes
On Dec 13, 10:31 pm, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message
, JimK
writes



Hmm.. sounds like a bridleway.

No. If it were just a bridleway by definition I wouldn't be legally
allowed to access my property by vehicle would I ?

If you own the land you can decide to permit higher rights than those
enjoyed by the general public. Notably granting yourself permission to
take a vehicle along it:-)

Erm are you saying I have to grant myself rights over my own
property!? ********!

Scenario.... Highways officer from County Council blocking your
bridleway with a little white van, we have received complaints from
legitimate users about vehicles driving along this bridleway... you,
politely, tell him it is your land and he says *that's all right then*.

Surely as landowner I reserve *all* rights.

Subject to the right of others to pass and re-pass along the route on
foot, cycle or horseback accompanied by one or more dogs!

Presumably you also grant permission to service vehicles, post etc. The
test of status is whether the rest of us have a right to drive along it.

Which you don't because it's a Bridleway as per Definitive Map.

The County Council is required to erect a sign, denoting the route,
where it leaves the metalled part of the highway.

Where's this stuff coming from? any links to backup your point of
view?

Erm. years of direct experience. The various agricultural bodies, DEFRA,
NFU, CLA publish guidance to farmers whenever legislation changes users
rights regarding access to the countryside. The one coming up is the
proposed legislation creating public access to as much of the coastline
as possible.

A quick dig in my filing cabinet produced The Rights of Way Act 1990,
guidance notes for farmers published by the Countryside Commission and
MAFF (now DEFRA). A second is Managing Public Access, a joint production
from CLA, NFU and the Countryside Commission dated 1994.

There ought to be some stuff on your County Council website and the
DEFRA one.

The rights of way bible is called the Green Book but I have never seen
one.

FYI the owners of the adjoining land are responsible for preventing
obstruction by overgrown hedges and the like. Theoretically Highways
have responsibility for the surface but rarely have funds or interest to
help.

Phone the County Council and ask to speak to the rights of way officer
for your area. They are usually practical people with an interest in
keeping the peace between owners and users.

regards

--
Tim Lamb

In message
,
JimK writes
On Dec 14, 2:51 pm, cynic wrote:
On 14 Dec, 10:33, Adrian wrote:



JimK gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

No. If it were just a bridleway by definition I wouldn't be legally
allowed to access my property by vehicle would I ?
If you own the land you can decide to permit higher rights than those
enjoyed by the general public. Notably granting yourself permission to
take a vehicle along it:-)
Erm are you saying I have to grant myself rights over my own property!?
********!

Not at all.

You don't have to follow any formal procedure to grant yourself rights,
just make a little promise not to shout "Git orf moi laaaand!" at
yourself whilst waving a shotgun in the general direction of yourself...

Have a look here. http://www.defra.gov.uk/rural/countryside/index.htm

regards



--
Tim Lamb

Tim Lamb wrote:

Theoretically Highways
have responsibility for the surface but rarely have funds or interest to
help.

The highways authority have a duty for maintaining the right of way, not
necessarily to maintain the surface because there is some discretion but
many seem to have assumed this. After all if you plough a cross field path
and then run a tractor wheel up and down the row to compact it you don't
expect the highway authority to come and surface it?

Even when the highway authority do assume upkeep of the surface then they
only own the surface, not the land underneath "solum", unless they purchase
that land. Should this surface be damaged other than by fair wear and tear
by the public then they can recover the costs of making good.

AJH

In message , andrew
writes
Tim Lamb wrote:

Theoretically Highways
have responsibility for the surface but rarely have funds or interest to
help.

The highways authority have a duty for maintaining the right of way, not
necessarily to maintain the surface because there is some discretion but
many seem to have assumed this. After all if you plough a cross field path
and then run a tractor wheel up and down the row to compact it you don't
expect the highway authority to come and surface it?

The Rights of Way act 1990 gives the occupiers of *agricultural* land
the right to plough up cross field paths and bridleways if this can't
reasonably be avoided. Subject to their restoration within a time limit
to a condition *convenient* to use.

Even when the highway authority do assume upkeep of the surface then they
only own the surface, not the land underneath "solum", unless they purchase
that land. Should this surface be damaged other than by fair wear and tear
by the public then they can recover the costs of making good.

Yes. In JimK's circumstances this does not appear to be agricultural and
certainly not *cross field*land so any deliberate disturbance needs to
be agreed with the highway authority.

regards

--
Tim Lamb

On Dec 14, 8:41 pm, Tim Lamb wrote:
Erm are you saying I have to grant myself rights over my own
property!? ********!

Scenario.... Highways officer from County Council blocking your
bridleway with a little white van, we have received complaints from
legitimate users about vehicles driving along this bridleway... you,
politely, tell him it is your land and he says *that's all right then*.

As my private track (with bridleway status) is the only way to access
my house - more likely I would challenge them to stop me and have them
ridiculed.

Surely as landowner I reserve *all* rights.

Subject to the right of others to pass and re-pass along the route on
foot, cycle or horseback accompanied by one or more dogs!

Er yes agreed. That is after all the deftn of "bridleway" (BTW I am
not disputing its' existence...)

Presumably you also grant permission to service vehicles, post etc. The
test of status is whether the rest of us have a right to drive along it.

In message
,
JimK writes
Phone the County Council and ask to speak to the rights of way officer
for your area. They are usually practical people with an interest in
keeping the peace between owners and users.

But are unlikely to assist, more likely to start jobsworthy
"insistence" on some spec. or other costing £1000s more than I am
prepared to pay.

Scenario:- If I concreted the whole thing what's the worst case
outcome from my point of view? and on what pref. legal basis? I would
not be blocking it or denying anyone their rights over it.... so who
would do what about it?

Umm.. I can't answer that. Highways have always been helpful: supplying
free kissing gate sets, replacement bridleway gates and metal furniture.
They must have some *powers* but I don't know what.

Under the various acts you can close off a section in order to carry out
*works*. Agriculturally speaking this might be for work related to field
drainage, cable laying or such like. Inevitably notification would have
to be given along with a time scale.

Concreting the whole thing would not please horse riders but you might
get a vote of thanks from ladies with prams and the cyclists.

The concrete wheel tracks with softer ground between sounds a reasonable
compromise but I do think you need the whole width to be more or less
level.

If you are determined not to involve Highways you could ask for comment
in news groups specialising in horses or rights of way without revealing
your location.

regards
--
Tim Lamb

On Dec 15, 9:27 pm, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message
,
JimK writes

Phone the County Council and ask to speak to the rights of way officer
for your area. They are usually practical people with an interest in
keeping the peace between owners and users.

But are unlikely to assist, more likely to start jobsworthy
"insistence" on some spec. or other costing £1000s more than I am
prepared to pay.

Scenario:- If I concreted the whole thing what's the worst case
outcome from my point of view? and on what pref. legal basis? I would
not be blocking it or denying anyone their rights over it.... so who
would do what about it?

Umm.. I can't answer that. Highways have always been helpful: supplying
free kissing gate sets, replacement bridleway gates and metal furniture.
They must have some *powers* but I don't know what.

Under the various acts you can close off a section in order to carry out
*works*. Agriculturally speaking this might be for work related to field
drainage, cable laying or such like. Inevitably notification would have
to be given along with a time scale.

Concreting the whole thing would not please horse riders but you might
get a vote of thanks from ladies with prams and the cyclists.

and the walkers I suspect!
In context - the horses *have* to use full on tarmaced lanes to get to/
from one end of it (the way we drive out), at the other end there is a
metalled road for min 100m before muddy tracks start again. So it's
not like they can "lose" themselves in any "soft turfy wilderness" and
suddenly come upon my concrete tracks.... the rest of the track is
surfaced with large uneven stone flags (but a on-trivial 6" thick
say), or crushed concrete, or rough tarmac lumps and loose gravel all
with lashings of surface water to varying depths - it's not a bucolic
horsey heaven scene is it??!! :)

Surely on balance, sloped-edged concrete tracks would be an
improvement for most users of it?

The concrete wheel tracks with softer ground between sounds a reasonable
compromise but I do think you need the whole width to be more or less
level.

mmm currently drainage is down the middle so that could be tricky to
do, plus would change the whole drainage setup...

If you are determined not to involve Highways you could ask for comment
in news groups specialising in horses or rights of way without revealing
your location.

Thanks for your comments Tim, very interesting.
Cheers
JimK

In message
, JimK
writes

Concreting the whole thing would not please horse riders but you might
get a vote of thanks from ladies with prams and the cyclists.

and the walkers I suspect!
In context - the horses *have* to use full on tarmaced lanes to get to/
from one end of it (the way we drive out), at the other end there is a
metalled road for min 100m before muddy tracks start again. So it's
not like they can "lose" themselves in any "soft turfy wilderness" and
suddenly come upon my concrete tracks.... the rest of the track is
surfaced with large uneven stone flags (but a on-trivial 6" thick
say), or crushed concrete, or rough tarmac lumps and loose gravel all
with lashings of surface water to varying depths - it's not a bucolic
horsey heaven scene is it??!! :)

Doesn't sound a major issue.

Surely on balance, sloped-edged concrete tracks would be an
improvement for most users of it?

I forget the width you were proposing but anything linear raised or
lowered is a hazard to a cyclist. I have a set of barbed wire scars
across my left thigh caused by my front wheel being *trapped* in a
shallow wheel rut and tipping me onto a fence.

The concrete wheel tracks with softer ground between sounds a reasonable
compromise but I do think you need the whole width to be more or less
level.

mmm currently drainage is down the middle so that could be tricky to
do, plus would change the whole drainage setup...

Oh. I have a copy of the specification used by groundwork trust here.
Basically 6" of MOT type1 topped with 6" of 20mm to dust crushed
concrete. In the event, the whole job was done with crushed concrete.
They drained by crowning or sloping to a ditch at the side. Highways and
Herts. County Council funded the job at around 58K.

regards

--
Tim Lamb

On Dec 16, 7:12 pm, Tim Lamb wrote:

Surely on balance, sloped-edged concrete tracks would be an
improvement for most users of it?

I forget the width you were proposing but anything linear raised or
lowered is a hazard to a cyclist. I have a set of barbed wire scars
across my left thigh caused by my front wheel being *trapped* in a
shallow wheel rut and tipping me onto a fence.

mmm yeah but bearing in mind the rest of the surfaces on the bridleway
- a cyclist could hardly or reasonably be "surprised" or object when
they find themselves on a regular 18" wide flat surface for 150m ?
If they can't manage to steer & keep straight on it then surely they
could reasonably be expected to get off and push? (as some of them do
on other more ludicrous parts of the bridleway).

The question is still "who decides what sort of surface I appply to my
roadway over which some specific other users have rights to pass"...
We may well all have our ideal surfaces but I can't accept (yet) that
I am obliged to provide some conbination of them all - unless someone
can show me where the (legal) requirement is.

Oh. I have a copy of the specification used by groundwork trust here.
Basically 6" of MOT type1 topped with 6" of 20mm to dust crushed
concrete. In the event, the whole job was done with crushed concrete.
They drained by crowning or sloping to a ditch at the side. Highways and
Herts. County Council funded the job at around 58K.

what distance was that for!? hope they got it tendered
"competitively"!

ISTR crushed concrete was abt £2/T ex works.....

cheers
JimK

In message
, JimK
writes
The question is still "who decides what sort of surface I appply to my
roadway over which some specific other users have rights to pass"...
We may well all have our ideal surfaces but I can't accept (yet) that
I am obliged to provide some conbination of them all - unless someone
can show me where the (legal) requirement is.

I don't think there is one. Your insurers may have an opinion with
regard to any public liability. Inevitably, now that everyone is looking
over their shoulders to avoid responsibility for anything likely to lead
to litigation, over specification will occur. The bridleways on this
farm are subject to rutting. Cattle feeding trips in soft conditions can
quickly erode a pair of trenches 6" deep. Our Highways man supplied a
few tons of crushed concrete to put in the softer spots. So that was
deemed acceptable at the time.

Oh. I have a copy of the specification used by groundwork trust here.
Basically 6" of MOT type1 topped with 6" of 20mm to dust crushed
concrete. In the event, the whole job was done with crushed concrete.
They drained by crowning or sloping to a ditch at the side. Highways and
Herts. County Council funded the job at around 58K.

what distance was that for!? hope they got it tendered
"competitively"!

Not my money:-)

400m of byway and around 800m of bridleway (to a lower specification)
The job included digging out, installing treated softwood edging,
membrane, laying and rolling the surface in two stages and finally about
400m of three rail post and rail fencing plus some gates.

regards

--
Tim Lamb

On Dec 17, 12:39 pm, Tim Lamb wrote:

The bridleways on this
farm are subject to rutting. Cattle feeding trips in soft conditions can
quickly erode a pair of trenches 6" deep. Our Highways man supplied a
few tons of crushed concrete to put in the softer spots. So that was
deemed acceptable at the time.


"supplied" as in gratis? you to apply it? or stockpiled for them to do
as and when?

So in general how's it work - do you approach Highways man and ask for
assistance? or do they receive "complaints" from ROW users and then
offer assistance??


Herts. County Council funded the job at around 58K.

what distance was that for!? hope they got it tendered
"competitively"!

Not my money:-)

400m of byway and around 800m of bridleway (to a lower specification)
The job included digging out, installing treated softwood edging,
membrane, laying and rolling the surface in two stages and finally about
400m of three rail post and rail fencing plus some gates.

what was it like before all this? and how is it holding up?

cheers
JimK

In message
,
JimK writes
On Dec 17, 12:39 pm, Tim Lamb wrote:

The bridleways on this
farm are subject to rutting. Cattle feeding trips in soft conditions can
quickly erode a pair of trenches 6" deep. Our Highways man supplied a
few tons of crushed concrete to put in the softer spots. So that was
deemed acceptable at the time.


"supplied" as in gratis? you to apply it? or stockpiled for them to do
as and when?

Gratis. They delivered to my yard for me to use.

So in general how's it work - do you approach Highways man and ask for
assistance? or do they receive "complaints" from ROW users and then
offer assistance??

I think you would have heard by now: if he were getting serious
complaints.

Our particular Highways man was initially employed by the district
council and I first met him at a site meeting with our then landlords.
Subsequently we bought the land and I had various contacts with him over
issues like *wobbly* stiles. (they issued free kissing gates and
arranged a volunteer working party to install them). He attends the
*rights of way* committee meeting at our parish council

He moved to the County Council Offices when the responsibility for
rights of way changed but I've not noticed any difference.

I would just phone for a *chat*, explain who you are and your problem.
Ask for advice on an affordable solution. Be humble:-)
Towards the end of the conversation suggest you have heard that
landowners have received help by way of materials in other Counties.
Budget time is April so you are about right to get your toe in the door
for next years allocation. Much sucking of teeth between now and then
though:-)




Herts. County Council funded the job at around 58K.

what distance was that for!? hope they got it tendered
"competitively"!

Not my money:-)

400m of byway and around 800m of bridleway (to a lower specification)
The job included digging out, installing treated softwood edging,
membrane, laying and rolling the surface in two stages and finally about
400m of three rail post and rail fencing plus some gates.

what was it like before all this? and how is it holding up?

The bridleway is fine but I rarely take vehicles along that route. The
byway has puddled where water fails to drain easily and has *potholed*
in two places. I think 20mm to dust topping is too fine for normal road
vehicles. Previously the byway was hoggin/gravel surfaced and badly
rutted and potholed. The bridleway was soft arable land with some
ancient cart ruts.

regards

--
Tim Lamb

On Dec 17, 6:27 pm, Tim Lamb wrote:
what was it like before all this? and how is it holding up?

The bridleway is fine but I rarely take vehicles along that route. The
byway has puddled where water fails to drain easily and has *potholed*
in two places. I think 20mm to dust topping is too fine for normal road
vehicles.

mmm I agree we used some "cricketball to dust" crushed concrete on
some other sections and it's holding up well (to cars, horses etc - no
ruddy big traclers :)) tho running water soon erodes it....

mmm maybe I could see if i can't find some cheap chunky crushed
concrete and hoy it down - thing is I'm getting pretty Peed off
constantly maintaining it - usually in winter- hence my thoughts
turning to "real" concrete tracks for a try at longevity...

thanks for your time Tim
Cheers
JimK

JimK wrote:
....
mmm yeah - xcept there are a few issues that make that un/hard
workable - not least the bridleway status - can you shut a bridleway
for 24 hours without notice?

No, but you can close it temporarily if you issue the proper notices. As
Phil says, your local aauthority can advise you on that.

Colin Bignell