Devon TRF Group Forum

Centurion · Novice

Hambeer Lane

Tribey · Expert

Well Matt, you could have started with a more straight forward one!

Hambeer Lane used to feature on our Devon overlays as a legal route, but I did not put it on GRM at all because my initial research at that time didn't convince me of it's correct status.

Incredibly Hambeer Lane has been subject of a TRO since 2008, but the order was not published correctly by DCC and the lane had never been signed correctly by DCC, and hence we had continued riding it, believing it to be legal.

In 2020, during COVID, there had been a temporary restriction of use and a local consultation on several roads in that area, which in 2022 led to a full TRO being granted to other nearby tarmac roads, again without consultation with the TRF.

It was only when these later TROs came to our notice did we dig into the matter, at local and National level.

JV at National TRF started a conversation with counsel and DCC to fight the latest Order, in an attempt to keep Hambeer Lane open to us, but as it transpired that the 2008 Order was actually still in force, it would have been TRF money wasted, so the legal challenge was halted.

The fact that we (Trail riders) had continued to ride Hambeer Lane, and there appears to have been no complaints or issues with that use, led to us (Devon TRF) to approach DCC asking them to review several other existing Devon TROs to confirm their necessity or even to consider an exemption for 2 wheeled users, a strategy that has worked elsewhere in the country.

In all we referred a list of 10 TROed Devon lanes to DCC. There is no statutory obligation for DCC to carry out any reviews, but at the time they appeared receptive.

We have not to date received a reply.

In the mean time, Hambeer Lane (for its entire length) is subject of a TRO (the 2008 Order being replaced by the 2022 Order) that includes motorcycles (EXCEPT FOR ACCESS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES{hint}, but it may still be incorrectly signed)

Centurion · Novice

Brilliant. Thanks for that. I will no longer attempt to ride it anymore! I even did a search on DCC before I posted this and looked under TROs, but there was no mention of Hambeer Lane, because it was clearly under Ball's Farm. Don't make it easy do they! And I'll also have to avoid Crabb Lane (shame, as that's fun).

youaintseenme · Clubman B

ooeerr

I still use em all .... car and motorcycle as appropriate

Grandfather rights, probably

And Im not alone, I usually meet mpv traffic on Little Johns Cross hill and Balls Farm road

Recently had to give up using Scratchface lane ( almost opposite Balls Farm road where it meets Ide village road ) as the potholes have just got too deep and wide for Golf mk 4
It was my way around the traffic buildup in the Pocombe bridge junction area, taking me up to the B3212 at the start of Longdown straight

And theres always the excuse that you are on your way to The Bridge Inn, from any of those TRO'd routes .

Tribey · Expert

Yes, when you're out riding, always carry that birthday card for hand delivery to a resident there!

Pete · Expert

The No Entry signage was placed there to prevent rat running commuters cutting through the housing estate to avoid congestion on Cowick street and Dunsford road, this is not an anti trail bike matter.

While there are no entry signs visible on Google street view with the access only qualification below at the entrances of Little John's cross hill, Doctors walk, Balls farm road and Crabb lane (Cowick street end) which must be respected I do not recall any on Crabb lane approaching from Ide lane and I am unable to see any TRO no entry signage on Google street view at the junction of Hambeer lane with Cowick lane.

There are signs which appear to mirror those at the far end which tell users that Hambeer lane is subject to the national speed limit and those leaving Hambeer lane are entering a 30 mph zone, but Google street view is unclear.

There are examples elsewhere where a lane is just rideable in one direction due to signage at one end only.
Unfortunately I cannot find video of Hambeer or Crabb lanes so it appears I have not ridden them in the past 13 years, but if there are no signs the TRO is not enforceable.

So, can anybody local advise,
1. Are there No Entry signs at the junction of Cowick street/Hambeer or not? [SX910909 Google street view is unclear]
2. Are there No Entry signs on Crabb lane approached from Ide lane? [None at junction SX908903 but Google street view car did not go all the way]

Pete · Expert

Incidentally, playing Devil's Advocate, I could not help but notice that the footpath which crosses Hambeer lane is shown on the land charges map coloured in the same as other publicly maintainable highways so this could under NERC S.67 rules become a new Byway were it to be claimed as it is apparently on the List of Streets.

A speculative Schedule 14 Definitive Map Modification Order application to alter the status from Footpath to Byway would give us legal access to this group of lanes until it was determined which could buy us years.

Centurion · Novice

I just looked up Scratch Face Lane and that looks amazing! I was 'riding' it on Google Maps though, and at one point (where it breaks on Google Maps), there was a sign saying no public vehicular access (for a few metres before it starts again), but I can't for the life of me find that sign now! I'm definitely going to be riding that lane, and then pushing bike through the short section.

Centurion · Novice

1. Are there No Entry signs at the junction of Cowick street/Hambeer or not? [SX910909 Google street view is unclear]
2. Are there No Entry signs on Crabb lane approached from Ide lane? [None at junction SX908903 but Google street view car did not go all the way]
1. I've never seen any. As of March 2022, the blue sign was blurred. And it's missing from September 2022. But there are no signs in the September 2022 picture. I'll take a ride there this weekend and have a look.
2. No, I rode there this weekend and there was nothing at the top (Ball's Farm Road), or at the bottom.

youaintseenme · Clubman B

When the A30 dual carriageway was built, it cut across Scratchface lane and a short length of accomodation road was built to connect the bottom end to Ide village road just east of the bridge carrying the A30 over Ide village road.
For reasone we never discovered, this short length was given bridleway status but was generally ignored by the natives. Almost no traffic uses Scratchface lane these days, even the horse riders seem to have given up as riding a horse along Ide village road ( with a 60mph speed limit) is not ideal.

www.google.com/maps/@50.7066648,-3.5625861,3a,45.3y,240.23h,84.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZuU5gYloWHFRyMphudji_Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

no bridleway sign is visible at the Ide village road junction, and a helpful no through road sign at the top end confirming mpv use

www.google.com/maps/@50.7062885,-3.5743691,3a,75y,66.6h,72.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8D1lD5J5bagFxaj9AZxhtg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

but a less helpful one at this point where the road got diverted in 1974 -

www.google.com/maps/@50.7076967,-3.565265,3a,41.8y,105.37h,79.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smu_r5gKt86fU1ru4-xKDpw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Square plate signs are advisory apparently ..........

I went to the primary school at Ide, lived there for my teenage years and helped to design then build the A30 dual carriageway along this stretch, so have to admit to some local knowledge (-;

youaintseenme · Clubman B

Pete, that footpath that crosses Hambeer lane is called Broadway path and has been a footpath for longer than I can recall. There is a restrictive pedestrian gate somewhere along it.
I do not think we would make any friends by doing a sch 14 claim and would likely bring attention to the poor signage that we currently use as justification .....

Seriously the only access to a very popular pub, the Twisted Oak ( that I previously referred to as the Bridge Inn, its previous name) is via Little Johns Cross hill or Balls Farm road so theres no real issue with using these roads if you are aware of this.

Pete · Expert

youaintseenme wrote:
Seriously the only access to a very popular pub, the Twisted Oak ( that I previously referred to as the Bridge Inn, its previous name) is via Little Johns Cross hill or Balls Farm road so there's no real issue with using these roads if you are aware of this.

Thank you, it is worth knowing that a visit to the Twisted Oak pub legalises use of these ways for access in accordance with the signage.

youaintseenme · Clubman B

Approaching Crabb lane from Ide Village road ( formerly Ide Lane ) ie just west of the A30 interchange, there used to be a bridleway sign and a horse stile that was an intimidating 18" high log with restricted approach and landing areas.
Last time I rode this route there was no signage and the horse stile had been dismantled by natives but this was probably 4 years ago.

Again though, assuming no signage or stile, it would be a direct route from the A30 interchange to the Twisted Oak pub

Note that the google street view vehicle didnt attempt to drive all the way in a Soiutherly direction, unlike its efforts on Scratchface lane. Possibly another argument to justify mpv use or at least add to the uncertaintycaused by using publicly available information, to plod ?

Centurion · Novice

I did Crabb Lane again recently, and again there's no signage whatsoever. It's really poor.

Centurion · Novice

I recently went back to Hambeer Lane from Cowick Lane, and there's no TRO at that point, just the blue 'Not suitable for Motorvehicles'. They really do need to get their signage correct.

youaintseenme · Clubman B

Its better for us if they dont.

We have a justification if challenged that there was no signage to indicate other than unsuitable. Plod might give it a go but CPS will not persue a case.
Sign the TRO's properly and all you ( me really ) have is 'local with grandfather rights' which is unlikely to persuade CPS that 'its ok its only that serial offender Bob ........'

Jules · Novice

Hi,

I MTBd up Hambeer to Little Johns Cross (I live at the top of Barley Lane).

On entering Hambeer there were clear fresh tracks indicating its been used for local access.

Given there is absolutely no signage other than Unsuitable for Vehicles at both ends of the lane and no indication of TRO what indicates to the user that this lane is subject to a legal restriction not just and advisory of unsuitable?

This is a great route for me to get to Sainsburys for fuel. Its more direct and has a smaller carbon footprint than going down Buddle etc

Jules

-- Edited by Jules on Monday 27th of November 2023 03:16:15 PM

Tribey · Expert

In my opinion too, there needs to be correct legal signage if a successful prosecution for contravening the Order is to take place. There isn't currently the correct signage in place for all the restrictions in this area.

The subject of TROs in this area reared its head in October 2022 when we became aware of the latest Order, which had in Sept 2022 gone through the Order process without the Council notifying the required interested parties, of which the TRF is one.

We then also found out there had been experimental restrictions in this area during Covid in an attempt to promote 'active travel' in the making of an improved walking and cycling network, as part of the Emergency Active Travel Fund measures, and part of the councils 5 year Action Plan of the Cabinet-approved Exeter Transport Strategy 2020-2030. Again the TRF were not consulted in any of this.

The TRF sought legal advice to challenge the council in the making of the latest Order, because we enjoyed riding Hambeer Lane and couldn't see the need, but the council then revealed that there was in fact already a Traffic Regulation Order in force for the green roads in the 'Balls Farm Road area' including Hambeer Lane since January 2008! an Order that we were not consulted on and that had not all been signposted correctly, lanes that we had continued to ride unawares, and were on our group overlays!

Balls Road Farm area TRO 250108 page1 signed.JPG

Balls Road Farm area TRO 250108 page2 signed.JPG

To my knowledge there was not a single complaint or conflict regarding trail riding on Hambeer Lane in all that time, questioning whether the Order was actually necessary.

I have written to Devon Highways suggesting that this Order, one of several in Devon, could be reviewed and amended to allow trail bike use.

youaintseenme · Clubman B

Thanks for this Ray, I probably had been told about these recent orders but filed them away as not worth worrying about as I have always ridden these lanes .........
If they were not properly advertised and have not been correctly signed, I would suggest ( in the event of a challenge) that they were not properly made and therefore have no standing.

College Lane with the famous long ford by the Huntsman Inn at Ide is signed as TRO at both ends which means Scratchface lane is technically not accessible from the top ( Longdown) end . I would consider these two lanes as a part of the Balls Farm area and ideally they should be on our mapping.

I would be delighted to see some 2 wheeled exemptions for this nest of lanes and as you say, theres never been any problems with us using them to my knowledge but then again large noisy groups exercising their rights, this close to Exeter and the village of Ide could become a problem, as we have learned the hard way with lanes on the edge of Newton Abbot.

Pete · Expert

Tribey wrote:
the latest Order, which had in Sept 2022 gone through the Order process without the Council notifying the required interested parties, of which the TRF is one.

It is usual for the user groups to be consulted.

Ramblers Association for the walkers

British Horse Society for the riders

Auto Cycle Union for the wheeled users (not the TRF, but as you know a TRF member receives the Autocycle union consultations)

This duty is a legal requirement, not a courtesy, when it comes to Definitive Map Modification Orders, but I do not think this falls into that category because the local highways engineer has the authority to make instant decisions on safety grounds when it comes to road closures

Jules · Novice

My worry is that as this inappropriate signage has now been brought to the attention of DH they will merely drive out and staple TRO status to a wooden post ?

If part of the TRO legal (?) process is to consult amongst others the TRF then as above legally a TRO cannot be applied ?

On my way up I chatted to a local resident walking a dog. She said hadnt seen trail bikes in a while. She seemed to think it was a byway open to all traffic though. And was relaxed with the thought of bikes plodding up and down at times. As above I think either bikes or cars or both have been up. Its not technical to navigate by any means. The tracks on entrance (from the bottom) looked more trail bike than car though.

Being local to this and Ide routes Im happy to do what I can to assist.

Jules

Jules · Novice

Quote: To my knowledge there was not a single complaint or conflict regarding trail riding on Hambeer Lane in all that time, questioning whether the Order was actually necessary.

So what was the original reason for such an order/s ?

Why on the TRO there is no reference to why a decision was taken I.e mitigating reasons/circumstances?

Perhaps DH engineers visited a cluster of old lanes, deemed them economically unviable to maintain and took the admin route of a TRO.

However. In the clause is states access is allowed for maintenance. Being TRF riders can we claim riding the lanes with tools in packs is both assessing the requirement for maintenance and where possible also performing such maintenance (I cleared a branch on my way upis this maintenance)?

Sorry for churning this one up but having pedalled up that lane it seems the perfect BOAT.

Jules

-- Edited by Jules on Tuesday 28th of November 2023 09:50:06 AM

youaintseenme · Clubman B

Jules
you touch on the basis on which we ride unsurfaced routes
Our official, public stance has to be based on the law as understood by authority and legal experts. Ray works hard at establishing and maintaining this record of what we can, to the best of our knowledge, show to be legal to ride with mpv

However if you are prepared to go a little deeper and explore shades of grey you could come up with ways of arguing that you do have a right ....

ideas that have come up over the years include permission to visit a piece of land that touches ( fronts) the defined way, delivering leaflets, surveying in order to plan future repair work and no doubt other creative ideas like your maintenance suggestion.

This alternative approach requires a reasonable understanding of RoW law and includes an understanding of the basis on which we might be prosecuted.
Riding with a certain police inspector over the years ( he would never mention his plod connection) and listening to him deflect challenges was at times hilarious as he just quoted passages of law with incredible confidence and no one was going to challenge his apparent knowledge.

Its probably not in broader TRF interests to encourage this kind of approach though and if a prosecution were to happen, the TRF would not offer free legal support ( it does if a paid up member is prosecuted on a lane that we tell you is legal to use ) but at the same time there are riders who are prepared to take a different approach.
My starting point used to be if 'its a twin hedged route, in Devon its a legal road' . Sadly legislation in 2005 took away this simple but pretty reliable basis on which we could ride.

But we still have grey areas that we exploit, like the white routes on OS mapping that have no status. Some of us might ride these routes on the basis that the wording of the highways act 'riding on a route other than a highway. could make it difficult to prosecute, as the whitey may argued to be a highway. However you would need the evidence but within the archives of DTRF research we do sometimes have such information.

We used to offer RoW courses that covered such thinking and anyone who attended such a course would get a bit more information from our keeper of maps.........

Jules · Novice

Hi,

Appreciate the advice and history. Like the idea of a road being defined by having a hedge on each side. What happened to a simple life eh

By no means do I plan to ride a route thats not supported by the TRF more understand why a route would have a TRO on it in the first placea route that may have carried mechanised traffic 150 years ago. And other forms even earlier. I brought it up as there is evidence of mechanised use.

Of interest the TRO states Hambeer Lane for its full length. However if you go to google street view the top 150 yards or so from John Cross is actually on street view so did google infringe the TRO ?

Its better to be part of the solution than the problem. Understanding the environment helps in this regard. Exploring the grey may work but at the same time may threaten future discussions.

Ill use my eMTB and MTB to cruise up and down it as part of going on my non motorbike ridin . Its literally on my doorstep and a great lane to both climb and descend.

Brilliant short cut too, although therein the problem that if it was in too good a condition would be regularly used by those wishing to miss out the Buddle/Cowick lane junction. Id guess this is partly why a TRO was placed on it in the first place.

Onward and upward

Jules

-- Edited by Jules on Tuesday 28th of November 2023 02:18:10 PM

-- Edited by Jules on Tuesday 28th of November 2023 02:18:36 PM

Pete · Expert

Jules wrote:

Brilliant short cut too, ...... would be regularly used by those wishing to miss out the Buddle/Cowick lane junction. Id guess this is partly why a TRO was placed on it in the first place.

Quite so, not an anti trail rider issue, just to stop the rat running commuter