12 August 2010

Keeping the door to Ham open

My definition of Ham (and it's my blog so we are using my definition!) stretches east to include Latchmere Close and part of Latchmere Lane.

The southern border on Latchmere Lane is not that obvious and can only be judged by the gradual change from open spaces with trees (Ham) to more regimented housing (North Kingston) but the border on Latchmere Close is clearly marked by this wall and arch.

There used to be a gate here too, and it was even locked at times, but organisations like The Ramblers are fighting to keep our rights of way open. They have my full support.


  1. Hallo Matthew. You may want to update your click link to the Ham and Petersham Assoc. The new site appears on http://www.hamandpetersham.com/

    Your existing link still calls up the old one.

    Keep up the nice photos. 'roony

  2. I think that if they want to close the gate they should! It's their road! You will have other rights of way as well!

  3. I think that Anonymous will find that these are public roads. Living there gives you no right to deny access to other people. Gates are evil.

  4. i disagree, gates give you safety.

  5. As defined by DEFRA Latchmere Close is not a public right of way which means the gate is legal and can be shut and locked at any time, the land owners currently allow access but should the vandalism that blighted this street return the gate will be locked permanently. As far as gates being evil you had better take that up with anyone with a gate, including St Andrews Church!

    1. DEFRA does not define public rights of way, RBK does, and there is one along Latchmere Close even though the land is not owned by the Council. I also note that the presentation on the future use of the prison site shows several new footpaths crossing it.


All comments are welcome. Comments are moderated only to keep out the spammers and all valid comments are published, even if I disagree with them.