Name

Subject

Reason

Interest

Mr Pawley

Coastal Access: Public Slipways in Plymouth (minute 10 refers)

A user of slipways and the Secretary of Mayflower Boat Owner Association

Personal

Mr Pawley

South West Coast Path Update (minute 11 refers)

Is the Plymouth local representative for the South West Coast Path

Personal

Mr Skinner

Public Path Extinguishment Order – Ridgeway School (minute 12 refers)

Ramblers and Open Spaces

Personal

Mr Emery

Public Path Extinguishment Order – Ridgeway School (minute 12 refers)

Ramblers and Open Spaces

Personal

Councillor Wheeler

Coastal Access: Public Slipways in Plymouth (minute 11 refers)

A member of the Cattewater Harbour Commission

Personal

Councillor Wheeler

Public Path Extinguishment Order – Ridgeway School (minute 12 refers)

Member of the Planning Committee

Personal

Councillor Churchill

Public Path Extinguishment Order – Ridgeway School (minute 12 refers)

Member of the Planning Committee

Personal

(a)

Mr Stewart, Vice-Chair was not present at the meeting and he should be removed from the attendance record;

(b)

regarding minute 71, Mr Attrill did not leave the meeting and his name should be removed from the list members who left the meeting.

(1)

the minutes of the meeting held on 28 March 2011 are confirmed as a correct record subject to the above amendments in (a) and (b);

(2)

regarding minute 66, the Forum Secretary would chase the response from Ian Gillhespy, Senior Valuation Surveyor.

(a)

the recently published 2009/10 Annual Report is forwarded to Natural England;

(b)

a mechanism is added to the document to easily identify which resolutions have been completed and which are still outstanding;

(c)

an update is provided to the next Forum meeting from Robin Pearce, Public Rights of Way Officer on the progress of recruiting a university student to undertake a work placement within the public rights of way department.

(a)

section 4.11 stated that the forum needed to have one member from each user group present for meetings to be quorate and that given the low number of landowners this could potentially cause conflict at future meetings and as such needed to be reviewed further;

(b)

Natural England’s guidance for LAFs should be reviewed and an updated section 4.11 included in the Terms of Reference to be discussed at a future meeting;

(c)

clarification was needed on the membership of Beth Roberts who was acknowledged to be a landowner in the Annual Report but an other interest member on her nameplate.

(a)

there should be a section that highlighted the number of designated public rights of way at the beginning of the year and how many designated public rights of way at the end of the year;

(b)

the section on membership groups needed to be clarified and updated;

(c)

in section 3.1 the wording ‘as far as practicable’ should be included after the word constituted so that the sentence reads ‘The Plymouth Local Access Forum has been constituted, as far as practicable, so that it is balanced between three main interests’;

(d)

clarification should be sought on the wording used in section 3.4 – Advertising for Members as this was felt that it did not follow the guidance produced by Natural England.

(1)

the LAF Secretary would make the suggested amendments and additions as discussed in (a), (b) and (c) above;

(2)

theLAF Secretary would seek clarification on the guidance from Natural England and report back to the next meeting where the annual report would be reconsidered.

(a)

the detail of the ROWIP required members to be able to have an informed discussion with the Public Rights of Way Officer before determining the priorities;

(b)

If the ROWIP was deferred until the next meeting then there was the potential that time would elapse before any of the allocated revenue of £10k could be spent;

(c)

an all forum working group would be the best way to address the work programme priorities of the ROWIP with the Public Rights of Way Officer also invited to attend.

(a)

Plymouth City Council had a responsibility to provide coastal access and that this was also under the remit of the Local Access Forum;

(b)

in Plymouth there were three main ways to access the sea, which were using slipways, landing stages and steps;

(c)

due to slipways and steps involving tidal movements both were subjected to regular sea washing which resulted in the growth of weeds; it was the council’s responsibility to maintain these areas to ensure that they were cleaned and safe to use;

(d)

recently a member of the public slipped on the Mount Batten slipway as it had not been cleaned and following an inspection was closed; the slip had since re-opened and had been fully cleaned following a written complaint being sent to the Chief Executive of Plymouth City Council;

(e)

the council’s webpage for landing stages and slipways, highlighting which slipways were public, private and commercial, was inaccurate; this was inadequate particularly as this is the first place that members of the public look for coastal access points.

(f)

given the importance of the America’s Cup and the high number of expected visitors that this would bring it was imperative that the council maintained its means of coastal access to an acceptable standard;

(g)

the Forum needed to highlight their concerns to Plymouth City Council and recommend that the inaccuracies on the slipways and landing stages webpage is updated as a matter of urgency;

(h)

Plymouth City Council when updating their web content should liaise with the Waterfront Partnership and the Tamar Estuaries Consultative Forum to ensure that their web content does not conflict.

(a)

the boardwalk at the Royal William Yard had been fully erected, although it was still closed to the public for decorative work;

(b)

the steps at the Royal William Yard were not in place and works had stalled due to a lack of funding. Funding discussions were ongoing and were dependent on the footpath through the yard being adopted as a public right of way;

(c)

the signage erected at Breakwater Road had improved access to the Yacht Haven Quay footpath, however, there had been one comment from a member of the public that they wished to see the bespoke cast iron signage renovated rather than replaced.

(a)

they were disappointed that the LAF had not been consulted prior to the Extinguishment Order being made on 3 June 2011;

(b)

since the original consultation with the LAF 18 months ago the footpath still had not been fenced; it was felt that this needed to be considered before the Extinguishment Order was made;

(c)

if the Forum objected to the Order then the decision would be referred to the Secretary of State;

(d)

the Extinguishment Order was very similar to a recent order in Buckinghamshire where the Inspector did not confirm the order due to the school not erecting a fence;

(e)

the Forum should object to the Extinguishment Order on the grounds that the local authority have not followed the correct procedures and regulations contained within the Highways Act 1980 and the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

(f)

the school was instructed to not fence the footpath by the fire authority as a fence would jeopardise the pupil’s health and safety;

(g)

they supported the Extinguishment Order as it would provide increased protection to teachers and the pupils of Ridgeway School.

(a)

footpaths were identified using the Ramblers’ maps and then walked by the group to identify potential issues;

(b)

the Whitleigh area was well designed with some excellent footpaths, particularly around Cann woods and it was understood that these paths were being used by a local health group walk leader;

(c)

it was believed that the paths were maintained by the council and recommendations were provided to Rosemary Dale, Major Schemes Officer within the Sustainable Transport department about cleaning, street lighting and signage.

(1)

the LAF Secretary would type up the notes of the Access Whiteligh Project Working Group and distribute a copy to all members by email;

(2)

Ian Stewart, Vice-Chair would draft a letter to the Planning department asking for them to explain the process of determining applications where a public footpath is involved.

(a)

during a previous consultation in 2010 Forum members opted to hold their Forum meetings at 10:30am;

(b)

the Forumshould not be a lengthy meeting as the working groups should undertake to look at issues in detail with the Forum used to endorse the working groups recommendations.