Meeting documents

Apologies were received from:

·         Mr S Thorns

To disclose any Personal or Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

There were no declarations of interest.

To confirm the minutes from the meeting held on 08 March 2017.

The minutes of the meeting held on 08 March 2017 were agreed as an accurate record.

Matters Arising

Mr B Worrell gave an update on Item 4- Kent permit system-

The Permit System

Administered by the Rights of Way department.
No charge as they don’t want any excuse for not applying.
Permit Application available on line on Kent website.
Generally uses combination locks with a physical barrier.
What is interesting is that physical barriers still allow track bikes to get through but as they are perceived to cause no more damage that horses, a blind eye is turned, unless they go off the track line and cause damage.  It is recognised that the track bikes and quad bikes are still illegal and the PCSO (see below) will have a word.
Some minor issues of locks being ground off.
Some users have given out the combination to other users.
But they have to sign a Code of Conduct which prohibits this.
Permit can be rescinded if any infringement of the Code, including not keeping to the track, etc.
There has been an improved detection rate of abuse and users are respecting the Permit system.
More users are again using the route including walkers, cyclists and horse riders.

There is some policing of the specific Rights of Way:
In one case there is a PCSO funded through partner contributions (including the police themselves) who also carries out other duties and applies the Road Traffic Act to offenders.
The Rights of Way department will perform occasional inspections usually at a time when there is likely to be unauthorised use.
Also the Permit Application is undergoing a revision to allow sharing of information with the police, particularly as they are involved in the policing of the routes.

There are three specific routes which have been the subject of abuse.

The first one initially started with an ETRO as an experiment.
There were 107 landowners along this route and the fields and woods had been sold off in ‘leisure plots’, several who were no longer alive, and so there was no control or stewardship.  The 4x4s were all over land, fly tipping was the norm, burnt out stolen vehicles, and real damage to the surfaces.  The Permit allowed the reporting of misuse and a large majority of the landowners got together and become a community with control and stewardship.  Many other users are using the route again and the Council spent some money re-instating the surface to withstand legitimate users/permits.

The second was part of a National Trail and had residents at one end who were fed up with the anti-social behaviour.  The permit stopped fly tipping and users now keep to the route.  I think this is the one with the funded PCSO.

The third one had a clay undelay and was remote.  The 4x4s caused real damage to the under-surface with large deep ruts full of water both on and off the route.  There were a large number of U-Tube clips  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Ms J Taylor gave an overview of the report provided; the following points were raised in discussion:

·         It was asked if Wycombe District Council (WDC) would have the power to make this decision with or without the forums input. It was advised they would have the power to proceed regardless of any feedback.

·         It was asked if the area was for pedestrians or vehicles, it was advised there was currently access for both.

·         The Chiltern Society stated they were rejecting recommendation as they felt it would be setting a president for the District Councils and the County Council to be able to shut public rights of way as they wish.

·         Trail Riders’ Fellowship and MPV users were accepting the proposal as they felt it was a short area and were plenty of other access points, had it been a longer stretch they too would have rejected the proposal.

·         It was asked if the statistics of the issues were available as the report states there were issues at all times of day and that alternatively a timed closure could be acceptable. It was felt that  a full closure would be over the top. And by closing the acces you would simply more the issue from one area to another.

·         It was asked that if people/groups object but WDC choose to take the proposal forward, would there be an appeals process for people to follow. MS Taylor was unamaware but said she would look into it and feedback to the forum.

ACTION: Ms J Taylor

·         It is felt by the forum there were too many issues that had not been addressed by the report.

·         The forum are objecting the proposal on the grounds of-

o   May set a president for other areas

o   Closing a RoW access.

The Chairman thanked Ms Taylor for the update.

Update to be provided by Ms S Wright, Ridgeway National Trail Project Officer.

Ms S Wright gave a presentation on The Ridgeway- Next Steps for Buckinghamshire. Presentation attached for information.

The following points were raised in discussion:

·         Mr B Worrell trying to lobby for the Ridgeway to be set to the highest status possible to allow for up to horse and carriages to be able to use it. It was recognised that there was the need and the demand for cycles and horses but looking for a future option of parallel routes to allow this.

·         Signage- with the signage could information be provided on the QR code or the website as to how accessable that path is for different levels of disability. It is unfortunate for less abled to find out half way down the path. Ms Wright felt this would be useful both on th QR codes and on the website.

·         Ms S Wright asked for suggestions for stone that could be used to put plinths in along the Ridgeway, the forum suggested:

o   Denner Hill Stone

o   Pudding stone

·         It was raised that there is no representative the AONB on the membership, can this be addressed for future meetings.

ACTION: Ms J Clark

The chairman thanked Ms Wright for the update.

Update to be provided by:

·         Helen Francis, Definitive Map team.

·         Jonathan Clark, Strategic Access Officer, and

·         Joanne Taylor, Operations Team Leader.

A.   Definitive Map Team- Emailed to get updates from the day but no response, Jon  can you please add these…..

·         Item 27- Awaiting diversional.

·          

·          

·          

·         No further updates or questions.

B.    Strategic Access Update- Mr J Clark

·         No further updates or questions.

C.   Rights of Way Operations Update- Ms J Taylor

·         It was asked who’s decision it was to bring external servies back in house to BCC? Ms Taylor advised a decision would be made in house and a Cabinet Member decision would then be completed from there. There would be extensive discussion around this prior to a decision being made.

·         Could an update on this be provided at the next meeting.

ACTION: Ms J Taylor

The Chairman thanked the officers for the updates.

The Chairman noted the report, the following points were raised in discussion:

·         It was asked if it would be likely the works on EWR to be operational by 2019, what was the chance of this?

·         It was advised……Jon, can you fill the blank here please?

·         A member felt there was some confusion around registering of footpaths with local parishes, do we feel as a forum there needs to be some clarification to the Parishes around what does and doesn’t need to be registered. An email needs to be compiled and sent out to parishes to ensure everyone is aware of the process.

ACTION: Mr J Clark

·         A link to a webiste that may help around clarification to be sent to Mr Clark to distribute to the forum.

Mezzanine Room 1, County Hall, Aylesbury.

10am Wednesday 8 November 2017.

10am Wednesday 8 November 2017. Mezzanine Room1, County Hall, Aylesbury.