Minutes of Meeting held on 26th January 2016
Tyne & Wear Local Access Forum
Present:Liz Bray (Chair, LB) Victor Cadaxa (Vice-Chair, VC), Kathy Atkinson (KA), Nigel Harrison (NH), Andy Blanchflower (AB), Terry Welsh (TW), Councillor Gary Haley (Gateshead Council), Alison Blackburn (ABl), Ron Noble (RN), Charlie Hall (CH), Councillor Audrey Huntley (South Tyneside Council)
In Attendance:Heather Evans, CTC (HE), John Bourn, Regional Transport Team (JB), Kim Farrage, Regional Transport Team*, Tim Ducker, Sunderland City Council), Rob Hindhaugh, Gateshead Council, Neil Frier, Gateshead Council (NF), Martin Metcalf, South Tyneside (MM) Simon Carey, Newcastle City Council (SC), Chris Pope (Natural England), Claire Dance (Natural England)
Apologies:Graeme Clark, North Tyneside Council (GC)
* Taker of notes
1. / Welcome and ApologiesThe chair welcomed everyone and asked those present to introduce themselves. Apologies for absence were noted. / Action
2. / Declarations of Interest
No declarations of interest were made.
3. / Election of officer posts until 26th April 2016
Asthe last election of officers was held at the February 2015 meeting, following discussions with the Rights of Way Officers and in order to abide with LAF rules and regulations, it is proposed to extend current officer roles until the next LAF meeting in April.
This proposal was accepted by a Quorum
4. / Minutes from meeting held on 13thOctober 2015
The minutes were agreed as a correct record.
5. / Update on the North East Coastal Path
Chris Pope and Claire Dance from Natural England gave a presentation on the North East Coastal Path. As part of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, work is well underway with England’s coastal path which will enable people to have a right of access around the open coast.
The Act also provides provision for “roll back” without the need to go back to the Secretary of State.
This scheme will be implemented from the Scottish Border to Skegness and will be split and executed into 11 sections with 1 stretch already open and 4 in development. The stretch which goes through the Tyne and Wear area is the South Bents to Amble which is 6.9km long and carries on from an already open stretch; it goes through the land of three local authorities.The route itself will, in general, follow the current rights of way route.
CH advised that it may be worthwhile looking at the current cycle way maps to assist in mapping the route.
It was stated that a legally secure continuous route would be designated as a national trail which will also have “spreading room”- land beside the route where people can spread out and explore, rest or picnic seaward of the trail.
These routes are helping to support local businesses; for example, in Wales, £16 million was contributed to the Welsh economy, not taking into account the health and wellbeing impacts.
For the South Bents to Amble section, preparation work started in Summer 2015 including familiarisation work and desk top research. 94 different owners and occupiers were consulted with as well 4 public drop in sessions in December 2015 plus numerous stakeholder meetings.
It was advised that, from Stage 1, options have started to develop proposals via working with the relevant LAF’s as one of its key stakeholders to look at alignment options while striking the balance and also undertaking a sensitive features assessment.
Stage 3 of the development would be to send any recommendations to the Secretary of State (SoS). There would also be a consultation exercise in which all representations would be taken into consideration.
CP advised that a decision would then be taken by the SoS which is expected to take place mid-2017, with the route expected to be open by early 2018 subject to there being no issues or setbacks.
The establishment and initial maintenance costs will be 100% funded by Natural England (NE); NE will also meet 75% of the ongoing maintenance costs and the rest will be funded by the relevant local authority.
CH also informed the Group that monies must be spent on those Rights of Way via foot not bridle paths.
VC noted that some of the footpath surfaces on the National Trust land are in poor condition and queried whether these could be changed. It was advised that this could be taken up with their local authority; it was also noted that Natural England will be speaking to the National Trust as part of their consultation.
TW noted that he would like the athletics networks within our area to be involved. Natural England advised that they would add them onto their contact list.
TW also stated that, where feasible, we should ensure as wide access as possible e.g. gates instead of stiles, however it is recognised that in more rural settings by its very nature, a lot of the terrain will be unsuitable.
LB queried whether there will be guidance published on what parts of the route will be fully accessible. It was advised that this information would be on the National Trails section of the website.
AH stated that, where direct access around the coast is not apparent, will suitable alternatives be looked at? For example, Souter Lighthouse to South Shields not beside the cliff edge but still has a clear view of the sea.
TD stated that south of Hendon has got “roll-back” which is inspected at multiple times per year and, as and when the cliff moves, they re-align the route accordingly.
RH queried how the negotiations are going with landowners. Natural England stated that there has generally been a good reception; there were drop in event before Christmas where landowners were very amenable. Communication is always made at a very early stage and, even on a national scale, there have been low levels of objection.
LB thanked Chris and Claire from Natural England for attending and providing the Group with an update. / Action
6. / Signage on Multi-User Routes-Discussion
LB stated that there has been a lot of ongoing discussion about this matter including looking at various examples and asked the Group whether they wish to make formal advice notes to each local authority.
ABl advised that she had not had time to look at the signs but if each multi-user route has appropriate signage and sticks to it then you cannot go wrong. More symbols can be confusing.
LB noted that this sometimes can be the problem; there is no set standard sign. VC agreed that, from the examples which have been looked at, there is no comparability between the signs in Tyne and Wear.
LB queried about the hot spots including Bowes Railways as a lot of cyclists won’t slow down.
NF advised that if a problem is being encountered with signage, then this needs to be followed up with central government as opposed to local government.
RH stated it is all down to education and sometimes there is an issue of too much information on one route.
TD agreed and noted that unfortunately there are no signs which will deter reckless people.
LB and VC thanked everyone for their contributions and thoughts on the signage and proposed that no further action be progressed.
ACTION AGREED
7. / Improving Strategic Cycle Routes through Newcastle
JB gave a short presentation on the Northern part of Newcastle City Centre and the cycle delivery plans which Newcastle City Council have planned.
ABl queried what provision the new scheme at Mary’s Place will have with regard to pedestrian crossings. Will a pedestrian have to cross a cycle lane which could potentially be very hazardous?
LB asked whether concerns had been passed onto Newcastle City Council and they have been.
HE advised that the cycle scheme on Claremont Road was different to what was being constructed on John Dobson Street although it does seem as though that there will be a pedestrian crossing.
SC advised that drivers are now only allowed to drive as far as Ridley PlaceRH queried whether lights would remain on Percy Street; it was advised that yes they would remain.
LB stated that any further queries should be passed onto JB who will notify Newcastle City Council.
TW queried as to how these schemes are being monitored? NF advised that, in the case of the majority of schemes, highway authorities look at them in great depth and how it corresponds with government legislation; most schemes will then go through an audit process to verify the key elements resulting in post- construction monitoring and evaluation, NF also advised that the HSE only get involved in a scheme if there has been an accident.
TW also queried who to contact if a set of lights were changing too quickly. It was advised that he should call Enviro-call.
LB asked whether any further action was needed from the LAF in regard to the cycle schemes in Newcastle, in particularly the scheme on John Dobson Street.
KA replied that she felt that two way cycle movement could have a detrimental effect on those using the crossing including those with prams and she would draft a statement of concern which would be passed to TW so it could be considered from the Disability Sub-Group’s viewpoint before being circulated to the full LAF / JB will add this presentation to the LAF website
KA to liaise with Disability Sub-Group
8. / Local Authority budget cuts and countryside access
LB advised that this item had been added to the agenda due to the Group havingreceived information on Gateshead Council’s proposed budget cuts. Comments had to be submitted by 30th December 2015 which the LAF had responded to.The submission tried to be as constructive as possible and raised a series of questions.
It was advised that Nigel and Andy Blanchflower have been invited to a meeting with Gateshead to discuss their proposed cuts so will update the LAF at the next meeting.
RH advised that Countryside Rangers are at risk as part of the proposed cuts.NF stated that currently ROWO are not included within the proposed cuts.
LB applauded Gateshead Council for consulting the LAF on the proposed cuts. In the LAF’s Forward Plan, it states that the LAF will “support Local Authorities in their efforts and encourage more action to protect, expand and manage the Rights of Way network”. She suggested that a Sub- Group is needed to look at path management.
9. / Introduction to funding for the Public Right of Way Network
LB stated that there are a lot of different funds which are available and asked whether the Group would welcome an overview of funding and what funding is available? The Group agreed that this would be extremely helpful.
TD advised that each local authority could each do a part but would work together. It will also be worthwhile identifying any issues e.g. maintenance each ROWO has. / ROW Officers
10. / Monitoring of Progress:
(i)Forward Plan; 4 themes (promotion and Education, Connectivity and Linkage, Disabled Users and Supporting Local Authorities)
(ii)ROWIP priorities and progress
A paper on the monitoring of progress against the Forward Plan and the ROWIP priorities and progress will be produced by LB for the AGM meeting in April. If anyone has anything which they wish to submit, please send them via JB
11. / Foot Crossings on the Rail Network
LB advised that if anyone has any concerns regarding foot crossings on the rail network please let the Group know.
RH stated that Dave Shorrocks has been tasked with looking into this and will ask if he can attend the next LAF meeting / RH enquire to see if Dave Shorrocks can attend the next meeting
12. / Officers Report including discussion and questions.
12.1 Gateshead
RH gave an update on matters relating to Gateshead which included discussing the Footpath at Ryton Golf Course in which the Council is seeking to make a public path diversion due to an underground fire. The Order was confirmed on the 27th October 2015.
RH also advised that due to storm damage a section of the Keelman’s way has been sectioned off. 400m of the river bank around this footpath has gone in the last few years.
It was stated that the planning in Crawcrook in relation to houses are still in discussion with plans for it to progress to outline planning application stage. There are still on-going negotiations with the developer.
12.2 Newcastle
SC went through his progress & update report and stated that discussions are ongoing with developers alongside the planning application in regard to Footpath 4 and Footpath 6 Dinnington and will know more in April once a decision has been reached.
SC also advised that regarding the restricted Byway 5 at Newburn, progress is rather slow as it is taking a lot of time and resource. It is hoped that the developer will enhance the route.
It was also noted that there has been a lot of storm damage on rights of way which is consuming a lot of the capital budget.
KA advised that the LAF is still not being informed about public consultations, could the ROW officers ask if they are informing user groups.
LB stated that she had raised it in the letter which she sent to each authority but may need to be reinforced.
ABlackburn noted that Newcastle City Council are currently consulting on their Green and Open Spaces and queried whether the LAF should form a response.
LB advised that the consultation was about more about anti-social behaviour.
12.3 North Tyneside Council:
As GC from North Tyneside had sent his apologies, no further information was available apart from the progress update report which was part of the meeting pack.
12.4 South Tyneside
MM from South Tyneside stated that he is happy to answer any queries and that there was nothing new to report.
AH advised that there had been a public consultation for the IAMP in which there were three main options largely centred on the central core of the site and she was awaiting feedback.
VC noted that the Testo’s and Downhill Road schemes have been amalgamated; until the Development Consent Order has been published, there is nothing more to report.
AH stated that there had also been a consultation on Lindisfarne and John Reid road which proposes that access to the A194 via the estate which causes severe bottlenecks will be closed.
AH also noted that there have been flood defences constructed at Fellgate due to multiple episodes of heavy flooding and that the works had won an award.
GH queried that,with the development of the IAMP, and the inevitable increased traffic, the Follingsby Lane cycle lane will provide a useful connection; will there be developer contributions to upgrade the route?
AH advised that it may be an idea to contact the developer as they have been proactive in relation tohomes which are located at Follingsby Lane.
LB said there are lots of opportunities for improvement but it is important that channels of conversation open early.
TD stated that no big development will happen without appropriate cycle routes and sustainable travel options.
LB advised that representation from the LAF was essential and that it will be an agenda item for the next meeting. If anything has any thoughts in the meantime email JB.
KA asked if Downhill Lane is a multi-user route? TD stated he would look into this and advise accordingly
12.5 Sunderland City Council
TD went through his progress and update paper with the Group and stated that, as part of a Regional Growth Fund funded project, Sunderland has widened 17km of route. The final stretch of the route needs to be completed and the vegetation will be cleared to help get it into a fair standard.
TD stated that there are also ongoing schemes at Washington Way and Coalfield cycle scheme. There has been political endorsement for a strategic cycle network. / JB
TD
13. / Chair’s Report
LB went through the Chair’s report and the Group accepted the circulated information.
LB did advise that any assistance in logging the consultations and responses would be helpful as this information is needed for the Natural England annual report.
LB queried whether anyone used the Huddle application as it is the best source of accessibility information. If anyone would like to gain access to the Huddle please contact Rob Leek by emailing
14. / Planning Sub-Group Chair’s Report
VC advised that the main issues had been covered. He stated that planning sites and strategic development continued to be monitored and responded to accordingly.
15. / Disability Sub-Group Chair’s Report
TW advised that there are still 3 members on the Sub-Group and that the issue regarding the hole in the bench at Freeman Park has been chased up but was still in the queue waiting to be fixed.
TW also stated that a representative from the Wheelchair Racing Group would like to join the LAF and he has been referred to the website.
It was also noted that the Wheelchair Racing Group are looking to identify a route for their race. TD stated that Hetton Lyons could be a possible location.
TW advised that this Group will not be a formal Sub-Group but more of a topic group which allows for flexibility.
16. / Feedback from Regional LAF Chairs’ meeting
There are two national LAF conferencescoming up, the first being on 1stMarch in Leeds, it was proposed that 2 representatives from the Group attend the conference. Those who wished to attend were asked to register their interest with JB. (Post-meeting note: The LAF Chair attended the meeting – only one place was finally available).
It was also stated that Local Nature Partnerships have merged covering most of the northern regions which coincides with the LEP boundaries.
17. / Recruitment of members
Two members have not attended recent meetings so it might be appropriate to contact them to see if they wish to continue being a member of the LAF or would like to stand down.
It was also advised that new members need to be recruited and a recruitment campaign needs to be launched focusing on recruiting members who have interests not currently represented.
It was also stated that those members who haven’t updated their skills on the website need to do so.
ABl advised that there was a Northern Disability Forum meeting on the 12th March at Newcastle Central library, it may be worth a representative attending to promote the LAF.
CH noted that Sustrans would like an official invite to join the LAF and queried whether someone could write a letter to Sustrans. LB advised that it has to be the appointing authority and it was agreed that JB would liaise with Gateshead about a recruitment campaign. In relation to Sustrans, it was noted that LAF members hold their membership as individuals and not as representatives of specific organisations.
18. / Any Other Business
LB stated that Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs) could now be sought and that it will be interesting to see how the process progresses. RH will provide an update.[1]
The LAF Terms of Reference needs to be slightly amended. The annual report needs to be prepared and submitted by the 30th April.
LB noted that it is proposed that the re-election of officers occurs at the next meeting as opposed to the end of the financial year. This was agreed by members. / RH
19. / Dates of Next Meetings
Next meetings:
26th April 2016
12th July 2016
[1]“PSPOs are intended to deal with a nuisance or problem in a particular area that is detrimental to the local community’s qualify of life, by imposing conditions on the use of that area which apply to everyone so that the majority of law-abiding people can use and enjoy our public spaces and be safe from anti-social behaviour.” – description taken from Gateshead Council website.