Agenda item

CABINET MEMBER: Councillor Gareth W Griffith

To consider the report.

·         To accept the draft plan and note the observations received during the meeting and incorporate them in the document for public consultation. 

·         That the final version is submitted before the committee following the consultation period.

Submitted - the report of the Countryside Manager, highlighting the work that had been in progress. He reiterated that the aim of the plan was to ensure that accessible and safe access was available for people to use in the countryside, green spaces and along the coast. The Committee’s opinion was sought regarding the content of the latest review.

An overview of the three main headings incorporated in the plan was provided;

1) Maintain and manage the network - it was noted that different types of users needed to be addressed; however, priority was given to paths in categories 1 and 2.

2) The definitive map and statement - it was explained that this could be referred to should a case or dispute arise regarding the status or existence of a path.

3) Assess and meet the needs of users - It was noted that there had been an increased demand for multi-use paths during lockdown, as more people stayed local. It was explained that the lonydd glas allowed for this type of use to an extent.

It was explained that a marked difference when comparing with the previous plan was the absence of detailed work programme. Instead, it was noted that annual or two-yearly work programmes would be prepared. It was noted that the plan tied in with the policies of the Council, Welsh Government and Natural Resources Wales.

Before opening the discussion up to the committee, the members were asked to consider whether the report conveyed, in their opinion, the aspirations and requirements of the people of Gwynedd, considering accessible countryside access.

During the discussion, the following observations were made by Members:-

- The members gave thanks for the draft report and the discussion was commenced by enquiring what methods had been used to assess accessibility for disabled people as there was so many diverse needs. In addition, it was asked whether disability organisations had been consulted as part of the plan.

- What steps were intended to be taken to update the information in terms of the condition of the network? Attention was given to the possibility of grading the accessibility of the different paths, in order for residents to plan using appropriate paths that met their needs.

- A discussion was held on whether there was a risk of losing paths in lower categories that did not receive regular funding such as categories 1 or 2.

- It was noted that some landowners refused to accept that there was a public footpath on their land. This was reiterated and it was noted that barriers such as fences disrupted some paths as a result of this.

- A discussion was held on the possibility of clear signage in order to show the right way for walkers or users, as some paths were vague.

- The committee's attention was drawn to the condition of the path near Pistyll Church.

- Reference was made to the importance of the following report, emphasising that everyone benefited from the paths.

- It was explained that some towns or communities had many paths to maintain and an enquiry was made about who funded these.

In response to the comments, the Countryside Manager noted the following points:

- The committee was reassured that a consultation had already been held in respect of accessibility for people with disabilities. This was reiterated, noting that the Council's Disability Officer had collaborated with the department.

- It was acknowledged that it was difficult to meet everyone's needs and assess each path; however, reference was made to the common principle of reducing barriers and this was done as much as possible.

- It was noted that one of the objectives and actions was to develop basic knowledge about the condition of the network.

- In response to concerns regarding the loss of paths, it was noted that the lowest categories included paths that were not in use; however, legally, they had not been lost. It was reiterated that the process of surrendering the occupancy of a path was long.

- In relation to the path near Pistyll Church, it was noted that the relevant service would be informed of this.

- With regards to maintenance within communities and towns, it was noted that the Council contributed towards this and that it was possible to apply for external grants. It was reiterated that liaison officers were working to identify local grants that could be used to maintain paths.

RESOLVED

·       To accept the draft plan and note the observations received during the meeting and incorporate them in the document for public consultation. 

·       That the final version is submitted before the committee following the consultation period.