Cabinet Member:
Councillor Dafydd Meurig
Consider the Cabinet Members Report
Minutes:
a)
Submitted
- a report by the Cabinet Member, providing an update on the progress made with
the work of preparing a review of the Rights of Way Improvement Plan. It was
reported that the work of preparing the Improvement Plan had been divided into
two parts, namely
to review and prepare an Action Statement. When reviewing, it was
considered to evaluate to what extent the objectives had been achieved in the
previous plan, assess the network's current condition and discover to what
extent the rights of way would satisfy the public's requirements. In order to
establish a picture of the current situation in terms of the network’s
condition and to seek the public's opinion, a public consultation had been held
by preparing a digital questionnaire. It was added that 1,386 valid responses
had been received, which was very encouraging.
It was explained that the draft action statement (which was included
with the report) attempted to identify the main work themes and the actions for
the Rights of Way Improvement Plan, and that this would be the basis for
preparing a detailed work programme. It was hoped to establish a realistic and
attainable work programme in addition to avoiding some of the weaknesses of the
previous plan.
b)
During the discussion the following observations
were noted:
·
The
programme was challenging, given the Council's savings plan
·
There
was a lack of information about the access available to the public
·
Did
the budget respond to the priorities of the questionnaire's respondents?
·
It
was difficult to believe that no maps of the paths were available on the
Council's website
·
Has
consideration been given to further plans for the future should the precept of the Community Councils reduce
or come to an end?
In response to a question regarding the contribution of the National
Park and the Coast Path to the network, it was emphasised that Natural
Resources Wales contributed £80k per year but there were no detailed figures on
the National Park's expenditure.
In response to an observation regarding the work programme themes'
priorities, it was emphasised that aspects of each theme would receive
attention, but that this would depend on the available resources.
In response to an observation regarding the path categories and whether
priority should be given to category 1 and what would happen to category 4, the
Cabinet Member emphasised that it would be difficult to keep a balance between
the categories and there was no intention of ignoring category 4. It was added
that the Unit would continue to investigate, collaborate and attempt to keep
access open.
In response to an observation should there be obstructions on the
lowest categories, it was emphasised that the information needed to be shared
in order to attempt to resolve the obstructions. It was added that it would be
the landowner's responsibility to restore gates and stiles.
In response to an observation regarding developing maps on the website,
it was highlighted that discussions had been held and that the support of the
Council's Website Department was needed in order to implement further. It was
noted that many had asked for the service and therefore the hope was to develop
maps in future.
In response to an observation regarding the possibility of Community
Councils failing to cope with additional responsibilities and whether there was
statutory legislation noting that the Council was required to ensure that it
maintained all paths, it was reported that it was the Council's responsibility
to ensure access. Nevertheless, it was emphasised that category 1 and 2 would
be prioritised, unless there was sufficient evidence to show that more use was
made of category 3 and 4.
An observation was received that it would not be possible to depend on
the Community Councils to do the work as they had increasing responsibilities.
In response to an observation that should the precept of
Community Councils to maintain paths be reduced, and if a further plan was in
place, it was noted that the Department had attempted to safeguard the
Community Councils' money, but it would be difficult to know how much money
would be available in future. Nevertheless, it was added that the Unit had
expert staff who would be offering training, use of equipment and support, and
the need to consider the possibility of collaborating with community plans such
as Tref Werdd. It was added that there was no money in reserve, but the
categories' money would need to be used and to prepare the Community Councils
to do the work. It was also noted that the plan was reviewed every two years to
assess whether the plan was too ambitious.
c) The
report was accepted.
Supporting documents: