Byways Working Group Meeting 16 June 2006

Record of meeting.

Present:
Keith Ferrin KF, Roger Manning RM, Mike Overbeke MO, Graham Rusling GR, KCC
Andy Small AS, Kent County Constabulary,
Matthew Balfour MB, Kent LAF
Gary Thomas, GT, Kent LAF, CPRE
Steve Neville SN, KORVA, Trail Riders Fellowship
Clive Powell CP, KAPC,
Anne Rillie AR, British Driving Society
Neville Machin NM, Ramblers Association
Alan Tuckwell AT, British Horse Society

The reasons for establishing a Byways Working Group were set out.
Byways, and their vehicular use particularly, are a highly emotive issue with individual cases often being highly complex. Kent County Council is seeking where possible to achieve consensus; and to provide transparency around decision making. Above all it needs to be able to demonstrate that it is acting in good faith in reaching decisions on the byway issue.

Composition:

The working group needs to be representative of all users. While the Local Access Forum is represented on the working group and represents a wide cross section of users it was felt that cycling and disabled users should be represented on the working group.
Further representatives could be co-opted should it be necessary.

Terms of reference:

Meeting 3 times annually the working group will advise the Portfolio Holder for Highways Transportation and Waste on recommendations for the management of BOATs generally and individual BOATs made by the PROW Service Delivery Manager or Head of Countryside Access Group.

The decision on any recommendation will be made by the Portfolio Holder for Highways Transportation and Waste.

Process:

Taking a problem listed on the programme of byways for consideration-

1. Inspect the route (this may be carried out with working group members).

2. Information gathering exercise. Views, experience and knowledge of all those interested parties (as far as they can be identified) including Parish Councils sought.

3. Report with draft recommendations sent out to working group members plus all of those contacted as part of the information gathering exercise. Report to be provided approximately one month before meetings for comment.

4. Report considered at Byway s Working Group. Advice provided to Portfolio Holder as necessary. Decision taken on the recommendation by the Portfolio Holder.

5. Decision communicated to all of those consulted during the information gathering exercise and on the draft recommendation. Communications to include " This matter has been considered by the Byways Working Group and the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Transportation and Waste has decided that…."

6. Decision implemented by PROW Service Manager

Current Policy and Practice

GR gave a brief presentation summarising current KCC policy and outlining practice. (power point attached including notes).

Condition survey of BOATs

In 2004, in response to a growing number of reports concerning damage to BOATs and antisocial use, MO agreed with Richard King (Portfolio Holder at the time) to survey and produce a database of all the BOAT's in the county. PROW officers completed the survey in 2005 and established an Access Database with the results. The survey had identified problems with 50 of the 204 byways, approximately1% of the PROW network of Kent.

The information gathered had been used to inform the proposed programme of byways for consideration by the working group.

Proposed programme of byways for consideration.

GR tabled a draft programme of byways for consideration (attached). Views were sought on the draft programme and members were asked to propose any suggested amendments, or new routes for inclusion following discussions with their organisations. GR to extend the programme to include all of the routes identified as having problems from the survey.

Background reading

Link below for DEFRA Making the best of byways , and Regulating the use of motor vehicles on public rights of way and off road.

www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/cl/mpv/index.htm

Identified Actions

· The report of the PROW Service Delivery Manager to set out the range of solutions available with a preferred option.· The current byway policy should be enshrined within Countryside Access Objectives and Policy. GR

·Representatives of cycling and disabled groups to be contacted and invited to sit on the working group and to be briefed on progress to date. GR

· SN requested byway/bridleway shape files for his GIS system so the routes could be quickly identified. GR

· The draft programme of routes is to be circulated to all, including the remaining routes on which issues had been identified during the survey and condition data. Maps to be provided for the top 13 as currently listed. GR

· Members to respond within 6 weeks with a view on the proposed programme and any proposed amendments. All